I'm tempted to let Susan have it, in large part because she asked one of the best questions. (No, that Brooklynite wasn't me. I couldn't figure out how to pretend to be civil towards her.)
But there are a few general points worth making. First off, when asking how she got that platform, look to Ezra. I strongly suspect this has something to do with them making nice with each other. Maybe theGarance stepped in as peacemaker, if only for the sake of the clique's dinner parties being happy places. I could be completely wrong, but it seems a bit too much of a coincidence.
Second, note that every single number she came up with to support her argument was hypothetical, and based on willful ignorance of reality, like her earlier drastic underpricing of coverage from Blue Cross/Blue Shield, which she tried to paper over as somehow a well intentioned mistake. People being denied coverage or care within their coverage isn't, to her mind, a serious problem, only maybe 2% for the latter. Sure, that 2% represents MILLIONS OF PEOPLE, and doesn't include the millions more in family who also are very directly impacted, but she has AmbienCR to help her ignore that fact when trying to sleep at night. And the uninsured are kids and (illegal) immigrants, who only get hurt in accidents which are probably their own fault to begin with. Megan is a true libertarian, she thinks if people want to get sick we should not stop them.
The take home message is she has no argument, she just has a handful of wishes and a bookshelf full of literature from the health insurance industry she's paid to restate the conclusions of.
Wednesday, August 26, 2009
About the WaPo Chat
Posted by
brad
at
9:34 PM
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comments:
What about the guy who chimed in with the "you really really know what you're talking about on health care!" comment? Jesus, who are these people and why in the world do they think someone who gives a solid number in an argument and then later calls it "hypothetical" has any clue?
Post a Comment