PDA

View Full Version : RT host claims Ron Paul




Constitutional Paulicy
01-25-2013, 03:36 AM
killed his campaign manager

I was hesitant to post this but here it is anyway. Talk about distortion of facts.



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9jEULop4YLQ&feature=youtube_gdata

jmdrake
01-25-2013, 05:43 AM
http://www.dailypaul.com/178830/personal-statement-on-kent-snyders-death

Personal Statement on Kent Snyder's Death
Submitted by brandoj on Thu, 09/15/2011 - 18:42
in

Ron Paul
healthcare
kent
RonPaul
snyder
Uninsured

I think that everyone aspires to be a caring person, to be concerned with the well-being of their neighbors, and to be gracious with their talents and treasure. I struggle with this at times, but I am trying to improve my ability to identify those truly in need and lend an outstretched hand. Kent is one example of this. I did not know Kent personally, but the news of his death was very saddening to the community of people who support Ron Paul and who were proud of Kent's untiring efforts in support of the cause of liberty. When I heard of his family's situation, I donated money to ease the cost of his medical bills. Maybe paying off $400,000 worth of medical bills through the charity of nearly complete strangers was overly-optimistic, but that didn't prevent almost $35,000 being raised through random donations on ChipIn.

As someone who donated to Kent Snyder's family to assist with his bills, I find it difficult to convey how deeply hurtful it is to see the circumstances of his death politicized. I do not intend to be lectured to, by people who made no effort to help Mr. Snyder's family, as to why I must be compelled by force of government to shoulder the cost of his health care when I was perfectly willing to do so voluntarily. If you are locked into the mindset that people do not care for one another and must be forced against their will to give to those in need, you need to question whether you are projecting your own failures onto others. If we can defeat people's presumption that "government will take care of everybody," maybe we could get to a place where charity is cultivated without being co-opted by force.


And the fake journalist cut off Ron Paul's answer to Wolf Blitzer. Here's the full exchange.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8T9fk7NpgIU

Note that Ron Paul eventually gets to his point which is that there are alternative to helping indigent people get healthcare that don't include taxes. One of Ron Paul's problems in debates has been lack of coaching. I say that will all respect. The problem with that exchange is that while his ultimate answer was good, he paused just long enough before giving it so that someone dishonest could soundbite him. Here's how I wish he had answered the question.

"Wolf, have you ever heard the saying that if your only tool is a hammer, you think everything is a nail? The problem today is that Americans have been led to believe that government is the solution to every problem. I practiced medicine before there was medicare and the way we handled indigent patients was........ Other alternatives could include ......... And we could reduce costs by doing ........ which means that the 30 y/o in your scenario could be taken care of, and then have medical bills when he got out, but they wouldn't be so enormous because our costs wouldn't have been driven up so high like they are now doing to government meddling via......."

Here are my thoughts on lowering medical costs by reducing government.

1) End or cut back on the life of drug patents. A patent is granted by the government. It's not a "right". Congress is authorized to grant patents, but not required to do so. And there's no reason they have to be as long as they are now. In order to not drive pharmaceuticals out of business, cut back on the red tape required to bring drugs to market. Of course we have to worry about unsafe drugs getting through. That already happens (example is Vioxx). There is evidence that the FDA knew Vioxx was unsafe but approved it anyway. Because the FDA is a government agency, there are no repercussions for this "failure". But say if there was a private entity, similar to consumer reports, that gave grades on drug safety? If information came out that this private corporation did the same thing, it could be sued along with the drug company.

2) Give the tax benefit for health insurance to the individual instead of to the employer. Health insurance shouldn't depend on your employment, but rather on your ability to pay. It's a shame that its much easier to get car insurance than it is health insurance, but part of that is because of the connection of health insurance to employment.

3) End arcane licensing requirement for medical personal and hospitals. Some people don't know this, but even if you have the money you can't just build a hospital where you want. You have to have a "certificate of need". Some bureaucrat hast to decide whether a particular community "needs" so many hospital beds. And even if you've already built a hospital, you can't expand it without a new certificate of need. Also if you recall from Katrina, there were doctors who wanted to go to New Orleans to help with the emergency, but were blocked because they weren't licensed to practice in Louisiana. This is where the interstate commerce clause should kick in. People living in New York have the same anatomy as someone living in Louisiana. One license should cover all 50 states.

I'm sure there are a lot of other was to reduce the size of government and medical costs.

dillo
01-27-2013, 01:54 PM
http://aattp.org/this-faux-outrage-is-absurd-thom-hartmann-freaks-out-on-idiot-libertarian-video/?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter


pretty good debate here, but the guy from RT is an asshole

acptulsa
01-27-2013, 01:55 PM
Anyone care to supply details so the rest of us don't have to drive this up the rankings by clicking on it?

sailingaway
01-27-2013, 01:59 PM
So is this headline. Snyder was campaign manager and made decisions on benefits if anyone did, but when they were running in 2007 Ron didn't know if he would even have support. He was expecting to be in a debate or two, and not to carry a full staff for long. SNYDER, who already knew he was dying and hence was uninsurable, was one of the main people talking Ron into running, as I understand it. When this smear was raised against Ron in the campaign, his family came forward with a statement to that effect. He got all the care there was to give, it was just eaten by taxpayers when it exceeded his assets, the same as it would be now under Obamacare, and was for the too poor forever before that. He didn't die of the disease of lack of insurance, which in any event it was too late for Ron to provide since he had a preexisting condition, but a different one.

acptulsa
01-27-2013, 02:06 PM
The sad part is pre-existing conditions is one of the few strong arguments in favor of Obamacare, and these clowns are ignoring that so they can be sensationalist, wrong, and stupid.

Hooray for the enemy! May they always make such thorough fools of themselves.

sailingaway
01-27-2013, 02:09 PM
The sad part is pre-existing conditions is one of the few strong arguments in favor of Obamacare, and these clowns are ignoring that so they can be sensationalist, wrong, and stupid.

Hooray for the enemy! May they always make such thorough fools of themselves.

Yeah, but they could have addressed preexisting conditions surgically, (not that I'm saying it is the place for federal govt at all), by something like the federal flood insurance or the 'bad driver car insurance' states have, a dedicated pool that doesn't mess up insurance and healthcare for everyone else in the country. Obamacare was about getting everyone under their control for spending on health care.

RonPaulFanInGA
01-27-2013, 02:11 PM
People parroting this line have to be being purposefully disingenuous. Synder went to the hospital with pneumonia at its onset, and died. How would his having health insurance have changed anything? He wasn't turned away for lack of insurance, nor was his treatment delayed. Was him having an insurance card going to magically save his life?

KingRobbStark
01-27-2013, 02:46 PM
People parroting this line have to be being purposefully disingenuous. Synder went to the hospital with pneumonia at its onset, and died. How would his having health insurance have changed anything? He wasn't turned away for lack of insurance, nor was his treatment delayed. Was him having an insurance card going to magically save his life?

You're right.

phill4paul
01-27-2013, 03:06 PM
So is this headline. Snyder was campaign manager and made decisions on benefits if anyone did, but when they were running in 2007 Ron didn't know if he would even have support. He was expecting to be in a debate or two, and not to carry a full staff for long. SNYDER, who already knew he was dying and hence was uninsurable, was one of the main people talking Ron into running, as I understand it. When this smear was raised against Ron in the campaign, his family came forward with a statement to that effect. He got all the care there was to give, it was just eaten by taxpayers when it exceeded his assets, the same as it would be now under Obamacare, and was for the too poor forever before that. He didn't die of the disease of lack of insurance, which in any event it was too late for Ron to provide since he had a preexisting condition, but a different one.

People would do well to copy paste this to their arsenal. A good summary in short form.

Danke
01-27-2013, 03:23 PM
bump

TheGrinch
01-27-2013, 03:35 PM
Had to cut it off when he started equating health insurance with healthcare, as if they're the same thing.

If you don't understand why insurance companies denied people with pre-existing conditions, then you don't understand how insurance works or what purpose it serves (to levy risk, with the rate based on risk/reward).

However, I'm increasingly convinced that this linking of healthcare/insurance in the public sphere is every bit as much to blame as the bad policy that only exacerbates the problem.

Basically "healthcare is too expensive without insurance, so everyone should be insured", rather than determining ways to actually reduce costs and raise efficiency. Seems to me to be a scam from the healthcare, insurance and government side.

sylcfh
02-07-2013, 01:38 PM
Was there any statement ever released aside from speculation on what caused Kent Snyder's death?

If not, any argument, especially over health insurance, is meaningless.

BlackTerrel
02-07-2013, 09:03 PM
Communists.

NIU Students for Liberty
02-07-2013, 09:17 PM
Had to cut it off when he started equating health insurance with healthcare, as if they're the same thing.

If you don't understand why insurance companies denied people with pre-existing conditions, then you don't understand how insurance works or what purpose it serves (to levy risk, with the rate based on risk/reward).

However, I'm increasingly convinced that this linking of healthcare/insurance in the public sphere is every bit as much to blame as the bad policy that only exacerbates the problem.

Basically "healthcare is too expensive without insurance, so everyone should be insured", rather than determining ways to actually reduce costs and raise efficiency. Seems to me to be a scam from the healthcare, insurance and government side.

This. Rather than create another problem by subsidizing the very same insurance corporations liberals claimed to rail against in the first place, efforts should have been made to determine the culprit behind rising costs. As Ron has stated multiple times, it makes no sense for every other technology to go down in price while medical technology is one of the fastest growing in terms of innovation, and yet it goes up in price.