• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Woman Who Attacked ObamaCare Apologizes After Breast Cancer Diagnosis

Two years ago, Spike Dolomite Ward and her husband had to choose between paying their mortgage or keeping their health insurance. They kept the house, and now at 49 Ward has been diagnosed with breast cancer. She didn't know how she'd afford months of expensive treatment, until he discovered the Pre-existing Condition Insurance Plan, which is part of Obama's healthcare plan. Now she's publicly "outed" herself in the hopes that she can teach ObamaCare opponents that the uninsured aren't just lazy freeloaders.
Click to expand...

I cant be the only one who read her 'story' and was pissed off. Or am I?

Money was tight - and like countless other people - they had to make choices where to cut back money. Somehow that came down to the house VS their healthcare (nevermind cellphone, internet, tv, etc etc etc).

So - naturally - they CANCELED their own insurance knowing all too well the possibility of something bad happening when they're uninsured.

But then she claims that "not all people without insurance are lazy freeloaders" and that "If you still have a good job with insurance, that doesn't mean that you're better than me, more deserving than me or smarter than me. It just means that you are luckier."

She's a ****ING DIP**** who put their general healthcare underneath the possibility of SELLING THEIR HOME. Holy poo - since when are homes that important? Would it have killed them to just let go of it or rent it out? . . . and she breaks it down to being 'lucky' or not? What about all the other people who were in their same situation and chose to just keep the insurance they originally had even if it meant letting go of something else?

Well - they most certainly wouldn't have been having to appologize to the president and make total asses out of their selves - now would they?
 
Last edited:
Aunt Spiker said:
I cant be the only one who read her 'story' and was pissed off. Or am I?

Money was tight - and like countless other people - they had to make choices where to cut back money. Somehow that came down to the house VS their healthcare (nevermind cellphone, internet, tv, etc etc etc).

So - naturally - they CANCELED their own insurance knowing all too well the possibility of something bad happening when they're uninsured.

But then she claims that "not all people without insurance are lazy freeloaders" and that "If you still have a good job with insurance, that doesn't mean that you're better than me, more deserving than me or smarter than me. It just means that you are luckier."

She's a ****ING DIP**** who put their general healthcare underneath the possibility of SELLING THEIR HOME. Holy poo - since when are homes that important? Would it have killed them to just let go of it or rent it out? . . . and she breaks it down to being 'lucky' or not? What about all the other people who were in their same situation and chose to just keep the insurance they originally had even if it meant letting go of something else?

Well - they most certainly wouldn't have been having to appologize to the president and make total asses out of their selves - now would they?
Click to expand...

You don't know **** about this lady, and whether she had cable, a cell phone, or whatever. Nor is it your place to judge. Every thread I go in you are outraged at someone and talking about their needing to burn in hell and how dumb they are. Always up on your high horse. No one is impressed.
 
Tigger said:
No, it sounds like she suddenly realize that her convictions weren't going to make life easy or simple and so she abandoned them without even the pretense of following them. That's part of why I've got mine in WRITING, and notarized. Now I can't just change my mind on a whim and do the easy thing rather than the Right one.
Click to expand...

What exactly is "wrong" with abandoning stupid convictions? Humans are not infallible. Sometimes we come to the wrong conclusions, and realize it later. To not be willing to admit that is not "conviction" to anything other than being a stagnant and uneducated person. I see nothing "right" about that.

Convictions are not always good just because they're convictions. A conviction in the absence of logic is just an obstinate ego trip.

Tigger said:
Four words for you.....

Better DEAD than RED

I have already informed family and friends that I will NOT accept ANY government medical care, regardless of the reason. It's actually written into my living will. If the only means to pay for a procedure or other medical expense is through government funds, I will not take it. Period. I'd rather die, thank you very much.

Yes, I do understand that means after age 65 I will be without any medical insurance.
Click to expand...

I am aware someone has already said something similar to this, but I'll recap: You have already gotten government-sponsored medical care. Government-sponsored medical care has probably saved your life, from the sounds of things.

You can try to dance around it and say it's not "direct" all you like, but you're wrong, and it is. If the government weren't directly involved with medical care at virtually all levels you'd probably be dead already. It doesn't get any more direct than that.
 
Last edited:
whysoserious said:
You don't know **** about this lady, and whether she had cable, a cell phone, or whatever. Nor is it your place to judge. Every thread I go in you are outraged at someone and talking about their needing to burn in hell and how dumb they are. Always up on your high horse. No one is impressed.
Click to expand...

:shrug:

She said it herself
We made a nerve-racking gamble, and we lost.
Click to expand...
- I'm just not admonishing her for praise she doesn't deserve.
 
Aunt Spiker said:
:shrug:

She said it herself - I'm just not admonishing her for praise she doesn't deserve.
Click to expand...

I don't think anybody is praising her. The reality of the situation is that people make these choices everyday. And what are they going to do more times than not? Go for the home first health care second when they are not sick at the time.

BTW odds are had she been sick at the time the story would probably be a bit different.
 
coolwalker said:
Everyone has the right to change their opinion. The Government has no right to force anyone to buy anything. It then becomes a tax because the government has no role as a retailer. Some portions of all insurance plans should be altered, but to have a government official look at a chart and tell me "well, based on your age you can't have this operation" is just plain wrong. For you pie-in-the-skyer-liberal-Obama-Lovers, send him another few dollars for his campaign. He only has a billion right now.
Click to expand...

So, you are FOR people who are 102 years old having cardiac bypass even though there probable survival rate is below zero?? You are FOR proliferate spending that only nets income for hospitals without getting outcomes for people? Happens you know
 
bowerbird said:
So, you are FOR people who are 102 years old having cardiac bypass even though there probable survival rate is below zero?? You are FOR proliferate spending ...
Click to expand...

Profligate.
 
whysoserious said:
You don't know **** about this lady, and whether she had cable, a cell phone, or whatever. Nor is it your place to judge. Every thread I go in you are outraged at someone and talking about their needing to burn in hell and how dumb they are. Always up on your high horse. No one is impressed.
Click to expand...

When someone is expecting others to pick up their bills it is indeed our place to judge. See the thread about the couple collecting welfare while living in the 1.2 million dollar home.

That doesn't mean we would find that she did anything wrong but indeed we may judge.
 
It's a shame it takes breast cancer for the woman to realize it's not only free loaders that tend to get screwed or have problems with insurance.
 
iliveonramen said:
It's a shame it takes breast cancer for the woman to realize it's not only free loaders that tend to get screwed or have problems with insurance.
Click to expand...

Some people learn the hard way.

Reminds me of the teabagger who got in a fight at a rally and was injured - and then had to take up a collection for his medical bills because he had no insurance.
 
iliveonramen said:
It's a shame it takes breast cancer for the woman to realize it's not only free loaders that tend to get screwed or have problems with insurance.
Click to expand...

If she elected to drop her insurance and now expects someone else to pick up her bills, is she not a freeloader?
 
jimbo said:
If she elected to drop her insurance and now expects someone else to pick up her bills, is she not a freeloader?
Click to expand...

From the article it seems as if she's paid to an insurance provider her whole life. Recent events made her drop insurance. That's entirely the issue. If I pay insurance premiums my whole life...lose my job and am uninsured for a short period of time...am I a free loader? No, it's bad timing and is a flaw in the private insurance system. Humana doesn't care if I paid to CIGNA my whole life.
 
iliveonramen said:
From the article it seems as if she's paid to an insurance provider her whole life. Recent events made her drop insurance. That's entirely the issue. If I pay insurance premiums my whole life...lose my job and am uninsured for a short period of time...am I a free loader? No, it's bad timing and is a flaw in the private insurance system. Humana doesn't care if I paid to CIGNA my whole life.
Click to expand...

I'm not arguing right or wrong. I'm suggesting that expecting someone else pay your bills is the definition of freeloading.

FWIW, she did not pay her provider her whole life. If she had, she would have had insurance when she needed it, and this thread would have no meaning. She elected to gamble her wellness against her home, and lost.
 
jimbo said:
If she elected to drop her insurance and now expects someone else to pick up her bills, is she not a freeloader?
Click to expand...

She isn't expecting someone else to pick up her bills. She just wanted to buy insurance without being excluded from doing so.

You bring up a good point though - with no pre-existing condition exclusions, someone could just wait until they are sick and then buy insurance, though that didn't seem to be her intent here. The answer to that problem was...the mandate requiring everyone to buy insurance.
 
You can still be against Obama care and for some type of government assited healthcare system. If I could design a system she would be covered but it wouldn't be Obama care.
 
misterman said:
She isn't expecting someone else to pick up her bills. She just wanted to buy insurance without being excluded from doing so.

You bring up a good point though - with no pre-existing condition exclusions, someone could just wait until they are sick and then buy insurance, though that didn't seem to be her intent here. The answer to that problem was...the mandate requiring everyone to buy insurance.
Click to expand...

She is in fact expecting the taxpayer to pay her bills even though if her insurance had been kept up, there would have been no preexisting problem. She did in fact wait until she needed the insurance to elect to pay for it. Now with the payment of a small fee, she will be able to incur a major expense on the taxpayers dollar.

As to your mandate argument, the government has no right to make my risk/reward decisions. Right or wrong, I have the right to make them, and accept the consequences and/or rewards.
 
jambalaya said:
You can still be against Obama care and for some type of government assited healthcare system. If I could design a system she would be covered but it wouldn't be Obama care.
Click to expand...

I agree...I'm not a big fan of Obamacare. It's basically a handout to private insurers. At the same time....it supposedly was the only thing that would get support from Conservatives being a former Conservative plan. He should of just said "fu** ya'll we're going public option".
 
jambalaya said:
You can still be against Obama care and for some type of government assited healthcare system. If I could design a system she would be covered but it wouldn't be Obama care.
Click to expand...

Okay, how would you do it?
 
iliveonramen said:
I agree...I'm not a big fan of Obamacare. It's basically a handout to private insurers. At the same time....it supposedly was the only thing that would get support from Conservatives being a former Conservative plan. He should of just said "fu** ya'll we're going public option".
Click to expand...

Agree. It was a compromise that pleased nobody and probably won't work.
 
she did not pay her provider her whole life. If she had, she would have had insurance when she needed it, and this thread would have no meaning
Click to expand...

Of course...I mentioned she had to drop insurance due to financial problems. She paid earlier in her life...when she was healthy...which is the point of insurance. The moment she drops it..bang breast cancer. For almost her entire life...she did the right thing, pay insurance premiums incase she has a problem. When she needs it the most, she doesn't have it.

It's a pretty messed up system.

She elected to gamble her wellness against her home, and lost.
Click to expand...

I don't know if that's a gamble as much as being a rational human being.
 
iliveonramen said:
Of course...I mentioned she had to drop insurance due to financial problems. She paid earlier in her life...when she was healthy...which is the point of insurance. The moment she drops it..bang breast cancer. For almost her entire life...she did the right thing, pay insurance premiums incase she has a problem. When she needs it the most, she doesn't have it.
I don't know if that's a gamble as much as being a rational human being.
Click to expand...

It's a pretty messed up system.

Again, I am not arguing right or wrong, moral or immoral, compassionate or non compassionate. I just used your words, which stated that having someone else pay your bills is not freeloading, that your whole life means earlier in life, and now that making a choice to drop your insurance, knowing that you will not be able to reinstate if you suddenly need it is not a gamble. It is in this case the ultimate gamble, unless you can get someone else to pay your bookie.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom