« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

MEMBER DIARY

Blitzer blindness, organized religion and pre-Medicaid American exceptionalism

“But Congressman, are you saying that society should just let them die?” - Wolf Blitzer, CNN

While Mitt Romney and Rick Perry indulged in strained Social Security/Ponzi scheme analogies at least week’s Republican debate, Blitzer’s loaded question and Ron Paul’s actual answer revealed much about what divides so many Americans and prevents policy solutions in health care and other areas:

PAUL: No. I practiced medicine before we had Medicaid, in the early 1960s, when I got out of medical school. I practiced at Santa Rosa Hospital in San Antonio, and the churches took care of them. We never turned anybody away from the hospitals.

Of course, the post-debate focus of the mainstream media was on a shouted assent to Blitzer’s question from an audience member and the Democratic Party’s half century agenda to define the Party of Lincoln as heartless Scrooges (see also racist, sexist homophobes, but I digress).

And indeed, given the long periods of Republican control of Congress and the White House since the 1950s and especially since the 1980s, with Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid still intact, Democrats have a hard time relying on historical facts and their definition of compassion, i.e. blinding support for New Deal and Great Society programs, to make the GOP into a Dickensian villain.

Meanwhile, we don’t remember any 24/7 MSM uproar when $500B was cut from Medicare to pay for ObamaCare in 2010 by President Barack Obama and super-Democrat majorities in both houses of Congress. Nor do we recall even one White House press conference question about President Obama’s 2009 town hall “take the painkiller and go home” response to the daughter of a 105-year-old mother concerning what should happen if mommy showed up at the hospital with her ObamaCare policy needing a pacemaker.

I’m sure liberal heads would explode if they were reminded that fetuses with hands, feet and unique DNA are uninsureds that would appreciate merely not being aborted/killed long enough to buy or not buy an insurance policy and have the option of being left to die at age 40 and that Terry Schiavo had insurance.

A review of the transcript of the full exchange between Blitzer and Paul reveals bullying interruptions by the supposed “moderator” on the issue of who pays for the self-indulgent uninsureds in emergency rooms driven by the apparent assumption that absent the existence of Democratic Party-favored Big Government, millions would die in emergency room waiting rooms in America.

Such an assumption smacks of either a profound ignorance of American history or an agenda that deems the end, i.e. ever increasing government control of health care, justified by fraudulent means.

As Dr. Paul made clear, after answering “no” to Wolf’s question, Christian charity routinely stepped in to help the poor in medical emergencies before FDR and LBJ assumed the role of Big Daddy. You know, those wahoos that eschew science for superstition but somehow managed to stumble into the health care business and helped build a society great enough to feed the world and save it from fascism before Lyndon Johnson’s version changed the definition of “great” while it destroyed the society we call the Black family.

Blitzer’s question seems to reveal a key component of the Left’s wilful and unjustified denial of American exceptionalism. Is it because to do so would be to acknowledge that organized religion is and has been much more than just the latest quote from Pat Robertson? Or is it that only if the government achieves things with their tax dollars can they claim some credit and thus affirm their own lives and their own religious faith in the Utopia liberalism dreams of creating?

Bestselling vampire novelist Anne Rice famously converted to Christianity several years ago, only to even more famously denounce the Church last year:

“I remain committed to Christ as always,” she wrote, “but not to being ‘Christian’ or to being part of Christianity. It’s simply impossible for me to ‘belong’ to this quarrelsome, hostile, disputatious, and deservedly infamous group. For 10 years, I’ve tried. I’ve failed. I’m an outsider. My conscience will allow nothing else.”

Of course, we know that the adherents of un-organized religion and both organized and unorganized secularists are never quarrelsome or hostile. And how convenient to not have to dirty one’s hands with actual people. Yes, follow Christ by all means, i.e. the one that didn’t establish a Church?

Disorganization never established Southern Baptist (pictured in New Orleans) and Roman Catholic Hospitals able to care for the uninsured and unlike the healing meccas envisioned by the Wolf Blitzers and Barack Obamas of the world they never needed Medicare, Medicaid or federal law to mandate succor for the indigent.

Nor did they ever oppose care for infants born alive after botched abortions in non-Christian hospitals like the President who now craves to be loved. The Left needs to deal with all those they “let die” and authorize the affirmative killing of, before they lecture conservatives on the subject.

Conservatives and liberals have legislative records that need not be obscured by lone wolf anecdotes shouted at Wolf. Or would the Democratic nominee like to be bound by the shouts of Cindy Sheehan?

Mike DeVine

Editor - Hillbilly Politics

Co-Founder and Editor - Political Daily

Atlanta Law & Politics columnist –  Examiner.com

“One man with courage makes a majority.” – Andrew Jackson

More DeVine Gamecock rooster crowings at Modern ConservativeUnified Patriots,  and Conservative Outlooks. All Charlotte Observer and Atlanta Journal-Constitution op-eds archived at Townhall.com.

COMMENTS

  • Flagstaff

    “Is it because to do so would be to acknowledge that organized religion is and has been much more than just the latest quote from Pat Robertson? Or is it that only if the government achieves things with their tax dollars can they claim some credit and thus affirm their own lives and their own religious faith in the Utopia liberalism dreams of creating?”

  • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine

    yes, I lean to number 2 as well

  • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine

    nt

  • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine

    Americans want a fighter.

  • conservativecurmudgeon

    …that, as the Government has ballooned, the Church has shriveled. It is also by design that this be the matrix.

    Whose design? Well…

    Lucifer was cast out of God’s realm because he set about to take unto himself the mantle of God. God, you see, cannot be God, and countenance any rival–otherwise, he’s not God, but one of a whole host of “gods”, and not really omnipotent in any way. He’d just be one of the guys, if he let Lucifer carry on.

    And, in the Garden, when the beast hissed to Eve that, heck no, God didn’t say she’d DIE if she ate of the Tree, she’d only become more like Him –God, that is–, and that wasn’t DEATH, was it?– mankind has ever since been infected with a God-complex, and we’ve ever tried throughout the ages to set ourselves up in our own personal Little God Shops, secure and sanguine in the knowledge that, certainly, we can do it better than He can.

    Surely, a beneficent and “compassionate” Government can provide charity better than those already commissioned by God to do so, right? Except, of course, we never examine the root words: Government GOVERNS, that is, it coerces (ultimately, at the point of a gun), and cannot, by definition, nurture. There is nothing charitable in coercion. In fact, this is one of the earthly expressions of the tension implicit in Free Will: God cannot be Love if he forces himself upon us.

    Government social programs, likewise, cannot be “compassionate” by the same dynamic: All of its lifeblood is taken by means of coercive force, True compassion is the fruit of selfless love, given freely.

    Worse still: We all know this intuitively, and yet: We don’t speak openly of it, lest we sound “un-compassionate”. A sinful Catch-22.

    Ours is a fallen world. All we can do is hold back the floodwaters for a season, a generation. But, I’m with you: We must engage the thought-stream behind the language. And it starts with calling out misguided souls like Blitzer.

  • http://www.usdebateboard.com usdebateboard

    He does Wolf Blitzer’s dirty work.

    “Governor Perry, would you rather fund Medicad or watch Medicaid patients die?”

    Ron Paul is no Republican. He’s just found their message easier to hijack.

  • aesthete

    Morality cannot be coerced; *action* certainly can, but without the concomitant heart condition is nothing but a meaningless gesture.

  • aesthete

    means never having to say that you’re sorry: it is a fact that, whatever government scheme is in place, there will be people dying at emergency rooms. Government has never been able to eliminate any deplorable human action; after 5000+ years of criminalized murder and theft (those actions that almost all people believe should be criminalized), these actions still occur. It is, therefore, no surprise that in a free market, some will die waiting in emergency rooms, on the operating table, in a dive bar, on the streets, etc. The same applies to virtually every undesireable state; its mere existence as an anecdote or even as a somewhat common occurrence in no way means that we can, in fact, prevent it from being the case.

    Therefore, it is not necessarily the case that any small and manageable problem requires government intervention. In the case of people dying in emergency rooms, it is unclear to me that government intervention changed the stats on that issue at all. There are no statistics that I am aware of to back that assertion. I don’t think the world of Ron Paul, but it is irritating to see this quote disparaged by leftists, as if it is utopian, when it is not at all clear that their “solution” to this problem has helped (and when it is clear that government intervention in the healthcare market has on net increased costs). Of course, no one on the left is going to acknowledge this, because it is axiomatic to the left that government intervention is everywhere and always a positive, and that humanity consists of fungible, malleable pod people.

  • conservativecurmudgeon

    There is just what is moral, and what is not. It is not up to us to decide. Of course, we can trot out the old tired tropes: such as, to cannibals, cannibalism is “moral”, but, even when these stone-age cultures are examined in fine, they don’t go around eating their children, and find such behavior, well…. to coin a term: immoral. There is no “western” morality, or “eastern” morality. There is just “morality”– and then there are the ethics of the broader culture, in whatever the setting.

    But, yes, clearly, morality cannot be forced from without, or it isn’t moral, in the purest sense. Again, an earthly expression of a divine intent.

    BEHAVIOR, on the other hand… well, that’s another matter. Just ask a two-year old. And, we put guardrails on the mountain passes, and checks and balances in our government, for a reason.

  • aesthete

    I probably should have used other terminology.

    I simply meant that, just as charity cannot be coerced (the coercion changes the act into something else), neither can “family values” or anything else.

  • westcoastpatriette

    to allowing communities, nonprofits and churches to handle all of the social problems in this country, it is now.

    I honestly don’t know why the Republican party isn’t using the financial meltdown as a time to fully promote the American way to provide aid to the suffering. Instead, they stay on the defensive with obnoxious questions such as Blitzers.

    I can think of so many inspiring ways to remind America that the answer to returning to a sane, healthy and happy country is by stopping allowing our elected representatives to force taxpayers to pay for charity. Many people have actually forgotten this as an option and as long as conservatives allow liberal morons such Obama and Blitzer to lead the way with guilt trips at the suggestion that the government is failing–not to mention fleecing Americans–we will never get the upper hand and begin to phase out these failing programs.

  • runner12

    NT

  • runner12

    After LBJ’s “War on Poverty”, so many Americans became dependent on the government. Prior to this time, it was churches and communities who took care of the poor, started schools, and built hospitals. It was the Church who had a strong, solid role in meeting the needs of society.

    Now Big Brother government has created many failed programs that do little to raise people out of poverty and actually work to perpetuate the cycle.

  • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine

    my latest, fresh off the presses that echos your comment

    http://www.redstate.com/gamecock/2011/09/20/defining-the-gop-reach-out-blacks-shouldnt-need/

  • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine

    smile

  • acat

    I may have mentioned something similar in the past, but I’m too lazy to go google it.

    In short, when I look at the difference in dollars-per-student for the schools run by Chicago Public Schools vs. Chicago Catholic Church, I can only conclude that at best I’m getting a bad deal from government, and at worst I’m getting ripped off.

    The Catholics accomplish far more with far less money and worse facilities … one must conclude that, like other social activities, there’s something lacking in the government approach.

    And no, the Catholics don’t just take the cream of the crop. They’ll take any kid whose parent(s) or guardian(s) ask, and charge what can be afforded. The rest is paid by private donors.

    Mew

  • westcoastpatriette

    .

  • olsmithie

    before it gets to the intended, can’t possibly be practical.
    Take the US government, for one example…

    Nice diary GC.

    Regards,

  • http://www.examiner.com/x-1597-Charlotte-Law--Politics-Examiner Mike gamecock DeVine

    great movie