Nedra,
I consider you a friend by now (aren't we all though) and I don't want to
pick on you or sound like it either. I think you bear a much heavier cross
with epilepsy than I do. If I sound angry it's at other people.
On Wed, Oct 28, 2009 at 8:04 AM, nedra3boys2001 <Nedra3boysI@
> HI,
> I am a political news junkie. I also know a lot about David Axelrod and
> his development of astroturfing ( creating of false sense of public ground
> swell of support for a concept or product, his company which specializes in
> this service, ect). I STRONLY AGREE with Michelle Malkin.
>
Where was/is the fake grass-roots protesting? I don't see any here, fake or
real.
David Axelrod's company is AKP&D Message and Media (akpdmedia.com)
in Washington sets one of these stupid things up for when they're out of
work. (About half the time; there are two parties.) He makes money from
writing speeches and doing commercials for political clients. I guess he
does stuff for 60 Minutes too. But "astroturfing"
petitions on that website? The "donate" links? The information about public
demonstrations? The offers of free signs? The lists of dishonest talking
points that I hear repeated endlessly?
Now I get emails all the time, from FreedomWorks (
http://www.freedomw
outfit run by him and Steve Forbes, and it's supported by Verizon, SBC,
Philip Morris, and the Scaife family. They run a big social networking site
for conservatives there. The emails invite me to all kinds of goofy
tea-party protests they set up and give me people's emails and phone numbers
so I can harass them with lists of questionable talking points that
FreedomWorks distributes on every issue. That's what "astroturfing" is.
Having 60 Minutes do a story on epilepsy involving your own family might be
something but it isn't "astroturfing"
Why? Because despite the fact that I have 3 special needs children and
> many major health issues myself, I do NOT want the government running my or
> my family health care. My son with uncontrolled seizures went to more than
> a half dozen neurologists. Most said take him to a psychiatrist, it is
> autism and not seizure and don't bother ever coming back here, stop those
> seizure meds. Except the head of a major ped hospital, that ped neuro
> wanted all the seizure meds except the one causing brain atrophy to CONTINUE
> not for seizure control, he said there were no seizures. He wanted it
> continued for mood reasons. And once other doctors heard he said that, they
> didn't seriously consider the case, head guy had spoken.
>
> So I don't want the government plan because I want to be able to go to get
> second, third, fourth, and more opinions because those other opinions saved
> my son from seizure more times than I can count. Those neuros were wrong.
> My son had a difficult case but they didn't want to hear it. I have
> closely followed the proposed plans and I would not have the options to go
> to other doctors. Also the number of doctors has a risk of dropping as do
> the selection of medications.
>
That's a tragic story. My family has been hit with epilepsy and autism, but
you have been dealt a worse hand. Your family's suffering shouldn't be being
used to push a nasty talking point about "government-
is not even on the table here. And nobody EVER explains to me why
"government-
is "I need X so I don't want government-run health care"- as if one
automatically follows the other, like the talking point says.
What is currently being proposed isn't even "government-
that's just FreedomWorks'
government will forbid the preexisting conditions crap, and with the "public
option" it will run its own insurance company to make sure real health
insurance companies compete fairly. Government-run health care is what they
have in France, Switzerland, England, etc.
And what's totally ironic here is that people in those countries get second
/ third / fourth opinions with no problem.
So Malkin is right, Axelrod has a family story but to play it yet again,
> yes I have the Parade story, to get support for legislation that would
> affect MY FAMILY but not his makes me furious!
In other words... the government shouldn't do anything about health care
since the politicians already get it for free?
It's like saying the President shouldn't address homelessness because he
already has a White House to live in.
> They can rename the bill, mislead about states opting out ( yeah you still
> PAY FOR IT)
The thing has to make money or else it isn't a competitor, that's the whole
point! Other insurance companies get free reign ("freedom") to charge
whatever premiums they want in states where governors opt-out for freedom's
sake.
> but it will change medicine in this country and not for the better. I also
> have worked in the medical field and we need to tort reform and to be able
> to shop for insurance state to state. Those things are not being considered
> while taking over a major aspect of our lives is.
>
Being able to shop for insurance from state to state is a popular talking
point, and a deceitful proposal. We've tried this already with the credit
card companies.
It backfired totally because it's an obvious trick. The states are not
supposed to be competing with each other, the companies are. Being able to
choose between Acme Insurance of Connecticut and Acme Insurance of Tennessee
doesn't mean Acme Insurance better compete with itself now and lower prices-
that's absurd! It means both Connecticut and Tennessee better ditch their
consumer protections, fast, because Acme Insurance is the real customer
who's shopping from state-to-state, not you.
Once "you" can "shop from state-to-state"
50 states and their laws pertaining to health care. It will identify the
state that is most willing to let them screw people over, charge immense
premiums, not cover anything, etc. And it will shut down 49 of its
operations and move to that one state. And then, you can just "shop to that
state" or be uninsured.
Do you know why you always send your credit card bill to a company in North
Dakota? The credit card companies didn't all move there because of the
weather! Letting North Dakota regulate the credit industry for the entire
nation hasn't worked out very well.
As for tort reform, that IS a problem and IS a part of the bill being
considered. But according to the CBO the money we will save with that is a
drop in the bucket, and they might not have fleshed out its line item in the
bill. Maybe.
> So I am sorry for the suffering of the Axelrod family but not to the point
> of letting it ruin my family's medical care!!! He sure isn't letting my
> family's suffering alter his legislation! Where is HIS COMPASSION? Must
> have left that in Chicago.
Once again, if the only people who are in a position to do anything about
our messed up health care system are already automatically getting it for
free (as part of it being messed up BTW), it doesn't mean health care should
never be fixed.
Nedra, I wish the best of luck to you and your family-
-Jason
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch format to Traditional
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe
No comments:
Post a Comment