the Daily Show has been on a roll this week covering the government shutdown and the resulting consequences of republican policies. the transcript below is from last night's episode regarding states which refused to expand Medicaid to implement Obamacare
part 1: http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/thu-october-10-2013/medican-t
part 2: http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/thu-october-10-2013/medican-t----taker--states

and the link below is from two nights ago when Jason Jones performed a hostage negotiation with republican strategist Noelle Nikpour. i would highly encourage anyone flabbergasted about the reasons for the shutdown to watch the negotiations video, i found it both enlightening and pathetically sad at the same time. the mental acrobatics required to keep up a simmering rage against something which is really not as bad as it's made out to be are kind of astonishing imho...

---------------------------------------------

Earlier this week, we talked about how the official launch of Obamacare was marred by web glitches and long delays. But there was another major obstacle to Obamacare's implementation — total dickishness. You see, Obamacare, for all its well-documented issues and problems, is still a well-intentioned attempt to get people who have not had health insurance in this country, health insurance. Medicaid has traditionally covered people up to this income level. (gestures with right hand)

Obamacare was going to cover them ostensibly down to this income level. (puts left hand above right)

So it was going to be like a little gap there, about the size of an iPad, except instead of an iPad, it's about 8 million people living just above the poverty line.

So to provide health insurance for this nation's, you know, that creamy center, the federal government was going to give the state governments money to expand their Medicaid program. For three years, the states would pay for this program — I think the number for this was... zero. Then after that, they would pay up to 10%, I think, by the time it was 2020. So what a great deal. But wouldn't you know it?

SCOTT PELLEY (10/2/2013): 26 states declined to go to that expense.

26 states! Holy fuck! That like... a third of... (does math) a little more.... 26 states! It must be a pretty eclectic group, with many different reasons to explain why they would turn down federal money to bring health care to their working poor. Or maybe there was just one reason.

SCOTT PELLEY (10/2/2013): All of those states have Republican governors or legislatures that are controlled by Republicans. [http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-18563_162-57605792/coverage-gap-leaves-up-to-7-million-ineligible-for-medicaid/]

Oh! Which makes it really hard not to see this as just the latest example of that hit game show sweeping part of the nation: What do you hate more: Poverty or Obama?

Brought to you by Spite. Spite — the emotion that makes you turn down millions of dollars that would go towards health care for the working poor because you hate the President. And Arby's. Arby's — technically, it's food.

Now of course, I imagine that the states when asked why they didn't accept the Medicaid expansion don't probably list "spite" as the answer. So let's see what their reason is. You there, governor of the state in this nation that has the most uninsured children out of any other state.

GOV. RICK PERRY, R-TX (4/1/2013): Medicaid expansion is simply put a misguided and ultimately doomed attempt to mask the shortcomings of Obamacare.

GOV. RICK PERRY, R-TX (7/9/2012): To expand this program is not unlike adding 1,000 people to the Titanic.

That's true, that's true. That's really true. If the Titanic had crashed into a hospital.

But hey, you know what? Everything's bigger in Texas. Especially tumors. What about you, Mississippi? You, Mississippi, or as you're also known, the 49th healthiest state in the union-issippi.

7/5/2013:

REPORTER: Of all the states in the country that should be embracing some of the changes coming from Obamacare, your critics would say Mississippi should be at the front of the list.

GOV. PHIL BRYANT, R-MS: Peter, the problem is it is the worst system of delivering health care known to man.

(whispers) No it's not.

Listen, it's not perfect, a lot of things we'd like to change, but it is not the worst system of delivering health care known to man, as anybody knows who's been a patient at Enema Hut.

Enema Hut — cuz there ain't nothin' wrong with ya that can't be cured by some rectal irrigation.

Now you're probably thinking, Jon, this is so abstract, with these numbers. Can you show me what you're talking about, maybe with an example from the Show Me State, Missouri?

ELAINE QUIJANO (10/2/2013): 45-year-old Bertha McIntyre needs daily medication. ... She does not qualify for Medicaid in Missouri because her family income is too high, about $1,200 a month.

Well ain't she fancy! What with her clothes and shelter. See, that woman is considered too rich for Medicaid, but too poor for the Obamacare subsidies that have an effect. Yeah, that's how much sense this all makes. So, why not expand Medicaid, Missouri?

10/2/2013:

ELAINE QUIJANO: Republican state Senator John Lamping argues Missouri faces tough choices.

MISSOURI STATE SENATOR JOHN LAMPING, R: The entire cost of Medicaid in Missouri is one-third of Missouri's budget. ... We can barely afford to be in the Medicaid program as it exists today.

Boy, that is a tough choice. Should we, as a state, accept 100% of this program's expansion costs from the federal government for the first three years, or, I don't know, fuck it. But it is a tough choice. What are some of the tough choices your citizens are making?

BERTHA McINTYRE (10/2/2013): Am I going to take food out of a child's stomach, or am I going to do without going to the doctor? Which would you choose?

(uncomfortable audience reaction)

And here's the best part. These governors and legislators who refuse to accept federal dollars to expand Medicaid for people like that nice lady? All but 3 of those 26 states they represent already take more money from the federal government than they contribute in tax dollars.

They are already burdens on the systems. I believe they're referred to by those Republicans as "moochers". Moocher states. And if statehood was health care, Mississippi and Missouri would be rejected as having that as a pre-existing condition.

So you may be thinking to yourself, well, so what are these uninsured people do for health care? Well, Republicans actually had that covered in the last presidential election. Not sure how that worked out.

MITT ROMNEY (9/23/2012): Well, we do provide care for people who don't have insurance. If someone has a heart attack, they don't sit in their apartment and die. We pick them up in an ambulance, and take them to the hospital, and give them care.

Historical Footnote is right. (audience laughter and applause)

You can always go to the emergency room when you're having a heart attack. And apparently they think that's the fiscally responsible option, rather than expanding Medicaid. Because unlike Obamacare, we all know ER visits are free!! Just one little problem.

BEN TRACY (3/28/2013): When the uninsured end up here in the ER, their costs are passed on to paying customers. That means insurance companies end up paying more, so they raise rates, and fewer people can afford health insurance. [http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-18563_162-57406091/texas-nurse-helps-the-uninsured-get-needed-care/]

JUDGE NELSON WOLFF (9/26/2013): The impact to our hospital district is $52 million dollars a year. Had we expanded Medicaid, we would've got that $52 million from the federal government. Instead, we're getting it from local taxpayers.

Got it? Medical care for the uninsured is already ballooned the cost of the system. This is an attempt to gain control of those costs. So if you have a better answer, Republicans, let's fucking hear it! But don't make your plan, "What do we need food stamps for, when we already have dine & dash?" We'll be right back.