Wednesday, May 1, 2024

Top 5 This Week

spot_img

Related Posts

GOOD READ: David Limbaugh on U.S. healthcare and the “40-million”, um, “un-insured”

I’ve brought this up before in front of liberals who have become totally glued — beyond the reach of any of my facts or pure logic — to the totally phony Michael Moore/CBC propaganda that “40 million Americans are uninsured”.  And their subsequent (phony) boo-hoo-hoos and stated or unstated insinuation that those poor folks are therefore at risk of dying (always “in the street”, and usually they’re kids, amazingly!), or losing their homes, and certainly losing their first born to nefarious (evil “corporate”!) creditors, in order to pay for some healthcare.  Which, by the way, is “free” in Canada, and “perfect in e-ver-y way.”)

David Limbaugh column today:

… But did you know that, according to a U.S. Census Bureau report, more than 10 million of these “uninsured” are not American citizens? That almost 18 million, with annual incomes exceeding $50,000, can afford health insurance but choose not to buy it? That more than half of those 18 million people make more than $75,000? That about 19 million of the uninsured are between 18 and 34 years old and may not consider coverage a pressing priority? That almost half the uninsured only remain without insurance for an average of four months? Without question, these figures overlap, but it’s safe to say that the left’s alleged number of truly uninsured is enormously overstated and distorted.

There is also a significant difference between being uninsured and having no access to health care. The law mandates emergency room care, even for those unable to afford it. …

He doesn’t even mention that the poor automatically get state-funded Medicaid, and seniors get Medicare.  Nor that Canadians — including Liberal politicians — and folks from all over the world — flock to America for their healthcare…

ALSO SEE THIS BRILLIANT EDITORIAL in the Wall Street Journal today.  Here’s a snippet:

The indecipherable language of government has actually become dangerous to the well-being of the nation. As the federal government claims ever greater powers, its language has become vague to the point of meaningless and meaningless to the point of menacing.

The other day I was watching “Morning Joe” on MSNBC, and Kathleen Sebelius, the secretary of health and human services, came on from Washington to talk about health care. A reporter on the set, Andrew Ross Sorkin of the New York Times, asked a few clear and direct questions: What is President Obama’s health care plan, how would it work, what would it look like? I leaned forward. Finally I will understand. Ms. Sebelius began to answer in that dead and deadening governmental language that does not reveal or clarify but instead wraps legitimate queries in clouds of words and sends them on their way. I think I heard “accessing affordable quality health care,” “single payer plan vis-à-vis private multiparty insurers” and “key component of quality improvement.” In any case, she didn’t answer the question, which was a disappointment but not a surprise. No one answers the question anymore.

As she spoke, I attempted a sort of simultaneous translation, which is what most of us do now when we hear our political figures, translate from their language to ours. “Access health care” must mean “go to the doctor.” But I gave up. Then a thought crossed my mind: Maybe we’re supposed to give up! Maybe we’re supposed to be struck dumb, hypnotized by words and phrases that are aimed not at making things clearer but making them more obscure and impenetrable. Maybe we’re not supposed to understand.

 

Joel Johannesen
Follow Joel

Popular Articles