Tuesday, August 19, 2008


What was that about "universal coverage"?

If B. Hussein Obama is elected, and if Democrats (as expected) widen their majorities in Congress, it's a safe bet that some form of government-funded health care will be implemented at some time in the very near future. If you think that's a good thing, you need to check this out (from the September 1, 2008 National Review magazine):

The left wing of the Democratic party still holds up Canada’s "single payer" — that is, entirely government-financed — health-care system as a model. The latest innovation of that system: Overextended doctors are deciding which patients will get treated by drawing names out of a hat. They are rationing health care, in other words, by lottery. Dr. Ken Runciman of Ontario told Canada’s National Post that he had to cut his workload and couldn’t find a better method. "It was just my way of trying to minimize the bias . . . rather than going through the list and saying ‘I don’t like you, and I don’t like you.'" Dr. Runciman has cut 100 patients from his practice, while another doctor in Newfoundland has cut 500 patients. All in all, too few Canadian doctors means that approximately 5 million Canadians are now without family care. What was that about "universal coverage"?

In all of the countries in which a government-run system of health care has been established, rationing of care is the order of the day, day in and day out. Remember that, you Obamaniacs.

<< Home

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?