Animal Farce

American Spectator's Jeffrey Lord is apparently very angry that Rep. Giffords got really good health care and is getting rehabilitated and cites her treatment as exactly why we need to (surprise!) repeal Obamacare.

If Gabrielle Giffords were not part of the governing elite -- the Ruling Class -- with this serious of a wound, a gunshot to the brain -- under ObamaCare would she be receiving this kind of A-triple plus treatment?
Or, would she instead be receiving the treatment President Obama himself insisted must be required for average Americans when he said:

"I don't think that we can make judgments based on peoples' spirit. That would be a pretty subjective decision to be making. I think we have to have rules…"

Rules. Government rules. And it is precisely Gabby Giffords' "spirit" that is being cited in news stories as evidence of her progress. A clear violation of the President's insistence that medical decisions can't be "based on peoples' spirit…we have to have rules." Unless, apparently, one is Gabby Giffords -- or, in fairness to Giffords -- Congresswoman Gabby Giffords. Member of the Ruling Class Gabby Giffords.

So let's ask the question that is at the moment too challenging for some.. The question that went straight to the heart of Orwell's Animal Farm warning.

If Congresswoman Giffords were not a 41-year-old Ruling Class Member of Congress but, say, an 81-year-old unknown middle-class woman in otherwise good health living in the Bronx and hit by the same gunshot wound to the head in a robbery, would she not be at risk of facing what Sarah Palin calls the "death panels" of Obamacare? Which is to say, government rationing? Instead of being transferred on an Air Force jet to Houston, accompanied by her surgeon, for decidedly expensive treatment (not to mention the transfer itself and the care already received) under Obamacare, wouldn't she or her family be facing the decision that is implicit in President Obama's own words that, well, there have to be rules about this kind of thing?

Three reactions to this:

1) Ass.  Do the words "too soon" mean anything to you?  The woman was shot in the head by a madman.  Have some semblance of respect.


2) Wouldn't a member of Congress be getting this same exact level of treatment if Obama had never passed Obamacare, or if Obamacare was repealed tomorrow?


3) Congratulations!  Considering #2 there, you've made the perfect argument as to why we need the public option, and it's one liberals have used before.


Seriously, this is like saying "Boy the fire department sure reacted quickly to the blaze at the Mayor's house.  Would you have gotten the exact same level of response?  Of course not.  As a result, we should privatize  fire departments because fire response time is inherently unfair.  The fire department is making life and death decisions about people's lives!  We can't have that.  You want better fire service?  Pay for it!"

Here's the problem:  health care is already rationed in this country by the ability to pay for treatment, or more specifically, getting your insurer to pay for it.  Your health insurance provider is your death panel.  They always have been.

This was an idiotic argument two years ago, it's idiotic now.