Skip to main content

Douche/Jerk of the Week: Alabama Congressman Mo Brooks

While speaking with CNN's Jake Tapper, Alabama Congressman Mo Brooks said the following with regard to the House's latest healthcare bill:

"My understanding is that (the new proposal) will allow insurance companies to require people who have higher health care costs to contribute more to the insurance pool. That helps offset all these costs, thereby reducing the cost to those people who lead good lives, they're healthy, they've done the things to keep their bodies healthy. And right now, those are the people--who've done things the right way--that are seeing their costs skyrocketing."

While I'm tempted to simply go off on Mo Brooks right now, I'll try to keep my cool. Are the odds better for those who "lead good lives" to be healthy and not require as much healthcare as those who don't "lead good lives"? Sure. However, is it a guarantee? Absolutely not! I was born with epilepsy. What did I personally do to deserve being rejected by health insurance companies or see increased rates? Jimmy Kimmel's son was born with heart problems. What did he do to deserve a similar potential fate? What did millions of Americans who have preexisting conditions do to deserve Representative Brooks' claim that they apparently weren't leading "good lives"? I'm sorry, but things aren't as cut and dry as living a good life vs. living a bad life, and it's incredibly ignorant and cold-hearted for the Alabama Republican to suggest otherwise. For that asinine and cruel statement, Alabama Representative Mo Brooks receives my first ever Douche and Jerk of the Week award. Congratulations!

http://www.al.com/news/index.ssf/2017/05/rep_mo_brooks_people_who_live.html

Labels

Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Boycotting jukeboxes because of TouchTunes

I love music and enjoy hitting the bar(s) over the weekend, so naturally, when the mood strikes me, I've never been coy about playing some songs on the jukebox. This past Thursday, a friend of mine turned 50, so several friends of her's, including myself, all met up to celebrate the occasion. At around 9:30, a friend of mine and I both chipped in $5 to play some songs on the jukebox. Four hours and 231 skips later, we gave up on hearing the songs we had selected, and went home knowing we had just wasted $5. This wasn't the first time such a thing had happened to me (and many others), and due to that, I'll be boycotting jukeboxes. Why? The scam known as TouchTunes. You see, here's how the plot typically breaks down. A person (or group of people) downloads the TouchTunes app on his/her phone, consumes one too many adult beverages, and due to this, has less care for spending extra money to hear the songs of their choosing right NOW. That's the thing with TouchTun...
2 comments
Read more

Face guarding is legal in college football and the NFL

I just wanted to remind fans and announcers especially, that face guarding is legal in both college football and the NFL. It all comes down to contact. So long as a defender doesn't make contact with an intended receiver, he doesn't have to turn around to play the ball. I can't tell you how many times every week I hear announcers talk about face guarding being a penalty. It's not. I even heard one announcer yesterday state, "If the defender doesn't turn around and play the ball, the ref will call pass interference every time." That's simply not true. Courtesy of referee Bill LeMonnier, he says this with regard to the rule at the college level (answered on 8/12/13): "NCAA rules on pass interference require the face guarding to have contact to be a foul. No contact, no foul by NCAA rules." In the NFL rule book, this is written:  "Actions that constitute defensive pass interference include but are not limited to: (a) Contact by a ...
2 comments
Read more