The vocal opponent of health care reform in the U.S. steered largely clear of the topic except to reveal a tidbit about her life growing up not far from Whitehorse.Isn't that funny. She was happy to use "socialized" medicine from Canada, but now bad mouths socialized medicine. In short, she is a typical politician who says one thing and does another. Or, put another way, her policy prescriptions are for "the little people" while she enjoys a different standard when it comes to herself. In short, a hypocrite.
"We used to hustle over the border for health care we received in Canada," she said. "And I think now, isn't that ironic."
Here's a person who lies to the American people that "socialized medicine" means "death panels" when she knows darn well it doesn't because she and her family used Canada's "socialized medicine" for her own benefit and was gleeful enough to admit it before a Canadian audience. But she tells her American audiences that "socialized" medicine is evil and will kill them.
Pathetic! And this is the kind of hypocrisy and lies which a large number of Americans lap up. Just as their corporate overlords want them to.
2 comments:
As you say Palin is a politician (not a very good one). I have been fortunate to have seen through her from the moment of Mccain unveiling her at the convention. Dark forces were at work then and still work behind her every move. I have trouble being liberal when I think about her...
Anyway, concerning the healthcare issue, here is an article originally from Newsweek but I found it on rsn titled; Why The GOP Is Wrong on Health Care .
Thomas: That article you point to is done by Daniel Gross. He's a writer I follow. I read all his stuff on Slate. This means I sometimes miss stuff he publishes elsewhere (but as you can see, he published this on Slate as well).
I enjoyed his short little book Pop! about economic bubbles. It was published in 2007 before the housing bubble crashed so it ends up being a little more upbeat about bubbles than most people are today. That book was more approriate for the technology bubble of the late 1990s that crashed but left a legacy of infrastructure which proved valuable in the past decade. So while investors were hosed, the average person is now better off because of the investment. The housing bubble was an "investment" which won't have a positive legacy value. It is purely overproduction of a commodity, not new infrastructure supporting new uses.
I generally enjoy all of Gross's articles. He isn't a deep thinker, but he is topical and fun to read. He isn't a "me too!" writer. He uses his own judgement and his judgement is fairly sound.
Post a Comment