Honorary Doctorate?

About Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

Fr. Z is the guy who runs this blog. o{]:¬)
This entry was posted in SESSIUNCULA. Bookmark the permalink.


  1. Jack Regan says:

    Is it helpful to insult and belittle those we disagree with?

    It’s cathartic, yes, but will it really get us anywhere? I mean, will it actually change hearts?

  2. Clinton says:

    Mr. Regan, your questions put me in mind of a comment by the Earl of Chesterfield, that
    “… ridicule is the best test of truth”.

  3. letchitsa1 says:

    I dunno…I think it’s pretty funny.

  4. Dr. K says:

    “It’s cathartic, yes, but will it really get us anywhere? I mean, will it actually change hearts?”

    If it gets Obama voted out of office, I’d say we got somewhere!

    By the way, how did the charity and dialogue approach of the first two Obama years go for us? We have a massive Obamacare bill that threatens our religious freedom.

  5. Dr. T. says:

    Dr K:
    There seems to be a problem with distinguishing the idea of helping everyone get decent medical care no matter what there state in life, and certain provisions of Mr Obama’s health bill. The bill may not be ideal, but it tries to help people. The main problem with the bill is the idea of having non-essential medical issues, such as contraception, as a health care issue without appropriate religious exemptions. [That may not be the only issue to which people could object.] This is an attack on religious liberty. But giving all Americans essential health care is a noble effort, and seems pretty Christian to me. That is why I recoiled when I heard that unelectable fellow Romney say that he would scrap the health care bill on his first day in office. Why throw out the baby with the bathwater? [Perhaps there is no baby in the bathwater. Perhaps, instead, it is a, say, Norwegian Rat.] Just change the provision on religious exemption. People like Romney [? What sort of people might that be?] are using the religious freedom issue to further the interests of their honorary buddies, that is, the private insurance companies whose main motive is profit. Imagine, profit as the basis of essential health care…. not a good start. [You think profit is … bad?] I find it odd that the US government owns the armed forces who spend billions buying weapons to kill people, but leave the health care issue to the profit motive. Something is wrong with that picture. [Perhaps some here will point out what they think is wrong with your analysis.]

  6. mamajen says:

    @Jack Regan


  7. StJude says:

    How true it is.

  8. AnAmericanMother says:

    Jack Regan,

    Take some advice from the daughter, granddaughter & great-granddaughter of old-fashioned Southern politicians. You may not like their politics (I’m no longer a Southern Democrat), but they knew human nature and they knew politics.

    You cannot take a powder puff to a gunfight. These are Chicago mob-style politicians with no morals, no shame and no standards. They have spent the last 2 1/2 years in lying and schmoozing the bishops to try to buy their silence on ObamaCare. Since that is no longer effective, they are resorting to character assassination, personal attacks, ‘divide and conquer’ by suborning the LCWR and other ‘useful idiots’, and, of course, more lying.

    Ridicule is one of the more effective weapons in this all-out war. It’s in Saul Alinsky’s book – dedicated to Satan and these people’s Bible.

    “The devil . . . [that] proud spirit cannot endure to be mocked.” – St. Thomas More

  9. AnAmericanMother says:

    The ‘Sieg heil’ hand gesture is a nice touch, too.
    He doesn’t have his nose in the air – must not be channeling Mussolini there – but it’s still pretty funny.

  10. Facta Non Verba says:

    I think it is helpful to the voters to point out what a liar Mr. Obama has been, saying one thing during the campaign of 2008, and doing exactly opposite when in office. And his comments on “you didn’t build that,” which were off teleprompter, pierce the veil and show us his true beliefs and apparent contempt for free market capitalism. I wonder whether black liberation theology influences this contempt.

  11. Supertradmum says:

    A sense of humor is a sign of predestination.

  12. Jack Regan says:

    I seem to be starting a few discussions here :)

    Let me explain… there is nothing wrong with fighting hard and there is nothing wrong with humour. I just think we need to find a happy medium between personal insults and attacks, and challenging things that are wrong in the most useful ways.


  13. Jack Regan: Liberals constantly use nasty rhetoric and lying innuendos. It is only when they are losing the argument that they whimper about “changing the tone”.

  14. LisaP. says:

    Dr. T.,

    Our family is low income (under $30 a year), three kids, one with a pre-existing condition, no work benefits. We oppose the health care reform bill not just on grounds of religious freedom but because it will limit our options, further impoverish our family, and / or drastically decrease the quality of our health care. This entire bill hurts poor people and people with medical conditions.

    Take this scenario, someone says to a poor man, “I’m going to give you help with the basic needs of your life. As part of my plan for doing so, I will enslave the society of which you are a member”.

    The noble poor man might very well say, “I won’t profit from the degradation of my nation.” The self-respecting poor man might say, “I don’t wish to starve, but I’d rather starve free than grow fat enslaved.”

    But even a poor man who is not noble, the poor man who simply uses reason, should realize that the kind of person who *wants* to enslave his entire nation is not likely to be offering the kind of help that is truly help.

    This article has some interesting ideas on how to fix the system without socializing it.


  15. Jael says:

    This comment was posted by patback at CatholicVote.org. If it’s correct, it’s something to consider:

    “I think you forgot a crucial part of Obama’s speech. The word “alone” at the end. See Obama actually said that people who built business didn’t do it by themselves because they had teachers, firefighters, and police officers to help and protect them. We are a society. We are in this together. It’s sad that “catholic” vote has forgotten that fact.”

    Even so, I think Fr. Z’s post is just feeding back the truth to someone who badly needs a reality check.

  16. Indulgentiam says:

    Dr. T: “I find it odd that the US government owns the armed forces who spend billions buying weapons to kill people, but leave the health care issue to the profit motive.”
    It is incredibly ironic, at least to me, that there are those who believe that health and safety are mutually exclusive. In this ever increasingly violent world he who has no way of defending himself does not remain healthy for long. Those who think that socialized medicine is the answer are incapable of learning by example. Look at the countries that currently have it. the very rich in those countries come HERE for surgery. Dr. T if you are a doctor than you know that current government run medical programs are rife with waste, fraud and outright stupidity. and you want to give those people a say in your medical care? b/c that is what you are advocating you know. If you are really a doctor then you know why most doctors refuse to take medicaid patients. But if you are not then i invite you to go ask one, you’ll get an ear full. Government can’t run the programs they have now. The answer is NOT more government please believe me, they are not smarter than you, no matter what they tell you.
    Go here and be informed—-http://www.heritage.org/research/projects/the-case-against-obamacare
    [Numbers 6:24-26]
    [24] The Lord bless thee, and keep thee. [25] The Lord shew his face to thee, and have mercy on thee.[26] The Lord turn his countenance to thee, and give thee peace.

  17. Jack Regan says:

    Fr. Z… Thanks for your reply. I completely and totally agree. Liberals (a side I am NOT on – I totally agree that Obama is bad news) are as bad if not worse. But I feel we should challenge ourselves to be better.

    In my experience, the person who can keep his head and appear calm, yet credible in a debate always comes off far, far better than the one who inevitably gets wound up.

    It’s an interesting discussion anyway. All in good humour :)

  18. acardnal says:

    “Honorary Doctorate” – Fact

    “You didn’t earn it.” – Fact

    “A bunch of sycophants gave it to you.” – Fact

    No insults. Just facts.

  19. digdigby says:

    No that is NOT a Hitler salute. Shame on you! He is parting the Red Sea.

  20. PostCatholic says:

    Who has ever earned an honorary degree? It’s an award, not a reward.

    Jack Regan: Liberals constantly use nasty rhetoric and lying innuendos. It is only when they are losing the argument that they whimper about “changing the tone”.

    And liberals say the same of conservatives. It’s better to behave well, I think.

  21. Dr. T. says:

    According to some of the arguments that I hear against wastage and inefficiency, the military should be privatized too.
    But wastage and inefficiency usually comes from a an organization that gets too big to handle. Health care should be relegated to the states.
    I do not understand how providing medical services to everyone regardless of their income will enslave them. If anything, people are enslaved to the insurance companies, if they have have insurance in the first place. What kind of service is that if you have to mortgage your house for it?
    It is also curious that most industrial countries have government run health care, and by preference they would not have it any other way. And they have all the options they want, no insurance companies telling them they can only have such and such a doctor or treatment.
    Of course, rich people come to the USA to get medical services. The USA has a lot of rich people who have made these experimental services possible in the first place.

  22. Peter in Canberra says:

    I liked the caption. Very apt.

    Re Jack regan’s comments, it brought to mind how we outside the USA view your approach to your own president. Indeed it seems to me that you treat your President more like royalty than do many countries with a monarchy. He is an elected official. Maybe that’s apropos of nothing but it came to mind.

  23. LisaP. says:

    Dr. T,

    It was an analogy. You seem to refuse to take any of my points.

    We are the target demographic for the president’s reforms, this stuff is killing us. The health care reform bill will hurt the rich, it will hurt the middle class, and it will hurt the poor. It is cruel and it is destructive to the freedom of all Americans.

    As for all those other lucky countries, I have seen real examples of folks in the Type 1 diabetes community that are living under nationalized medicine. With all due respect, sir, your contention that “they have all the options they want. . . ” is through the looking glass absurd.

  24. wmeyer says:

    For decades, the Democrats have voted as a bloc, taking the incremental victories, large and small which have brought us to our current pass. For all that time, while Dems have been shrill and defamatory, Republicans have been oh, so courteous, have voted their conscience, and have in almost every way demonstrated their unwillingness to bring more than a powder puff to the fight (hat tip to AAM).

    It is time for the Republicans to take off their gloves and recognize that this is a Chicago-style fight. No bare knuckles, but brass knuckles. And he who fights meanest will eventually win. The rest will be also-rans.

    It should by now be abundantly clear that Obama envisions himself our ruler, not our president. That alone is sufficient cause to remove him, and despite the rhetoric of recent years, if there has in my life been a president worthy of impeachment, this is the one.

    A similar lesson needs to be learned inside the USCCB.

  25. Indulgentiam says:

    Dr. T: “the military should be privatized too.” Ok, i don’t think you thought that one through. Military in the hands of a select few is a really bad idea, think military coup.
    you further say: “It is also curious that most industrial countries have government run health care, and by preference they would not have it any other way.”
    Where are you getting this information? Google –World Health Organization” and take a look at the stats. For just one example lets take our closest neighbor with Government Run Health Care; Canada. “The Vancouver Coastal Health Authority is considering cutting more than 6,000 surgeries to make up for a $200 million budget shortfall. British Columbia Medical Association president Dr. Brian Brodie called the proposed surgical cuts “a nightmare.”
    Unsurprisingly, the collapse of Canda’s government-run health care system is not confined to the West Coast. The Canadian Press reports today:
    The incoming president of the Canadian Medical Association says this country’s health-care system is sick and doctors need to develop a plan to cure it.
    Dr. Anne Doig says patients are getting less than optimal care and she adds that physicians from across the country – who will gather in Saskatoon on Sunday for their annual meeting – recognize that changes must be made.
    “We all agree that the system is imploding, we all agree that things are more precarious than perhaps Canadians realize,” Doing said in an interview with The Canadian Press.

    A man in Canada who has had emergency Cardiac surgery has been unable to get into see the cardiologist for followup almost a year after his surgery. Why? b/c of a shortage of doctors, they leave there to come here. why? well who wants to bust their butt, in medical school, in a country that regulates your every decision and pays a mediocre doctor the same as a good one? See that’s what’s wrong with socialism with its forced redistribution. Not everyone has the same work ethic and those who work their tails off do not want to pay for those who refuse too. Remember the story of Cain and Abel?
    [Genesis 4]
    [3]And it came to pass after many days, that Cain offered, of the fruits of the earth, gifts to the Lord. [4] Abel also offered of the firstlings of his flock, and of their fat: and the Lord had respect to Abel, and to his offerings. [5] But to Cain and his offerings he had no respect: and Cain was exceedingly angry, and his countenance fell.[6]And the Lord said to him: Why art thou angry? and why is thy countenance fallen? [7] If thou do well, shalt thou not receive? but if ill, shall not sin forthwith be present at the door? but the lust thereof shall be under thee, and thou shalt have dominion over it.”

    I know that there are many people in this country without healthcare but i also know that the Interstate Commerce Clause has kept the price of healthcare out of the reach of many middle class Americans. Open up the market and the competition will drive down the cost. Think of it this way if you are the only burger joint in town then you can pretty much charge $10.00 for a burger and get away with it. But say another burger joint opens across the street and starts selling them for $2. Your going to have to drop your prices or go out of business. So who do you think is responsible for the Interstate Commerce Law and the current insurance mess? yep, the government. I know this retired Marine who puts it this way “bureaucrats couldn’t find their own butts with 4 hands a flashlight and a mirror” and he would know, in his 35 (maybe more) years in he had to deal with a lot of them. Hope this helped.

  26. Indulgentiam says:

    I’m sorry, when mention healthcare I actually mean health insurance.

  27. Dr. T. says:

    For all you say is bad about Canada’s health care system 90% of the people would reject anything similar to what the USA has.
    It is easy to site exceptional cases. I am sure one can find quite a few in USA too. No one in Canada is without health care, because the health services are shared with everyone.
    The reason why the USA has so much money for health care has also to do with the foreign investments coming into the USA, and investing in medical technology and insurance companies. It has nothing to do with the “system”. The USA is thought to be a save haven for investments.
    That story about 6000 surgery cuts in BC was a rumor from 2009, which never materialised….sounds like a rumor the USA insurance companies would have started.

  28. Indulgentiam says:

    Ok, so you pull stats out of thin air and call verifiable news reports “rumor.” basically you just want somebody to agree with you. Sweetie this isn’t obamacommunistlies.com. Your on the wrong blog if your looking for somebody to tell you lies and make you feel better. Of course you could be a troll. In any case good night. The Lord bless you and keep you,…

  29. Peter in Canberra says:

    Re Dr T’s comments – Well I’m no fan of Obama, and especially his health care system, but this is another area that Americans may not appreciate – large parts of the rest of the world really do wonder how such a wealthy country has eschewed having a national system of health care. It is obviously a complex issue but at risk of being a lightning rod, this seems to have to do with your political history – rugged (protestant?) individualism ?

  30. AA Cunningham says:

    “Is it helpful to insult and belittle those we disagree with?” Jack Regan

    Have a nice cup of reality Jack. Using the very words and ideas of a narcissist to point out his arrogance and hypocrisy is not an insult. The truth can often appear brutal to the obtuse. Behind every double standard lies an unconfessed single standard.

  31. robtbrown says:

    1. I have no objection to some kind of federal health care supplement for those who cannot afford private insurance. Unfortunately, abortion and contraceptives will be eventually part of the system.

    2. I do object, however, to the naive idea that the federal govt can wave a magic wand and make the increasing cost of health care (thus insurance) go away. National Health Systems like Germany are having the same kind of problems. There are two causes: (1) Demographic, the huge, young baby boom generation that 30 years ago financed health care for a fairly small older, sicker generation is now greying and becoming the older, sicker generation. And the younger, healthier generation is comparatively small. Further, modern medicine, esp cardiovascular medicine, has extended the lives of those in the sicker category. Social Security faces a similar situation, but it can be fixed fairly easily by raising the age of eligibility, which Medicare cannot do.

    2) Technology has produced many, many new diagnostic and treatment procedures, most of which are expensive–people are simply using more medical resources. For example, knee and hip replacements are much more common now than they were 30 years ago. I have a niece and nephew who went to a Dermatologist for treatment of pimple. When I was that age, we used alcohol, or if we wanted to spend big bucks, clearasil. Further, physicians spend more time in training now that ever before with all the subspecialties. I have a friend who’s a cardiologist. After med school, he did a 3 year residency in Internal Medicine, then a 3 yr fellowship in cardiology.

    3. Politicians often exaggerate and sometimes lie, but these seem to be recording setting days.
    A few years ago it was Bushco saying the Iraq War would pay for itself. The Dems, trying to recapture the liars’ mantle, maintained that the new Health Care law would pay for itself. After the laughter stopped, they went back to the garbage can and pulled out the line it would be financed by taxing sugared beverages. Again there were guffaws. Finally, the law established new taxes, which of course still won’t pay the bills.

    4. Places like the Mayo Clinic and the VA were also invoked. More crapola. Not only does the Mayo pay competitive salaries to physicians, but it has something else to offer: Those on staff don’t have to do paper work (it is done by residents and fellows in training), so they can see more patients. I make regular use of VA medicine and know several physicians personally. They complain about the massive restrictions on practicing medicine and their digital paperwork obligations.

    5. Although some kind of national health care would extend basic health care to everyone, which is good, it is delusional to say that European national health systems deliver the same product that is available in the US. John Burns, the famous Brit war correspondent who works for the NY Times, favors national health care and was treated for cancer a few years ago. He started in England, then switched to the US for treatment. He said that if he had continued under the Brit system, he would already be dead. Then added he that a premie son would not have survived in England but was born in the US and is now an adult.

  32. robtbrown says:

    Dr. T. says:

    For all you say is bad about Canada’s health care system 90% of the people would reject anything similar to what the USA has. It is easy to site exceptional cases. I am sure one can find quite a few in USA too. No one in Canada is without health care, because the health services are shared with everyone.

    No one is without basic care. Specialized care is another matter. A podiatrist told me she worked in Canada for a while. They were given an old diagnostic machine (MRI or CT Scan, I cannot remember). It never worked.

    Bill Frist said that he worked in the British system and would be given a list of 50 patients. By the time he got to #30, the patient was already dead.

  33. robtbrown says:

    Peter in Canberra says:

    Re Dr T’s comments – Well I’m no fan of Obama, and especially his health care system, but this is another area that Americans may not appreciate – large parts of the rest of the world really do wonder how such a wealthy country has eschewed having a national system of health care. It is obviously a complex issue but at risk of being a lightning rod, this seems to have to do with your political history – rugged (protestant?) individualism ?

    The US is often a convenient target in these matters. I knew many Aussies when I was Rome, and once they raised the question of the treatment of American Indians. I told him that here any American Indian can get a univ degree for about $100 a year–that stipend includes everything–tuition, room and board, and books. I then asked whether Australia extends the same offer to aborigines. His answer was No.

    Re Health Care: John Burns said that for his nation he wants the British system. For his family he wants the American system.

  34. APX says:

    No one is without basic care. Specialized care is another matter. A podiatrist told me she worked in Canada for a while. They were given an old diagnostic machine (MRI or CT Scan, I cannot remember). It never worked.

    This is so true. Saskatchewan has terrible services for mental health and psychological issues. The wait times are horrendous (It can be up to two years to see a psychiatrist). The neighbouring province, Alberta, has amazing services for mental health and psychological issues (I know because I liaise with everyone for work when referring my clientele to wherever.) The problem was, people from Saskatchewan were traveling to Alberta for mental health services and Sask Health was being billed for it. Now Sask Health won’t pay for out of province mental health services.

    The same is true for MRI’s. I have been waiting 4 years to get an MRI in Saskatchewan. I’ve been living in Alberta as a student for the past number of years. It would be very easy to get an MRI done here, but Sask Health won’t pay for it because then everyone will be coming to Alberta for MRI’s.

  35. Angie Mcs says:

    This photo says it all : look at his body language, his now all too familiar smirk, the triumph in his eyes and the garment, representing an honor that makes a mockery of what it represents. The only objects of ridicule here are the American people.

  36. Dr. T. says:

    One way of gauging the effectiveness of a health care system in the general population is to look at infant mortality rates for a country. The USA is doing even worse than Cuba. Canada, Britain, Australia, and generally all of Western Europe are doing way better than USA. That says a lot……

  37. AnAmericanMother says:

    Dr. T,
    Nice try, but no dice.
    For at least 25 years Europe and the rest of the world have used a different standard to gauge infant mortality. In the U.S., any infant showing any sign of life, even slight muscle tremors, is counted as a live birth (per W.H.O. recommendations). Others do not follow that standard – in many European countries, infants who are born at less than 28 weeks, weigh less than 1,000 grams, or are less than 35 cm in length are not counted as live births and thus do not appear in the infant mortality statistics if they do not survive. And no efforts are usually made to save them.
    Works wonders for your infant mortality statistics if you just erase the at-risk births.

  38. Indulgentiam says:

    Dr.T: “The USA is doing even worse than Cuba. Canada, Britain, Australia, and generally all of Western Europe are doing way better than USA. That says a lot……”

    Clearly you are not firing on all cylinders. Or you believe everything that the MSM force feeds you. I wonder, do you ever research any of the things you are told or do you merely accept Everything Anybody tells you? The only thing in your statement that “says a lot” is the enthusiasm with which you regurgitate misinformation. Do you work for the obama campaign? Below please find the CORRECT information regarding infant mortality rates.

    Cuba vs. the United States on Infant Mortality

    Recently released statistics on the infant mortality rate in the Western hemisphere yielded an odd conclusions — Cuba’s infant mortality rate, 16 6.0 per 1,000, is now lower than the U.S. infant mortality rate, at 7.2 per 1,000. Given Cuba’s poverty level, its 6.0 rate is very impressive, but is it accurate to say that Cuba now has an infant mortality rate lower than the United States? No.

    The problem is that international statistics on infant mortality are helpful in revealing large differences, but when it comes to small differences such as that between Cuba and the United States, often other factors are really behind the numbers.

    The primary reason Cuba has a lower infant mortality rate than the United States is that the United States is a world leader in an odd category — the percentage of infants who die on their birthday. In any given year in the United States anywhere from 30-40 percent of infants die before they are even a day old.

    Why? Because the United States also easily has the most intensive system of
    emergency intervention to keep low birth weight and premature infants alive
    in the world. The United States is, for example, one of only a handful countries that keeps detailed statistics on early fetal mortality — the survival rate of infants who are born as early as the 20th week of gestation.

    How does this skew the statistics? Because in the United States if an infant is born weighing only 400 grams and not breathing, a doctor will likely spend lot of time and money trying to revive that infant. If the infant does not survive — and the mortality rate for such infants is in excess of 50 percent — that sequence of events will be recorded as a live birth and then a death.

    In many countries, however, (including many European countries) such severe medical intervention would not be attempted and, moreover, regardless of whether or not it was, this would be recorded as a fetal death rather than a live birth. That unfortunate infant would never show up in infant mortality statistics.

    More info can be found at:
    World Health Org.—http://www.who.int/research/en/
    Be extremely cautious when reading the studies on these sites. Be sure to chase down the original study. Quite often they do not post all the results just the ones that they agree with.

  39. AnAmericanMother says:


    Obviously thinking along the same lines. As my dear old dad says, “Figure lie, and liars figure.”

    Also, anybody who wants to can look up “Cuba’s Health Care Horror” – if they have a strong stomach.

  40. SKAY says:

    “It should by now be abundantly clear that Obama envisions himself our ruler, not our president.”
    I agree. The picture says it better than a thousand words as Angie Mcs points out..

    Democrat advisor James Carville has said gleefully that Obama is winning the street fight. He should know about ugly street fighting politics since he comes from Louisiana Democrat politics. Leftist Obama advisor David Axelrod is a master of the “art”

  41. Indulgentiam says:

    i saw your very good post only after i had finished. I could have saved Fr. Z the space. I know all about “Cuba’s Health Care Horror” i still have family there. Please, please keep them in your prayers.

  42. robtbrown says:

    Dr. T. says:

    One way of gauging the effectiveness of a health care system in the general population is to look at infant mortality rates for a country. The USA is doing even worse than Cuba. Canada, Britain, Australia, and generally all of Western Europe are doing way better than USA. That says a lot……

    Right. We all know about all the pregnant women heading to Cuba, sometimes going by raft, to have babies.

    Did you read above what John Burns said about his preemie son?

  43. Dr. T. says:

    What you are saying is that the infant mortality rate will go up if American medical technology is exported to Cuba…..I wonder what the Cubans would think of that.

    Well, I did not want to use the CIA Fact Book rather than the UN figures I originally used because some of you may think the CIA un-American. But their Fact Book puts USA even way worse in infant mortality rates than Cuba and the rest of the countries I mentioned. I suppose that because the CIA knows nothing, is doing a bad job at intelligence, and is run buy the government, it should be scrapped and turned to the private sector. Curiously the stats from the Fact Book are often used in academic papers….

    I think a good point was made about rugged Protestantism as the guiding light for these social issues in USA. I wonder if Darwin and his colleague Huxley were Protestants. The way private business with its Darwinian/Huxlean paradigm is seen as the savoir of the world by so many in the USA reminds me of what I once read by Max Weber, making me wonder if one has to be a Protestant not to be poorer in worldly possessions.

  44. Indulgentiam says:

    Dr.T: “What you are saying is that the infant mortality rate will go up if American medical technology is exported to Cuba…..I wonder what the Cubans would think of that.”
    They would think then Shout, “gracias a Dios y La Virgin!!!” No matters who’s figures you use you will still NOT be able to prove your lies b/c they are LIES. Lets be clear, Lie; is a false statement made with deliberate intent to deceive; an intentional untruth; a falsehood. False as in there is PROOF that it is NOT true. chew on that a while

  45. robtbrown says:

    Dr T,

    1. It’s common knowledge that Darwin was a Protestant–and at the end of his life was an agnostic/atheist.

    2. You seem uninformed about business. Generally, small businesses are not highly competitive, dog eat dog environments. On the other hand, corporations often have a strategy to put the competitor out of business, e.g., Lowe’s vs Home Depot, Walmart vs Target. Because corporations try to control the market, they can be considered semi-socialist. `

    3. It is romantic Marxism to say that Catholicism means poor. Some Rich Catholics: The two richest men in Germany are serious Catholics, the Albrecht bros (one of whom died last year). They own ALDI and Trader Joe’s. Thomas Monaghan, the founder of Domino’s Pizza, is rich. The Carney Bros, who founded Pizza Hut (one left the Church because of divorce). Bing Crosby and Bob Hope (who converted a year before he died) became rich with Calif real estate. Peter Lynch, who built the Fidelity Magellan fund into a monster. Alfred Hitchcock and John Ford (IMHO, the two best movie directors)

    4. There have been rich Catholic nations–Spain, Portugal, France, and Austro-Hungary, during their respective Imperial years.

    5. NB: The rugged individualism that you implicitly criticize

    a. Saved Europe from Hitler and after the war saved Europe from starvation
    b. Saved the world from Communism (which perhaps you don’t think is such a good thing)
    c. Invented the computer chip, which I think is one of the 5 most important inventions in history.
    d. Invented the Internet
    e. Produced the first moon landing
    f. Produced the vaccine for polio

    6. I don’t know how Cubans would do with American technology, but Cuban cigars aren’t all that good anymore.

  46. Dr. T. says:

    What I am trying to say is that the poverty rate in USA is over 15%, the worse since the 1960’s. How are these folk going to get basic medical care for them and their children? By becoming Protestant and acquiring the Protestant work ethic?
    Please do not get me wrong. I think Mr Obama has been disastrous as he has put his ideology ahead of his running a good government. But it is also true that a lot of the economics is beyond his control, and there are not enough regulations for him to work with either. Look at Canada which has weathered the economic storms of the past 5 years pretty well. They have a conservative government, but they will not hesitate to use government control to make sure there is no meltdown in the economy. What happened to the banks in USA that precipitated the meltdown could not happen in Canada. There is no wild west in the basic financial sector there. And on top of that, everyone is covered for their medical misfortunes in Canada: no special treatment just because you are rich.

  47. (X)MCCLXIII says:

    @Dr T.,

    I appreciate that it’s difficult to keep ones cool in the face of strong comments, but I don’t think you do yourself any favours wondering about the religion of Darwin and Huxley and speculating about its possible significance. The history is well known. Darwin’s family had shallow roots in any religion; for example he was baptised and eventually sent to Cambridge with the intention of entering protestant ministry by an unbelieving father for what seem to have been insincere reasons. Similarly, Thos. Huxley appears to have invented the term “agnostic” (as applied to himself). Darwin, at least, was baptised; but it seems clear that neither he nor Huxley were believing Christians of any sort in their maturity, and certainly not “rugged protestants”!

  48. Dr. T. says:

    Yes it is true about Darwin and Huxley, but the term “rugged Protestantism” reminded me of another expression on our side, “cafeteria Catholics”, folks that claim to be part of a religion, but accept only those principles of that religion that suits their fancy.
    I do find it odd, however, that so many of those who call themselves “Protestant” Christians will also have this survival of the fittest attitude when it comes to medical care, the economy, and the poor. That is what I was basically getting at.
    Yet it is also true that new religions, often claiming to be in the “Protestant” tradition, have sprouted up which offer instant health and wealth. I guess their followers need no medical coverage….

  49. AnAmericanMother says:

    Your family has my prayers. A dear friend in college was saved from Cuba by “Operation Peter Pan” — his father was a physician, his mother a gracious and beautiful lady (he had her portrait, which he carried out with him). He never saw his parents again, and nobody knows what happened to them – they just disappeared into the maw of Castro’s revolution.
    The Cuban regime is pure evil, and I would not believe anything that came out of their mouths.

    Dr. T,
    You have a trusting but misplaced confidence in statistics.
    The number of people below the “poverty level” in the United States has increased substantially because of the way that level is calculated. It is calculated from reported income only, and does not include assets, capital gains, or any benefits such as Medicaid, EBT, housing subsidies, etc. Thus a millionaire who is living off his capital gains may well be below the poverty level, as well as the more obvious case of a family that is receiving a great deal of public assistance but reports little if any income “on the books”.
    I have lived in Haiti, so I know what abject poverty really looks like. And yes, we have poor people in this country (some of ’em are my friends!) and one poor person is one too many. But the idea that someone who is a dollar below the Federal poverty level is going to be unable to obtain medical care is nonsense. For one thing, you can just walk into any emergency room and be treated (that’s why an aspirin costs $7).
    The chief of Grady Hospital, our big public hospital in Atlanta, had a fine solution that I wish had received more attention from the media and the legislature. Take the money that is being wasted implementing all the Byzantine complexities of ObamaCare, and fund proper public clinics for the poor with state-of-the-art technology and physicians who are paid a substantial wage. Attach the clinic to a hospital so that serious illnesses and injuries can be easily transferred to the ER, and rotate the residents through as part of their medical education. A lot of very fine ER specialists and surgeons do a rotation at Grady, because you will see all the gunshot and razor wounds as well as automobile collision injuries, house fires, industrial accidents, etc. Our family surgeon, one of the best in Atlanta (may he rest in peace!) did a stint in the Navy and then ER at Grady. His stories would curl your hair – but he was a great surgeon, steady of hand and nothing ever fazed him.
    Instead of wasting all this money trying to get ‘insurance’ for the poor . . . . what they really need is not insurance, but medical care. Insurance, especially as administered by the government, simply cycles tax dollars through many bureaucratic hands, each taking a cut, so that very little actually provides health care to the poor that supposedly benefit. We would do better simply to fund good public clinics.

  50. AnAmericanMother says:

    Dr. T,

    What you are saying is that the infant mortality rate will go up if American medical technology is exported to Cuba…..I wonder what the Cubans would think of that.
    They would be delighted. Because what that would mean is that (1) their little premature infants would be counted as live births; and (2) their premature infants would have a chance at life instead of being tossed into a dirty burn barrel. In other words, the little ones would be treated as human beings for the first time.
    Deo gratias!

  51. LisaP. says:

    One of the problems with socialized medicine is that it’s being voted in for the good of poor people by folks that have never even met any poor people.

    Dr. T., If someone is impoverished, there are several choices for health care.

    1. If he or she can get a job with benefits, he will have health insurance no matter his health or history or salary. Some states allow some wiggle room here, but not much.

    2. If he or she can’t get a job with benefits, he can buy his own private health insurance. With a high deductible plan, this will run his family about $6000 (it was closer to $5000 before Obamacare, thank you, Mr. President). This is what we use.

    3. If you have a pre-existing condition, most states have high risk insurance pools, where you again buy your own insurance. This costs us about $260 per month (again, huge rises in the last couple years and the program will likely disappear if Obamacare continues, thank you, Mr. President.) This is what we use for our daughter with diabetes. It’s hefty. If you can’t afford it, there is a sliding scale where the government pays your premiums, then it’s not so hefty.

    4. If you are too poor to buy these, and you have children, or are pregnant, you can get Medicaid for them, which covers only what it wants to cover but does so at 100%. This is essentially what all Americans will be on if we go to socialized medicine. There are also other state programs for children that cover health care for kids whose parents make too little to buy insurance but too much for Medicaid.

    5. This leaves one gap — adults without a pre-existing condition who do not have employer health care and can’t afford their own insurance. They have two choices.

    a. Pay out of pocket, and be smart about it. For example, there are clinics here that will charge a flat rate of $150 for an office visit, all inclusive, X-rays, etc. if necessary. If you are healthy, you can get away with paying very little for your health care over the course of a year. The problem comes if you have a major illness or accident. If this happens, you move to b.

    b. You take the health care you need, and you get billed. Most of the time, if you cannot pay, you can negotiate down the bill, almost always by half, and sometimes drastically ($10,000 bills down to $600, to take an example from a family I know). If you choose not to pay at all, you cannot be punished — there is no debtors prison in America, and hospitals must treat you no matter how much you owe them. However, if you have a job or any assets, your money can be taken if a court decides you owe it. So insurance is, in essence, asset protection.

    I do not recommend this route, and I find this gap to be the worse part of our current system, because it’s fine for a major event but a poor way to get health care for chronic conditions. But no one in this country ever need go without health care, no matter how poor — the only people I have ever heard of who have not received health care have not asked for it, because they don’t want to owe money or because they don’t want their assets seized. That’s a different problem, and often actually a personal one. There’s also a question of the quality of the health care you get if you are “indigent”, on Medicaid, or paying half your bill. This is a concern. But I don’t see how putting *everyone* on the same system solves this problem, because the poor who are getting third rate health care now won’t be any better off if they get third rate health care along with everyone else later. Then there’s not even a standard of comparison to drive improvement, which is one reason why folks in nations with socialized medicine seem content with their lot — they have forgotten there ever was any other lot to have.

    Oh, and let me mention:

    c. Accident insurance — accident coverage can be purchased for about $65 a month for a family (again, more than before, thank you Mr. President, etc.). Not everyone can buy that, but if you want insurance to protect assets than it is worth the cost to save yourself from bankruptcy or lien. It only covers accident, not illness, so pre-existing conditions don’t matter. So our family has a $10,000 deductible, but also accident insurance, so if I get cancer we will owe that $10,000 per year but if I’m in a car accident and my bills exceed $10,000, the accident insurance will reimburse me and I pay nothing. It’s a clever product.

    It’s a convoluted system, I like things simpler, and people fall through the cracks. But more people will fall through the cracks with a socialized system, and the ones who don’t fall through the cracks will get poorer service. It’s true folks in countries with socialized systems recommend them — they’re told Americans are dying in the streets over here for lack of free health coverage, and the one thing you see over and over is how grateful Europeans, etc. are that they can go to the doctor without paying the bill. But the lack of care, lack of choice that I’ve seen folks become acclimated to, that’s no where near a fair trade off.

  52. wmeyer says:

    Another problem with socialized medicine is that it destroys the health care system. When you effectively cap a doctor’s earnings, you reduce the incentive for anyone to invest in so many years of education. When you fund hospitals with an annual allocation, conditional on treating everyone who walks through the door, then there is a tendency to find little reason to apply expensive treatment.

    I spent a total of 13 years of my adult life as a resident of Canada. The system is not all bad, but it is mostly bad. Ultimately, one of the worst features of the system is that patient has no voice. He is not a customer, just a unit of production, and if all the paperwork is correctly executed, doctor, hospital and government are all happy. Never mind the patient.

  53. Pingback: Honorary Doctorate? – What Does The Prayer Really Say? | Universal Health Care Advice

  54. Supertradmum says:

    I have lived under English and Canadian socialized medicine and both are mostly bad.
    I have shared the nightmare of being yelled at by five English doctors at once when I refused to have an amniocentesis. Days before my son was born, the government cut back on cleaners. and I had to clean the bathrooms myself with disinfectants bought by my husband. The nurses did not mind, as they would not have been done. Some pediatricians were good, but for specialized care, my son was ill for nine months without the care he should have received as a baby.

    In Canada, the care was mostly bad. I am not going to list all the problems, but I can tell you they were serious. Even some doctors apologized to me for less than top care, due to government restrictions. One doctor told me that he would hardly deal with the paper work, as secretaries and office workers had been fired to save money.

    When I came back to the States, one of my doctors was a Catholic from Canada, who had to leave in order to avoid having to compromise his conscious.

    And, now, living in London as a foreigner and a private patient, I cannot walk into the majority of clinics in my area and get served. They do not take private patients. In order to get two prescriptions renewed, I had to go to Emergency and sit for hours and hours, as the only doctor in a five mile radius who took private patients was in the hospital himself. In order to get the prescription, I had to ask a priest who new the pharmacist to go with me, as it was considered “irregular” as I am not on national health, even though I was paying full prices.

    I am totally against socialized medicine.

  55. Dr. T. says:

    Here is an interesting alternative for some of you folks, but it would entail living like Catholics are meant to:


  56. Supertradmum says:

    apologies for errors…it is 1:33 here..

  57. Indulgentiam says:

    Socialism i.e Communism has never worked anywhere in any application. It has always lead to tyranny, poverty and despair. No surprise considering that it is the brainchild of the freemasons and probably their number one project.

  58. AnAmericanMother says:

    Dr. T,
    You should read before you link.
    From the article: “This year the department of insurance has requested Medi-Share be held in contempt for the unauthorized sale of insurance.”
    So far you’re batting .000.

Comments are closed.