Skip to main content

John Delaney's Plan To Stop Mass Shootings: Make Mass Shootings 'Cost Prohibitive'

John Delaney and his ability to be shamelessly and wholeheartedly beholden to private insurance companies have found something new to exploit: the two mass shootings in El Paso, Texas and Dayton, Ohio, both of which happened at the beginning of August just hours apart and left 32 people dead.

Delaney was given ample time during the past two Democratic primary debates to lay out his proposals, in which he was laughably seen as the rational moderate, when in reality he was just arguing for the status quo. Apart from arguing against any real or meaningful change, Delaney's most memorable debate moment was when Bernie Sanders rebutted his ridiculous anti-Medicare For All statements with “Well, you’re wrong!” Which drew a large cheer from the crowd.

Delaney’s big new idea to end gun violence, which you can see pictured above, is to require “liability insurance” to purchase a gun - an idea which is comical and was mocked in the replies to his tweet.

To be fair to John Delaney and his 1980’s brand of politics, you can kind of see what he’s aiming for: liability insurance which would fluctuate based on mental health history, racist political beliefs - which they could just lie about - what the gun would be used for (obviously they wouldn’t say to commit a mass shooting).

The problem with this and Delaney’s thinking on many issues is his being bound to for-profit insurance companies. After all, this is how Delaney made his $92.6M net worth.

Back in 1993 John Delaney co-founded Health Care Financial Partners, who used their vast amounts of money to grant loans to smaller-sized healthcare providers who couldn’t receive a loan from the large banks. Delaney’s only concern from then to now has been one thing: profit. Take this quote of Delaney’s from a 1998 interview with National Real Estate Investor, “But make no mistake: Delaney may enjoy financing the little guys but he wants to challenge the big guys in his field.” The quote shows that Delaney was only concerned with how much money he could make from the healthcare industry, which is why he’s reluctant to want to change the system because it's what made him and his buddies rich.

Back to current day John Delaney and his ridiculous gun control proposal, it was rightly mocked in the replies to his own tweet and only proposes more questions: What about a shooter who uses a family members gun? How would this close the gun-show loophole? What about the El Paso shooter who didn’t have a history of hate crimes? How does this clamp down on illegal gun sales in the US?

Delaney has spent his whole adult life making money from things which shouldn’t even be for profit in the first place, it’s not a shock that many of his other ideas revolve around helping insurance companies make even more money as it is who John Delaney has and will always be.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

MSNBC Host Lawrence O'Donnell Explains How The Democratic Party Treats The Left

MSNBC's "The Last Word" host Lawrence O'Donnell describes his politics as a "practical European socialist", which essentially boils down to being a nordic-style social democrat, usually in favour of a mixed economy with a generous welfare state and has defended his positions on MSNBC news shows that typically frown upon stepping outside the neoliberal bubble. O'Donnell is no progressive hero in the context of american politics, sometimes scolding progressive politicians whenever they mildly criticize the Democratic Party, such as when Bernie Sanders tweeted about having to take on the Democratic establishment as well as Republicans, O'Donnell decided to concern troll Sanders by claiming that the Democratic establishment wouldn't pass Sanders' proposals if he wasn't nice to them. Over the course of the last few months an old video of O'Donnell explaining how to move the Democratic Party further left and how the party treats the p...

Why The Labour Party Lost The UK Election

Whichever way you approach the recent UK election, it would be fair to say that the Labour Party experienced a drubbing, resulting in a loss of 60 seats and handing the Conservative Party a large parliamentary majority. There has however been a fierce debate surrounding the reasons for Labour’s defeat, reasons ranging from Brexit, Jeremy Corbyn himself or supposedly racist voters. This debate has deeply spilt the two main factions of the Labour Party, between moderates and progressives. Blairites vs Corbynistas if you will. Moderates place the blame solely at the feet of Jeremy Corbyn, his supposed anti-semitism and poor electability. Progressives see this defeat as a result of a Brexit backlash with many Leave voters leaving the Labour Party while the Conservative Party had one core message: “Get Brexit Done” which seemingly resonated. It is fair to suggest that Corbyn’s popularity isn’t exactly soaring, with the mere mention of his name bringing about a whole range of different...

Sally Albright: I'd Prefer 4 More Years Of Trump Than President Bernie Sanders

One of the main talking points used against Bernie Sanders and his supporters is that their lack of enthusiasm and support for Hillary Clinton in 2016 directly led to Donald Trump becoming president, with Sanders supporters being labelled as privileged and sexist for not backing Clinton, and yes that includes you misogynistic Jill Stein/Green Party voters! However, our favourite anti-Bernie Democratic loyalist, Sally Albright, now insists that it isn’t pivotal that you support the Democratic nominee in order to defeat Donald Trump, should Sanders win the 2020 Democratic nomination. Albright recently claimed that “ 4 more years of Trump would be better in the long run ” as opposed to a President Bernie Sanders. This comes after the “moderate” wing of the Democratic Party have spent the past three years suggesting that apathetic Sanders supporters are the cause of every terrible Trump decision and we’d be in a utopia if us sexists would have just fell in line behind Clinton. In ...