About Us
Mission Statement
Rules of Conduct
 
Name:
Pswd:
Remember Me
Register
 

GOP to 9/11 Responders: Tough Luck.
Author: Raine    Date: 07/29/2010 13:34:05

Sometimes I really just don't understand how the GOP mind works. Today it's recommending that its members vote against assisting 9/11 victims, particularly the emergency responders to the disaster on that day.

Politico is reporting this morning:
House Republican leadership is advising its members to vote against a bipartisan bill that would, among other things, bolster medical support to Sept. 11 victims.

The James Zadroga 9/11 Health and Compensation Act of 2009, sponsored by New York City Rep. Carolyn Maloney (D), provides medical monitoring to those exposed to toxins at Ground Zero, bolsters treatment at specialized centers for those afflicted by toxins on 9/11 and reopens a compensation fund to provide economic loss to New Yorkers.

And it’s all paid for by closing a tax loophole on foreign companies with U.S. subsidiaries, Democrats say.
Republicans are claiming that this will increase taxes, without clarifying that this actually closes a tax loophole to foreign companies. They want people to believe that it will be THEIR taxes that are increasing. Once again they use the average taxpayer as a shield to protect corporate interests and in this case, 9/11 victims are -- well, victims again. Let me reiterate -- this is PAYED for by closing a tax loophole to foreign companies that get subsidies. One would think that is a good thing.

One could argue the need and validity of re-opening this fund, but I think it is truly disingenuous to deny assistance of medical treatment to those that were exposed to toxins at the World Trade center. I'm not even going to bother discussing the hypocrisy that we have already spent over a trillion dollars on 2 war fronts as a result of 9/11. The issue here is that many people have fallen ill in the years after the towers came down, and those illness have been link to that fateful day. According to a report in the International Business Times yesterday:
As many as 20,000 others, according to government figures, have suffered since the event, either from exposure to the toxic dust of pulverized buildings and combusted chemicals, or injuries, or post-traumatic stress, or all three. [snip]

"The upcoming Senate hearing on the 9/11 Health and Compensation Act is a critical step in the long journey to achieve justice for the responders and survivors of 9/11," Nadler said in a release. "The federal government is long overdue in providing health care and compensation to the many heroes, workers, community members and others who have become sick because of their exposure to toxic Ground Zero dust."

A former compensation fund for victims ran out in 2003. Supporters of the Zadroga bill say that many illnesses only came to the fore after the former fund closed, and that many people were only partially compensated by the that fund.
We were asked in the months and years after 9/11 to never forget.

We were asked to raise our flags and be patriotic. We were asked to love our country and remember the victims. The GOP needs to be reminded of that, and do the same for the ongoing tragedy that is 9/11. People are still suffering from lingering effects and they deserve the same dignity as those who were killed that day. They should not be punished because they had the good fortune to survive.

We should not be putting foreign corporations ahead of our own people. That isn't supposed to be what we do in America -- especially to the survivors of the World Trade Center disaster.

&
Raine


34 comments (Latest Comment: 07/30/2010 03:47:33 by Al from WV)
   Perma Link

Share This!

Furl it!
Spurl
NewsVine
Reddit
Technorati

Add a Comment

Please login to add a comment...


Comments:

Order comments Newest to Oldest  Refresh Comments

Comment by wickedpam on 07/29/2010 12:43:33
Morning

Comment by wickedpam on 07/29/2010 13:33:09
do these callers not realize you can buy bogus papers and look offical?

Comment by Raine on 07/29/2010 13:47:30
Blog is up, BTW.

Comment by Raine on 07/29/2010 13:54:18
Something that a lot of people don;t seem to realize:
The Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency expects to deport about 400,000 people this fiscal year, nearly 10 percent above the Bush administration's 2008 total and 25 percent more than were deported in 2007. The pace of company audits has roughly quadrupled since President George W. Bush's final year in office.



[snip]



The Obama administration has been moving away from using work-site raids to target employers. Just 765 undocumented workers have been arrested at their jobs this fiscal year, compared with 5,100 in 2008, according to Department of Homeland Security figures. Instead, officers have increased employer audits, studying the employee documentation of 2,875 companies suspected of hiring illegal workers and assessing $6.4 million in fines.


Comment by Scoopster on 07/29/2010 14:01:20
Morning all..

Comment by BobR on 07/29/2010 14:06:21
RW Caller is avoiding the questions

Comment by Raine on 07/29/2010 14:11:38
Now he's pulling numbers out of his ass...

Comment by wickedpam on 07/29/2010 14:15:18
back in a bit - time to get to the eye doc

Comment by Raine on 07/29/2010 14:17:44
Quote by Raine:

Now he's pulling numbers out of his ass...


Illegal immigrant numbers plunge

California's number drops by 250,000, the nation's nearly 1 million. The sharpest drop in three decades renews the debate over what to do about those still here.

The number of illegal immigrants living in the United States dropped to 10.8 million in 2009 from 11.6 million in 2008, marking the second consecutive year of decline and the sharpest decrease in at least three decades, according to a report this week by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security.





Comment by Raine on 07/29/2010 14:21:09
Quote by Raine:

Quote by Raine:

Now he's pulling numbers out of his ass...


Illegal immigrant numbers plunge

California's number drops by 250,000, the nation's nearly 1 million. The sharpest drop in three decades renews the debate over what to do about those still here.

The number of illegal immigrants living in the United States dropped to 10.8 million in 2009 from 11.6 million in 2008, marking the second consecutive year of decline and the sharpest decrease in at least three decades, according to a report this week by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security.



I did hear him say that we had 30 million undocumented immigrants in the USA. So here is more proof that he pulled it out of his ass.

From Wiki

The illegal immigrant population of the United States in 2008 was estimated by the Center for Immigration Studies to be about 11 million people, down from 12.5 million people in 2007. According to a Pew Hispanic Center report, in 2005, 57% of illegal immigrants were from Mexico; 24% were from other Latin American countries, primarily from Central America; 9% were from Asia; 6% were from Europe; and 4% were from the rest of the world.




Comment by TriSec on 07/29/2010 14:35:50




thlpth.





Comment by Raine on 07/29/2010 15:06:25
WTF is market based immigration? This is another that is full of garbage.







Comment by Raine on 07/29/2010 15:07:37
I'm not so naive to hear him laying on the latino accent a lot thicker as this interview goes along...

Comment by Raine on 07/29/2010 15:11:06
I hope he never DOES come on the show again. That was so damn disingenuous.

Comment by livingonli on 07/29/2010 15:20:15
Good morning folks. Looks like we are supposed to get rain today.



These right-wingers will just throw any bullshit out there, won't they?

Comment by livingonli on 07/29/2010 15:26:00
Anyone got The View on?

Comment by Scoopster on 07/29/2010 15:42:35
Quote by Raine:

WTF is market based immigration? This is another that is full of garbage.


Market based immigration actually makes some sense - when the economy's good, business here will look for cheap immigrant labor. When it's bad, like it is now, those immigrants will go back home to their families and hopefully find work there.



Comment by Scoopster on 07/29/2010 15:44:08
Next time someone tells you that the Obama's spending is the reason we have a deficit... remind them of reality:



http://images2.dailykos.com/images/user/6685/chart_of_the_day_bush_policies_deficits_june_2010.gif


Comment by Raine on 07/29/2010 15:44:40
Quote by livingonli:

Anyone got The View on?






I am half streaming it -- Hasslbeck got a prompt slap down from the POTUS So yes, I know the huge revelation Chris will be mentioning...



It's telling, considering John McCain knew...

Comment by Raine on 07/29/2010 15:49:32
I will watch the entire show later.



Hasslbeck is truly an idiot.

Comment by livingonli on 07/29/2010 16:00:00
Hasselback's brain power couldn't light a match.

Comment by Raine on 07/29/2010 16:06:28
OK, I know it's Fox and the Wall Street Journal, but can someone PLEASE tell how a Private First Class could come into such high security documents?



Army Whistleblower Bradley Manning Linked to Afghan War Leaks

Comment by Raine on 07/29/2010 16:08:19
This is Manning. This story has been simmering for weeks.



Something smells here, I'm just not sure what.

Comment by TriSec on 07/29/2010 16:09:08
Some Scout Geek action today....



On this day in 1907, Lord Baden-Powell arrived at Brownsea Island to set up a 'test' camp. The first boys arrived on August 1.



And it's also the day that John McCain almost sank the USS Forrestal singlehandedly...





Comment by Raine on 07/29/2010 16:25:11
Why are conservatives complaining about a racial divide in this nation, and then ask the left and the right to come together to solve the problems when it is conservatives that went out of their way to creat controversies like the AZ immigration law and the Shirley Sherrod issues?



THEY did this, and now they are blaming liberals for standing up to this? It's bullcrap.





Comment by livingonli on 07/29/2010 16:30:24
Huckabee now has a daily talk show on my local Fox station.

Comment by TriSec on 07/29/2010 16:44:22
I won't wait for Ask a Vet; you know I've been following this.



Over 6,000 graves at Arlington might be mismarked



WASHINGTON — The number of mislabeled graves at Arlington National Cemetery could be 6,600, the senator whose subcommittee is investigating potential contracting fraud there said Thursday.



"We now know that the problems with graves at Arlington may be far more extensive than previously acknowledged," Sen. Claire McCaskill, D-Mo., said in her opening testimony at a hearing where the cemetery's former superintendent and deputy superintendent were subpoenaed to testify.



"At a conservative estimate," she added, "4,900 to 6,600 graves may be unmarked, improperly marked, or mislabeled on the cemetery’s maps."



The estimate far exceeds one given by Army investigators last month that some 211 remains could be affected by the graves scandal. The review found lax management of the cemetery and a reliance on paper records to manage the burial sites.



In his prepared opening statement, former Superintendent John Metzler accepted blame for the mixups but cited a 35 percent cut in staff and the complexity of burying 6,000 people a year at the cemetery.



"Those staffing losses were to be offset by increased opportunities for outsourcing to private contractors," Metzler stated. "As experience has shown, however, that approach does not always result in the most effective or efficient solution."



Comment by Raine on 07/29/2010 17:11:45
this is the takeway:



In his prepared opening statement, former Superintendent John Metzler accepted blame for the mixups but cited a 35 percent cut in staff and the complexity of burying 6,000 people a year at the cemetery.



"Those staffing losses were to be offset by increased opportunities for outsourcing to private contractors," Metzler stated. "As experience has shown, however, that approach does not always result in the most effective or efficient solution."




This is so infuriating. As experience has shown, private contractors have fairly fucked our national security, and now those that have died for it.

Comment by Scoopster on 07/29/2010 18:38:28
So I just got a tipoff to a potential good job lead from a friend who's in college and being recruited..



http://careers.epic.com/listing-us




Yes, I realize it says Wisconsin.

Comment by Raine on 07/29/2010 18:50:38
Quote by Scoopster:

So I just got a tipoff to a potential good job lead from a friend who's in college and being recruited..



http://careers.epic.com/listing-us




Yes, I realize it says Wisconsin.




Comment by Al from WV on 07/29/2010 19:33:36
It's fairly disengenuous to blame people who oppose a bill for opposing health care boosts for 9/11 responders just because someone else claims that is what the bill does. Even Politico, who has repeatedly demonstrated a preference for liberals and a distain for conservatives, puts it, "House Republican leadership is advising its members to vote against a bipartisan bill that would, among other things, bolster medical support to Sept. 11 victims." (emphasis mine) The bill is 220 pages long, I've looked it up at OpenCongress. I scanned it, but it's too much time to take while I'm being paid to do other things. I did note that it does more than the simplicity that comes from "bolster medical support to Sept. 11 victims." That phrase sounds like they get more doctor access, coverage for a longer time and for more conditions, etc. In actuality, the "extras" are at LEAST that it creates an entire new program office in the govt, and it appears to affect the Social Security Act and other legislation. There is at least a good chance that this is new coverage, new programmatic action, NOT the "bolster" that politico reports (inasmuch as "bolster" means makes something existing into something better).



Ergo, until I read the bill, I cannot, with any conscience at all, condemn someone who opposes the bill for opposing better health care for 9/1 responders. There is strong evidence that the two (bill vs better health care) are not the same.

Comment by Raine on 07/29/2010 20:31:09
Here is the Bill.



The bill is paid for. The bill helps people. I stand by what I wrote. The story is also backed up in the Troy Record and the NY Daily News. They are blocking the bill for political reasons, not because of the bill.



I used Politico actually because I tend to find it a bit conservative leaning. It's sorta funny that you think they disdain conservatives. Many liberals think the opposite is true. Maybe they are doing something correct here. I don;t know. I know that Mike Allen wields an awful lot of newsmaking power in this country, for better or worse.



And I tell you what, I met a bunch of the writers for Politico a few weeks ago, based on my (very nice, btw) conversation, I would tend to think they actually try to lean conservative. One reporter actually told me, it's how they get better access. I won't name names, but I hope you know me well enough to know, I wouldn't make that up.



Either way, the story is out there, and it's not a Politco smear job. The GOP wants to block this bill.

Comment by Al from WV on 07/30/2010 03:47:33
Quote by Raine:

Here is the Bill.



The bill is paid for. The bill helps people. I stand by what I wrote. The story is also backed up in the Troy Record and the NY Daily News. They are blocking the bill for political reasons, not because of the bill.



I used Politico actually because I tend to find it a bit conservative leaning. It's sorta funny that you think they disdain conservatives. Many liberals think the opposite is true. Maybe they are doing something correct here. I don;t know. I know that Mike Allen wields an awful lot of newsmaking power in this country, for better or worse.



And I tell you what, I met a bunch of the writers for Politico a few weeks ago, based on my (very nice, btw) conversation, I would tend to think they actually try to lean conservative. One reporter actually told me, it's how they get better access. I won't name names, but I hope you know me well enough to know, I wouldn't make that up.



Either way, the story is out there, and it's not a Politco smear job. The GOP wants to block this bill.


So, a bill does A, b, c, d, e, f, g, h, and I, and b helps people. Let's ignore A, c, d, e, f, g, h, and I then, when we the people consider the bill.



I'm sorry, Raine, not me.