GOP's 9/11 first responders health bill shame
Posted on Tuesday, December 21, 2010 at 08:19 AM
Larger Text
Print
E-mail
57 Comments
RSS 
Recent Posts
- Will New York Senator Chuck Schumer ditch gay couples for an immigration deal?
- If nobody's happy, it's working – the abortion debate and Irish politics of stalemate
- Conservative news entertainment complex claim Barack Obama leader of Al Qaeda
- Why Irish grudges are passed on - a long tradition of never forgetting
- Boston man confronts Infowars conspiracy nuts over 'false flag' claim
Archives
That means Giuliani knows the risks. So why isn't he speaking out against the Senate GOP's heartless decision to vote against the Health Bill for the 9/11 responders?
Composed of mostly cops and firemen, the majority of those responders presumably GOP's voters themselves, it seems remarkable that they could be called heroes in 2001 and claimant fraudsters in 2010.
Why would Senate Republicans balk at the modest price tag for this bipartisan bill when they thought nothing of approving tax cuts for the nations richest one percent and ballooning the deficit?
Earlier this month Senate Republicans blocked the measure with a filibuster as part of their pledge to halt all legislation until passage of the tax bill. President Obama signed the tax bill last week but the GOP have still not acted.
Why? Is it because the former heroes of 9/11 are now seen as a bunch of latter day money grabbing welfare queens in the eyes of the GOP Senate? Critics say that Republican senators see this bill as an 'entitlement' program. That means it would help the needy. That makes it a socialist handout. They also don't like the zip code, which is no fault of the first responders.
What a shame the Senate GOP have voted to keep tax breaks for themselves while those who ran toward the twin towers when everyone else was running away are forgotten by the party that - just a few years earlier - wrapped itself up in the flag and made commitments that they simply haven't kept.
UPDATE: Yesterday Rudy finally spoke out. “This should not be seen as a Democratic or Republican issue,” Giuliani said on a Fox News affiliate. “It shouldn’t even be seen as a fiscal issue. It’s a matter of morality, of obligation.”
Hear, hear. It's sad to see how wrapped up in politics the GOP are willing to become. It's at the expense of the nation every time.
57 comments
seanomelbourne | Dec 26, 2010, 05:27 PM EST
I stated that the U.S. subverted elected governments in central and south America for almost a century.
Chavez was freely elected his presidency is the responsibility of the Venezuelan people not the U.S. state dept. The problem is you cannot mind your own business and let everyone else look after themselves. As far as Reagan is concerned you believe your own propaganda,maybe Nancy consulted her star chart and advised him,(as she was prone to doing).
Report abuse
Monsoonman | Dec 26, 2010, 04:56 PM EST
Go check up on your facks Lad, Reagan negotiated through strength, that's the only thing the russians respect. obama and co. are groveling for a political favor in order to look like they are actually accomplishing something. We negotiated our missile defenses away, in order to get a paper signed...shades of neville chamberlain....So you think the dictator/thug hugo chavez is a good man?
Report abuse
seanomelbourne | Dec 25, 2010, 09:13 PM EST
Have one to many Mman? cannot find a blog by Dennis on these pages. the present START treaty is technically an annexure to the original treaty. The U.S. has subverted democratically elected governments in central and south America for almost a century.
Report abuse
Monsoonman | Dec 25, 2010, 11:40 AM EST
Reagans START treaty looked out for the best interests of the US and was negotiated through our strength, that's why it was ratified so quickly O'Dennis. If obamas START treaty was so good why didn't it get instantly ratified since the democrats held a super majority in the house and senate for the past 2 years? Because it is a bad deal for the US and could only get passed by a corrupt lame duck congress...Look up wikileaks Dennis, there is an interesting bit on how we subvert our friends(Honduras), in order to placate communist dictators(hugo chavez)...fact! But it ought to warm the cockles of yer heart to know that, eh Dennis? Oh yeah, Merry CHRISTmas.
Report abuse
hancock | Dec 24, 2010, 11:24 PM EST
It was also caused by the Dems having no guts.
Report abuse
seanomelbourne | Dec 24, 2010, 08:19 PM EST
The late passing of the bills were due to the intransigence of the GOP,for example,the start bill was presented 13 times and knocked back by the party of no. It spent 6 days in congress before it was eventually passed.Reagan's 1st.start treaty only took 5 days in total to pass.The first casualty here is truth The immorality lie's with those who have spent 2 years filibustering every piece of legislation and presidential appointment. Your crocodile tears are noted Mman. I wish you a happy season.
Report abuse
Monsoonman | Dec 24, 2010, 05:32 PM EST
Lad, even if the lameducks passage of important legislation is constitutional, it certainly is immoral and an affront to the majority of the American people. A large portion of this lameduck congress, that could be fired, were just fired by the American taxpaying citizens...They come back without anything to lose or anyone to answer to and pass perverse legislation.
Report abuse
seanomelbourne | Dec 23, 2010, 05:56 PM EST
Southbendnative reading from Fox talking points to justify his minimum standard of literacy. If passing bills during the lame duck session is unconstitutional what amendment is been broken dunderhead.
Report abuse
SouthBendNative | Dec 23, 2010, 01:38 AM EST
olovely, the GOP wants to hold the DEMS to their promise to cut spending elsewhere to pay for new spending..perhaps you have not read of Paygo in the newspapers you idiot. They have not said it is a public giveaway. They are correct that it would add to the debt. All they are after is offsetting spending cuts and to debate the bill properly. The Dems as usual, are using this to convince dopes like you that they care..when in fact, they could have and should have brought this up for debate ages ago. Oh and never mind the fact that passing bills like this during a lame duck session is unconstitutional..read a book sometime or ask your mommy to read one to you if you aren't capable. The brilliant line that Cahir uses to conclude his drivel filled column is more accurately applied to the left. Sadly idiots like you lap it up.
Report abuse
seanomelbourne | Dec 22, 2010, 06:39 PM EST
I see the three stooges Carlson,Kilmeade and big ears are now blaming Obama and the Dems for the delays in passing the responders bill,what a miserable bunch they are.
Report abuse
olovely | Dec 22, 2010, 10:11 AM EST
Pick up a paper sometime SouthBendNative before you start abusing people on public forums, eh? Republicans have said clearly the 9/11 health bill is a special-interest giveaway that would add to the nation’s debt. They are absolutely against taking care of the first responders, that's why the first attempt to pass the bill in the House failed in July. Whatever happened to supporting our nation’s heroes?
Report abuse
SouthBendNative | Dec 22, 2010, 08:21 AM EST
Cahir, it is dopes like you who make it impossible for serious people from opposite sides to ever get together on anything. The GOP is not against taking care of the 1st responders. They are simply wanting a reasonable time frame for discussion and to determine the best delivery method to ensure fraud and abuse is limited. Idiots like you try to reward poor behavior by the leftists who could have brought this up for discussion anytime in the past 2 years and decided to ram a bunch of legislation thru in a lame duck session to avoid scrutiny of the crap these bills contain. It is actually in violation of the constitution to pass legislation during a lame duck session anyway. You lefies control the media, so facts that don't fit your template are not discussed. What a shame you and your side have no conscience. This can and should be taken care of when the new congress is seated. We'll see then how much the Dems support it when they can't demonize the GOP. The complete lack of scruples on the left is breathtaking.
Report abuse
Monsoonman | Dec 22, 2010, 12:15 AM EST
Next time we have an act of war committed against us on our soil, we should suspend possee comitatis and have the military go in. A lot less litigation and they are more prepared to operate in post apocalyptic conditions.
Report abuse
McNamara31 | Dec 21, 2010, 10:48 PM EST
Yaright You stated: "first responders`were only too happy to become media darlings." Are you kidding me?If it were your son or daughter they were digging out of the Towers you wouldn't be the cold hearted basta*d your words imply. What do you propose? Let them become homeless because of mounting medical bills and die in the streets? The proposed responder health coverage only kicks in after their "own" medical, workmen's comp or other settlements have been exhausted. So we are not talking about a payday here. Next time a terrorist attack of this magnitude happens and you are buried beneath the rubble you can tell the "darlings" to pass you by because as you also stated, "bad stuff happens".
Report abuse
Report abuse