For Profit "Health" Care **IS** GENOCIDE, and I'll take that argument to my grave!

[Union Yes]

Finally a Dem that spoke from the heart. Finally, a Dem that is showing more spine than I've ever seen from a Dem in my lifetime.(Cept for Teddy of course!)

Rep Al Grayson has burst onto the scene simply by telling the truth.

For Profit "Health" Care is indeed a holocaust.

Grayson was 100% correct when he called it a holocaust on the House floor.

"Health" Insurance executives routinely make decisions to deny coverage that they know will lead to the death of many policyholders.

They do so for the sole purpose of maintaining profitability.

They choose to deny and let die perhaps thousands of their policyholders each and every year and have done so for decades.

44,000+ die annually in America due to these choices of denial, according to a recent Harvard study.

When "Health" Insurance execs WILLFULLY CHOOSE to deny and let'em die by the masses of thousands, Execs and their death panels are choosing to commit GENOCIDE!

They only want healthy policyholders so they can fleece them and bleed them dry from soaring premiums.

The moment that healthy policyholder gets sick, Execs choose to DENY AND LET THEM DIE.

For too long our government has sat idly by and watched and ENABLED this HOLOCAUST.

Rep Al Grayson, with more courage and integrity than I've seen in a long time from a pol, said what needed to be said. He spoke the truth.

He was 100% correct to proclaim that the health care crisis in America truly is a holocaust.

Warning to other elected Dems..

A spine of this magnitude will cause you and our party to walk upright with your head held high.

Max Baucus, Conrad, and Blue Dogs can hang their heads in shame and continue to drag their knuckles.

Al Grayson set the standard on what a Dem should stand for. A warrior for the people.

It's time to pin a new motto on the "Health" Insurance industry..
We deny and let them die.

[DesertFlower]

1. i agree. nt

[rollingrock]

2. Possibly the greatest financial racket/scam of all time

its right up there with the banking industry.

the health insurance industry makes Bernie Madoff look like a petty thief.

[Union Yes]

4. Correctamundo!

:hi:

[DearAbby]

3. +1

Well said

[Omnibus]

5. It's NOT genocide. It's atrocity, it's murder for profit.

It should be abhorrent to any moral person, to set personal profit over life-or-death. That they do so disgusts me, and should disgust anyone with a soul.

But it's not genocide. They aren't deliberately trying to wipe everyone out, and only about .015% of us per year actually die. It's not personal, it's just business. If asked to describe it precisely, I'd call it "systemic mass negligent homicide for profit". The persons responsible should be fined unto poverty, then jailed for life.

I'm not condoning the bastardry they're perpetrating, but saying it's genocide is an exaggeration that belittles actual genocides.

It's almost certainly not a holocaust, either, but that is more defensible.

[Union Yes]

6. I disagree that it's not genocide.

I agree with the rest of what you said.

To me it's a very blatant form of genocide. Health Care Execs have consistantly chosen to deny health care year in and year out.

If 44,000+ died annually in any other nation, America would be screaming genocide.

[Bluenorthwest]

9. If 40+ thousand a year does not qualify as a holocaust

I guess a day like Sep 11 is virtually a non event, the percentage of us that died being so low, the number so, well, tiny, compared to other events. Is it even fair to call Sep 11 and a quake that kills tens of thousands tragedies?
Splitting hairs over the terminologies to use for mass deaths inflicted for political or financial reasons seems like folly to me.
Not a holocaust? You mean it is not as bad as the Shoah. The Shoah was a holocaust. I was raised to call the WW2 multiple genocides The Shoah, a word that translates more closely to 'calamity' or 'tragedy'. Shall those words also be dismissed from their proper English usage?
The word 'holocaust' is used all over English literature, both before and after the Shoah. This is why the word 'holocaust' is used to mean the Shoah in English, not because a word needed to be created for that time out of nothing, but because a strong and meaningful word was needed to invoke the depth of the tragedy. A word like Shoah could have been used in the US, devoted exclusively to the WW2 European events, of which genocide was the worst element, but not the only element. It was battle, and genocide, and bombings of civilians, burning of towns, destruction of art and culture, it was the end and begining of nations. It was an inferno, a holocaust. Not even the word Shoah means just the camps and genocide victims, it means the whole of the calamity that was that time and place.
In my opinion, attempts to remove that word for our lexicon do not serve the memory of those who died, using fitting words does. Words that live and breath and mean things. A term of poetry or art is not the way to hold a memory, the use of words that mean things in current life is. That is why we say Holocaust with a cap H and we do not say Shoah, this was a choice made by people who survived. Because in English Shoah means only that thing from the past but to the survivors the most important holocaust is the next one, the one we can prevent. It should always be named with living words that do not imply a past impossible to repeat.
In short I find the whining over the word holocaust to be an insult to those who lived through the Holocaust. Shoah means the thing that happened. Holocaust means the thing that could happen again, that IS happening now, and the survivor's point was always 'never forget, and never again'. Such goals are not served with sanitized language and a separation of those events from the chain of history and the lexicon of horrors.

[cali]

7. sure it is- if you completely alter the meaning of the word.

[Union Yes]

8. Is it that Americans have been so brainwashed into believing the U.S. is incapable..

of such atrocities.

Can you put a figure on the numbers who have died due to lack of affordable access, or denied/dropped coverage, or preexisting conditions since say 1990?

Care to take a guess at the number dead since 1990 due to for profit health care?

We both know that number could be 500k+ possibly more than a million.

Go on and deny it all you want.

I'll call it what it is.

Pure FUCKING GENOCIDE.

[cali]

10. your hysterics don't change a thing. It's no more genocide

than are lethal car accidents.