So Ron Paul was asked in the Tea Party debate last night if a 30 year old without health insurance who went into a coma should just be allowed to die.
Paul, to his credit, said no, but opined that he'd be taken care of anyway.
Several voices from the Tea Party audience, however, cried out "YES!"
Yes. Just let him die.
A new low for the Party of Love.
A new low for the Party of Love.
5 comments:
The Beloved Spouse told me about this. Aside from the audience's reaction (hard on the heels of applauding Rick Perry's execution record last week), Paul's answer sucks eggs, too.
By saying the man would be taken care of, how does he propose to pay for it? Is he advocating a continuation of the present policy that's breaking the country? Alleged fiscal hawks should not be allowed to give facile answers like that without also explaining how they plan to pay for it.
Dana, I'm sure he intended that charity would take care of they guy in the coma.
Cathy
Aren't these people the same ones who said that the Obama health-care plan would have "death panels" to decide issues like this? Hmm...
They want to keep the bureaucracy out of it and just let you die.
Remember when Alan Grayson said of the Republican health care plan, "Don't get sick. But if you do, die quickly"?
Post a Comment