Video: Kurt Loder smacks universal health care
posted at 1:21 pm on August 27, 2007 by Allahpundit
Share on Facebook | regular view
Technically this isn’t a surprise: he panned “Sicko” in June to the great delight of conservatives expecting the arbiters of hipness to rubber-stamp it “cool.” Still, it’s jarring to see the pied piper of MTV, where good intentions and “authenticity” matter most, taking a proud libertarian line on this. He’s got his work cut out for him, though. A new survey by Democratic pollsters shows that young voters are more lopsidedly left than they’ve been in generations. An NYT poll in June found that 62% of voters 18-to-29 support universal health care in particular. The Dems are practically guaranteed to pick up congressional seats next year, so unless the GOP can keep the White House this deal is as good as done. Click the image to watch.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages:
How bad is it when you’re a Liberal filmmaker attacking the Bush Administration, and you’ve lost the support of MTV? Bad.
amerpundit on August 27, 2007 at 1:23 PM
He may not dissuade many, but hopefully enough.
Kowboy on August 27, 2007 at 1:27 PM
Here’s what Socialists/Democrats (hey, they’re pretty much interchangeable now) don’t seem to get: That which the government can provide the government can take away.
flipflop on August 27, 2007 at 1:37 PM
Loder is probably not long for MTV.
WasatchMan on August 27, 2007 at 1:39 PM
They go out of their way to show the problems with the healthcare that the military is getting on one hand and then try to promote the same govermental control over health for the rest of America.
They aren’t stupid, but they think Americans are.
Asher on August 27, 2007 at 1:40 PM
Their support ends with one phrase. “You’ll get to pay for it too.” Huh? What? My taxes are going up? But I’m healthy! We need to rethink this. Reality has a way off biting good intentions in the arse. Tax ‘em enough to make a latte unaffordable and support for universal healthcare will wane.
Theworldisnotenough on August 27, 2007 at 1:45 PM
More importantly, is it “A NYT” ir “An NYT”. Never know which one to choose when saying the acronym requires one, and saying the words requires the other.
Kevin M on August 27, 2007 at 1:47 PM
Decades of leftist indoctrination will do that to you.
madne0 on August 27, 2007 at 1:50 PM
Socialized medicine was “as good as done” in 1992-3, also. At least according to all the smart, tuned in political junkies back then. Remember how that all worked out?
Fred on August 27, 2007 at 1:52 PM
Didn’t I see this video a couple of weeks ago somewhere? (not complaining / just checking the status of my alzheimer’s)
jaime on August 27, 2007 at 1:56 PM
Too bad voters 18-to-29 don’t make up a significant portion of the electorate.
bert169 on August 27, 2007 at 1:59 PM
If government manages to do for health care what it did for America’s schools… we’re all going to die.
Maxx on August 27, 2007 at 1:59 PM
The assumption being that a gaggle of (D)’s can get anything done.
No disrespect, AP, but I just don’t see that happening.
yo on August 27, 2007 at 2:00 PM
That made so much sense it was scary.
Christoph on August 27, 2007 at 2:04 PM
The republicans keep blowing the Healthcare debate and likely the immigration debate (and soon the two of them will become intertwined)
The dems only want universal healthcare to add millions to healthcare that dont have insurance. That does NOTHING for the millions who do have insurance and pay their own way.
Republicans should have seized on the idea and pushed for reducing COSTS which would benefit EVERYONE and not just those without health care. But instead they have let the dems have this issue and sat on their butts about it.
Now the dems want to legalize millions of illegal aliens at the SAME time they want to hand out universal health care. And what will THAT do to our immigrantion problem ?
If you think the border problem is bad now just wait.
William Amos on August 27, 2007 at 2:04 PM
Not surprising, given how illegal and legal immigration (including H1-Bs) have suppressed wages. Depressed wages only serve to push people further to the left.
PRCalDude on August 27, 2007 at 2:05 PM
the propaganda and misinformation to the ‘youth vote’ is other places as well, see the Daily Show sometime. War Politics is easy thing to lie to people about and get emotions stirred.
jp on August 27, 2007 at 2:07 PM
Kurt Loder finally dropped a load that wasn’t full of crap…
saltydogg14 on August 27, 2007 at 2:09 PM
This is more the result of decades of narcissistic, moral preening being exhibited as a substitute for thinking. Thanks a lot, Boomers.
SWLiP on August 27, 2007 at 2:15 PM
Hey ! I’m a Boomer, if your going to blame boomers… at least blame leftist-boomers.
Maxx on August 27, 2007 at 2:21 PM
Almost makes me glad that while this generation is more decidedly leftist, their also more decidedly non-voters than any generation previous. They want their opinions to matter, they just don’t want to get off the couch to state them.
Spc Steve on August 27, 2007 at 2:21 PM
he kept qualifying his statements with “i’m not an expert”…then why is on tv discussing in it? And if he’s correct that young people don’t think about healthcare much…why would they want the hike in taxes for universal healthcare? Why not just stick with the current system and not get healthcare?
crr6 on August 27, 2007 at 2:23 PM
He’s not an expert.
But he makes sense
Kini on August 27, 2007 at 2:24 PM
What? No free pony for everyone!
Captain America on August 27, 2007 at 2:25 PM
Is Tabitha Soren still alive?
JammieWearingFool on August 27, 2007 at 2:29 PM
The bad thing about health care in this country is this
Let’s say you pay an insurance co. $10,000 / year for premiums
You and your family actually only use $4,000 in that year
That $4,000 bucks is what the doctor or hospital charged but if you paid cash,
the doctor would be glad to provide the same service for $1,500
The insurance companies make a killing and don’t provide care.
The doctors malpractice insurance company makes a killing and don’t provide care.
Doctor and hospitals charge way more than necessary because they are trying to screw the insurance companies because the insurance companies are always trying to screw them.
People with full coverage medical insurance do not exercise thrift because they want to screw the insurance company that is screwing them.
If there were no medical insurance at all then Doctors and hospitals would be cutting their prices to get you in the door.
This whole cycle of madness is predicated on the fact that people want to live. So they will go to a doctor or a hospital without getting competitive quotes. If they have insurance you can be sure they’ll spend injudiciously. You would buy a refrigerator that way.
A huge amount of money is spent on the last ditch efforts to keep an old enfeebled person alive. We need to be more courageous and pragmatic about dyeing. Some times ya just have to let go.
People like Michael Moore want to eat gallons of ice cream and potato chips, avoid exercise and expect someone else to save their decrepit ass
TheSitRep on August 27, 2007 at 2:42 PM
Harpoon on August 27, 2007 at 2:48 PM
Guess what? Sometimes taxes need to get raised to improve life for Americans. The conservative meme of ‘low to no taxes’ leaves us high and dry when, say our bridges collapse or a natural disaster hits one of our major cities. Family values indeed. And how is Reaganomics working out nowadays, hell, did that ever work? Conservatives may place a few extra dollars in their pockets above the health, education, and infrastructure of our entire structure, but you know what? If I could give up some of my money to insure that all Americans are covered by some type of health insurance, I’d do it.
Nonfactor on August 27, 2007 at 2:49 PM
s/b concerted.
Harpoon on August 27, 2007 at 2:49 PM
I wouldn’t worry about the kids being “left leaning.” If there’s one thing I’ve learned from the last election, it’s that 18 year olds don’t vote, even if they have the chance. It’s us grown ups with jobs and such that vote. Narcissism only lasts until you get a job, a car loan, and a mortgage. Then you realize that you’re NOT as important as you think you are.
Universal Healthcare is a complete load. People like to blame insurance companies for their bills. How ’bout you blame the people who set the prices? That would be the doctors, hospitals, and other health people. Then blame the trial lawyers who sue for a jillion dollars, driving up malpractise insurance for doctors. Then blame pharmaceutical companies for price gouging. Insurance, in fact, makes your health care CHEAPER. Because they set an insurance price. Don’t believe me? Go off of your health insurance and have a physical. What costs you $25.00 with your health insurance will cost you $300.00 (not including lab processing fees). Or go to a country where health care is for the few and see how long you last against malaria or polio.
Of course, I WORK in the health care industry, so what do I know? ;)
mjk on August 27, 2007 at 2:52 PM
They’re referring to a age group that is used to getting something for nothing. There’s no surprise they think it’s a good idea. Most of them are most likely still living at their parents home. Ask some one who pays taxes and supports a family. Those are the ones who are going to have to flip the bill.
KCtheKat on August 27, 2007 at 2:55 PM
Unbelievable.
The problem, Nonfactor, is not in the amount of taxation – it’s that distributing the funds raised is a political, not a rational, process.
Slublog on August 27, 2007 at 2:55 PM
If it’s not a problem of taxation then why is it the major complaint of those opposed to universal health care, or infrastructure, or city rebuilding? I would agree that competency and distribution plays a major role in whether programs like universal health care would work–which is why competent officials who want universal health care to work should be elected–but some public education systems in southern California aren’t a problem because the government doesn’t want to help or has screwed up in helping, it’s a problem because of money.
Nonfactor on August 27, 2007 at 3:01 PM
You can always get a majority of people to favor universal health care as long as you don’t show them how much ‘free’ health care costs and how much it restricts choice. People tend to change their mind when faced with the bill.
Exactly.
I’d also add, when you already have huge entitlements like SS and Medicare careening towards insolvency, selling universal health care is going to be even more difficult. It would dwarf both of those programs in size, and would require huge tax increases, signifcant rationing of care by government bureaucrats, or (likely) both.
Hell, I almost hope Democrats try it if they take the WH in ‘08, could make 2010 look like 1994 all over again.
thirteen28 on August 27, 2007 at 3:01 PM
TheSitRep on August 27, 2007 at 2:42 PM
As I understand it, they charge the uninsured MORE than they charge the insurance companies for the same thing. They figure the uninsured will just pay it without question.
What ever happened to MTV playing Music Videos? And what the hell is a Kurt Loder?
Masscon on August 27, 2007 at 3:02 PM
If you’re going to assign motive to those with whom you disagree, why bother debating at all? You’ve got us all figured out – we don’t care about infrastructure, sick people or any of that touchy-feely garbage.
Congratulations. You’ve cracked the conspiracy.
Slublog on August 27, 2007 at 3:03 PM
umm want to check and see how many BILLIONS of dollars the feds spent on roads last year ?
The problem is that money doesnt solve problems it only disguises them.
William Amos on August 27, 2007 at 3:04 PM
Yep, not a surprise you feel that way… but do you ever think taxes should maybe also go down? Or is up the only way you ever see them going?
Well of course it does. Because all the money that could be spent on that crucial thing was wasted on useless crap; and not wasting money on stupid crap isn’t feasible… or something.
An interesting, useless non-related statement. I’m not surprised, but still confused.
I dunno, maybe the giving of tax dollars to the poor so they’d spend it was a much better plan. Except it’s become very hard to properly fund. Odd that Bill Clinton helped revamp some of those policies. See, I can do odd politically motivated economically vague statements too… I’m not sure why we went here, but I’m fine with it.
Really, how much of your money? And to be fair, how much money do you have? Enough to fully cover you and another family out of increased withholdings alone? i.e. do you have 2000-3000/month you’re willing to shell out in addition to your current taxes?
Or are you amazingly willing to give $20-$50 from each paycheck in order to try to recoup a couple grand worth of insurance… and if, as I suspect, you’re planning on receiving more than you’re paying… that’s not really generous.
Oddly, I suspect (as most liberals) you’re looking to be philanthropic with someone else’s money; rather than either being generous with your money, or trying to persuade other people to willingly give without using the force of Government.
Bye now… try again later. Maybe with some new material. This is a decade old debate here…
gekkobear on August 27, 2007 at 3:04 PM
Slublog, you raise a good point.Too may times we are paying taxes for specific items, but the funds find a way to other uses. For example, in NH they are having an issue over raising the highway tolls, not because of the increased cost of the upkeep of the roads, but because the lawmakers are raiding those accounts to pay for other items. Which I believe is a violation of their state constitution.
striper1 on August 27, 2007 at 3:04 PM
From what I understand the amount spent is 90-95% of the total spent in an individual’s life time and that we are the only country in the world that does this. Will this continue under socialized medicine?
Harpoon on August 27, 2007 at 3:05 PM
That’s because they’ve done such a good job managing Social
Security and Medicare they think folks will overlook this …
pbary on August 27, 2007 at 3:05 PM
Perhaps in California, but I could name a number of schools here in Maine that have the opposite problem – enough money that is just not well-spent. A few school administrators in the southern part of the state just resigned.
All too often, when a governmental body “runs out” of money, the problem is not a lack of funds, it’s an inability on the part of governments to account for how all of the funds are spent, or bad policy decisions made in the past that force that organization to spend a disproportionate amount of money on a particular issue.
Slublog on August 27, 2007 at 3:12 PM
Whoops. Got going on another thought before completing a sentence.
The last sentence in the first paragraph should read: “A few school administrators in the southern part of the state just resigned for mis-managing the more-than-adequate funds they received last year.”
Slublog on August 27, 2007 at 3:13 PM
You may care about those things, but looking at the policies conservatives are supporting it doesn’t seem like it. I remember watching clips from Fox News about universal health care (aside from this one) where the pundits and guests are perfectly happy to state that they don’t support health care for everyone because it would cost people more money. I just saw a segment last night where they were talking about whether or not the government should help the people in Ohio after the flooding and it devolved into a discussion about New Orleans where some of the guests were all to happy to state that the only thing the government should do to help these people is provide a FEMA trailer.
Nonfactor on August 27, 2007 at 3:14 PM
It doesn’t “seem like it,” huh? Sorry we don’t emote enough for your liking.
There are a number of conservative public policy organizations who have offered up suggestions for funding health insurance. The Maine Heritage Policy Center here has suggested health savings accounts as a way to help the under or uninsured in this state. The governor rejected that plan and went with a universal coverage model that is now spending $15 million a year to cover 1800 people.
As for New Orleans, quite a bit of federal assistance has been given. Money is not the problem there.
Slublog on August 27, 2007 at 3:23 PM
You may care about those things, but looking at the policies conservatives are supporting it doesn’t seem like it. I remember watching clips from Fox News about universal health care (aside from this one) where the pundits and guests are perfectly happy to state that they don’t support health care for everyone because it would cost people more
Answer me this Nonfactor. Why are we so worry about just a few million uninsured people (estimates 12 to 15 million) when over 100 million have health insurance ?
Why do we have to give them free insurance that the rest of us have to either get from our jobs or pay for ourselves ?
Why not reduce prices so that everyone benefits ? Why pander to small group like the dems are doing ?
William Amos on August 27, 2007 at 3:26 PM
Motives are irrelevant. Attitudes are irrelevant.
Socialized medicine is one of the worst ways to distribute health care. It is overpriced, perpetually entangled by red tape and inefficient.
Perhaps you should work for a government agency. I am personally familiar with departments in my organization that consist of two Directors in charge of 2 lower level employees. This is commonplace.
Government never has to concern itself with making money…only spending it. It’s a fact that the tax cuts in the 1980’s increased revenues to the treasury. This was repeated with the Bush tax cuts. But it’s never enough.
Asher on August 27, 2007 at 3:31 PM
And tell me this, Nonfactor: Why would I want to let the same people who run the DMV, Social Security, Medicare/Medicaid, and ALSO build those same bridges you are complaining about run my health care too?
Of course, we COULD go to the Stalin method of taking from everyone and giving to the guys up top. That’s the modern dem party method, isn’t it? Or we could just shoot those who “cost the system too much money” like Mao. And Castro. But hey, what the heck? They probably weren’t part of the proletariat anyway, right?
Vanceone on August 27, 2007 at 3:38 PM
$150 billion, which adjusted for inflation, was way more than we spent on the Marshall plan after WWII. It’s not the money that’s the problem, it’s the degenerates in New Orleans receiving it.
PRCalDude on August 27, 2007 at 3:59 PM
You understand it in the reverse.
You can get way cheaper health care if you pay cash. In America Cash Talks and BS walks.
When you pay cash they don’t have to worry about collections and even possibly getting stiffed by Insurance Co. or Medicare. When a doctor submits a bill his staff has to file the procedure code perfectly or it gets kicked back, and they don’t even tell him why.
it is typical that doctors wait 120 days for payment from third party payers.
Just imagine if you had insurance for groceries.
Would you make more cost effective choices?
Would the grocer run specials and try to stay competitive?
Would you buy rib eye steaks or ground beef?
Would you drive a little further to get a better deal?
The answer to all those questions is obviously, NO!
People would throw stuff in their cart that they don’t even need.
Nobody’s gonna by hamburger helper when they could have Alaskan king crab.
The problem with government ran or any third party payment plan is that it takes the individuals ability to make smart choices.
If you think our insurance program is bad just take a look at socialize medicine, it is even worse.
TheSitRep on August 27, 2007 at 4:01 PM
Those who would sacrifice freedom for security deserve NEITHER!!!
wecoyote6969 on August 27, 2007 at 4:08 PM
Would you also give up some more so every American had a job? Oh, and shouldn’t we cover their transportation as well? We damn well better make sure they’re fed well also.
PatrickS on August 27, 2007 at 4:13 PM
Dude! it would not be SOME money it would be ALL money.
People need to eat healthier and exercise. There is no substitute for personal responsibility!
Read this
TheSitRep on August 27, 2007 at 4:15 PM
So why stop there? Let stop cancer & AIDS treatment. Since those are expensive treatments then those people should “let go.” How about we stop treatment for everything. That would be more cost effective right? Where would you draw the line? Personally I draw the line at doing whatever is humanly possible to help a person.
Leave it to Gov’t? No way. My families health is too important to leave to some idiot bureaucrat. Too bad my health insurance premiums are post tax vs pretax. Too bad I can’t set up a health savings account with pretax dollars with an annual carryover. Demo’s are so worried about the small % of people without “healthcare insurance” they don’t want to help the people that do have healthcare insurance so things would be just a tad easier on the working stiffs.
One last thing, just because someone doesn’t have health insurance doesn’t mean they can’t get medical attention. Just ask an illegal.
VikingGoneWild on August 27, 2007 at 4:16 PM
I came from Hawaii which has a govt mandated employer provided health care system. Simply stated, if you work full time your employer must provide some form of health coverage.
Is it any wonder that Hawaii is one of the hardest states to either be an employer or make a “living wage”?
I have since moved away to a state that doesn’t mandate coverage and guess what? Wages here compared to the cost of living are HIGHER and many employers will offer some sort of coverage as an incentive to attract or keep good employees.
I am currently self employed and do not currently waste my money on insurance because I have found with a little due diligence I can not only find great medical care, by paying cash I get it at rates that are less expensive than my “co-pays” when I had insurance.
The only type of medical insurance I carry at all is catastrophic and much like life insurance I hope I never have to use it.
wecoyote6969 on August 27, 2007 at 4:33 PM
Sent this to Hotair yesterday. Seems the socialistic state of San Franciso has so overtaxed housing that they are forcing minorities out of the city
Whenever liberals “fix” something they always make it worse
William Amos on August 27, 2007 at 4:36 PM
I imagine it feels good to say that, knowing the whole time you’re not obligated in any way to do it or to suggest exactly how it would happen.
Taxes are not an “if I could…to ensure that…” proposition. Paying them is not your choice, and where they go is a decision — often a very poor one — made by someone else. Remember that tobacco settlement money that was going to go to people with lung disease?
Around $12,000 a year in tax money goes to each student in my district, which just moved up out of Academic Watch status. And who’ll vote for another tax hike? People who “would happily pay more in taxes to ensure our kids are well educated.”
I’m insured, and I’ll still end up paying $6,000 out of pocket for my wife’s medical expenses. I’m used to footing the bill myself, but go ahead and send that extra money my way.
saint kansas on August 27, 2007 at 4:42 PM
Nonfactor,
I find it deeply troubling that you support a system which would take fistfuls of money from my family so that I can be told by the government that I can only get medical treatment with their permission, with the doctors they choose, on their schedule.
If that isn’t a symptom of insanity, I don’t know what is.
As Loder says, “Access to a waiting list is not access to health care”.
Buy Danish on August 27, 2007 at 4:44 PM
18-29 year olds don’t vote.
Socialized medicine is not a solution. If one example of a country with socialized medicine works and is superior to US healthcare can be provided, then I might entertain the thought.
Anyone know of any?
awake on August 27, 2007 at 5:36 PM
Kurt Loder: You want the Walter Reed scandal types running Universal Healthcare? I think not…
What a fantastic line! Government Healthcare Slogan: “Let us do for you, what we were incapable of doing for our Troops.”
Sultry Beauty on August 27, 2007 at 6:08 PM
Hey this is a free country ( or supposed to be )
You can get any damn thing you want just work and save your money.
But don’t come crying to my hard earned money or me when you get aids because you like it in the tooter. Or get cancer because you smoke and abuse your body with processed foods and trans-fats.
Hey face reality some times people get sick and die that is life ( or the end of I should say )
What is laughable are the folks that are worried about the population explosion while at the same time want to find a cure for aids.
They quote these polls stating 62% of people want free health care but not one of those fat lazy slobs will get off his ass and exercise. Hey people take charge of your own health don’t let the government or doctors do it for you.
Doctors and hospitals kill more people every year than guns do.
More people die every year fro mis-prescribed medicine than died in Chernobyl.
Hey, doctors are necessary and when ya need one, ya need one. But if we focused on health maintenance instead of cure we’d be in much better shape.
We spend way more on taking our pets to the freakin’ vet and getting boob jobs in America than entire continents spend on health care. Hell I bet just California spends more on that crap than most countries.
If anything, we have too much medicine and drugs.
TheSitRep on August 27, 2007 at 6:23 PM
Is it true that private medical practice is outlawed in Canada?
sonnyspats1 on August 27, 2007 at 7:46 PM
I believe they used to be, but rules have been relaxed recently.
Slublog on August 27, 2007 at 7:51 PM
Was it as good as done when Clinton had a Democratic Congress?
Was it as good as done when Carter had a filibuster-proof Democratic Congress?
Was it as good as done when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor?
Hell no! It’s as good as done when WE say it’s as good as done!
km on August 27, 2007 at 8:02 PM
Kurt Loder has never scored!
Wingo on August 27, 2007 at 9:43 PM
Dying is part of life? No kidding. I would hvae never guessed that. Just because dying is part of the life cycle doen’t mean we roll over and die if we get sick.
Did you even read what you wrote initally? You stated a person should just accept the inevitable and die. My question to you is where would you draw the line re: treatment(s)? A small cut? A broken leg? Knee replacement? Chemo?Where would YOU draw the line?
I suppose if we got rid of the medical profession altogether than we would all save money but it wouldn’t make our society any better. I personally like knowing that if I get injured my doctor/Urgent Care will be there and I won’t have to take a 2nd mortgage out on my home to pay for it. That is why I have health insurance.
Like I stated in my previous post if the politicians really cared about healthcare than my health insurance premiums would be pretax and my health savings account would be pretax dollars with an annual carryover. Demo’s are so worried about the small % of people without “healthcare insurance” they don’t want to help the people that do have healthcare insurance so things would be just a tad easier on the working stiffs.
VikingGoneWild on August 27, 2007 at 10:02 PM
The problem is, you get the coverage, but not the service. I’m in Canada, we have “universal health coverage”. I know the system. The problem is, with the exception of basic things like a doctor’s check up or some stitches to close a wound, health care up here is primitive. Case in point, my brother got a herniated disk in his back. Could not walk. Was in constant pain. He needed an MRI. He makes good money. Lives in a nice house with a big swimming pool. Has everything he needs. But no MRI for his back.
Why? Because those machines, as expensive as they are, are not available up here in enough numbers to get an MRI. The health care system is a huge money pit and we still can’t afford those machines, machines you Americans take for granted. My brother had to be driven to Buffalo, across the border, in a $50,000 car, into your country, to get an MRI. Talk about irony. He got the MRI that same day. He paid for it and received it. In our univeral health care socialized system, such basic medical care was not available to him, no matter his funds.
To make matters worse, he was told an appointment with a back doctor in Canada would take months. And then, several more months to get the actual surgery. Fortunately, my brother had some connections, and he was able to see a doctor in two weeks. But only because he had connections. Just like in a Stalinist system, where party members enjoy the privleges of a bit more vodka, and bread not so stale.
This is what “universal health care” is all about. It is about extending the “right to coverage” to everybody by removing the quality of care for those who already have it. In the process, you must now ration the health care. So really, what universal health care does is benefit the working poor who are uninsured now, but screws everybody else. And most people in America are already covered through work. This is why it is a socialist scheme. It brings down the majority to share one low common level with the working poor. Classic Marxist theory once again disguised as a humanitarian gesture.
Univeral health care is a great idea. Just like a two-day work week. It sounds great on paper. But, just like communism, it doesn’t work. It lowers the level of health care for the majority to elevate the level of health care for the few.
jihadwatcher on August 27, 2007 at 10:05 PM
Hey, I know it’s trendy to always make the Germans the bad guys, but we can’t blame them for bombing Pearl Harbor. It was the Chinese.
jihadwatcher on August 27, 2007 at 10:10 PM
One question Nonfactor.
Please quote me in the U.S. Constitution where you find the right to health coverage?
SSG Fuzzy on August 28, 2007 at 12:37 PM
I’m a SoCal resident and my wife has been an educator her entire adult life. Can you site some specifics regarding your statement about the money issue? I know sometimes the money doesn’t get down to the classroom for basics because it is being sucked up by admin costs, so is this what you are talking about?
Snidely Whiplash on August 28, 2007 at 4:19 PM
Comment pages: