Saturday, Oct. 10, 2015    Login | Register        

The facts: Socialism and U.S. healthcare

As a physician practicing in the area for over a decade, I had to respond in conscience to the recent editorial referring to healthcare for the poor. In order to make any decision as a populace, we must first have the facts. There were many misleading statements and few facts in Mr. Timothy Parker’s recent essay.

I can start with just the title at first, “Poorest Entitled to Healthcare in U.S.”

First and foremost, no one is “entitled” to any benefits not listed in the Constitution. We may vote democratically to add benefits (Medicare, Social Security, housing) but no one is entitled.

Secondly, and more pertinently, we HAVE health insurance for the poorest. It is called Medicaid.

Many do not understand the difference between Medicare (elderly and disabled) and Medicaid (poorest). There are strict low-income caps on any who apply for Medicaid. It is exclusively designed for the poor.

As far as the rest of us,there is no doubt that there is a problem with healthcare in the U.S. However, to say that there are 50 million people without “healthcare” is misleading. There are 50 million without “health insurance.”

Anyone who is ill can go to an emergency room and receive care; and of those 50 million, how many are between the ages of 20-35 who would choose not to buy insurance even if they had the financial means?

A healthy 26-year-old can get insurance for about $150 per month. Would that person choose to pay for insurance, or put part of that toward his iPhone bill?

Looking at the numbers, there are about 25 million people who need health insurance who can’t afford it. That is about 7 percent of the U.S. population.

What the Affordable Care Act (ACA) did was revamp the entire system for only 7 percent of the population.

It put control of our personal health decisions in the hands of the federal government. Regardless of whether it is the government directly or the insurance exchange, the ultimate power of what health services are covered, how much is paid, and what services can be offered comes from the Secretary of Health and Human Services.

The U.S. Preventative Task Force is the federal government’s public health screening arm. Under President Obama this task force has recommended that NO man of ANY age should ever be screened for prostate cancer. They also recommend that no woman under 40 without risks should get a mammogram and after age 50 every OTHER year.

To most doctors this is unconscionable. What about those who agree with Obamacare? Do you follow those guidelines? Does Mr. Parker? The real question is what will happen in 2014 when the federal government takes control of those decisions for you and your doctor?

The ACA/Obamacare was not passed “with great compromise” as inferred. Not a single Republican in the House voted for it. It is modeled after “Romneycare” in Massachusetts, however, and this year the governor of Massachusetts is attempting to pass a $20 billion cut to their program because of the losses.

Last year Massachusetts tried to pull legal immigrants from the insurance pool, but they were denied by their own state supreme court.

Looking at socialized medicine worldwide, we see a similar picture. Most socialized nations have the same rate of increase in health expenditures as the U.S., they just have a lower starting point.

These starting points are falsely low as a result of their health insurance and retirement systems not being included in expenses because the governments are responsible for retirement.

It would be similar to United Healthcare or Blue Cross Blue Shield not having to pay for a human resource department and 401k plans.

Most importantly, we have to look at quality of care for those who are sick. In Canada, the death rate from breast cancer is about 10 percent higher than in the U.S. For colon cancer it is about 7 percent higher.

I have had Canadian patients inform me wait times for elective hip replacement is 13 months. Right now I have a patient whose sister has a herniated back disc and is on chronic medication whose wait time for surgery is 15 months. She is attempting to get a surgery here in the U.S.

Canada is worse than most of Europe, but not by much. In Britain they deny certain seniors dialysis, which leads to certain death. Longer wait times, less care — and this is before austerity measures.

What we all must understand is that there is no magic bullet. If we choose socialized medicine, it is not only the doctors and hospitals that suffer, but also the patients. Some bureaucracy that “knows best” will decide what is right for us.

On the other hand, if we choose a market-driven system, there will be those who fall between the cracks of care. For those there is charity care — free medication and free services with a little investigative work.

All major pharmaceutical companies will give free medications to those with low incomes, including the working poor.

Right here in Fayette there is the Fayette Care Clinic and the Take Care Clinic for low- or no-income persons. There are often delays and changes in charity care but those are not much worse than we see in socialized care elsewhere.

Medicare is available for those who become disabled at younger ages.

If we say we are following Judeo-Christian beliefs, will we be able to live up to our responsibilities with donations of time and money? If not, will we choose “forced conversion” where the taxes of ACA/Obamacare are used against our will to fund second-tier healthcare for all? This is what this next election will decide.

I have presented hard facts and personal experiences. Mr. Parker has provided vague facts and innuendos. Whom should you believe?

This is the information age. I challenge everyone to research these facts using reputable sources. Please educate yourselves — your life depends on it.

Anthony F. Lawson, M.D.

Fayetteville, Ga.

[Dr. Lawson is associated with Starr’s Mill Internal Medicine located on Ga. Highway 74 just south of Peachtree City.]



albion's picture

American citizens are indeed “entitled” to a guarantee of access to benefits based on established rights and legislation. In the preamble to the Constitution our Founders thought it appropriate to include the phrase “promote the general Welfare”.

Recognizing that the Preamble serves as an introduction, and doesn’t assign powers or provide specific limitations to the federal government, it does outline the fundamental purpose and guiding principles of the document.

One of the principles was tested in Ellis v. City of Grand Rapids. The City of Grand Rapids wanted to use eminent domain to force landowners to sell blighted property in the city to owners that would develop it in beneficial ways: in this case, to St. Mary's Hospital, a Catholic organization. In deciding whether the project constituted a "public use", the court pointed to the Preamble's reference to "promot[ing] the general Welfare" as evidence that "the health of the people was in the minds of our forefathers".

The argument was made that “renewal and expansion of hospital and medical care centers, as a part of our nation's system of hospitals”, was in accord with an objective of the United States Constitution: “promote the general Welfare.”

And there you have it: Constitutional intent, correctly interpreted, within the legal system. I’m sure legal scholars could make counter arguments. That’s what scholars do after all.

Social Security and Medicare are insurance programs that we are entitled to, because we pay for them. Our "right" to healthcare IS an entitlement based on moral and social principles, within the framework of our society. These are "rights" based in the concept of social equality. Again we can lean on the intent of the Founders. Having established some foundation let’s get into the nitty-gritty.

Medicaid serves 43 million children, 11 million non-elderly, low-income adults and another 8.8 million with disabilities. Some of those who don’t qualify for Medicaid, and can’t afford private insurance, will walk into emergency rooms and urgent care clinics when their disease, injury or illness becomes unbearable. In those cases, we the insured and the non-poor have historically paid for their care through increased premiums and through our taxes. Either way we foot the bill.

Poor people often have to decide between food and medicine. These are choices that should not be contemplated in civilized society, yet the good doctor seems to argue that the poor are taken care of adequately enough. And hey, some of those poor people are “choosing” to not buy insurance, so it’s the poor who are to blame for insufficiencies in the quality and affordability of their health care.

The Affordable Care Act provides Americans with improved health security by putting in place comprehensive health insurance reforms that expand coverage, hold insurance companies accountable, lower health care costs, guarantee more choice, and enhance the quality of care. Whether these improvements benefit 30 million or 7 million, they’re still worth pursuing.

Fear-mongering notwithstanding, government control is not a realistic effect of the Affordable Care Act. Forcing tens of millions of citizens into the arms of the for-profit health insurance industry is a bigger, and more real concern. Insurance company underwriters and panels have always sought to deny coverage, in the interests of greater profit. Their incentives are perverse. Single-payer, universal healthcare (Medicare for all) would be more in the spirit of “the general Welfare”.

Clearing up some disinformation:

The prostate screening recommendations of the U.S Preventive Services Task Force found that the treatment of cancers detected by the PSA test may result in lasting harms including impotence from surgery, radiation or hormone therapy, incontinence from radiation therapy or surgery, problems with bowel control from radiation therapy and even death from surgery. The risks outweigh the benefits. It’s a recommendation, not a law, and it’s based on years of accumulated scientific data. Digital exams may still be performed routinely, so it’s not like men won’t be “screened” in some fashion. The same goes for breast exams.

Republican opposition to the ACA was a clear demonstration of the craven, intransigence of a Republican party that has veered dangerously off course. The chief tenets of the ACA were Republican ideas not so long ago. Now that President Obama has succeeded in advancing the legislation, that had failed to be enacted for decades, it’s suddenly socialism. Any reasoned review of the path from the principles to the enactment would result in a different conclusion. It is progress and it’s long overdue.

Socialized medicine is NOT socialism. Actual statistics show that socialized medicine is cheaper, saves lives, and helps alleviate class and racial inequalities in healthcare.

Demonizing socialized medicine conveniently ignores the VA and the medical departments of the US Army, Navy, and Air Force which can be considered socialized medicine systems. Medicare, Medicaid, and the US military's TRICARE also fall under this definition.

On Canada:

Health Canada publishes a series of surveys of the health care system in Canada based on Canadians first-hand experience of the health care system. Although life threatening cases are dealt with immediately, some specialist services are non-urgent and patients are seen at the next available appointment in their local chosen facility.

• The median wait time in Canada to see a specialist physician is a little over a month with over 89% waiting less than 3 months.
• The median wait time for non-urgent diagnostic services such as MRI and CAT scans is about two weeks.
• The median wait time for elective surgery is a month with over 82% waiting less than 3 months.

Although Canadians get the services of their physicians and hospitals included, they have to pay the cost of prescription drugs themselves. Many take out insurance for this but it’s not compulsory. Some people pay out of pocket.

• 34.3% of adults reported having no out of pocket costs for prescription drug costs.
• 96.2% of adults pay less than 5% of their disposable income on prescription drugs.

85% of Canadians reported that they were "satisfied" or "very satisfied" with the way health care services are provided in their country and nearly 90% rated their physician in the same way. Hospitals received an 80% rating for patients being "satisfied" or "very satisfied". That does not read like a system rife with suffering.

The next election won’t change anything. In the increasingly remote possibility of a Romney presidency, he will not “repeal Obamacare”, as he says, because it is essentially “Romneycare” after all. The provisions will continue to roll out over the next several years and people will continue to appreciate the reality versus the manufactured fear and outrage.

I have accepted Dr. Lawson’s fact challenge, using reputable sources including, but not limited to:
• The U.S. Constitution
• The U.S. Preventive Services Task Force
• The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services
• Health Canada

Peachtree City, GA

"All generalizations are false, including this one." - Mark Twain

Git Real's picture

Now...In your own words tell us how Obama, Hillary and your fellow minions are blameless in what has transpired in the Middle East over the past few days.

<em><strong>Stupid can't be fixed. We can only vote him out</strong></em>

Four Americans have died. (and politics goes on as usual). Four have been arrested/captured as possible suspects in this horror. A stupid video was used by protagonists to stir up a populace. Who paid for this video that came out of the US? Who sent the video to the Arab world - in time for 9/11 disruption? Why is the American Jewish community denying that members of their community paid for this video? Why is Obama being blamed for the video? Why are all news media reporting the facts - except Fox Newes which is sensationalizing, rather then getting feet on the ground information and using the videos from other news media. (I hope I'm wrong in what I'm assuming about this - but it stinks) We have war ships in strategic places ready to act - and Marines are on the ground as I type. Is this what America wants - more war, death, destruction? I sincerely believe that Romney, the individual, knew nothing in advance about this horror - or he would have been able to handle it in a more 'presidential' way. The timeline shows that Romney's comments came BEFORE the death of our Ambassador. The facts show that the comment made by the officials at the state department were not well advised.. .and did not come directly from Obama. Are politicians using this tragedy to make Romney appear ready to handle foreign relations? Are politicians using this to make Obama look like he can't handle foreign relations? I believe that our politicans are not representing the American people. . . and that is sad and dangerous. . . for if we go to war over this incident - our sons and daughters pay the price. Somewhere in someones calculations - our sons and daughter are expendable in order to win an election. IMHO..

Most Americans are glad that President Obama is the person dealing with the current crisis in Muslim countries. Imagine if John McCain or Mitt Romney were in charge? Shoot from the hip diplomacy? Invasion of another Muslim country? President Obama and Secretary Clinton will handle the crisis with a minimal loss of American lives and do their best to repair the damage to our relations with those nations.


S. Lindsey's picture

... MOST really? Don't think so.

How is the Arab Spring working out there Lion...?

"Whoever claims the right to redistribute the wealth produced by others is claiming the right to treat human beings as chattel."

-Ayn Rand

albion's picture

Thank you for your well considered retort GR

Keep up the good work!

"All generalizations are false, including this one." - Mark Twain

[quote]The next election won’t change anything. In the increasingly remote possibility of a Romney presidency, he will not “repeal Obamacare”, as he says, because it is essentially “Romneycare” after all. The provisions will continue to roll out over the next several years and people will continue to appreciate the reality versus the manufactured fear and outrage.[/quote]

Romney won't change anything - Obamacare is Romneycare

[quote]American citizens are indeed “entitled” to a guarantee of access to benefits based on established rights and legislation. In the preamble to the Constitution our Founders thought it appropriate to include the phrase “promote the general Welfare”[/quote]

welfare; to provide those services that citizens cannot provide for themselves Some believe that the poor should pull themselves up by their bootsraps or get sick and die. That's what the countries run by those 'Arabs' seem to be doing.

[quote]Republican opposition to the ACA was a clear demonstration of the craven, intransigence of a Republican party that has veered dangerously off course. The chief tenets of the ACA were Republican ideas not so long ago. Now that President Obama has succeeded in advancing the legislation, that had failed to be enacted for decades, it’s suddenly socialism. Any reasoned review of the path from the principles to the enactment would result in a different conclusion. It is progress and it’s long overdue.[/quote]

Over the years, Republicans supported ACA. Now that Obama got it through Congress, Republican supporters call it socialism. How will ACA change under Romney?

Anyway - we'll see what happens after November 6. Thanks SJF.

SPQR's picture

Excellent rebuttal. But just like the counterpoint, it attacks the symptom and not the underlying problem. The real problem. Healthcare, with the advent of subsidized group insurance back in the 50's became a cost plus proposition and never looked back.

IMHO, we have the world's best health care system.
Our problem is with the health insurance industry.

We might need a regulated health insurance industry that is able to cross state borders and operate nationally but in return may need to be regulated as to rates, loss ratios, and consolidations. We need multiple options in health care insurance but we need to ensure that the industry does not consolidate into 2 or 3 large companies.

There are industries that have been de-regulated that have suffered from too much competition, losses and consolidation that have resulted in "too big to fail" banks who, we the American people had to bail out, who are now killing us with high fees. Also, let's not forget jumbo airlines who can now charge high travel rates and associated fees. Airlines were de-regulated, as were the banks and telephone companies. Good examples where Americans benefited on a mid-term basis due to increased competition but suffered long term after consolidation to a few large players.

Let's remember that state insurance regulators stand in the way of national competition.

As for government control, let's keep it private but healthy, competitive and regulated otherwise we will continue on the current course of insurance companies blocking Americans from our health care system by raising rates, cutting back on what policies will cover and refusals for experimental life saving treatments which are the making of the much feared death panels.

The fastest way to socialized medicine is to allow free market competition where consolidations to 2 or 3 companies can hurt the American people.

I'm all for free enterprise but in this 1 case, as we have learned from history, regulation might be needed.

PTC Observer's picture

You have misread the Constitution, but you are not alone.

As to your other "reputable sources", they are all government sources, or didn't you notice this small fact?

This is the bottom line pal, Americans don't like to be told what to do with their own bodies, their money or their freedom. Especially by a government that was instituted explicitly not to do these things. You can sing all the old socialist songs you want, the fact remains that we are all free individuals, no matter what kind of gun you and your ilk hold to our heads. There is no common good, except that common good that we as individuals want to freely give to our fellow man. We certainly don't need a government to force us to do it, and we don't need people like you deciding for us what we should give up to do that.

albion's picture

The socialist meme is typical ad homonym attack BS.

fwiw I consider myself to be a moderate, left leaning American. In a rational assessment of my views and opinions, that's true. You however have moved so far to the right that you have no concept of "moderate". Instead you assert that you know better than I what Americans believe and want.

I am free and appreciate that I can excerise my freedoms. I also believe that government can do good, because the government is us.

You speak of government as an oppressive and alien thing. I am sad for you. It seems that any good works done on your behalf will be the subject of your derision and resentment.

No one has forced you to do anything. This abrogation of freedom nonsense is just echo chamber reverberation. Name a single way in which we are less free as the result of the ACA. Oh wait, I just thought of one for you: we are less free to become bankrupt due to medical costs.

"All generalizations are false, including this one." - Mark Twain

S. Lindsey's picture

...just an observable fact. The system that you advocate for can be found in most Socialist Countries so it is not much of a stretch of the imagination to see why you agree with the sentiment.

btw-Freedom of Choice lost. Do you have the choice to not have healthcare or are you "mandated" to have it?

"Whoever claims the right to redistribute the wealth produced by others is claiming the right to treat human beings as chattel."

-Ayn Rand

albion's picture

You kids are hilarious!

Yes, those evil socialist countries - Thirty-two of the thirty-three developed nations have universal health care, with the United States being the lone exception. "Long live the for-profit health care industry."

There are currently four socialist countries on the planet: China, Cuba, Laos & Vietnam. Are we like them?

Other with constitutional references to socialism are Guyana, India, North Korea, Portugal, Sri Lanka, Syria and Tanzania - or are we more like them?

So is it those countries you refer to, or is it the federal, constitutional democracies and monarchies of Norway, New Zealand, Japan, Germany, Belgium, United Kingdom, Kuwait, Sweden, Bahrain, Brunei, Canada, Netherlands, Austria, The UAE, Finland, Slovenia, Denmark, Luxembourg, France, Australia, Ireland, Italy, Cyprus, Greece, Spain, South Korea, Iceland, Hong Kong, Singapore, Switzerland or Israel who all have either a mandate, single-payer or some other form of socialized healthcare.

Your fears are baseless and your "facts" are not facts at all but complete bs. Come back to the discussion when you can operate in the real world. Your parallel universe is imploding.

"All generalizations are false, including this one." - Mark Twain

PTC Observer's picture

no sense in arguing about it with the likes of you.

I think Alexis de Tocqueville said it best more than 170 years ago, about his observations on early American society in Democracy in America.

“A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship.”

Why don’t you pick up a copy and educate yourself on the reality of the world as it really is, or are you like most leftist and refuse to because it is in your best interest not to.

You have noticed I hope that we are 17 trillion dollars in debt? That Europe is bankrupt? How in the world do you think we got here? Talk about parallel universe, well it's your universe you have to worry about pal.

[QUOTE]How in the world do you think we got here?[/QUOTE]

Especially since we had a surplus before a certain party won the White House!!!!!

PTC Observer's picture


"“A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government."

It doesn't matter what the Democrats left the Republicans in the 1990's.

Here, take a look at this DM.

It's the red numbers you should focus on DM.

You just keep looking at the numbers - that is about all you can handle.

PTC Observer's picture

And you can't or you choose not to while you call for even more deficit spending to support unsustainable programs.

Go back and look at the last line item in the link DM. You can't possibly think that this can go on and on and on. Maybe you don't care, maybe you would like to see a dictatorship? A good socialist would be good for you, maybe the guy that occupies the WH right now?

A democracy to end democracy, right DM?

Can you share without using 'talking points'? 'I' don't support unsustainable programs using deficit spending - but that's the hand we've been dealt for more than 50 years. To expect to correct this in 3 years is ????? . Americans are seeing progress, and wondering would returning to the practices that got us here is wise. We'll know in November.

PTC Observer's picture

I have no idea what you are talking about.

Correcting out of control spending is at some point, self correcting, but the result of this correction is chaos.

So, if we don't start correcting it the world loses confidence in our will and more importantly our currency. It will be our children that pay for this both financially and with their freedom. You are a big proponent of government "solutions" but government solutions have only served to bankrupt the nation. Yet, you seek more "solutions". There are no government solutions only political pay offs.

Are those talking points? If so, just ignore them as you normally do.

Please share MY sentence which makes you believe I am a BIG proponent of government solutions.

PTC Observer's picture

Now tell me DM I don't have to go looking very deep in these pages for your support for the new health care law that will add another program to bury our country under even more debt.

Do you denounce this program as a waste of money DM?


I didn't think so.

[quote]Do you denounce this program as a waste of money DM?[/quote]

No - and neither do EITHER of the candidates for president!!!! (Although one keeps changing his position almost weekly.)

PTC Observer's picture

Not talking about them, we're talking about you.

So, go back and re-read the string here DM.

Like I said, just ignore me as you normally do. But you are part of a really, really big problem for our country.

Our country is broke, you know it, but you and other leftists persist.

You know what the outcome will be.......and you invite it.

Any individual who proposes disenfranchising a good part of the American populace is not to be considered creditable. You have become a joke IMHO. But your comments are entertaining. The bottom line will be realized in November - and then we'll go from there.

PTC Observer's picture

Nothing will change in November, only the faces may change. The problem will continue with help from folks like you.

It's all in the numbers DM.

If you ran out of food and only had 5cents, would you hold on to the five cents or spend it on seed in order to grow more food?

PTC Observer's picture

Wouldn't be worth anything if I ran out of food DM.

I fact that you will find out.

kcchiefandy's picture

...just give us your credit card #'s and the CCV #'s on the back and we'll help you understand debt. A DEBT IS A DEBT, it doesn't matter 'how' it works between nations; it's still a debt. Btw, the largest debt holders of American debt are Americans (bonds, notes, etc...); China owns a lot but not the majority amount... Hey, I NEED a Cadillac, I'm too big for a Prius to haul me around; I'll just put it on your credit card...I'm sick - it's not my fault - I'm sure you won't mind; thanks for the help!

Not using my credit card currently. Sorry.

S. Lindsey's picture

Here’s the clip of President Obama’s interview with David Letterman (which Steve Hayes discusses in greater detail here), during which Obama shows that he apparently has no idea how big our national debt is — apparently even to the nearest trillion.

...and that is the problem.

"Whoever claims the right to redistribute the wealth produced by others is claiming the right to treat human beings as chattel."

-Ayn Rand

kcchiefandy's picture a previous party! Hmmm, how'd that happen? Read your history, DM; your male whore was living off other peoples work! Wow, how well does THAT fit his party?!?! Clinton's welfare reform was a positive step, though, btw; too bad Obama the Socialist went off the deep end...

You read your history. I think there was an administration between Clinton and Obama.

opusman's picture

Yes, but who controlled congress ( and the purse strings) to get that " surplus" and who controlled congress when that " surplus" was turned into a deficit.

"Invincibility lies in the defense. The possibility of victory in the attack."

[quote]and who controlled congress when that " surplus" was turned into a deficit.[/quote]

Bush! He was the 'leader'. Look it up. The deficit didn't start with Obama. It grew as steps were taken to stop the downward trend. You've got to look at more than Fox - or you're not going to be prepared to hear what should not be news to you during the debate. <cite> That dog is right on the scent!</cite>

[quote]I think Alexis de Tocqueville said it best more than 170 years ago, about his observations on early American society in Democracy in America.[/quote]

We've gone beyond EARLY AMERICA SOCIETY STATUS. Please join us in the 21st Century. It is wise to apply wisdom to the CURRENT SITUATION. 236 years - there has been a change.

PTC Observer's picture

Does not change with time.

Read it. Not one president has instituted all of the abuses that are stated in this document - and that's the truth. As a people, we are continuing to strive for the 'truth' necessary for a peaceful existence within our shores and globally. Until this Congress, our representatives have done well with the responsibility given to them under the Constitution. We will vote on November 6. . . and we expect to continue to move Americans. Not just 53% of us.

maximus's picture

We're sure lucky that "Not one president has instituted all of the abuses that are stated in this document". But Obamarx is trying hard.

47% don't agree with you - so he's just going to ignore them!!

maximus's picture

I can't even understand what you're trying to say, Dimwit Mom.

kcchiefandy's picture

...she's saying 47% still want their check coming after Oct. 4...

PTC Observer's picture

Is what I am worried about, forward off a cliff

kcchiefandy's picture

...that was a document to justify separation from the British Empire, not the foundation for a new, independent government. After the success of the revolution, THEN we got down to business of running this new nation. Remember the Articles of Confederation? THAT was our 1st shot at government. Did you want to 'alter or to abolish it', that being our current form of government? You might meet some opposition there...

And, WOW! Are you so arrogant that you think those thoughts from 170 years ago cannot, do not, apply to today?? You must not be Christian, because those ideas are over 2000 years old - who'd believe in that old crapola?!??!

I don't think I missed the application of wisdom from the past .

[quote] It is wise to apply wisdom to the CURRENT SITUATION. 236 years - there has been a change.[/quote]

Hey guys, it has been entertaining. There are different points of view. Looking forward to Oct. 3rd!

The next time I go to the grocery store, I'm going to wear a shirt that states "If you are using food stamps or an EBT to pay for groceries, THANK THE 53% THAT PAY FEDERAL INCOME TAXES."

I am tired of standing in line at the grocery store behind a baby-momma with 3-4 little chillens and no baby daddy in sight, watching her use food stamps or an EBT card to buy a bunch of un-healthy crap that is paid for with the money that I earn.

These people should at least have the decency to thank every taxpayer that they see for providing for her 'family'. These people have grown to think that they are entitled to money that they did not earn, whilst spitting out a bunch of kids they can't afford.

<strong>These people are:</strong>
Seniors, students, persons who have lost their jobs in this economy, people earning below the poverty level(if you're talking about those who don't pay income tax). If you're talking about 'baby mommas' - well the 'other' candidate seemed to be saying that and turned a few people against his candidacy - so keep it up Grizz!

Gort's picture

Dmom, maybe Grizz can take his wife with him to the grocery store. She can wear her “I’m With Stupid” tee shirt, eh? Ha!

Remember: If you think Social Security and Medicare are worth saving, vote Democratic.

My wife passed away 3 years ago so that probably ain't gonna happen, you buttwipe.

Gort's picture

Grizz, sorry for your loss but we all have dead relatives and family members to morn now don’t we?

Is this the reason you're so bitter about,… well everything actually?

Remember: If you think Social Security and Medicare are worth saving, vote Democratic.


Ad space area 4 internal

Sponsored Content


It just doesn’t make any sense. But then again, a lot of things in this world don’t make sense to me.


The Holliday Dorsey Fife Museum is hosting its eighth annual Cemetery Spirit Walk Friday and Saturday, Oct. 16-17, 6:30-8:30 p.m.


This week's high school football schedule saw two big intracounty matchups which were also region games. Neither one was close.


A class on Infant CPR and Choking will be offered at Piedmont Fayette Hospital Monday, Oct. 19, at 6 p.m. for a fee of $10.