Prescription drugs in america are incredibly expensive, and for some reason both parties want to keep it that way (*hint* I think the reason is pretty obvious myself). Generic drugs are produced overseas and resold in the USA with a huge price increase. Also, Canadian pharmacies buy american-made drugs and charge far less than the same thing sold in america. Bernie Sanders tried to change that, but alas the big pharma-democrats in the senate stopped him. Republicans blocked it too. I'm retired and on a fixed income, and I'll probably vote for whoever will fix this problem. This list is representative of the choices I face and I have confirmed it with our European neighbors across the pond. I mail order from Canada when my Obamacare plan is weak. Canada is still cheaper than some plans on Obamacare. Both parties need a house-cleaning and I see no excuse for this: Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Jesse's cafe
Both Parties need a housecleaning, of course. But one Party, the Republican Party, is overwhelmingly responsible for your drug prices and consequent hardship. There are individually corrupted Democrats, but the entire Republican Congress and White House and Court as a bloc has created and defended and enforced the governmental protection of Big Pharma price gouging and its profits. There are no uncorrupted Republicans except maybe a couple of rookies - you can't "clean" that House. So on that criterion you cannot vote for a Republican, and you haven't been able to for decades now (For anything - the State governments are involved as well).
Big-pharma says they are trying to protect americans from inferior quality, whereas most Canadian drugs are produced by the same manufacturers at the same facilities as the drugs that you are currently purchasing right now. It's hard not to call it price gouging when it obviously is. Contrary to claims by Senator Cory Booker (D-NJ) -- the drugs from Canada are no more risky. His home state of NJ, of course, is a big pharma state, and Cory Booker's move was the final blow in the senate to kill a reform measure earlier this year. Senate Vote on Sander's Pharmaceutical Bill to lower prescription drug prices Canadian Pharmacy Facts Why Cory Booker is wrong about the safety of drugs from Canada
Keep on thinking you have me figured out. I have three relatives that served in state government with two as governors. All of them Democrat. Their turning point was the Great Depression. Republicans definitely had it wrong at that time. I guess you would call my family relatives dixiecrats. They never ever voted republican. Never. Global-elitism turns me off about Hillary. The democratic party has taken on more of that in recent years, and Hillary is the epitome of it. Hillary is on everybody's payroll with the Clinton Foundation -- a global front for global donors that has enriched them by 100s of millions, and Bill's offer to sever the ties was too little too late. Bernie is the one proposing the bills to bring down the costs. An article (linked at the bottom) sums up my sentiments pretty well about the democratic party at this time. Note that it was written after the election was over by a former Obama adviser, so you can't say it had an influence on me, like you keep saying. I think you have some denial issues myself. The whole democratic party does. It can't be Hillary's fault. Both parties are out of whack, and it is no longer a party problem. It's an american problem, and many of us feel like nobody represents us. The article covers it pretty well: Obnoxious elitism has found a home’ in Democratic Party
I'm just responding to what you post - I can read, see. I don't have to figure you out. You, on the other hand, somehow need to keep guessing and assuming and projecting your stereotypes unto the person (" I think you have some denial issues myself. The whole democratic party does. It can't be Hillary's fault."). So your ignorance of me is a real handicap for you. Both Parties are out of whack. Sure. Always have been. The big problem is the post-Reagan Republican Party - the Dems are still a bunch of objectionable politicians with flaws, the Reps have become a zoo of stark lunacy and yawning evil. The Dems, given power, can and will govern the country as a functioning First World democratic republic. The Reps, given power, cannot and will not. Banana republics become banana republics by somehow acquiring banana republic governments. That's how it happens. It's not like they're hanging around with their burgeoning debts and paramilitary security forces and cabal of rich owning everything, waiting for their Prince Trujillo to show up at the party. The Republican Party has been taken over by American fascism. Voting for that shit because your fe-fes got hurt by some elitist is childish - an abrogation of adult responsibility. You and half the people who voted for her. Adults, they were, who took one look at Trump and said you've got to be kidding.
The joke in the room is the cost of prescription drugs. Take a look at the OP. My European friends can't believe it. Bernie can do better, but I wasn't given that choice in the election. If Trump doesn't fix it then voters will find someone else. Hillary isn't willing to give up corporate donations to do the right thing. She's just more of the same system that got us where we are today, with companies that make donations for reciprocal preferences that come at the expense of voters. She loves the pay-off. How does a career politician become that wealthy? “An honest public servant can't become rich in politics.” — Harry Truman, Democrat President I have to agree with Mr. Truman. There is an honesty issue with Hillary, and she always has something to hide. I don't want her, or her blood-sucking parasite of a husband. He took most of what my grandmother had.
By using the office of president to funnel money to his businesses and his family's businesses. By getting millions in Russian funds to do their bidding. By getting his spokespeople to sell products on TV. Be Trump, in other words.
Please Woody, who do you think you are fooling? You've gone off the right wing deep end, so stop the nonsense about Bernie. The reason pharmaceuticals are so much more expensive in this country is because our elected and appointed officials are very beholden to special interest money. The way to do that is to change the way we elect our representatives and take the special interest money out of our polity. That means publicly financed elections. Republicans have steadfastly opposed anything which would drain our polity of special interest money, e g Citizens United. And you have a Republican Supreme Court judge sleeping with a lobbyist. And to make it stick, it should be embedded in the Constitution.
So you would never vote for a Republican, since the Party as a unit, and every politician in it cooperative, is primarily responsible for those drug prices. Trump is a Republican. Why would you look to him to interfere with the Republican agenda? Take a look at her tax returns. They're public information. One short answer is that Hillary is not a career politician - she kept her well-paid job as a lawyer while Bill was governor, for example. Her entire career in political office has been nine years in the Senate. That is hardly satisfactory, of course, as an answer - but does provide perspective. Most of the Republican ones rely on the standard Wingnut Welfare of book sales to mystery buyers, sinecures as visiting "intellectuals" at think tanks or liaison executives in government contracting corporations, speaking fees, phony foundations and charities, media talking head jobs, lobbyist positions and influence peddlers (especially for foreign interests), and the like, between or after gigs in office. Being rightwing business friendly authoritarians, both Clintons have some access to this trough. They are unusual in that their foundation appears to be honest and competently run, and some of their books were purchased by people who wanted to read them. Compare Newt Gingrich.
The OP should have answered your own question. He's an outsider. He was a democrat and switched. The Clinton Foundation is rather murky. That's where the money is. Her links with Tyson are an interesting subject on how to win with cattle futures. She could fill a graveyard with her former associates that died rather young. When duty called at Benghazi -- she exercised the judgment of a drunk with a hangover, because she probably was. Some mornings she doesn't even feel like getting up, so she says. I could go on but my stomach is reaching the limit. At least Trump's kids turned out o.k.
You are being evasive and dishonest comrade. You would never vote for a Democrat. You are just attempting to sow discontent and confusion with misinformation, just as your Russian comrades did during the last election. And when was Trump a Democrat, and when did he switch? Didn't your man Trump run on the premise that he was the ultimate insider and knew how things worked which made him uniquely qualified to become POTUS? So which is it, is he the ultimate insider as he asserted or is he the outsider as you assert? You cannot have it both ways. Oh, and what makes the Clinton Foundation "rather murky"? Please do be specific. The Clinton Foundation is very open and transparent. Unlike Trump, the Clintons and their foundation are very open and transparent. Their foundation is audited annually by one of the biggest and most reputable accounting firms in the nation and those audit results are publicly posted. What's murky about that comrade? Additionally, the Clinton Foundation is run by an independent board of directors. Add to that the fact that the Clintons have voluntarily disclosed 39 years of their tax returns. Those tax returns are online and publicly available. And unlike Trump, the Clintons receive no financial benefit from their foundation. Contrast that to your man The Donald. Trump has used his charitable foundation as a personal slush fund and has admitted to doing so. Trump's foundation's financials aren't annually audited by independent accountants, nor does he publish his foundations financials as the Clintons do. So why is it Clinton's foundation is "murky" and Trump's foundation isn't? And what about her cattle futures trading? Republicans have spent 30 years trying to find something, anything, on Clinton and have failed to do so. The unfortunate fact for you is Clinton's cattle futures trading back in the 90s has been thoroughly researched by Republicans and they have found nothing untoward. Well, then you should be able to name them. Where is this grave yard, and who are the names which have filled it? And where is the evidence to back up that one comrade? Not surprisingly, you don't have any, because none exists. You are just making shit up or mindlessly repeating right wing extremist crap as you are wont to do. And that's a crime? You hasn't had those mornings in which you don't feel like getting up?
What question was that? Rick Perry was an actual Democrat who actually switched. Trump is a Republican - and so is his Congress. You got exactly what you voted for - Republican governance, in all its glory. Normal favoritism in corrupt State level politics. So could Trump - only his were actually murdered. Do you understand what New York, Atlanta, and Soviet mob connections means? And the Republican Congress who defunded the security? As Trump is advocating now, btw - defunding the State Department. Trump's proposed further defunding of the State Department may at least reduce that danger somewhat - you can't attack people who aren't there. We'll be handling our risky and delicate diplomatic efforts via rifles and cruise missiles - what could go wrong? Not that murky, and her money connections are traced. Did you check into the Trump foundations, before voting? Of course not. They're rich and rapacious, and already mobbed up - if that's what you mean. Kind of like the Kennedy family, only kind of different somehow - can't quite put my finger on it - oh yeah: http://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/john-f-kennedy-receives-medals Eric and Donald Jr Trump are 33 and 39, respectively. Here's a Wiki summary of Robert Kennedy's life up until he was 35: Comparing the major Democrats and major Republicans along with their families is kind of interesting, especially the latest batch. It even has some thread relevance: Here's a guy who switched from Democrat to Republican (like the Donald, only this guy actually was a Democrat) and played a significant House role in Pharma regulation: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Billy_Tauzin Here's a successful Senator involved in the protection of Big Pharma predations for many years now (guess his Party): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orrin_Hatch and his successful son's very successful lobbying career for guess who: http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Scott_D._Hatch_(Lobbyist,_Walker,_Martin_&_Hatch) Would you like to continue with, say, Al Gore's lineage compared with W's?
I commended Bernie Sanders for tackling the high cost of prescription drugs in the OP. I guess you have nothing to say about that.
Oh that's right. It wasn't a question. You already have all the answers. By the way, the election is over. All the candidates were abysmal choices. I guess Bernie didn't fit in with the DNC super-delegate pay-off crowd. It wasn't his turn. Nobody wants to stay on subject for a constructive solution to high drug prices. At least Bernie tries. If you want to know why your candidate failed in 2016, I recommend you listen to Obama's former adviser Van Jones: Obnoxious elitism has found a home’ in Democratic Party From my point of view, it's spot on. Bernie didn't come across as arrogant and obnoxious. He doesn't fit in with the rest of you.
Just as folks like you commended Clinton when she ran against Obama..... come on comrade, it's time to be honest. Who do you think you are fooling? Hillary's position on prescription drugs is nearly identical to Bernie's: https://www.hillaryclinton.com/brie...on-plan-for-lowering-prescription-drug-costs/ Yet you treat Hillary and Bernie differently. Why is that?
I didn't, and you don't speak for me. She'll always be Hillary Rotten Clinton as far as I'm concerned. She is part of the problem, not the solution, IMHO. That's because they are. You should be honest enough with yourself to admit Hillary has conflicts of interest that Bernie doesn't have. Saying you're going to do something doesn't mean you will, and Hillary has a history of not following through in her own senate district. On the otherhand. Bernie is the real deal. If you must insult people to make your point then you must not really have one, and I will continue to ignore your uncivil behavior.
Only by those who don't know what McCarthyism is and who Joe McCarthy was or those feeling the pangs of their cognitive dissonances or simply dishonest folks.
