Reply With Quote
They have already gotten an adequate settlement.
7.4 BILLION??????
How can you even attempt to justify that?
Thank you, heroes!
This toast will have to do.
http://www.tnr.com/blog/jonathan-cha...ers-too-costly
They have already gotten an adequate settlement.
7.4 BILLION??????
How can you even attempt to justify that?
Last edited by CosmicCowboy; 12-10-2010 at 03:20 PM.
maybe because for-profit sick-care, long-term, any-term, is ripoff outrageous?
There were only 10,000 workers TOTAL affected. The majority of those are still perfectly healthy 10 years later. New York has already settled for $625,000,000.
This was pure political theater. 7.4 BILLION? bull .
There were only 10,500 workers who decided to sue the state of New York, not 10,500 workers affected by the events of 9/11. That's not enough to care for them anyway.
Awesome thread
Using 9/11 as a political club to beat whoever disagrees with you still sucks.
I don't think its a political club to the people affected. Pretty shameless to describe it as that.
Maybe the repugs are holding the 9/11 heroes hostage.
It's a political club for the pols who crafted the legislation and skedded the vote, and for the partisan flacks making political hay of it right now.
It's pretty naive to think it's not. It sucked when the Bushies did it. Now that the shoe's on the other foot, it still sucks.
If I didn't see on video, the workers not wearing proper PPE, then I could sympathize with them. As it stands, they did not follow proper safety measures, and my tax dollars should not pay for their mistakes.
If you have sex with someone you know to have AIDS, should we be responsible to pay for your medicine?
The vast majority of whom aren't sick and aren't going to get sick.
Why stop at 9/11?
Why not Hurricanes?
Tornadoes?
Floods?
Earthquakes?
Bad traffic accidents?
Now your a physician too!The vast majority of whom aren't sick and aren't going to get sick.
Come on, Dan, get real.
If Bill Frist by watching TV can diagnose Terry Sciavo as brain-dead, CC can diagnose 1000s of 9/11 responders as sick-care cheaters and fakers.
daily show link
When I read this thread CC's criticism made a lot of sense. This video rebukes his point, at least in the sense that fiscal responsibility is/was not the driving logic for republican opposition, and also exposing the hypocrisy of their position (ie, using 9/11 heroes for political gain but not willing to spend on them; willing to spend in Iraq but not for first responders; willing to debate don't ask don't tell but not willing to debate the bill, etc)
If we can separate those who get help by if they wore the proper protective equipment or not, I might agree.
Forming a position by a comedy show?
Wow...
Really pitiful.
how about forming an opinion based on the footage of the actual senators involved?
Is it in context, or is it snippets?
You could start by offering an opinion of your own in this vein. Got one?
my opinion-
as someone who owns a business, I know how important it is to have people committed to go above and beyond the call of duty when problems arise. So I think WC's "they're not wearing the proper safety gear" argument is utter BS. Its especially ironic from someone who I've seen arguing that govt regulations stop things from getting done. The reason they are heroes is precisely that, they went above and beyond the call of duty and put themselves in danger to help other people.
as a foreigner who studied in the US from 2000-2003 and ended up leaving basically because of the patriot act and the loony environment after 9/11, I think its hilarious that the same politicians that milked the super-patriotic angle are the ones that are turning their backs on those heroes. The only conceivable argument I can see for doing that, is the one CC gave where they are against unnecessary spending and the bill is full of "pork". But if those same politicians approve unnecessary spending in other areas (I'm imagining most likely, areas closer to them- coincidentally, of course), then that argument loses weight.
As for the video, I think its downright embarassing they didnt stand up to debate against the bill. If I were a US citizen I'd be asking myself if they recieve the same salary under that cir stance. At least where I've worked, most employees don't recieve full pay unless they do the full work. Regardless of whether you agree or not with the position, to not make a statement of principle is just lazy and disrespectful; 1000x so if they've been filling their mouths with those "heroes" for years. (I'm sure this is not the first time this has happened, in the US or abroad, its just an especially poignant instance of it happening)
WC, if the senators words have been taken out of context, by all means please put them in context. I see many speeches praising the heroes and extolling the values of patriotism, then a lot of NAY votes. If they have given a reasoned argument for voting NAY that the daily show has ommitted, by all means point me to it and I'll check it out
Not my job. If you are going to post something, put it in context, else expect it to be ignored.
And that' fine, and I agree the heroes need to be honored.
My point is, when you see the videos of the workers, many are not wearing their protective gear in an area they know if full of risks. Why should we foot the bill for their incompetence? They know the regulations and protocols, and were caught on tape not following them. Many jobs would have fired them for such actions, and they retained their jobs for their heroic actions.
Isn't that enough?
I'm not going to attempt to go back that many years. I stand by my contention that I have little sympathy for those being injured when not following standard safety protocol.
I have an idea.
Let's start a war in an energy/mineral rich country, profit off the land of those -eating turds, then use that money to pay for the 9/11 heroes fund.
I addressed this point in my previous post, go back and read it.
You should be ashamed of yourself. Since when does protocol trump necessity, especially when that necessity is to aid innocent victims? You call your heroes incompetent for not following regulations? It would be funny if it wasnt disgustingly hypocritical. How many soldiers and politicians have been "incompetent" by not following regulations? Or was their "necessity" (for national security and a democratic middle east!) more important than aiding those innocent victims?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
