Defending Republicare

In a previous post, I mentioned the GOP's plan for healthcare, which may include provisions banning the use of toilets, as well as mandatory childbirth for females over the age of fourteen.  And that's all true.  Republicare might include such provisions, as well as a cost saving provision which may eliminate the use of underwear.  And I would applaud such a move, as I'm a toilet paper guy and have always found underwear to be redundant.  After all, a recent report by the CBO puts America's underwear expense at $1.5 trillion over seventy years (inflation adjusted) and that may have been the amount Republicans were referring to when they spoke of cutting costs.

But then a commenter on that post really went too far, writing:

But I think you forgot the amendments about the mandated conversion of homosexuals and denial of health care to anyone with a skintone darker than John Boehner.

And yes, Republicans are smearing the hell out of Obama's plan, but that's no reason for us to engage in the same sort of vile lies and blatant distortions.  For instance, the bill absolutely does not mandate anyone to convert to any other sexual orientation. Rather, it has a voluntary lifestyle perference measure which encourages hetro tendencies using a financial-based incentive written into the tax code and enforced by the IRS. That's all.

And hey, if the gays don't want to take advantage of this great opportunity to convert back to their natural sexual orientation, nobody's forcing them to.  Instead, they can choose to pay ten percent of their AGI to the newly formed Public Church (or any of the other churches in the religion exchange) and continue to engage in all the anal ramming they can take.  And that just makes sense.  After all, why should the rest of us have to shoulder the burden of God's wrath just because these people don't feel like taking care of their own resonsibilites?

The New White

And it's nothing but a cheap smear for anyone to suggest that Republicare will be using John Boehner's skin color as a measure of healthcare worthiness. That was just in one early draft which has since been withdrawn. The new litmus test is Gary Bauer in wintertime (as seen here).

. 
While some on the far left insist on implying that there is some race-based motive for this policy, the real reason is that research has shown that dark-skinned (or swarthy) people tend to either fall into the category of super-human athlete (eg, Michael Jordan, Usain Bolt) or lard-assed welfare queen (eg, all the others); so they either aren't in need of health insurance or they're such walking disasters that no one should insure them.  And this fits well into the conservative theme of personal responsibility, as it encourages the lard-assed welfare queens to become super-human athletes so they won't die.  Seriously, isn't it time we stop coddling our fat asses?

And besides, even the most portly of blacks still looks healthier than a pasty little toad like Bauer.  I mean, come on, it's creeping me out just looking at that picture.  Anyone worse off than that guy is clearly in dire need of our assistance.  Remember, this dude's had health insurance for years and still looks like that.  Everyone else can take care of themselves.  This guy needs his insurance...and possibly a shift back to his natural sexual orientation.  And who knows, maybe some day we might actually find a cure for whatever it is this guy's got.