The Face of Republican Reason
Thanks for your email.
Arthur’s friend, Dean Roper -- a life-long Republican and CEO of UNC Healthcare System – was (and is) a staunch supporter of Obamacare.
During debate over The Affordable Healthcare Act, Roper observed that our existing healthcare system was destined for disaster.
Although Obamacare is far from perfect, it establishes a beachhead and points the way forward.
Did you ever see Michael Moore's "Sicko?" It is freely available at http://www.documentarywire.com/sicko Watch the first three minutes. Then, if you watch the rest, you'll see a "companion scene" in which a Canadian carpenter endures the same medical emergency. The contrast between American healthcare and Canadian is flabbergasting.
Evidence-based, single-payer healthcare is the most cost-effective way to insure everyone, a method of reducing the per capita expense of quality healthcare by half.
Lamentably, America’s right wing 1.) rejects “evidence” because Reason is “elitist,” and 2.) continues to believe that private health insurance -- despite egregious failure for decades -- is the ONLY way to contain cost.
Mark my words: If the GOP gets its way, half the population will soon be subject to three “death panels:”
Furthermore, American conservatives will applaud the slaughter.
In the following GOP presidential debate clip, Republicans actually cheer the death of “the uninsured”: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=irx_QXsJiao
Sure, we can go there...
Somalia did. Sudan did. Yemen did.
Here are the numbers: http://blogs.ngm.com/blog_central/2009/12/the-cost-of-care.html Click to enlarge graphic.
In Canada, where quality-of-care is pretty much the same as in the States – and where everyone is covered, and no one goes bankrupt from the stratospheric cost of privatized medicine – both males and females live significantly longer than their American counterparts even though per capita healthcare spending is half what it is in the United States. Click to enlarge graphic.
How do Republicans "get serious" about healthcare? They discuss contraception and how to limit it.
There was a time when the phrase “driven to distraction” was a colloquial reference to "going mad."
Now, the intention of drive people to distraction is a pillar of “conservatism.”
Remind me again...
What is it "conservatives" are conserving?
Surely, it bears no relationship to "one person one vote" nor enacting the will of the majority.
Increasingly, conservatives cling to the past because they’re stuck there, hunkered down in a state of “arrested development,” void of vision and any courageous inclination to work for a future that “The Invisible Hand” does not "automatically" provide.
Even as we speak, The Invisible Hand is in our pants, vacuuming our wallet, giving us a quick "blow" job. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invisible_hand
I recommend George McGovern’s “The Case For Liberalism: A Defense of The Future Against the Past”: http://humanities.psydeshow.org/political/mcgovern.htm
Excerpt: “My friend Bob Dole is fond of Robert Frost's observation that a liberal is someone who won't "take his own side in a quarrel." I will. I believe that the most practical and hopeful compass by which to guide the American ship of state is the philosophy of liberalism. Virtually every step forward in our history has been a liberal initiative taken over conservative opposition: civil rights, Social Security, Medicare, rural electrification, the establishment of a minimum wage, collective bargaining, the Pure Food and Drug Act, and federal aid to education, including the land-grant colleges, to name just a few. Many of these innovations were eventually embraced by conservatives only after it became clear that they had overwhelming public approval for the simple reason that almost every American benefited from them. Every one of these liberal efforts strengthened our democracy and our quality of life. I challenge my conservative friends to name a single federal initiative now generally approved by both of our major parties that was not first put forward by liberals over the opposition of conservatives. We need conservatives, of course, to challenge liberal ideas and proposals and to impel us to examine their soundness, but we cannot depend on conservatives to offer constructive new ideas of the sort that might bring about a more just and equitable society or a more peaceful and cooperative world. If we assume that Lincoln, the first Republican president, was a liberal (which he surely was), nothing inspiring has come out of the conservative mind since the age of John Adams. As my friend and sometime debating partner William F. Buckley puts it in his book Up from Liberalism, Conservatism is the tacit acknowledgment that all that is finally important in human experience is behind us; that the crucial explorations have been undertaken, and that it is given to man to know what are the great truths that emerged from them. Whatever is to come cannot outweigh the importance to man of what has gone before. The business of conservatives is, in other words, to cling tightly to the past, and although such a stance can be admirable, a stale and musty doctrine is of little use at a time when the nation needs not to fear the future but to seek out ways to improve it. Instead of spreading fear across the land, our leaders should be asking themselves, and asking us, thoughtful questions about the world in which we live.”
John Kenneth Galbraith epitomized our quandary: “The modern conservative is engaged in one of man’s oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness.”
And finally, as Trump -- and the rest of the Republican presidential field -- demonstrate: “If God wanted us to vote, he would have given us candidates.” Jay Leno
Pax on both houses
PS Most American "conservatives" are unaware that the GOP's core agenda is set by people as crass as Donald Trump. Although the rank-and-file think their party stands for "religious principles," it is The Golden Calf that rules, "conservatives" (whether they know it or not) lying prostrate at the altar. Plutocracy is alive, well, and "on the ascendant."
Go ahead. Make your day. Watch "Inside Job" at http://vimeo.com/23086688
Sent: Monday, February 20, 2012 5:20 PM
To: Alan Archibald
Subject: Fw: TRUMP EXPLAINS DUMBO CARE!!!!
Trump Explains Dumbo Care
No one can sum it up better than Trump
Let me get this straight . . .
We're going to be "gifted" with a health care
plan we are forced to purchase and
fined if we don't,
Which purportedly covers at least
ten million more people,
without adding a single new doctor,
but provides for 16,000 new IRS agents,
written by a committee whose chairman
says he doesn't understand it,
passed by a Congress that didn't read it but
exempted themselves from it,
and signed by a Dumbo President who smokes,
with funding administered by a treasury chief who
didn't pay his taxes,
for which we'll be taxed for four years before any
benefits take effect,
by a government which has
already bankrupted Social Security and Medicare,
all to be overseen by a surgeon general
who is obese,
and financed by a country that's broke!!!!!'What the hell could possibly go wrong?'