Health & Medical & Human Rights & Religion Posted by spyder, 22 Oct 2007 06:24 am
Why Can’t the Dalai Lama go home for the Beijing Olympics??
Well perhaps it is due to the following insanity in the form of an utterance by the official Tibetan Communist Party boss, Zhang Qingli:
“Such a person who basely splits his motherland and doesn’t even love his motherland has been welcomed by some countries and has even been receiving this or that award,” Tibet’s Communist Party boss, Zhang Qingli, told reporters during the congress. “We are furious,” Mr. Zhang said. “If the Dalai Lama can receive such an award, there must be no justice or good people in the world.”
Wow, so vitriolic and idiotic at the same time. The arrogant assumption that Tibet is China, predicated on an invasion by Mao, and a cultural revolution that eradicated history for a billion people, seems to fly in the face of any reasonably intelligent human being with access to the internet and an interest in history. But there’s more of course; consider this:
“He should resolutely abandon his Tibetan independence stance and activities,” Tibet’s governor, Qiangba Puncog said. “But in my opinion, some of those activities are actually escalating and setting a lot of obstacles for further progress.”
Has that ring of a made man, you know like Tony Soprano, telling you to just shut up and “forgetaboutit”. “It’s a done deal, Tibet is China, so shut your trap!” And, I suspect most citizens of the US would prefer it that way. Why??
Well consider the behavior of those, in the US, who are suggesting that people who acquire access to health care for their very sick children are inferior beings who lack substance and character. There is not one shred, not one single cell, of compassion within these evil and twisted things. If Michele Malkin’s vicious and hate-filled attacks on one family aren’t sufficient to make the comparison (between China’s leadership and the conservative imperialists in the US), then examine the following assassination attempt on another SCHIP family: National Review’s Mark Hemingway attacks the Wilkersons as irresponsible parents:
Dara admitted to me that she and Brian had been talking about having children since before they were married. She further admitted that after they were married she voluntarily left a job at a country club that had good health insurance, because the situation was “unmanageable.” From there she took a job at a restaurant with no health insurance, and the couple went on to have a baby anyway, presuming that others would pay for it and certainly long before they knew their daughter would have a heart defect that probably cost the gross national product of Burkina Faso to fix. But not knowing about future health problems is the reason we have insurance in the first place.For Dara and Brian Wilkerson, the fact that they don’t have health insurance is less about falling through the cracks than the decisions they’ve made. We know that Dara is at least capable of getting a job with insurance — so why does she not have one now? Even if it is difficult insure her child’s pre-existing condition, what about her and her husband’s health? Perhaps it’s rude to ask that question, but I think it’s rude to accept huge amounts of public assistance and then express gratitude by asking taxpayers to extend a Children’s health program to cover college-age kids who come from households making more than $80,000 a year.
Which brings us to another salient point — Bethany Wilkerson is healthy. She is covered by existing programs and has already received the much of the medical care she needs. The current debate centers on expanding the program, not kicking the Frosts and the Wilkersons to the curb.
So I hope Bethany grows up strong — I’m worried about her. Not because I’m worried that the state won’t take care of her, but I’m afraid that her parents will continue to set a bad example. In which case, she’ll need all the help she can get.
In the much the same way the Chinese rewrite history to suit their immediate needs in an effort to assassinate the character (well they do actively kill thousands of Tibetans too) of the Dalai Lama, the defender of compassion, Hemingway and cohorts of the reichwinger fascists ignore any factual records and historical processes to produce his version of character assassination (shall we try to ignore his blatant racism for now?). The facts themselves are pretty clear cut; from the Wilkersons:
We have seen the statement about my previous employment and here is what we have to say: I left my previous place of employment years before Bethany became part of our lives. I am a hard working woman. I have worked at Snappers Sea Grill for over 6 years. It is a good work environment and I am a loyal employee. My husband and I were blessed with Bethany two years ago and we are even more blessed to still have her with us today.
The Wilkersons said they are fully aware of the possibility that their finances and personal lives may be investigated by opponents of the SCHIP bill.
“We rent a house, we have one car that is a junker. Let them dig away, Bo Wilkerson said. “I have $67 in my checking account. Does that answer your question?”
The messengers from the empire are quite clear in their intent. If you disagree with them, suggesting that they present egregious misstatements of fact and reality, then you are a fatally flawed being who is at best a bad example, and at worst a grave threat to peace and well being. So there we have it; a no holds barred tag-team battle between compassion in one corner, represented by a Buddhist monk trained in compassion and a 2 year old girl, against imperial fascism, represented by the most unlikely of all possible allies the leadership of the Communist Party of China and US conservative leaders hiding behind their hypocritical shield of compassionate conservatism. Picture it in your mind: the Dalai Lama sitting next to the Kalachakra mandala with Bethany in his lap, across the ring from the President of the People’s Republic of China sitting on his pontifical throne with the kneeling Mark Hemingway and Michele Malkin (licking Hemingway’s face) begging for the last crumbs of the collapsing dollar.
Trackbacks
Responses to “Why Can’t the Dalai Lama go home for the Beijing Olympics??”
-
on 22 Oct 2007 at 10:22 am 1. black dog barking said …
I’m not an economist but it seems weird to base a large part of our nation’s economy on public health. Seems like we should be making stuff that makes life more productive for all of us. Seems like public health is a precondition to a healthy economy, not a profit center.
The Wilkersons and the Frosts were targeted by a crowd apparently jealous of those families’ good fortune — recovery from catastrophic injury and illness. If I ever feel the urge to begrudge a child’s good health I hope I still have enough wit to bite my tongue and shut up.
-
on 22 Oct 2007 at 10:35 am 2. spyder said …
Bush clearly had something else in mind when he vetoed $32 billion dollars over five years for children’s health care in the US. He needed all of that and more now just to get through some more war. Bush asks for $46 Billion more to fund Iraq, bringing total to $196.4 billion for the fiscal year that began October 1.
The figure, which Bush was expected to announce later Monday at the White House, brings to $196.4 billion the total requested by the administration for operations in Iraq, Afghanistan and elsewhere for the budget year that started Oct. 1. It includes $189.3 billion for the Defense Department, $6.9 billion for the State Department and $200 million for other agencies.
The figures were disclosed by congressional officials briefed on the request and who spoke on condition of anonymity because the announcement had not yet been made.
To date, Congress has already provided more than $455 billion for the Iraq war, with stepped-up military operations running about $10 billion a month. The war has claimed the lives of more than 3,830 members of the U.S. military and more than 73,000 Iraqi civilians.
The White House originally asked for $141.7 billion for the Pentagon to prosecute the Iraq and Afghanistan missions and asked for $5.3 billion more in July. The latest request includes $42.3 billion more for the Pentagon _ already revealed in summary last month…
Now how is that for some productivity? I wonder what Blackwater International (cute new logo too) gets out of this???
-
on 22 Oct 2007 at 2:02 pm 3. James Killus said …
I don’t have any problems with a health care program that covers college age students whose parents make over $80,000 per year so long as it also covers children whose parents make less than $80,000 a year, and those who make $80,000 a year and up pay taxes sufficient to support the system.
You know, if the sort of resentment expressed by Mark Hemmingway had been shown by a Democratic Presidential contender, Hemmingway would have been frothing at the mouth over its being “class warfare.”
The similar frothing from Zhang Qingli makes me think that their hold on Tibet is getting mighty tenuous.
-
on 22 Oct 2007 at 2:30 pm 4. spyder said …
Funny you should mention access to government-supported, full-spectrum, health care for those making more than $80k/yr. It strikes me that members of the President’s cabinet, department heads, agency and bureau officials, and most of their staffs (Level I = $186,000 and the rest down to $138,000); Majority and Minority Leadership of the House and Senate ($183,000); SCOTUS and all other Federal Judges ($215,000 down to $168,000); and nearly all other Federal Government service from members of Congress to district and regional officials ($154,000 down to $93,063)—all of these people receive free access to taxpayer funded health care that includes vision and dental plans as well as diverse pharmacological access from free to very low co-pay. It seems what might be good enough for them would be good enough for the children of this great nation. But many of them don’t see it that way. They should feel shame for their hypocrisy.
-
on 22 Oct 2007 at 3:07 pm 5. Oaktown Girl said …
They should feel shame for their hypocrisy.
But as you well know, they have no shame. About anything.
-
on 22 Oct 2007 at 8:48 pm 6. Kiera said …
HA. They don’t know what shame is. Or hypocrisy, for that matter. Sigh.
-
on 22 Oct 2007 at 10:55 pm 7. Oaktown Girl said …
The Wilkersons and the Frosts were targeted by a crowd apparently jealous of those families’ good fortune — recovery from catastrophic injury and illness.
Black Dog, (#1), I realize you’re being tongue-in-cheek here, but please don’t mind me for using this as a ranting springboard: My take is that the vicious attack on the Wilkersons and Frosts was all about panic. Anytime a real human face is put on the right wing policy platforms that hurt people, the wingnuts just completely melt down. Their policies are only “good ” in the abstract. You put a real face on it, and their “family values” bullshit falls apart like a cheap suit. And because they have no logical, reasonable footing on which to discuss the policy, they have to launch a full frontal assault on individuals instead.
I believe their panic is a reaction to the cognitive dissonance created by rank and file right wingers not being able to accept that anything they stand for could possibly be just plain mean-spirited and spiteful, even though it is. Those people who benefited from the S-CHIP program simply had to be bad, lazy, or irresponsible people, otherwise the wingnutters’ world view comes crashing down.
-
on 23 Oct 2007 at 2:22 pm 8. Zeus said …
It boils down to a pseudo-conservative, neo-con world view that depravity is the basis of existence and that punishment is the basis of morality. It is no wonder that hatred and abuse, with such a mindset, is cast as benevolence. “We’re just trying ‘toughlove’ to help the hapless, irresponsible living-life-as-it -comes get what they deserve for actually loving, enjoying life, and working hard.”
The noxiousness of such a stance is not nearly as alarming though as the ways in which it is allowed to stand both in the media and in our hearts as citizens. It’s as if, traveling past symbolic outrage, we have no other “gear” to kick ourselves into, so we get kicked around instead. This is where standing by and pushing to not only change health care into a public essential service but in developing practical compassion and a refusal to back down are required.
-
on 24 Oct 2007 at 9:45 am 9. spyder said …
Bill Scher writes today:
The State Children’s Health Insurance Program bill is not going away. House leaders announced that they are bringing another SCHIP bill to the floor this week, with minor changes but still expanding the program to cover a total of 10 million kids.
The White House responded by whipping out a fresh “fact” sheet. The headline?
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2007/10/20071023-1.html“Just the Facts: ‘Over Half the Families in America Are Not Poor.’”
And your point is?
Apparently, this is their point: “Congress’ bill would result in 57 percent of children in America and about 53 percent of families with children being potentially eligible for public assistance. The President has said poor children should come first. Over half the families in America are not poor.”
Of course, there is no way 57% percent of America’s kids would be in SCHIP. America has 74 million kids, and there’s only enough funding in the bill to cover 10 million.
More importantly, as far as SCHIP goes, it doesn’t matter that the number of those in poverty has risen to “only” 36.5 million people and 12.8 million kids in the Bush Era.
SCHIP has never been about providing health coverage to kids in poverty. That’s the purpose of Medicaid. SCHIP is about providing health coverage to kids who are not in poverty, but whose parents still can’t afford insurance.
During the SCHIP debate, the White House and its conservative allies have already managed to advertise their complete callousness to the struggles of working families.
Now they are advertising their failures to reduce poverty.
Once again, Mission Accomplished.
-
on 24 Oct 2007 at 10:08 am 10. Oaktown Girl said …
When are you people going to learn? How many times does the President have to keep explaining it to you?
Poor children deserve health care. Children who fall between the cracks do not. And if by some stretch of the imagination they ever did, well, that’s what emergency rooms are for.“Preventive” care and care for “pre-existing” conditions hurts the insurance industry, and that’s bad for business. And what’s bad for business is bad for the country.
