…and this is a 
The apocalypse is near. Americans must gird their loins and prepare to defend themselves against a terrible evil. Rick Santorum has a warning for us.
"Think about how they view you," he told the crowd of Republicans. "They view you no different than the drug dealer views the little kid in the school yard. They want to get you hooked, they want to get you dependent. They want to get you relying upon them for your wellbeing. And once they've satisfied you, giving them that drug, that narcotic, then you'll be reliant on them and, by the way, you'll also be less than what God created you to be."
Can you guess what quotidian horror Ricky is concerned about? It certainly sounds dreadful.
It's health care.
I know. Just let it sink in.
Rick Santorum and the Republicans are telling people that having access to doctors and medicines and being treated for your illnesses and being in good health is wicked, and that his hateful god intends you to suffer more.
And then…
The crowd thundered applause.
Stephen Colbert treats Republican health care with the respect it deserves.
Politics
Comments
Posted by: kieran
|
April 12, 2011 8:43 AM
Can someone explain to me what's wrong with healhcare? I have a little card in my wallet that allows me to get free healthcare across europe. If someone from France was to fall ill in Ireland they would get the same level of care as if I did the same in France. When people are at their weakest that's when you should help the most, why is that such a bad idea?
Why do people listen to a congressman/senator who has free healthcare?
Posted by: Audley Z. Darkheart OM, purveyor of candy and lies
|
April 12, 2011 8:45 AM
Everything else aside, I love Dan Savage, but I do not ever want to piss him off.
Posted by: Shala
|
April 12, 2011 8:45 AM
Ignorance is strength!
Posted by: QuestionAuthority
|
April 12, 2011 8:46 AM
Sanctimonious Santorum's overflow valve tripped again....
Posted by: Brother Ogvorbis, Apropos of Nada
|
April 12, 2011 8:47 AM
Though I am not a native Pennsyltuckian, I hereby apologize for Santoruming all over America. Little did we know that when we threw his sorry arse out, he would just spread himself across the whole country, lubricating the radical religious regressive right with his toxic effluvia.
There are a couple of questions that I ask right wing regressives when I meet them in meat space:
1. The Constitution says that the US Government is to 'provide for the general welfare'. Why do regressives (I use the word conservative because they don't grok regressive) hate the Constitution of the United States?
2. Why is ensuring the health and education of the American worker, the backbone of American wealth, anathema to regressives?
And I have never gotten a real answer to either. The one time I met Santorum (and shook his hand (yes, I washed (and made Lady MacBeth look like a slacker when it comes to hand-washing))) I was unable to ask either of those questions as I was on duty and in uniform.
Then again, he wouldn't have answered either.
Posted by: Jacob
|
April 12, 2011 8:48 AM
God made you sick for a reason. Stop trying to circumvent his will!
Posted by: llewelly
|
April 12, 2011 8:48 AM
Healthcare == Heroin.
Posted by: Capital Dan
|
April 12, 2011 8:48 AM
I genuinely hate this country sometimes, and I really wish people across the globe would stop looking to us as any sort of decent example of humanity. When the common good has been vilified, it's time to pack our bags and get out.
Posted by: David Marjanović
|
April 12, 2011 8:55 AM
Maybe Santorum has finally crossed the line into being too insane. Beck recently managed it.
Posted by: maureen.brian#b5c92
|
April 12, 2011 8:56 AM
"and I really wish people across the globe would stop looking to us as any sort of decent example of humanity"
Capital Dan, we don't. We haven't for decades.
Even people in desperately poor countries only pretend to in the hope of one day having enough to eat.
Posted by: It'spiningforthefyords
|
April 12, 2011 8:56 AM
I'm sick and tired of this! Can't ONE "Republican" seize the "Worst Human Being on Earth" Title and run with it? For a solid year at least?
It could be like Miss America, with one winner and a runner-up, and all the rest of these evil dead could go back to ordinary jobs.
If I chance upon RS's grave, he can count on me to "trod the dirt down" ala Elvis Costello. May he live long enough to understand how vile he is: vile, stupid, and evil at heart.
Posted by: Segmentum
|
April 12, 2011 8:56 AM
LOL, you are deluded, developed countries stopped looking up to USA a very long time ago.
Most view USA as a dangerous circus of fat, ignorant and hyper-religious people with a gun fetish.
But third world countries do look up to you, like Uganda...
Posted by: Equisetum
|
April 12, 2011 8:58 AM
Well, he does have a point. Doctors are probably responsible for more drug use in the country than anyone else. And they give out free samples, too.
Posted by: nigelTheBold, Minister of Spankings
|
April 12, 2011 8:59 AM
Capital Dan:
The common good is only good if you want everyone to have a decent amount of health and wealth. It certainly does not allow a tiny percentage of the population to grow obscenely wealthy.
Therefore, it's evil. After all, God only loves a very few of us. And you … you never call, you never write, you never send presents. No wonder you're not His favorite.
Posted by: Matt "Nora" Penfold
|
April 12, 2011 9:01 AM
It is not quite true that you can get free healthcare across Europe by showing your card. What you do get is access to the same healthcare, at the same cost, as a national of the country you fall sick in. Of course throughout the EU, and those other countries that extend the same rights, getting treatment no matter how expensive is not going to bankrupt you.
Posted by: landsharkmarc.myopenid.com
|
April 12, 2011 9:02 AM
Let me preface this by saying I can't stand Santorum and think he is an idiot beyond measure. That said, I am a believer in minimalist government so I do have to point out that the General Welfare clause has always been interpreted Constitutionally to mean the welfare of the union of the states, not the welfare of any one individual in the union. So Brother Ogvorbis, while you think that the GOP hates the Constitution, they view it as you hating the Constitution for arguing a new interpretation of the General Welfare Clause that would dramatically change the character of the Constitution.
Not saying you're wrong to complain about the GOP as they have plenty of things to complain about, but you have to understand that your argument on Constitutional purity grounds doesn't hold very well except on emotional terms.
Posted by: Epinephrine
|
April 12, 2011 9:02 AM
@Captain Dan,
As others have said, admiring the USA is not the prevailing attitude in my area/circles. Of course, that's a biased sample, but most people I know shudder at the thought of being more like the USA.
Posted by: Daniel Clear
|
April 12, 2011 9:05 AM
I'm addicted to good health. whenever I don't have it I feel very unwell. I agree, the government funded body that deals out drugs is no better than some sort of drug dealer, and it makes me less of an invalid than god intended
Posted by: MrFire
|
April 12, 2011 9:06 AM
Because that's altruism, and we all know that
BrundleflyJesusRand hates altruism.Posted by: nigelTheBold, Minister of Spankings
|
April 12, 2011 9:11 AM
landsharkmarc:
True, that.
Fortunately, it just so happens that the general welfare of the nation is best served when the nation helps ensure the welfare of all its citizens. So it all works out in the end.
Posted by: It'spiningforthefyords
|
April 12, 2011 9:13 AM
Oh, Segmentum is here? Drop dead, but without style.
That is all.
Posted by: MrFire
|
April 12, 2011 9:16 AM
I too believe that goverment should be no larger than it has to be. The problem is that my metric is different from yours.
Since I'm ignorant of this part of Constitutional history, may I ask you for a source on this?
Posted by: RationalMind
|
April 12, 2011 9:19 AM
I live in Wales . It is one of the constituent nations of the UK. It actually has its own indigenous distinct Celtic Language, Welsh or Cymraeg as those like me who speak it call it.
Some years ago the BBC did a survey of who were the greatest ever Britons .Winston Churchill won and Charles Darwin came 4th and was followed by Shakespeare and Newton.
They repeated the exercise to find out who was the greatest Welshman ever. The answer was Aneurin "Nye" Bevan who gets his unusual name from a 7th Century poet. Nye Bevan is famous for just one thing. He founded the NHS, our free National Health Service.
There is currently a big row in the UK over the Conservatives wanting to make changes. Any politician who tampers with the NHS does so at his peril. It is seen as one of the jewels in the crown of British culture.
Posted by: kieran
|
April 12, 2011 9:20 AM
Well the only thing I look for from america is Jon Stewart and Steven Colbert. I used to be able to watch them online but now they are no longer available from my location, so I used foxyproxy and could watch them online once again but then i upgraded that browser and while I did use google chrome with an add on it just wasn't the same. I can't watch either on sattelite as E4 stopped showing the dailyshow. Comedycentral why has thou forsaken me!
@15 Yes sorry should have made that clear but as you said it won't bankrupt you.
I just don't understand it at all, I can't grasp why providing a basic level of healthcare for free would cause the collapse of capitalism. I also can't understand a pharmacy where you can buy milk as well as drugs at? I can't understand people who can't afford healthcare voting for those who want to prevent them ever getting access to it? It is one area of American culture that I've never understood.
Posted by: Dianne
|
April 12, 2011 9:25 AM
What is the basic purpose of a government, any government? To protect the citizens of the country. What kills more US-Americans: heart disease or terrorism? Cancer or invasion by foreign military forces? Case closed: the Pentagon and the NIH need to switch budgets and access to health care is currently more central to the government's purpose than defending the borders.
Posted by: Hazzard
|
April 12, 2011 9:27 AM
To protect the interests of the insurance lobby, obviously. This was written into the Constitution by Jesus, in ink invisible to atheists.Posted by: MrFire
|
April 12, 2011 9:29 AM
Never mind, landsharkmarc. I found something.
But I daresay it is not as clear-cut as you make it sound.
Posted by: gadow
|
April 12, 2011 9:29 AM
Rep. Grayson was right when he said, on the floor of the House of Representatives, that the Republican plan for health care was "Don't get sick. And if you do get sick, die quickly." He was lambasted from both sides of the aisle, but it turns out the only thing he was wrong about was that this is the plan of a lot of Democrats as well.
And I have to say, I don't remember when Colbert just could not keep himself together. Just goes to show that Republicans can make even a consumate professional like Stephen Colbert lose it.
Posted by: Nerd of Redhead, OM
|
April 12, 2011 9:30 AM
Ah, I see Smeggy the total idjit is still working on his banhammer for utter insipidity.
Just imagine if we can take a large chunk of the obscene profits out of health care. Why, the cost of getting sick might actually go down, as total payments decrease. Gee wilikers...
Posted by: nigelTheBold, Minister of Spankings
|
April 12, 2011 9:35 AM
kieran:
Good question, but really it boils down to this:
God, country, family. In that order.
The conflation of religion, nationalism, a specific brand of corporate-controlled capitalism, and patriotism results in a rather red, white, and blue kind of poison. If you listent to the rhetoric from those who attack health care (or anything that might interfere with the flow of money into corporate coffers), you'll note specific key phrases, like "socialism."
It isn't so much that the conservative voters doesn't want healthcare for themselves. They simply don't want those other people getting it. You know, the ones that are lazy and don't work hard and so don't deserve it.
Posted by: hyperdeath
|
April 12, 2011 9:36 AM
kieran:
COMMUNIST!!!
Posted by: Mr Ed
|
April 12, 2011 9:36 AM
I have a modest proposal. For those health care consensus objectors who are 18, of sound mind and not showing the signs of depression they may opt out of all health care insurance. If they need services they will have to pay up front if they can not pay only palliative will be provided. If they wish to re-enter the health care system there will be a 10 year waiting period.
Posted by: nigelTheBold, Minister of Spankings
|
April 12, 2011 9:42 AM
Dianne:
Exactly. And it's not just the individual deaths. It's also the economic effects. The military is a net drain on the US economy (though tax funding of the military industry is definitely a significant part of the US economy). Health care is a net booster, as free access to healthcare means more people who take preventative measures, increasing average health, and so average productivity goes up.
The problem comes when you start cutting out the middleman. Without insurance companies, who's going to take their cut of the profits?
If you want to get rich, tax the friction, and make sure there's as much friction as possible.
Posted by: Segmentum
|
April 12, 2011 9:44 AM
There is nothing more insipid than your posts in this and other topics. You never say anything. You are embarrassing yourself.
Posted by: aidan
|
April 12, 2011 9:47 AM
"sorry, this video is unavailable from your location"
,,l,
Posted by: christophe-thill.myopenid.com
|
April 12, 2011 9:48 AM
So he's basically denouncing Big Pharma as the devil ?
Posted by: Anubis
|
April 12, 2011 9:49 AM
¿Not intended to be a factual statement?
Oh, man. What the hell is wrong with those assholes?
Posted by: nigelTheBold, Minister of Spankings
|
April 12, 2011 9:54 AM
Anubis:
There's nothing wrong with these assholes. They've finally just arrived at the point where they can freely admit their views no longer represent reality.
It's rather liberating, honestly. "Yeah, I live in a fuckin' fantasy world, and all my regressive policies are based on lies. But so fuckin' what?"
I think they are attempting to make their fantasy world reality by simply pretending it's real. It's a kind of consensual-reality world-building, only instead of working towards something good, they intend to fuck over as many people as they can, in the hopes that they'll be king when their reality finally solidifies.
That's all I can figure. Either that, or they have so much invested in their fucked-up view of reality, they're not going to let something as trivial as facts stand in their way.
Posted by: kieran
|
April 12, 2011 9:57 AM
@31 Comrade my cover has been blown!
Posted by: A. Nuran
|
April 12, 2011 10:04 AM
Now we see how they'll campaign to get rid of Medicare
Posted by: Matt "Nora" Penfold
|
April 12, 2011 10:10 AM
It is telling that the US right is not in favour of efficient government, merely small government, and then only small in certain areas.
The evidence that universal healthcare is both cheaper and provides better results is overwhelming.
Posted by: Segmentum
|
April 12, 2011 10:10 AM
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
FOR PEOPLE WHO CAN'T WATCH THE VIDEO THIS IS A 100% WORKING SOLUTION
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Posted by: Krebiozen
|
April 12, 2011 10:17 AM
@kieran Suggest you dump Chrome, get the latest version of Firefox and get the Modify Headers plugin to watch The Daily Show and Colbert Report in the UK. http://xrl.in/8s3t
Posted by: Audley Z. Darkheart OM, purveyor of candy and lies
|
April 12, 2011 10:18 AM
A Nuran,
The last Republican plan for Medicare I heard about (and I wish I could remember who proposed it) would completely dismantle it and give Medicare recipients money to go buy private insurance. IIRC, the yearly payments would increase with general inflation, but not healthcare inflation.
Not only that, but if the healthcare reforms were dismantled, what insurance company would take people who qualified for Medicare? Most (if not all) of them have got preexisting conditions. There would be no checks on the cost of insurance, either and the proposed plan has no way to keep pace with the rising costs of care.
It's not a bad plan if you're wealthy and can afford to pay for insurance out-of-pocket, but the rest of us can just hurry up and die before we become senior citizens, I guess.
Posted by: Eamon Knight
|
April 12, 2011 10:21 AM
@23: And when a similar poll was conducted in Canada, the winner was Tommy Douglas, father of Canadian medicare, and first leader of the NDP (that was an actual socialist party -- we allow those up here). Yep, a Baptist minister helped make Canadians "less than what God created [us] to be".
Posted by: AJ Milne OM
|
April 12, 2011 10:22 AM
Well sure, I guess not dying can be a mite addictive, I s'pose.
It's of a piece, really, tho', innit? I mean, isn't this man a member of a religion whose holy book at some point sez, more or less, 'Sex: well, if you absolutely must, but it is bad, donchaknow...'
Getting to my point--and I do have one--it amuses me 'cos I remember commenting at one point that there was something awfully convenient about this. Declare a basic biological drive a sin, you've got yourself a pretty much guaranteed supply of sinners*...
At which point, I opined it made roughly as much sense to declare breathing a sin...
So I guess I shoulda seen this one coming, really.
(*/Ye, I say unto you: all have sinned. As we've conveniently defined it that way, all the better to guilt you into tithing with, my dear...)
Posted by: teawithbertrand
|
April 12, 2011 10:29 AM
I take a statin drug to help control my cholesterol. Does this makes me "less than what god created me to be"? If trying to postpone the heart disease that killed so many of my ancestors pisses off Mr. Magic Imaginary Guy in the Sky, he hasn't mentioned it to me. And I would think that anyone who actually believes said sky guy (like, perhaps, someone who would "thunder applause" for Rick Santorum) might be annoyed at this asshole's presumption to speak for Him. No facts, no logic, no real argument, so he tries to bolster his nonsense with a "God Doesn't Like It" and watches the crowd of idiots cheer.
Posted by: Nerd of Redhead, OM
|
April 12, 2011 10:30 AM
Smeggy the idjit talking about himself.
Typical of egotistical losers, not recognizing the truth.It doesn't take much to see that health care can be expand to almost the whole country without increase taxes. Take the present contributions. Take the profit out of the insurance. Suddenly, 10-15% more people can be covered with the present contributions. Do the same for hospitals, remove the profit, and costs go down More people covered, more people actually paying for services. Win-win.
Posted by: MakeNine
|
April 12, 2011 10:35 AM
This is madness!!! This is AMERICAAAAAA!!!
Posted by: mxh
|
April 12, 2011 10:39 AM
With half the country responding to what Mr. Frothy-mix said with applause, America deserve being in the craphole that it is. Makes me want to turn republican and just take advantage of the idiots, since reasoning with them doesn't work.
Posted by: tytalus
|
April 12, 2011 10:39 AM
I may be stuck with Kyl as one of my senators (until he retires), but at least he got well and truly mocked last night for his foolishness. It doesn't surprise me that Colbert couldn't pull off what Kyl did with a straight face.
Posted by: SC OM
|
April 12, 2011 10:44 AM
Technically, it's "provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare."
/sorry-ass Schoolhouse Rock pedantry, with apologies
Posted by: Rich Wilson
|
April 12, 2011 12:10 PM
You can say this about any public service.Addicted to our roads much? How about our cops and firefighters?
Posted by: NiChrome
|
April 12, 2011 12:12 PM
And for one, tiny little anecdotal story about the efficiency of the US health system vs. the evil, socialist Canadian one, read this blog entry.
Our own little tale: The spouse and I moved to Canada from the US ~3 years ago (just applied for citizenship!) - last year cancer came a visiting (things looking okay now). As horrible as this experience was, it wasn't made worse by battles with insurance companies, bankruptcy to pay for treatments, etc.
Posted by: Louis
|
April 12, 2011 12:17 PM
What a fuckwit.*
That is all.
Louis
*Santorum obviously. Just to clear any possible ambiguity.
Posted by: Tetrode
|
April 12, 2011 12:19 PM
PZ, your headline was priceless: a frothy mix indeed. I had to gasp. You would enjoy the Rude Pundit, Lee Papa, at rudepundit.blogspot.com. I have no affiliation, just appreciation of profanely straight talk.
Posted by: Alverant
|
April 12, 2011 12:21 PM
Ironic that he's comparing healthcare to drug dealers. I always considered drug dealers to be conservatives by nature. Look at the simlarities:
Both want the government to stop interfering with their businsses.
Neither pay taxes on their fortunes.
Both push poison on people
Both believe in having guns ... lots of guns.
Both think they're due more respect than they deserve.
Neither cares who gets hurt or killed as they pursue their goals.
Both show a reckless disregard for poor people.
Both treat women like sex objects.
Both put money and their own welfare about all else.
Posted by: raven
|
April 12, 2011 12:21 PM
How does Santorum know what god intended for us?
He doesn't. He is just pretending. Universal Health Care is one of a zillion things never mentioned in the bible along with supply side economics and democracy.
Proof. I do know. God wants YOU all to send ME lots of money. And he wants Santorum to shut the fuck up and stop taking the lord's name in vain.
Which is what he is doing when he pretends to know what his deity wants and speaks for it.
Posted by: TransHero
|
April 12, 2011 12:25 PM
Rick Santorum is SUCH a santorum.
Posted by: feralboy12, der Ken-Puppe Sie außerhalb in 1983 verlassen
|
April 12, 2011 12:27 PM
I think I'm getting too much exercise. I've gotten hooked on it, and I'm far less than what god wants me to be.
Posted by: Alverant
|
April 12, 2011 12:29 PM
"what God created you to be"
And of course God created white rich people to be greater than poor non-white people. (snark)
Posted by: mrmisconception
|
April 12, 2011 12:29 PM
That sounds like the church to me, I actually thought that's what ex-Senator Whatshisface was talking about until his last sentence.
Posted by: Mattir-ritated
|
April 12, 2011 12:33 PM
Santorum (upper case) is actually much worse than santorum (lower case) - at least the latter is the result of safe, consensual fun.
Posted by: KP
|
April 12, 2011 12:34 PM
Re: The Colbert video, the conservative view of healthcare deserves so little respect that even Colbert can't deliver the bit without cracking himself up.
Yes, that's right, Republicans, he's laughing at YOU.
Posted by: Rikitiki
|
April 12, 2011 12:34 PM
Hmm, assuming Santorum and his idjits are jebus-followers: didn't jebus say some little thing about caring for the sick? So, by blocking universal healthcare, they are directly contravening his instructions, yes?
Posted by: mrmisconception
|
April 12, 2011 12:39 PM
The religious right in this country don't believe anything until the RNC tells them to.
Posted by: raven
|
April 12, 2011 12:42 PM
They are just pretenders.
Their jesus/god is a sockpuppet with millions of human hands up his rear end.
If he existed, he would be pretty ticked about now.
Posted by: Naked Bunny with a Whip
|
April 12, 2011 12:51 PM
So Santorum is admitting that universal healthcare coverage would be wildly popular and something that people would not want to give up. Duh. That's because it's a good thing.
His "drug dealer" metaphor works with the current private insurance system, too. After all, who wants to give up their healthcare insurance once they've gotten some? Hell, it works with employment in general. "They want to get you hooked [on a paycheck], they want to get you dependent [on monopolies]." What's the difference? Oh, right. Private industry is magically more efficient and responsive at providing services to all.
Posted by: consciousness razor
|
April 12, 2011 12:52 PM
Posted by: Janine, The Little Top Of Venom, OM
|
April 12, 2011 12:55 PM
One of my sisters is an assistant manager at a Walgreen's. She was rather surprised to find out that pap smears and breast exams are available there. I am trying to remember if I had a mammogram at a Walgreen's.
Posted by: MrFire
|
April 12, 2011 12:58 PM
Well! That would explain all the santorum!
Posted by: theophontes (θεός γαμώτο)
|
April 12, 2011 1:00 PM
@Segmentum #42
If your suggestion works against the Great cyberWall of China, you will have my undying gratitude. I'll check this tomorrow and let you know.
Posted by: Hairhead
|
April 12, 2011 1:14 PM
As a Canadian, I think that a lot of the anger and angst among the less well-informed of the American electorate is precisely rooted in their medical uncertainty. As has been noted above, our "greatest Canadian" is the man who created our Medicare system, and our medical system, like the Brits' medical system is the true third rail of our politics.
Now, we are in the middle of a national election campaign here in Canada, and I am somewhat morose over the choices offered us, and at the mere possibility of Stephen Harper getting a majority. But today, I read this:
PARIS — Canadians are the most tolerant people in the developed world, are terrific readers, enjoy more "positive experiences" than everyone but Icelanders, and don't produce many babies, according to a new report released Tuesday.
The conclusions were contained in the latest edition of Society at a Glance, a broad-brush analysis of social and economic indicators among the 34 member states of the Paris-based Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development.
"At 84 per cent on average, Canadians report the highest community tolerance of minority groups — ethnic minorities, migrants, and gays and lesbians — in the OECD, where the average is 61 per cent," said a summary of Canada-specific findings.
The report also found:
• Canada has a fertility rate of 1.68 children per woman, below the OECD average of 1.74 "and easily the lowest of the anglophone OECD countries;"
New Zealand's was 2.14, Ireland's was at 2.07, the U.S. was 2.01, and the United Kingdom had a 1.94 per cent rate;
• Canada had the sixth-highest proportion of foreign-born people in its population, at roughly one in five;
• Canadian 15-year-olds rank third in reading skills, behind only Korea and Finland;
• Canadians rank second after Icelanders in having "positive experiences — feeling well-rested, being treated with respect, smiling, doing something interesting and experiencing enjoyment," the report said; but
• "Canadians also have above-average negative experiences - pain, worry, sadness, stress and depression."
Hairhead back here: and so I have to realize yet again how lucky I am to have been born here, and that my current complaints are nothing compared to what is happening to the south. And I hope we (Canadians) keep on course.
Finally, I wish all you rational Americans the guts and the persistence to take your country back from the dog-fuckers who currently hold power. (cf. Santorum's "man-on-dog" comment which prompted Dan Savage's response)
Posted by: truthspeaker
|
April 12, 2011 1:14 PM
Because to fund such a system costs money, and that means extremely rich people might have to pay slightly higher taxes. Many of them do not want to pay slightly higher taxes.
Posted by: AJ Milne OM
|
April 12, 2011 1:15 PM
... not to mention a certain oddly repeated meme we've been noticing in the news of late...
(Ripply dream sequence/fade to past video effect...)
TITLE: 'Somewhere in a seminary'
INSTRUCTOR: ... So we are called upon to live lives modeled on that of our Jebus. And what do we know of our Messiah?
STUDENT 1: That he seriously loves teh buttsecks?
STUDENT 2: Like, on a pretty much cosmic scale? And, really, he's got a sex drive the size of the universe, and will take it from anyone, any time, anywhere?
STUDENT 1: Not so much bi as omnisexual, really...
STUDENT 2: But he's totally in denial and incredibly stressed about what this may mean for his own sexual identity, and in typically overcompensating fashion, rails on and on and on endlessly in public about what a great sin is teh ghey, all the while privately hitting the meth and the sheets hard with an oiled-up rentboy every weekend he can sneak away from his congregation?
INSTRUCTOR: You have learned well. Go forth and do likewise, my children. Go forth and do likewise.
(Ripply fade-back-from-flashback sequence...)
Posted by: theophontes (θεός γαμώτο)
|
April 12, 2011 1:19 PM
@ consciousness razor #69
Voltaire was mocking the optimism of Liebniz. (Who may well have adopted this turn of mind (at least publicly) to pander to his wealthy patrons -ie: feeding them what they wanted to hear in exchange for their cash.)
Posted by: MrFire
|
April 12, 2011 1:24 PM
*sprays
santorum coffee on screen*You gotta get round to writing your book, AJ!
Posted by: Dianne
|
April 12, 2011 1:28 PM
Hairhead@73: Don't think I'm not on to your scam. You're clearly trying to make those of us unlucky enough to live in the US jealous, thus increasing our negative experiences and further increasing your smug positive experiences. Well it's not going to work! We're all HAPPY HAPPY HAPPY! to have no health care, no sleep, and low reading skills. ... Ok, so maybe it is working.
Posted by: Janine, The Little Top Of Venom, OM
|
April 12, 2011 1:34 PM
*sprays santor um coffee on screen*
MrFire! Are you pointing your ass at the computer screen? How do you see the screen in this way? Or do you have an interesting anatomical anomaly?
Posted by: Brownian, Most Vicious & Petty of Pharyngulites
|
April 12, 2011 1:46 PM
I'm no more a fan of Segmentum than the next guy is, but his posts on this thread (at least) are not insipid.
Let's get over calling for the banhammer just because someone we can't stand shows up; save it for when they're saying deplorable things, not just being generally deplorable people.
Remember: we're an echo chamber, not a conservative media outlet. We don't ban people for who they are (i.e. black Democrat president), but for what they do and say.
Posted by: fuckin' kristinc
|
April 12, 2011 1:49 PM
Dammit, I was just there yesterday to get nail polish. I wish I'd remembered to grab a quick pap smear while I was at it.
Posted by: AJ Milne OM
|
April 12, 2011 1:50 PM
(Bows...)
Thankee. Tho' I worry what Penthouse Letters: the Closeted Clergy Gone Wild! edition is gonna do without me.
Oh, c'mon, Janine. We both know there are any number of ways this could happen...
(/Oh, okay. So I now know. From having just developed like three possibilities and accompanying mental images spontaneously upon reading this, and which I will now almost certainly never manage to scrub entirely from my imagination.)
Posted by: truthspeaker
|
April 12, 2011 1:52 PM
Except Ogvorbis's interpretation isn't new at all. It's the same interpretation that gave us anti-trust laws, Social Security, Medicaire, the space program, and many other things the federal government does, none of which have been ruled unconstitutional by a court.
Posted by: MrFire
|
April 12, 2011 2:09 PM
Janine: I shall add to AJ's assessment by saying simply that perhaps I enjoy a wide range of refreshing beverages, and occasionally get them confused.
Posted by: Eamon Knight
|
April 12, 2011 2:16 PM
@73• Canada has a fertility rate of 1.68 children per woman, below the OECD average of 1.74 "and easily the lowest of the anglophone OECD countries;"
....
• Canada had the sixth-highest proportion of foreign-born people in its population, at roughly one in five;
[wingnut]Hell, we're committing
racialcultural suicide! Letting all those furriners in, while we fornicate using godless contraception and abortion! (Damn that Jewish Morgentaler bastard!) All youwhitegood Canadian wimminfolk: START MAKING BABEEEZZZZ!!!!!![/wingnut]Re the Santorum quote in the OP: I've run across this "government dependency" meme before, notably on the blog of an obscure local Christian wingnut (who's an American ex-pat, and a personal ex-friend) who often goes off about the "Saviour State" we progressives are supposedly all devoted to. Her suggestion on public healthcare was to do away with it and hold neighbourhood bake sales to pay for little Johnny's chemo. The anti-goverment attitude goes well beyond any arguably rational concern about expanding state power or individual choices; it really comes down to a power struggle against perceived government encroachment on traditionally religious turf.
Posted by: Josh, "Raquel Dommage," Porte-parole Gay Official
|
April 12, 2011 2:17 PM
I got my last testicular cancer screening at Walgreen's. The helpful teenage girl at the checkout said "everything feels normal, I guess."
I'm making an appointment next week with the night stock manager for a prostate exam.
Posted by: Brother Ogvorbis, Apropos of Nada
|
April 12, 2011 2:29 PM
SC:
"Promote the common welfare." Thanks. I guess I am a fuckwit.
Posted by: Arty
|
April 12, 2011 2:47 PM
re: #79 & # 77 & # 82;
Man has a glass eye. Usual practice before inserting it in socket is to place in his mouth to lubricate it with saliva. Accidently swallows said eye. Concerned about possible medical complications, decides to have his doctor examine him. Very embarrassed to explain the real situation, he tells his doctor that he has an unusual pain in his lower bowel. Doctor peers up his butt and to his surprise sees the glass eye looking back at him. Doctor recoils in dismay, confronts his patient and declares plaintively; " You've been my patient for years, you must learn to trust me"!
Posted by: hinakuu
|
April 12, 2011 2:53 PM
and here i was thinking, for the first three and a half sentences that Santorum was talking about religion and finally going to reveal that he's been a Poe all along.
Posted by: Akira MacKenzie
|
April 12, 2011 2:54 PM
I think the following quote sums up our nation's situation:
"Socialism never took root in America because the poor see themselves not as an exploited proletariat but as temporarily embarrassed millionaires." --John Steinbeck
The "Protestant Work Ethic," the "Horatio Alger Myth," "Rugged Individualism," or whatever you want to call it, the USA's culture has been poisoned by the idea that 1) anyone who just works hard enough will become rich, 2) anything that hasn't been "earned" is not "deserved," no matter how much it is needed. They breed complacency and resentment which manifests itself in Senator Frothy Mixture and the Tea Baggers.
Posted by: Josh, "Raquel Dommage," Porte-parole Gay Official
|
April 12, 2011 2:56 PM
#88 - Groan (but lol). The patient gave the doctor the brown eye!
Posted by: Rev. BigDumbChimp
|
April 12, 2011 2:59 PM
ouch
Posted by: Josh, "Raquel Dommage," Porte-parole Gay Official
|
April 12, 2011 2:59 PM
Also, I had my last glass eye fitted at Walgreen's.
Posted by: UpAgainstTheRopes
|
April 12, 2011 3:24 PM
As soon as I saw "The frothy mix of lube and feces speaks" I knew exactly who this post was going to be about. Dan Savage did a hell of a fine job in raising the consciousness of errr... Santorum.
Posted by: nigelTheBold, Minister of Spankings
|
April 12, 2011 3:31 PM
I got my sex change at Walgreen's.
Posted by: https://me.yahoo.com/a/AKp_B_gSkpRDRUl5yBtgnnB0OHZG#94c23
|
April 12, 2011 4:54 PM
Hmmm, all I ever got from Walgreen's was change for a twenty.
(*rimshot*)
--Raynfala
Posted by: Roadstergal
|
April 12, 2011 4:57 PM
I'm going to have to show that article to m'boy. He's always bitching that we can't move to Canadia because it's too cold. I can tell him to put on a goddam sweater so we can go live with enlightened people.
Posted by: Kagehi
|
April 12, 2011 5:08 PM
I just had a vision of one of those, "robots take over the world for humanities sake", movies. Taking this interpretation of the constitution they shuffle everyone into dorms, let the occupants fight over scraps, but, since they still need to support the rest of the constitution, a lucky few get "elected", temporarily, to the "state legislature", and "federal legislature" dorms, so as to maintain the fiction that there is still a human based government of some sort. Mean time, in proper interpretation of the "welfare of the nation", all infrastructure in maintained perfectly, all roads, the stock market still runs, *by robots*, and everything moves along perfectly, just without humans involved to muck up the process. Those being only needed to fulfill the bits of the constitution that unavoidably require the fiction of them having a government at all any more.
If people, especially individuals, are not part of the equation, then what the hell does, "welfare of the nation", mean? Obviously, for those that don't get that, things like the EPA are not needed, because running the "machine" doesn't require clean air or water. But, what the hell does perfect roads, etc. matter, if there is no one using, allowed to use, healthy enough to use, or who can afford to use them? The concept is completely incoherent, since you invariably have to draw some arbitrary line, and pretend that everyone over it counts, while the rest deserve to be screwed (not that the regressives lack the ability to make just such bullshit distinctions).
Posted by: lautrec85
|
April 12, 2011 5:19 PM
They like a government small enough to not care about the citizenry, but big enough to maintain a grotesquely large nuclear arsenal and several illegal crusades around the world.
I can't say anything if Americans elect representatives that are obviously against them. It's their country, their decision. I just wish they didn't kill so many people in other countries.
Posted by: pyramus.nb
|
April 12, 2011 5:28 PM
Another piece of anecdata: a year and a half ago my husband (we're both men--another thing about Canada) needed emergency gall bladder surgery, as in Right Now Or Else. He was diagnosed on Friday afternoon and was admitted within the hour to a room which he had to share with one other patient. Friday night he had a preparatory operation to clear out the bile duct. Saturday he had the thing removed laparoscopically. Sunday he was well enough to go home, and he recovered without incident.
Total cost to us: nothing. No bills, no paperwork, no dunning notices, no bank loans, no penury.
Canadians cannot comprehend the American approach to health care.
Posted by: A Bad Idea (♀)
|
April 12, 2011 6:21 PM
pyramus.nb : Years ago I knew a Canadian boy who was visiting relatives in America. His father told him, "Whatever you do, don't get sick or hurt, because we can't afford to be American."
Posted by: Timaahy
|
April 12, 2011 6:22 PM
I've figured this out. The Republican Party is David Brent*. He thinks he's intelligent, compassionate, and everyone loves him. But really he's just a racist, sexist, homophobic bigot, who can't dance for shit.
* from the British version, obviously. :-)
Posted by: Akira MacKenzie
|
April 12, 2011 6:25 PM
Yeah! Well, it may have not cost YOU anything, you lousy, anti-freedom, moocher! But do you know how much it cost society's achievers? With the taxes they were forced to pay they could have bought a third mansion... NO! I mean, jobs! Millions and millions of jobs for the little people to pull themselves up by their bootstraps by. Yeah,that's it.
You not doing the patriotic thing and letting your husband die cost millions their jobs!
;)
Posted by: SC OM
|
April 12, 2011 6:37 PM
Promote the general welfare.
Posted by: RemembersABeach
|
April 12, 2011 6:54 PM
I'm between committments right now (after work, before leaving to lead a Girl Scout meeting), so I don't have time to read all the comments, forgive me if I'm repeating things others have already said.
Every anti-choice jerk should be required to explain how they can call themselves pro-life while opposing the health care access that keeps people alive.
Every jerk who thinks that jobs are important to the country should have to explain how people can be expected to be productive when they do not have access to adequate health care. Sick people are not good employees.
Every jerk who claims to be a christian should be required to explain how they expect to be judged under the "whatever you do to the least of these" standard when they are so eager to throw poor and sick people under the bus in search of that next holy dollar.
I do not understand how anyone can NOT see providing access to health care as a moral imperative.
Posted by: Audley Z. Darkheart OM, purveyor of candy and lies
|
April 12, 2011 7:08 PM
pyramus,
Geez, marriage equality AND medical care that doesn't force your family into bankruptcy? Canada must make baby Jesus cry.
Posted by: Akira MacKenzie
|
April 12, 2011 8:27 PM
ImaginesABeach @ 105
Ah! But the anti-choicers only care keeping the "fetus" alive. After it has shitted out of someone's mommy-hole, it's expected to pull its own weight and not be a mooching parasite on the "achievers" who make the engine of world run.
It's a matter of personal responsibility.
That's why we should follow the example of those upstanding Duggar clan and have women crap out children (yes, I'm continuing the child==feces theme, that's what they are) as soon from the moment she has her first period to the first hot flashes of menopause in order to replace those who die. After all, it worked so well in the Middle Ages.
But it's God's will that they have to live in appliance boxes at eat dumpster leavings while the rich live in opulence. Besides, if the poor are true Christians and obey God's word, they'll get to go Heaven after they die of a easily treatable but punitively expensive medical condition.
See! It all works out in the end.
Posted by: phoenicianromans
|
April 12, 2011 8:52 PM
I've had wingnuts argue that, since health care treats patients individually, it can't be said to be promoting the general welfare...
Idiots and fools.
Posted by: Rutee, Shrieking Harpy of Dooooom
|
April 12, 2011 9:14 PM
We had a unicorn on here once:
A Gay Republican Anti-Abortionist who was also Anti-War and Pro-UHC.
What a magical day that was.
Posted by: Ing: PhD Trollologist
|
April 12, 2011 9:17 PM
@Rutee
Jesus fuck...why do people find that one issue so important they're willing to sacrifice everything else and take the symbolic arm band of Republican just to uphold it?
Gay: Meh ok fine I'm a fag and deserve to die, it's a fair cop
War: Well they're only brown people
UHC: Well don't get sick
Abortion: FUCK YEAH BESTEST THING EVER!!!!
Posted by: Nerd of Redhead, OM
|
April 12, 2011 9:24 PM
Neither can a lot of us USAians. Especially those of us who can actually do arithmetic and see that the cost of universal coverage isn't that much more than we are presently spending via insurance companies and for profit hospitals.Posted by: Amphiox, OM
|
April 12, 2011 10:19 PM
A little historical perspective on Canadian healthcare (others more knowledgeable may add/correct as they see fit).
Universal healthcare in Canada was established bottom-up rather than top-down. At the time the Canadian system(s) were not dissilimar to the American one now. A single province (with the first socialist democratic government ever elected in North America, with the political legitimacy of having won multiple consecutive elections and being in power for almost 20 years, controlling a super-majority of over 80% of the seats in the provincial legislature) forged ahead to implement it, against political suspicion from the rest of the government, and fierce opposition from the medical establishment (the doctors in the province went on strike in protest). Even the specific individual arguments used in that debate are eerily parallel to the ones being used now by opponents of universal healthcare in the USA (this was in the 1960s).
It was the obvious, incomparable, and very public success of this one province's program, in direct comparison to all the other non-universal programs in the othe province's that eventually convinced the rest of the country to adopt a universal program based on that province's model. Even the bitter opposition from the medical profession faded and today most Canadian physicians are take universal healthcare access as a matter-of-course.
The Canadian system remains essentially a provincially run one to this day. The Federal Government provides half the funding, and sets, through the Canada Health Act, the standards that the provinces must each fulfill, but the details on how to fulfill them are left to each individual province to decide. And these details are, in fact, not always consistent from province to province. (Right now for example there is debate going on regarding the funding of some cancer treatments like Herceptin and Avastin, with some provinces covering and some not).
Arguably, the way progressives have been trying to get Universal Healthcare achieved in the USA these last few decades, culminating in the Obama plan, as a top-down approach, may not be the most effective way to do so. Perhaps it isn't even possible to do it this way and have it stick. Time will tell.
But perhaps the retrospective of history may show that the most significant and important thing Obama has done in this regard is when he offered all the state governors the opportunity to opt out of his program if they could replace it with one that fulfills the objectives of his plan just as well. It was read in the political media at the time as a 'call their bluff' moment where Obama dared his republican detractors among the state governors (some of whom had been talking loudly about how they could do so much better than 'Obamacare') to put their money where their mouths were. (Boy, Milt Romney must have been squirming during all this).
Somewhat overlooked in all this rhetoric, besides the fact that NONE of those republican governors have yet to propose any state-based plans, is that the only state that actually has taken up Obama on this offer to implement their own system in place of the federal one, is Democratic Maine, and their proposed alternate is a Universal Single-Payer system.
And if Maine's system proves successful, it is certainly plausible that other left-leaning blue states will be motivated to follow suit, and if all these blue states are equally successful at it, the pressure on the red states is going to mount inexorably, and America might just finally get universal access healthcare in this piecemeal fashion.
(I suppose some conservative states may continue to holdout, nothing seems to get through to some of them, like Texas, for example).
But it must be depressing looking at this from the American perspective to know that Canada went through all this in the 1960s (And America got to watch it all unfold at that time - it's not like this was happening on Mars or something).
Posted by: Amphiox, OM
|
April 12, 2011 10:25 PM
Less, actually! The per capita expenditure on healthcare by the United States is almost double that of Canada. On nearly all measures of public health quality (infant mortality, life expectancy, etc), Canada also blows America out of the water. (And some other first world countries are leaving Canada in the dust, too, in quality as well as cost. There are some European countries with universal access systems that are paying only a little more than half per capita what Canada pays. And that means the US is literally paying almost four times as much for healthcare that is of clearly inferior quality compared to some other First World societies.)
Posted by: Easterngal
|
April 12, 2011 11:12 PM
Yeah, this is one thing I have always been kind of puzzled. I know nothing about American system and have never been to the US, so all the numbers I know are quoted from the newspapers or from personal testimonies, etc.
I was always kind of shocked by the amount of (private) insurance paid by the US citizens. I have often read that people are paying hundreds of dollars per month just to cover themselves, it is really shocking to me because here where I live, even the private insurance doesn't cost this much unless you are like above 70 years old (and even then, it is like 200 dollars tops per month).
I have no knowledge whatsoever about the US system, I am just puzzled why there's such a big difference.
Posted by: What a maroon
|
April 12, 2011 11:28 PM
Wait. If I'm doing my math right, that means that McCain is your other senator and Janice Brewer's your guv....So anyway, what's your recipe for sanity? I assume it involves some combination of tequila and cannabis.
Posted by: theophontes (θεός γαμώτο)
|
April 13, 2011 1:18 AM
@ amphiox, Easterngal
For comparison and to give you an idea of health care in China: I am insured, along with my family, for the princely sum of USD1800. As circumstances would have it, we have not yet utilised the scheme. We have ended up in outpatients a few times though. In China (mainland) the costs each time (stitches to arm, sprained elbow) have been less than the cost of a beer. In Hong Kong admittance to outpatients, several hours of tests and observation (choking incident) where free. The only significant cost was from laser surgery (I think it is regarded as "cosmetic") for two eyes, which came to less than USD 3000, including five years of check ups. Medical costs have been, touch wood, quite negligible.
I often concern myself that many of the arguments doing the rounds amongst 'Merkins have little to do with facts or common sense. The entire planet, by and large, has found a way to make universal coverage work. There is no need to reinvent the wheel. Just adapt some "best practices" from countries where the system works. Why are Rethuglians so pig-headed about this?
(Speaking of similar ill-informed pig-headedness: Go METRIC guys ... for fuck-sakes!!!)
Posted by: theophontes (θεός γαμώτο)
|
April 13, 2011 1:21 AM
#116
(PS: For clarity that is $1800/3/12 = $50/person/month)
Posted by: Hairhead
|
April 13, 2011 1:43 AM
Look, I know I'm piling it on, but the latest developments up here in Canada centres around an Ontario judge deeming the criminal penalties around marijuana "unconstitutional". We in Canada may have legal marijuana, not just decriminalized marijuana, soon.
Of course, that will make us easier to invade.
Posted by: theophontes (θεός γαμώτο)
|
April 13, 2011 2:28 AM
@ Segmentum #42
I followed the instructions but it only slowed down the Colbert Report even more(I can see it behind the Great cyberWall, but very slow download). No luck for viewing youtube at all. This technique only works for a small number of sites. :-(((((
Posted by: Malcolm
|
April 13, 2011 3:24 AM
I have no health insurance.
Two weeks ago I went to see my doctor(NZ$42).
He proscribed 4 drugs for 3 separate things(total NZ$12).
He also arranged for me to see a specialist at the local hospital. The appointment was arranged within a week.
When I went to the hospital, I had my eyesight checked, drops administered, and a really cool scan of my retina (No charge).
I'm very glad that I live in a civilised country where healthcare isn't considered a form of communism.
Posted by: Kagehi
|
April 13, 2011 4:04 AM
Given the morons we have here, trying that would probably result in them trying to simultaneously bust you as a member of a drug cartel, and have you deported for being an illegal.
Posted by: Easterngal
|
April 13, 2011 4:28 AM
Many Americans surely have very weird ideas about what communism is. From my point of view, some of the things the Republicans do that has such "communist vibe", not dissimilar to some of the things my government do, for example -
1. Requiring members to never stray from the party line
2. Forced patriotism, trying to blame citizens for being not a True (good) Citizen. The first time I heard the argument that someone was not being a True American, I had such deja vu.
3. Blaming "outsiders" for all the faults, never taking personal responsibility, never admit "I was wrong"
4. Slogans, claim victory with lots and lots of slogans. Who cares about reality?
5. Em, (claimed) aversion to sex and alcohol? View women as baby making machines? No, wait, view everybody not in the ruling elite as expendable machines, actually
I think I could still go on, but my mind isn't working very clearly now...
Are they sure they are not taking the same lessons as my government?
And they always assumed we people in the developing country envy the US, hmm, okay, maybe we do, but do they even know what exactly we envy?
We envy the clean food, the well-built road, the government not snooping in our private sex life, etc etc. In short, we are envy of what the US government can do for its people, and now the Republicans want to dismantle all that, and still have the illusion that we third-world countries envy the US. Do you even have an idea that what you are dismantling are the things that make us jealous of the US?
Posted by: clamcyp
|
April 13, 2011 6:12 AM
You can always tell a Third World country.
It starts with corrupt elections where votes are bought and representatives are limited to the rich. It continues with lack of basic Health Care and Pensions. (Why do you have so many children? So that I can be cared for in my old age.)
Then there is the Judiciary. If it is not totally independent (that is, not dependent on electoral favour) there is another source of corruption. That goes for Law Enforcement officers as well. (Elected Sheriffs and D.A.s? Hey, vote for me, boy. All the rich men in the county are on my side.)
Then there's education. Free and effective education up to degree level is a distinguishing feature of First World countries.
Freedom from theocratic regimes is also important.
Show me a country where the religious leaders affect State policy, or where the Armed Forces are subjected to religious propaganda, I'll show you a Third World country.
About the only criterion of a Third World country you don't meet is having streets named after dates. (here in Cyprus, we rejoice in a plethora of those, including, delightfully, quite a few 1st of April Streets.)
Ah, well, you could always emigrate.
Posted by: opposablethumbstoo
|
April 13, 2011 9:17 AM
I have always thought the single best thing the UK ever initiated, bar none, was the NHS. With all its shortcomings and imperfections, this makes the difference between being able to sleep at night and living in constant fear of illness or accident to self or family.
Reading the clear and simple comments such as those of amphiox above, I can't understand why some of our home-grown tories/wannabe rethuglicanets are trying so hard to limit and privatise it, millimetre by millimetre.
I knew it was more expensive in the US; I had no idea how much more!
Sadly, as far as tertiary education is concerned, our Glorious Leaders are following in US footsteps just as fast as ever they can and striving mightily to make it the preserve of the rich only. They haven't gone all the way yet, but not for want of trying.
Posted by: OleanderTea
|
April 13, 2011 8:59 PM
Yes.
What's more, Jesus didn't charge a copay or turn people away for having pre-existing conditions.