Here is his video response to Hillary Clinton’s universal health care.
This entry was posted
on Wednesday, September 19th, 2007 at 11:57 am and is filed under Health Care, Politics.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
Romney sounds very polished - like he has the right answer memorized every time. Thompson makes it seem like he is not reading from a memorzed script with all his pauses and such, but I feel like he is = hence it makes me feel like he is acting. = Acting annoys me. Not saying what Romeny does is good - just does not annoy me as much
Wow, Fred Thompson is a flaming anti-American. If Americans have the best health care system in the world, but Japanese people are still healthier than Americans, doesn’t that imply that Americans have no common sense in regards to health-related decisions?
Apparently the only measure that matters in health care is the health of the citizenry, however thats measured. If the goal is the healthiest people i can think of forms of government must better suited for bringing about the best health care.
I should think the point of health care is to provide a level of care desired by the individual citizen irrespective of the health outcomes for the citizenry at large.
So you are in favor of the state letting someone infect themselves with leprosy, malaria, and bubonic plague, then wandering through the city you live in?
The state should protect that person’s right to -choose- his individual health outcome irrespective of its influence on the citizenry at large!
“I should think the point of health care is to provide a level of care desired by the individual citizen irrespective of the health outcomes for the citizenry at large.”
Sounds to me like you are saying that the point of health care includes everything up to and including allowing people, if they so desired, to carry dangerous infectious diseases (be “provided a level of care desired”) even if detrimental to others (”irrespective of the health outcomes for the citizenry at large”). Hey, I’m just feeding you back your own words. Are you going to address my objection to the value system you are proposing, or is simply referring to my characterization as ‘lame’ sufficient for you?
I didn’t realize the study you were talking about was measuring health care based solely on its ability to restrict those with contagious disease from spreading the pathogen. Not sure I agree with the way the study defines health care.
Um. I never said or even implied that it was the sole measure.
But for the record, I don’t have a problem with using it as a supplement in the case of deadly or debilitating diseases. I don’t see how infecting yourself with such a disease and walking into a crowded area knowing you could infect people is morally different from strapping a bomb to yourself knowing it could kill or injure others. But evidently you think such a terrorist should have his rights to refuse treatment or “restriction” protected, “irrespective of the health outcomes of the citizenry at large”.
September 20th, 2007 at 10:03 pm
If only I believed what he says. Just feels like he is acting with all that dramatic pausing and shit. How many times did he rehearse that scene?
September 21st, 2007 at 9:27 am
Odd cause of all the candidates that sound canned Romney is the most affected. If memory serves me properly you favor Romney.
September 21st, 2007 at 2:15 pm
Romney sounds very polished - like he has the right answer memorized every time. Thompson makes it seem like he is not reading from a memorzed script with all his pauses and such, but I feel like he is = hence it makes me feel like he is acting. = Acting annoys me. Not saying what Romeny does is good - just does not annoy me as much
September 23rd, 2007 at 9:01 pm
Wow, Fred Thompson is a flaming anti-American. If Americans have the best health care system in the world, but Japanese people are still healthier than Americans, doesn’t that imply that Americans have no common sense in regards to health-related decisions?
September 24th, 2007 at 12:33 am
Apparently the only measure that matters in health care is the health of the citizenry, however thats measured. If the goal is the healthiest people i can think of forms of government must better suited for bringing about the best health care.
September 24th, 2007 at 12:51 am
Isn’t the function of health care to render its citizenry healthy?
Or are you implying that Japan’s current government is a dictatorship?
September 24th, 2007 at 10:06 am
I should think the point of health care is to provide a level of care desired by the individual citizen irrespective of the health outcomes for the citizenry at large.
September 24th, 2007 at 8:15 pm
So you are in favor of the state letting someone infect themselves with leprosy, malaria, and bubonic plague, then wandering through the city you live in?
The state should protect that person’s right to -choose- his individual health outcome irrespective of its influence on the citizenry at large!
September 25th, 2007 at 12:20 am
Yeah thats exactly what i said. Seriously that is the lamest argument i have heard ever.
September 25th, 2007 at 1:18 am
“I should think the point of health care is to provide a level of care desired by the individual citizen irrespective of the health outcomes for the citizenry at large.”
Sounds to me like you are saying that the point of health care includes everything up to and including allowing people, if they so desired, to carry dangerous infectious diseases (be “provided a level of care desired”) even if detrimental to others (”irrespective of the health outcomes for the citizenry at large”). Hey, I’m just feeding you back your own words. Are you going to address my objection to the value system you are proposing, or is simply referring to my characterization as ‘lame’ sufficient for you?
September 25th, 2007 at 11:55 am
I didn’t realize the study you were talking about was measuring health care based solely on its ability to restrict those with contagious disease from spreading the pathogen. Not sure I agree with the way the study defines health care.
September 25th, 2007 at 1:13 pm
Um. I never said or even implied that it was the sole measure.
But for the record, I don’t have a problem with using it as a supplement in the case of deadly or debilitating diseases. I don’t see how infecting yourself with such a disease and walking into a crowded area knowing you could infect people is morally different from strapping a bomb to yourself knowing it could kill or injure others. But evidently you think such a terrorist should have his rights to refuse treatment or “restriction” protected, “irrespective of the health outcomes of the citizenry at large”.