Rick Santorum: Americans Invaded Normandy On D-Day Because Of Obamacare, Or Something
Rick Santorum had an odd line in his campaign announcement speech yesterday:
Santorum said, what he and Paul Ryan want to do is “give people the resources to go out and choose for themselves choose what’s best for themselves.”
Unlike Obama, he continued, who is spitting in the face of those Americans who fought on D-Day, 67 years ago today. “Almost 60,000 average Americans had the courage to go out and charge those beaches on Normandy, to drop out of airplanes who knows where, and take on the battle for freedom,” Santorum said.
“Average Americans,” he added. “The very Americans that our government now, and this president, does not trust a to make decision on your health care plan. Those Americans risked everything so they could make that decision on their health care plan.”
Video:
There are no words.
Mr. Matconis. As I said before, “not serious.” He may be above the radar, but….
Mataconis. (Sorry about that).
Someone correct if I’m wrong, but as members of the US military, those heroes who stormed Normandy were 1) involuntarily drafted – MANDATE! 2) provided government healthcare – BUREAUCRACY! and 3) reaped the benefits of an enormous GI Bill that gave them government support to buy a home or go to school – SOCIALISM!
Let’s not forget that they landed alongside British troops, under the auspices of Winston Churchill, who ENACTED THE NATIONAL HEALTH SERVICE.
Not to mention the fact that they liberated France, which would almost immediately institute a UNIVERSAL PUBLIC HEALTH INSURANCE PROGRAM. Didn’t they know that’s exactly what we fought the Nazis to prevent!
The GOP field of candidates is really a secretly filmed reality show, right?
It’s not Santorum, it’s Colbert.
Obama continues to demonstrate his inability to do anything that gives even a hint of economic improvement, but every 2012 Republican presidential candidate chooses to channel Sarah Palin on the campaign trail. Brilliant.
It’s a shame a country like ours continues to get lousy candidates shoved down our throats.
“Those Americans risked everything so they could make that decision on their health care plan”
Damn straight. Too bad it’s too late to make all those guys pay back their GI Bill benefits.
OK.
Not all were drafted, there were many volunteers. All women that served were volunteers.
That was part of their benefit package.
You forgot 4) free burial service, complete with marker
No words? “Schmuck” seems appropriate. Or just “Santorum” (frothy… so frothy).
What horrible, stupid, vile little people these Republican candidates are turning out to be.
Someone correct if I’m wrong, but as members of the US military, those heroes who stormed Normandy were 1) involuntarily drafted – MANDATE! 2) provided government healthcare – BUREAUCRACY! and 3) reaped the benefits of an enormous GI Bill that gave them government support to buy a home or go to school – SOCIALISM!
Gladly.
I am fairly comfortable in saying that the elite units of Overlord — the Rangers, the Pathfinders, etc. — were volunteers. Perhaps draftees, but volunteers for those particular outfits. One tends not to get “assigned” to such groups — you have to earn your way in.
As far as the other parts — simple quid pro quo arrangements. By essentially giving their lives to the government for the duration, with no guarantees that they would come back intact or even alive, they paid the full price — and then some — for those benefits.
Benefits accorded veterans are a debt of honor on this nation, recognition of the service they rendered us, the risks they took, the sacrifices they made. We have no moral right to treat them like, say, the Obama administration treated the GM bondholders. To liken that to charity or welfare is a gross insult to them and us, as it ignores how those people have already paid for those benefits with their blood.
J.
Jay Tea and Southern Hoosier must have been in the 5th Ranger Battalion, because they also completed missed The Pointe.
As equally insulting as it would be to equate universal healthcare or government services as simply charity or welfare…
Interested, I know exactly what the vets paid for what they receive. In the case of… say, you or me, what have I offered or given to the country to merit equal benefits? I’m no veteran. I never signed my life over to the government to use as it sees fit in the national interest. They owe me no such thing.
Stormy, sparkling witticism aside, it’s you that missed the point. Benocratic implied that veterans’ benefits are simply another form of entitlement, and not actual payment for services rendered. But I understand how you don’t grasp that concepts like “debt” and “honor” don’t mean much to you, so I will set aside my anger. Because you (and Beno and Interested) Just Don’t Get It.
J.
Winston Churchill, who ENACTED THE NATIONAL HEALTH SERVICE
Incorrect. Labour under Attlee brought in the NHS after their 1945 electoral victory.
It is however correct that (1) the NHS was largely conceived during Churchill’s national gov’t and (2) the Tories accepted the NHS when they regained power in 1951.
The only “benefit” Benocratic mentioned was the GI Bill, which was most certainly an entitlement. It may be it was a deserved entitlement, but an entitlement none the less. It’s also odd to describe it as payment when most of the people had no choice to turn down the “job” (of the 16.1 million US soldiers in WWII, 10.1 million were draftees). Again, this may be justified, but again it is what it is.
And in any case, none of that had anything to do with the healthcare debate. It’s the kind of clumsy manipulative attempt to wrap themselves in the flag that makes so many politicians look like fools to anyone who’s not completely enslaved by their emotions.
Well, I’ve been paying into SS for 37 years, but the GOP position is basically that I am a leech looking for a free lunch.
And, as was pointed out above, this has nothing to do with the fact that Santorum is a raging idiot. Let’s just let the bravery of our forces in WW2 speak for itself and leave partisanship out of it.
actually, anjin, the most common attitude I’ve heard is “it’s a Ponzi scam, most young people will never see a penny of what they’re paying in.”
There’s a columnist/talk show host up here who every now and then offers the government a deal: they can keep all he’s paid in to Social Security for about 40 years if — IF — he can be exempted from paying any more in and rely upon himself exclusively for his retirement. If you listen to the Democrats, that would be a hell of a deal for the government.
There’s no chance in hell they’ll take him up on his offer, though.
J.
Jay, thats the only solution to this mess that I see as a viable solution. Some sort of tiered cutoff with benefits fading out for age and also responsibility. Someone smarter than I can figure out the cutoff points – off the cuff – over 55, keep paying current rate, benefits will be mostly intact, 45-55 – reduced payments, reduced benefits, etc.
I don’t see any other solution (other than…do nothing and collapse in a few years).
And I also don’t see anyone in office having the balls to suggest such a plan.
Oh, please pardon all of us as we couldn’t possibly hope to posses your nobel piety…speaking of attempts to wrap themselves in the flag…
Psst, raise or elminate the FICA cap…
Please, Interested. It’s “noble.” “Nobel” is the name associated with the now-meaningless “Peace Prize.”
J.
Pardon the misspelling…my point, however, still stands…
There was a point in there, Interested? A rather stealthy one…
J.