Saturday, June 30, 2012
Versailles Smiles Upon Thee, O Happy Roberts
Beloved Hero of Planet Pepe
.........................................................................
But those stinking peasants, on the Rube side of the Potomac, ain't feelin' dat Love.
An NRO worth his salt: Goldberg punches Roberts in the gut
...............................................................................
Farmer Hanson doesn't trust this catshit the Establishment claims to be the finest of guano
"Now, I don’t know what’s in Roberts’s heart, but no court watcher I’ve heard from puts much weight on the idea that Roberts did anything other than reason backward from the result he wanted in order to buy respect from the court’s critics at the expense of his own beliefs.
At least that’s one thing both fans and critics of this ruling can largely agree on."
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
5 comments:
Grasping at straws:
In making the judgment that he did, Chief Justice Roberts deprived American advocates of a European-style social state of one of their most precious conceits, that right-leaning justices on the Court will stop at nothing to prevent the country’s health-care system from rising to the level of, say, Cuba’s, a system which, as Hugo Chávez can testify, is smokin’.
He deprived Pepe of the opportunity to say that Cuba is better than the US? Jeez. Of course Pepe will keep on saying that, no matter what. What a bunch of crock.
Spiking the ball, eh?
What I like about it is that it will be exactly the opposite AA.
No, Charly. It would take a particular sort of vicious blend of ignorance and stupidity to look at the aftermath of socialist medicine and not be struck by the powerful debasement in medicine and treatment of patients [excepting those who live within the courtyards of Versailles].
I credit you with sufficient intelligence and respect for evidence to know otherwise.... although your ability to face reality [yes, that very one you always vote with your feet to flee from] has always been the question.
This "medicine" to come...in 20 years it will be as fine a killing machine as the NHS, the cancer treatment centers of Canada, and the wards for the care of the elderly in Brussels and Amsterdam.
If it is not Cuba.
But you are safe, Charly, very safe. I do not expect you to give a flying fuck about the stinking peasant, and I have no doubt you will live out your life true to that principle.
On the contrary, it takes a common blend of intellectual mendacity to use scattered data to fit a shaky theory all the while refusing to look at the numbers in one's own backyard.
The data: a notoriously dysfunctional british healthcare system, but where are the neglected scandinavians, swiss, japanese, austrians, ... ? If you want to damn universal healthcare, explain why it's a low standard in the places where it works best, not worst.
Scattered data vs systemic failure: How do isolated incidents like contaminated blood in france (a fuck-up as anecdotal as it was horrific) stack up to policies of restricting coverage for people with pre-existing conditions (as non-anecdotal as horrific)?
How would sick people with serious conditions be treated in an environment with lifetime limits on coverage once the house and everything they own is gone ?
Or the farm, to address your question directly. (Particularly the traditional farm, assuming they still exist in the US.) And how will they get back on their feet riddled with debt and penniless ?
The anti-universal healthcare argument is all ideology with ambulance-chasing tactics. If a little old lady didn't make it to the emergency room on time in Canada can be found, that's yet another instance of the systemic failure of the notion of healthcare for all. But restricting coverage to the healthy or the employed makes good medical sense, presumably because it makes good economic sense.
As medicine progresses, people get older and sicker. How will they survive if everybody doesn't pitch in ?
Post a Comment