“Assassination” is actually more appropriate because the term implies that there are political reasons for the killing and to suggest that our health insurance industry is not politicised would be laughable.
“Assassination” is actually more appropriate because the term implies that there are political reasons for the killing and to suggest that our health insurance industry is not politicised would be laughable.
I don’t see any contradiction there.
The dem candidate literally platformed Republicans as part of the campaign, how are we supposed to pretend that they actually think Republicans are a threat to democracy?
You admit that running an actual progressive instead of a pro-fracking genocide apologist would be better, yet you think that admitting the weakness of our fascist “allies” isn’t excusable?
Make it make sense.
If only the Democrats had run a progressive candidate with popular policy proposals.
How many of your loved ones have they already murdered?
How many more will have to die before the owners of this country decide that a for-profit healthcare system isn’t worth the threat those profits generate?
The death toll of the health insurance industry currently stands at like 68,000/year. Health, life, and medical insurance companies combined employ about 900,000 people. We could end the insurance industry overnight and the lives saved would outnumber the jobs lost in like 13 years.