I missed this when it was making the rounds a month ago. Yeesh.
From the White House transcript of Pres. Bush’s comments at the Cleveland Clinic, 10 July, just prior to his vetoing the expanded S-CHIP program to cover more uninsured children.
Let me talk about health care, since it’s fresh on my mind. The objective has got to be to make sure America is the best place in the world to get health care, that we’re the most innovative country, that we encourage doctors to stay in practice, that we are robust in the funding of research, and that patients get good, quality care at a reasonable cost.
The immediate goal is to make sure there are more people on private insurance plans. I mean, people have access to health care in America. After all, you just go to an emergency room.
Well, as long as all folks have to do to get access to health care is go to an emergency room, I guess we’re all set. Perhaps that’s where he should have had his colonoscopy done back in June, rather than having all the equipment and personnel shipped up to Camp David.
Stephen Brust says on his website:
“Socialized” medicine
Who came up with that term, anyway? I mean, it isn’t exactly wrong, in the sense that, yes, if we all pay for something and we all receive the service, that could be called socialized. But do we talk about “Socialized education?” “Socialized streets?” “Socialized water?” The “Socialized army?”
Hmmm.
Come to think of it, I’m against that last. Down with the sociaized military!
Actually, that term seems to have dropped off the radar. Now it’s “federalized medicine” (to judge from the Bush speech I linked to).
I think there’s plenty of room to debate on the right model and means for improving health care access for the citizenry. It’s by no means a trivial policy debate. But to blithely comment on how everyone has access to health care because folks can just go to the emergency room is utterly and dangerously ignorant of the realities of the current health care system in the US — made all the more maddening coming from someone whose health care is provided by the very government he pooh-poohs as being able to do so for everyone.
Dave, I think there are two words in your comment that perfectly sum up the past 6+ years of George II:
Did anyone else catch this gem:
Why is this the immediate goal? Will it really solve anything? Why aren’t we looking for a real solution?
Oh yea:
George is not a member of the reality-based community.
As for a privatized military, Niccolo was again’ it and the recent and ongoing experience with Boots & Saddles says he’s still right.
See, that’s a policy question that can be debated. I think it’s goofy to think that private insurance plans will ever cover everyone, or cover them adequately (though it depends on what you define as “adequate,” too). But at least it’s one of the things that can actually be discussed and evaluated in a semi-objective fashion.
Emergency rooms = universal health access is just delusional goofiness, along with “Are there no workhouses?” and “Let them eat cake!”
More like, “F*ck’em. I got mine.”
Well, there’s the question. Is Bush inutterably dim and removed-from-reality misguided, or is he a corrupt, venal, evil Simon LaGree who enjoys rubbing the American populace’s nose in his wealth and power?
I’ll take door number 2.
Here’s why…
Bush is no dummy, he following the Repub agenda to a “T” and what we have now is the result. I agree with Jon Stewart and the article, Bush as we see him is a show.
An interesting article. Of course, the “Bush is an idiot …” meme is usually followed up by “… being manipulate by evil conservative/ neocon/ neofascist/ theocratic forces” (cf the Cheney discussion elsewhere), so it really doesn’t let Bush (or the conservatives) off the hook.
Oh Dave is on a roll! 🙂
First off why the either/or premise?
Why can’t George II be the Following:
A dangerously ignorant, inutterably dim, removed-from-reality misguided, corrupt, venal, evil Simon LaGree who enjoys rubbing the American populace’s nose in the wealth and power of he and his friends?
So the alternatives seem to be:
1. Dubya is a goofy frat boy who’s fairly goodhearted but utterly clueless and is being manipulated by evil forces to do their despicable whim.
2. Dubya is a goofy frat boy of the mean rich-bitch type, probably being further (if willingly) manipulated by smarter evil forces to do their despicable whim.
3. Dubya *is* a smarter evil force who wears the guise of a goodhearted goofy frat boy to fool everyone but who really goes out on puppy-hunting missions to feed his undead robotic ally, Dick Cheney.
I’ll take a mixture of number 3 and Boulder Dude’s statement.
To me Bush is just following the “New” republican agenda to a “T”, not much else. It’s all about keep the rich, rich and happy. And the poor and middle classes, just good enough to where they won’t really complain or want to over-throw the government. Just keep throwing down false tax breaks with Faux News reporting, that’s all it takes.