Friday, February 27, 2015

Questions the Defenders of the Grifter Richard Mack Should Answer

In the recent brilliant post about the Grifter Richard Mack, I brought you the oh-so sad story of yet another gunloon and rightwing whackjob fallen on hard times.

Hopefully Dead Soon
Of course, this brought out the usual cast of gunloons willing and eager to support anyone who is a gun fanatic and white supremacist.  My morality and humanity was questioned.  My patriotism impugned.  So many false premises and arguments.

Defenders of the Grifter Richard Mack really have to ask the following questions:

1. We get the Grifter Richard Mack doesn't like a black President and is opposed to anything the President favors.  OK.  So, this prevented him from getting healthcare insurance how?  He wants nothing to do with ACA--fine.  But he's getting to that age where medical problems are more, rather than less, frequent.

2.  His crowdfunding effort is very, very likely to leave him hundreds of thousands bucks short (Great News!).  Given the unhappy thought the Grifter Richard Mack survives--there will surely be more medical problems and bills down the line.  How often do you think the Grifter Richard Mack can go to the crowdfunding well?

3. Given the fact his crowdfunding effort will largely fail--and the fact he won't be denied medical care--how do you feel about having to pay more for medical care because the Grifter Richard Mack opted to make you a donor to his cause?


  1. 1. Why are you so filled with hate Jade?
    2. What do you feel is the source of your bigotry?
    3. From whom did you learn to be an arrogant narcissistic elitist ?
    4. Do you believe that wishing pain and death on another is good for your Karma?(just a hint Buddha would not)

  2. "My morality and humanity was questioned."

    Not much to question Jade when in one post you come right out and openly seem to look forward to someone's death. I'm not sure of your feelings regarding his wife, though I wonder if she falls under the guilt by association clause of your logic.

    "Defenders of the Grifter Richard Mack really have to ask the following questions"

    Jade, look up the word grifter and explain how it really applies to Mack. Otherwise I'm going to think you like using that word because it sounds cool,

    "So, this prevented him from getting healthcare insurance how?"

    Don't know, not something either of us can control. We literally have no idea as to what the circumstances are that left him with no health insurance. Perhaps someone here with experience in owning a business can speak to that.

    "His crowdfunding effort is very, very likely to leave him hundreds of thousands bucks short (Great News!). "
    "How often do you think the Grifter Richard Mack can go to the crowdfunding well?"

    So far he's over halfway there and growing. And again I'm seeing numerous contributions from people who despite their disagreement with Mack's stance are stepping up to help him and his wife through this crisis.

    Jennifer Maire
    1 hour ago
    I hope and pray that you both are better soon. I hope that no other family has to undergo this kind of stress, and that is why I support that ACA. All the best."


    "Michael LaBonte
    4 mins ago
    I have seen many of the cruel comments by those who take pleasure in the irony of your situation because of your opposition to the ACA and accessible healthcare for all Americans. I do not. As a liberal progressive, however, I do hope you will rethink your position on this. I actually think the ACA does not go far enough. We need a single payer system. Nonetheless, I have made a donation and wish you and your family the best."

    I'm truly heartened by you bringing this up here because it demonstrates that the humanity of people, no matter what their political affiliations overall get priorities right. There are even contributors who make comments much like what you've said here. And guess what, even with the stinging comment, they are still helping.
    I understand that you feel strongly about Mack and wish him ill. However, you're exuberance in trying to win others over to your side isn't doing you credit.

    "Given the fact his crowdfunding effort will largely fail--and the fact he won't be denied medical care--how do you feel about having to pay more for medical care because the Grifter Richard Mack opted to make you a donor to his cause?"

    Jade, the beauty of crowdfunding is that it is an individual decision and completely voluntary. The only one who can make me a donor to the cause is me.

    1. SS: You're being rather selective. How about the libs who donate$5 for the pleasure of calling him an asshole? I've seen a lot of these--or variations thereof.

      But you still refuse to answer the questions. Mack isn't getting younger. And even Jack LaLanne had health problems in old age. So how long can ke mooch off of others?

    2. That is entirely their choice. If it's worth contributing five dollars to help their plight to give them that satisfaction, what exactly does that say about them? Have you done that?
      As for how long he can get contributions, that is entirely up to the individual, since it's completely voluntary.

  3. Sure wish that nirvana of crowdfunding had helped the millions who went bankrupt trying to pay their bills, or the thousands that died. Of course this guy is a gun loon freak so the guns loons gladly give him money. Do I have to be a gun loon to get crowdfunding? My medical bills are going to bankrupt me too.

    1. Sammy, as I've cited above and you can see by visiting the site, there is an impressive percentage of people who don't agree with Mack's stance who are contributing. It isn't quite as one-sided as Jade suggests. In fact, I'd go so far as to suggest what you see proves Jade just plain wrong.
      In that regard, I'm delighted that Jades fellow progressives are showing Jade to be in the minority.

    2. So what?
      You think all people can get their way out of medical bankruptcy through donations? That's as big a lie as religious, fraternal, and community organizations could solve the problems of the elderly, the hungry, or child slave labor before the government got involved. The problems were way to big for all of those groups. The only difference is our early relitives agreed it was a responsibility to help, unlike the selfish generation today who accept death as the alternative. All your point proves is there are caring people on both all sides. But as your fellow gun loon said, it's OK with him if people don't get any help at all and then they die. As Scrooge would say, If they are going to die, let them do so and decrease the surplus population. The immorality of that kind of "go it alone" position shows the immorality of of generation. Our grandparents and great grandparents knew better and their efforts have doubled life expectancy. Oh, and yes, that took MONEY, which they gladly paid.

  4. In for five just because it makes Jadegold cry.

  5. Re: number 3: You mean the way my insurance premiums more than doubled since ACA passed since I'm having to pay for other people in the pool?

    1. Shop around you are getting ripped off by the liars who say the ACA has made rates rise. BS

    2. No, Sammy. Stop parroting the party line and be honest for once. Rates have skyrocketed since the passage of the law. I HAVE shopped around, gone to multiple agents, and looked through the whole list of possible plans rather than taking their word for it that the ones they offered were the best priced. Too keep my costs down I had to change plans a year and a half ago because I couldn't afford my old one. New premium started about where the old premium was Pre-ACA and is now 1.5 times as high. Old plan had $1,000 deductible and a $50 co-pay for doctor visits. New one requires you to pay the full cost of visits and has a $5,000 deductible. None of the new plans offered have the same terms as my old one, but the ones closest to it are charging 3 times what I was paying pre-ACA.

    3. Not only are millions more insured which saves millions, but health care costs have gone down, check the national, government figures. Seems it's you parroting the Republican party line about costs, which have been proven wrong by the numbers. You are talking about YOUR costs, not national average costs. Sorry you seem to be one of the few exceptions. That happens in a large program.

    4. Costs aren't down. If they were, you can bet Obama would have crowed about that in his State of the Union address rather than, instead, bragging that inflation in healthcare costs was near zero.

      The line about "exceptions" is a favorite among you supporters of the law--allows you to dismiss all data to the contrary. It's a very convenient excuse to employ, even though there is nothing that would cause an exception from the general rule in my case.

      Moreover, I'm drawing upon information from seminars put on by such notable conservative groups as the ABA--seminars that trumpeted how good the law was while simultaneously admitting that it was driving costs up and was going to, in a few years, destroy the employer provided insurance market.

    5. Again you refuse to look at the federal numbers, so you are wrong. Debate over

    6. Where are these magical Federal Numbers that even the President doesn't know about?

    7. I'm sorry, I thought you knew what you were talking about, obviously not. Bone up and get back to me.
      Are you basing your opinion on the same kind of "stories" that convinced you Iraq had WMD's even though Bush himself told the country there were no WMD's?
      I guess your distrust of government goes so far as to reject whatever the government says, or the facts government collects, like the Army's search for WMD's and its conclusion after 2 years that there were no WMD's.
      So again, you won't even check the federal numbers on this issue. Good luck debating yourself, you can't lose, just proclaim there is no evidence to dispute your "stories."
      End of this silly debate with you.

  6. Like these statements of concern for our citizens by your fellow gun loons
    "I agree that people without insurance or the ability to pay out of pocket for their medical bills should be refused treatment at hospitals or other medical facilities"

    And this:

    " If he can't get people to donate money to him or come up with the money on his own then he likely will not receive treatment for his problems. I am ok with that."

    Our past relatives who set up help programs are rolling in their graves, sick at the attitude that if some don't have money, they can just die.