Tag: Ryan

The Romney-Ryan anti-choice team

The Romney-Ryan anti-choice team

Posted on by Jack

I thought I would look back on a previous post and repeat much of what I said but emphasize the anti-choice aspects of it.

This is a quote from the Vice Presidential Debate last month. The link to the entire transcript is the my original post.

Representative Ryan:

“That’s why — those are the reasons why I’m pro-life.

Now, I understand this is a difficult issue. And I respect people who don’t agree with me on this. But the policy of a Romney administration will be to oppose abortion with the exceptions for rape, incest and life of the mother.”

Rep. Ryan is saying that he respects people who disagree with his belief but the favors a law that would force them to comply with his belief.

Or more accurately, they must comply with Gov. Romney’s belief because Rep. Ryan doesn’t believe in those exceptions but does defer to the top of the ticket.

So I guess if you are anti-choice and favor the repeal of Roe v Wade, the Romney-Ryan team is for you. If you are pro-choice, the issue is also pretty clear.

More disingenuous crap from Mitt Romney on medicare this time

More disingenuous crap from Mitt Romney on medicare this time

Posted on by Jack

I do like the term “disingenuous crap” to describe many of Mitt’s apparent positions. This time he is talking about Medicare.

I suppose it is meant to scare seniors who don’t think it through. Be Scared, very scared. Not so much about Obama’s cuts to Medicare as Mitt would like. But just think about the Medicare cuts in the Ryan/Romney budget.

Read the NPR story on his latest dubious and baffling claim. Is he really that that confused or is he trying to confuse us?

Pro-life and Anti-Choice: VP abortion debate

Pro-life and Anti-Choice: VP abortion debate

Posted on by Jack

Abortion is a issue on which Americans disagree. One side believes it should be legal. The other believes it should be illegal.

In last night’s Vice Presidential Debate, Vice President Biden and Representative Ryan pretty much expressed positions on opposite sides of this issue. The quotes below are from NPR which has the video and transcript online. Those interested in the whole exchange can find it there.

Representative Ryan:

“That’s why — those are the reasons why I’m pro-life.

Now, I understand this is a difficult issue. And I respect people who don’t agree with me on this. But the policy of a Romney administration will be to oppose abortion with the exceptions for rape, incest and life of the mother.”

Of course if you think about, it Rep. Ryan is saying that he respects people who disagree but the favors a law that would force them to comply with his belief. Or more accurately, they must comply with Gov. Romney’s belief because Rep. Ryan doesn’t believe in exceptions but does defer to the top of the ticket

Vice President Biden:

“With regard to — with regard to abortion, I accept my church’s position on abortion as a — what we call de fide (doctrine ?). Life begins at conception. That’s the church’s judgment. I accept it in my personal life.

But I refuse to impose it on equally devout Christians and Muslims and Jews and — I just refuse to impose that on others, unlike my friend here, the congressman.”

I am with Joe Biden on this one. I don’t think I should impose my beliefs on others. I think it is a difficult decision but I would rather see individuals involved decide rather than the government.

I can understand why some people will have positions very different, even opposite, from my positions. But I think there is a lack of consistency in taking positions that highlight individual free choice for most aspects of life but take the anti-choice position in others.

Then there is a practical issue. Abortions will occur whether legal or not. Would it not be better to have them occur in plain sight where they will be safer?

Do we improve the healthcare law or repeal and replace?

Do we improve the healthcare law or repeal and replace?

Posted on by Jack

Now that the healthcare law or the Affordable Care Act (ACA) has been upheld by the Supreme Court, the ball is once again in the hands of Congress.

Should we improve the law? Many people support aspects of the law but may oppose others. Perhaps they should encourage Congressmen to try for improvements. I will use the term Congressmen to include women just because “Congress persons” sounds awkward and I cannot think of a good inclusive term (Comments to suggest alternatives, anyone?) Maybe even replace those Congressmen who are not interested in improving the current healthcare law.

There are those who like the idea of repeal and replace. They would reject the law because there are parts they disagree with and trust Congress to replace it with something better. Not a very bright idea, in my opinion.

There are those who just want to repeal the law. Are they really happy with the current system? Do they think it is a good idea that many are uninsured, we have the most expensive system in the world, and certainly far from the best results? Not a good value in my opinion but then I don’t own an insurance company.

do we need to destroy medicare in order to save it

do we need to destroy medicare in order to save it

Posted on by Jack

No doubt Medicare has a problem. We are told the funds available are not enough to pay the benefits promised. So do we need to destroy Medicare (as it is) in order to save it?

Can we reduce costs without impacting benefits? You occasionally read about really big frauds being found. Do we need to do more about preventing those or at least minimizing damage? Private insurers seem less subject to this type of fraud. What is their secret? Can we make the medical system more efficient and less coslty.

If the American people think we should keep Medicare benefits, do we need to find a better funding mechanism? Obviously paying a small percentage of your salary while working and getting heath care benefits for life after 65 is not a viable model in itself. Do we want to supplement this from general revenues or add another dedicated tax. Increasing the taxes on gasoline consumption or adding a carbon tax seems appropriate. We need to decrease our dependence on oil and other carbon producing eneny sources so a tax seems logical to me.

Do we want to decrease benefits? That is the other possible solution. I don’t agree with Rep. Ryan’s plan but at least it has moved us a bit more toward a discussion on this.