Should Senator Mark Kirk from Illinois have had his Recuperation fully paid for by the Government?

Asked by: rruthbj
  • No responses have been submitted.
  • Mark Kirk is the biggest hypocrite in Washington.

    Mark Kirk has my vote for the most hypocritical politician in Washington. Already rich, he benefited massively from the best health care in the world, courtesy of US taxpayers.

    And what did we get for saving his life and his career? Not even a thank you.

    Instead, this person we spent so much to save now decisively turns his back on millions of people who not only have NO insurance of their own; they paid for HIS.
    His only concession to the general populace is that stroke sufferers should have better care. Few would argue with this. But that's typical Mark Kirk: trying to weasel himself out of tight corner by expressing sympathy with a "safe" cause -- one myopically defined by his own experience. This man has no morals at all.
    As far as I am concerned, Sen. Kirk, you are toast in the next election.

  • No, Senator Kirk is on Government Welfare for the Rich

    Senator Kirk "feels sorry for people without good insurance like his" but did not vote for Obamacare. He had a fully paid recuperation on the government, but does not want all people to have his benefits because it would cost too much. So he has free health insurance and all the paid time to recuperate...But he doesn't want "you" to have it. It is ridiculous that a Senator that makes enough money to have his own health insurance paid for by him, gets it free. But the people who vote for him, No Way, he feels sorry but...He's got his own...Now you go get yours. And it's not just Senators with these benefits, IT IS ALL THE TPUBS IN THE HOUSE AND THE SENATE. THEY GOT THEIRS NOW YOU GO GET YOURS. ARE THEY REALLY WORTH VOTING FOR??? Just Asking.

Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.