The Palinization of Rick Santorum

Rick Santorum has never been the sharpest knife in the drawer, but one has to wonder if he’s been possessed by the spirit of Sarah Palin when reading this statement he delivered at a Young Americans for Freedom conference the other day. See if you can make any sense at all of this:

“If we have a system where the government is going to be the principal provider of health care for the country, we’re done. Because then, you are dependent on the government for your life and your health…When Thatcher ran for prime minister she said — remember this, this is the Iron Lady — she said, ‘The British national health care system is safe in my hands.’ She wasn’t going to take on health care, because she knew once you have people getting free health care from the government, you can’t take it away from them. And the reason is because most people don’t get sick, and so free health care is just that, free health care, until you get sick. Then, if you get sick and you don’t get health care, you die and you don’t vote. It’s actually a pretty clever system. Take care of the people who can vote and people who can’t vote, get rid of them as quickly as possible by not giving them care so they can’t vote against you. That’s how it works.”

*scratches head* As someone on my Facebook said, it’s like a verbal ink blot. But I can’t detect anything remotely like a coherent thought in there. But I bet he got cheers for this frothy mix of gibberish.

Follow Us!
POPULAR AT PATHEOS Nonreligious
What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • http://zenoferox.blogspot.com/ Zeno

    “frothy mix.” Ha.

  • konrad_arflane

    I’m pretty sure he’s trying to suggest a conspiracy whereby the Democrats have a long-term plan to cull the voter rolls of Republican voters by letting them die of treatable diseases. I don’t know if the reason it came out as muddled as it did is stupidity or an attempt at deniability, though.

  • jamessweet

    Okay, it really is a verbal inkblot, because I thought I deciphered it, and got something entirely different from konrad.

    I thought he was arguing that you can do “free healthcare” by just not providing any meaningful healthcare at all: Healthy people don’t require significant healthcare, so it’s “free” and they are satisfied. Sick people die if not treated, so there is nobody to complain about the poor quality of the healthcare. Dead people don’t vote, and all untreated sick people become dead, ergo there will be no formerly-sick people to vote you out of office if you provide shitty healthcare.

    Not like anyone over the age of four needs the flaws in this argument pointed out, but I see three main ones: 1) Not all untreated sick people become dead; 2) while dead people don’t vote, surviving family and friends do; and 3) why wouldn’t the same argument apply to paid healthcare? In fact… the whole “usually you’re healthy” thing is EXACTLY one of the big reasons why private health insurance is kinda fucked up: You pay most of your money when they are not actually providing a service to you, and then hope that they will deal with you fairly when you do need it. And if they don’t, what recourse do you have? Not much.

  • http://en.uncyclopedia.co/wiki/User:Modusoperandi Modusoperandi

    Weird. I had no idea the Right hated the VA, so much. I guess they have to, if Socialized medicine is as bad as they say it is.

    Alternately, they’re talking about Obamacare, but that can’t be right because, no matter how Public the exchanges are, private insurance for private doctors in private hospitals isn’t Socialized medicine by any reasonable definition of the the term. Heck, it’s not even Socialized insurance, like Medicare.

    I’m going to have to cut this comment short. I’ve got an appointment for my Death Panel. Fingers crossed…

  • gshelley

    He thinks that the only people that get sick are …

    no, that doesn’t make sense

    I’ll try and break it down

    1) Thatcher promised to keep the NHS

    2) She knew that free health care can’t be undone

    3) Healthy people like free health care because it has no effect on them

    4) If you can’t get health care and get sick, you die

    5) This is clever because people who can’t afford health care will die and can’t vote against you

    I think he is saying that if there is no free health care, people who can’t afford it would somehow get it and be saved, but if there is free health care, they won’t get any health care and will die. Ignoring the fact that this has clearly not been the case in the UK, and that health care is not free, it’s funded from taxes and national insurance, it’s logically incoherent and even if it was true, people would have noticed and would want the NHS abolished or reformed

  • Moggie

    I… err… wut?

    It’s time for a Billy Madison misquote:

    Mr. Frothy, what you’ve just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.

  • http://www.gregory-gadow.net Gregory in Seattle

    Obligatory Rick Santorum link, for when the voices in his head tell him to run again for President.

  • http://polrant@blogspot.com democommie

    “Hidden Ranch Wordsalad Dressing, Frothy Mix” is their newest offering. True Story.

  • http://polrant@blogspot.com democommie

    P.S.

    Do NOT read the label.

  • http://polrant@blogspot.com democommie

    “Palinization”; is that like “Stalinization” with less intellectual rigor?

  • peterh

    If you follow the link in #7, you find Santorum saying, “Smart people don’t like me.” He may be onto something there.

  • http://www.clanfield.net janiceintoronto

    Time to duct tape these fools mouths shut, handcuff them and bring them to Canada to see how successful socialized healthcare works.

    I doubt it would change their tiny minds, but at least it would have the added benefit of shutting them up for a short while.

  • Mr Ed

    The speech makes perfect sense. Take five years of straw man arguments and arguments take to the absurd, mix vigorously in the echo chamber and skim off any critical thinking and you have the classic right wing kool aid. This is what happens when the leaders drink their own hyperbole

  • raven

    Rick Santorum has never been the sharpest knife in the drawer,…

    More like the Michele Bachmannization.

    Satanorum has three degrees, one in law, passed the bar. He’s made as much as $1.3 million dollars a year as a lobbyist in Washington DC.

    He is showing signs of Fundie Xian Induced Cognitive Impairment though.

  • arakasi

    He explicitly makes the point here that no matter how conservative Thatcher was, she still wouldn’t touch the NHS because it was just too damn popular. The same people who have been living with socialist health care for most/all of their lives really want to keep it. Fortunately, Santorum is here to keep the US from having a similar incredibly popular program.

  • davidjanes

    by any reasonable definition

    They require reasonable ones now?

  • raven

    Satanorum:

    because she knew once you have people getting free health care from the government, you can’t take it away from them.

    It is deliberately muddled because Satanorum is just lying a lot and making wild claims.

    1. Government supplied health care in a single payer system isn’t free. You pay for it with your taxes!!!!

    2. He is claiming that in single payer systems, the government can just refuse to treat you if you get sick and then you die. In theory yes. In theory the government can just kill you any time for any reason. They have lots of soldiers, guns, tanks, fighter jets, and nukes.

    In practice, in a democracy, it doesn’t happen very often.

    3. Most of the First World has some sort of government sponsored health care including Canada. I’m not aware that Harper the Canadian Bush clone is killing his opposition party voters by the millions.

    It’s quite popular and their voters aren’t in a hurry to get rid of it.

    4. Just about everywhere, national health care systems coexist with private health care. If you don’t want it, you can always go to the private sector and pay up.

    Take care of the people who can vote and people who can’t vote, get rid of them as quickly as possible by not giving them care so they can’t vote against you. That’s how it works.”

    No that isn’t how it works. The USA is low on the list of health care outcomes in the developed world.

    Satanorum is just lying and making wild accusations.

  • Larry

    Obviously, there is a secret message embedded in that frothy mixture of words somewhere. That random assemblege of nouns, verbs, and adjectives didn’t just spontaneously flow from his brain. Something is in there and I pledge to devote the rest of my life towards teasing it out. Wish me luck.

    [2 seconds later]

    Nah. It’s just word salad spewed by a demented troll.

  • matty1

    I think he meant to say “we must move forward, not backward, upward not forward, and always twirling, twirling, twirling towards freedom”.

    But seriously the idea the government paying for health care means elected officials spend their time reading medical notes and going “No heart transplant for Smith he voted the wrong way” is even more ludicrous.

  • http://howlandbolton.com richardelguru

    And to add to what the people who mentioned that a National Health Service is paid for: I gotta mention that id costs something like a half to two-thirds as much as the current US system.

    (I wonder where that extra money goes???)

  • http://howlandbolton.com richardelguru

    ‘id costs’?? I must have a cold…

  • raven

    It’s just another journey down the empty and dark hallways of Rick Satanorum’s warped mind.

    There are lots more on Google and Youtube.

    He proved too weird and repulsive even for the lunatic fringe we call the GOP, last election.

  • sigurd jorsalfar

    He seems to be trying to say that when the government has a monopoly over health care it can selectively decide who among the sick lives and dies, because the sick have no where else to turn. Most people don’t sit around worrying about this because they are healthy, so they fail to see the danger that Santorum is now warning them about this cunning plan.

    The implication is that n the hands of an Obama sick Republicans will be left to die and only Democrats will be saved. The great Thatcher saw the danger and promised not to do that to her political enemies because she was so compassionate.

    It’s a tad more coherent than most Palinisms, but every bit as dishonest, seeing as how it’s the current system that favors the lives of Republicans over Democrats.

  • http://en.uncyclopedia.co/wiki/User:Modusoperandi Modusoperandi

    davidjanes “They require reasonable ones now?”

    Never forget the lessons of Dream Warrior’s My Reasonable Definition of a Boombastic Jazz Style.

  • marcus

    Yes a single-payer health care system is wildly popular and everyone hates being ground under the boot-heel of socialized government mandated health care. Simple.

  • http://drx.typepad.com Dr X

    Of course, the government isn’t going to be the principle provider of health care because health care provision is almost entirely private. The federal government only provides health care through the V.A. and military hospitals. Santorum should know about this because his father was a V.A. a psychologist, who paid young Richard’s tuition at a suburban Chicago Catholic high school using V.A. blood money. Santorum vaulted to prominence on the bodies of dead veterans.

  • Randomfactor

    Weird. I had no idea the Right hated the VA,

    It supports people who are no longer making money for the military-industrial complex. Of COURSE they hate it.

  • scienceavenger

    …she knew once you have people getting free health care from the government, you can’t take it away from them.

    This is a common meme in the GOP, that these government programs can’t ever be ended once they start. It never occurs to them that the reason this is so is because people like the results, ie, it’s a success. Can you imagine how they’d react if we applied this same mentality to a free-market product people wanted?

  • http://en.uncyclopedia.co/wiki/User:Modusoperandi Modusoperandi

    scienceavenger “It never occurs to them that the reason this is so is because people like the results, ie, it’s a success.”

    But it can’t work. Government can’t work. Seriously, that’s, like, in Article I of the Constitution. And, even if it did work, that’s money that could’ve been used for tax cuts, leaving Americans more money in their wallet to spend as they wish, on more expensive healthcare insurance that they can’t afford, that doesn’t cover what they need, that’s capped, that drops them when they get expensive, and that in a millions of cases they can’t get at all (because of serious pre-existing conditions, like getting sick or old or old and sick) or that they can get but only in State-based High Risk pools that Republicans pretend to be for (but never fund them, because, again, taxes) and that, again, they can’t afford.

    The only thing that should stand between a person and their doctor is their bank account.

  • raven

    This is a common meme in the GOP, that these government programs can’t ever be ended once they start. It never occurs to them that the reason this is so is because people like the results,…

    It’s the same with electricity, the internet, cars, TVs, cell phones, warm winter clothing, safe drinking water, cheap abundant food, and cats.

    Once people get them, they don’t want to give them up.

  • raven

    This is a common meme in the GOP, that these government programs can’t ever be ended once they start. It never occurs to them that the reason this is so is because people like the results,…

    Not to mention Social Security, Medicare, democracy, and indoor plumbing.

    In fact, it has proven difficult to destroy modern Hi Tech civilization. These clowns really do want to go back to the Dark Ages. It wouldn’t bother me a bit, but they want to take us with them. Satanorum doesn’t want to be president, he wants to be a New Dark Ages Pope.

  • John Pieret

    Rick Santorum has never been the sharpest knife in the drawer

    Heck, he isn’t even the sharpest butter knife in the drawer.

  • Thumper: Token Breeder

    When Thatcher ran for prime minister she said — remember this, this is the Iron Lady — she said, ‘The British national health care system is safe in my hands.’

    Hang on… he’s speaking against nationalised healthcare, right?

  • Thumper: Token Breeder

    @sigurd jorsalfar

    I think you’re giving him far too much credit. Either that, or “trying to say” is the key phrase in your post.

    Or possibly both, since even if he had said what he was trying to say it would still be a stupid argument.

  • Michael Heath

    arakasi writes:

    [Rick Santorum] explicitly makes the point here that no matter how conservative Thatcher was, she still wouldn’t touch the NHS because it was just too damn popular. The same people who have been living with socialist health care for most/all of their lives really want to keep it. Fortunately, Santorum is here to keep the US from having a similar incredibly popular program.

    True, but he wants to justify it’s still a failed program in spite of Thatcher’s avoidance of the topic. The reason he descends into incoherency is his next premise which immediately follows his reference to Thatcher:

    And the reason is because most people don’t get sick, and so free health care is just that, free health care, until you get sick.

    This premise is wrong because healthcare is not free in the U.K. If your healthy, it’s the opposite. You’re paying taxes to provide healthcare for others where you have no need to consume this good. [If you don’t think you’re paying taxes – you still are, because taxes are embedded in the costs of goods and services you do consume.]

    So what we really have in the U.K. that makes conservative heads explode, is a population smart enough to realize their taxes that fund healthcare for the sick is a prudent hedge for them as well – even when they’re healthy. So when they get sick, you can afford to get sufficiently treated. “Prudent hedge” is of course what competently insurance policy actually is (assuming it has coverage consistent with what you think the premiums cover).

    If Americans ever become smart enough to figure out what the benefits of single-payer, then we’re going to realize Obamacare doesn’t sufficiently address the optimization of coverage. And then they’re going to want it. I think it’s inevitable, what’s taking so long is that we continue to act at the level of a 15 year old jock whose a little slow in the classroom.

    Even those who have great plans at their employer still predominately suffer from our current approach, and that’s because it reduces labor liquidity, which limits their career options outside their employer.

  • coffeehound

    @ # 33,

    Hang on… he’s speaking against nationalised healthcare, right?

    Yes, but logical consistency is a lot to ask of a man confused by shoelaces.

  • pocketnerd

    Here, let me simplify that for you: “It’s good when poor people die. Vote Republican.”

  • http://cheapsignals.blogspot.com Gretchen

    Dear Republicans,

    Please stop breaking the government and then bitching about how it won’t work because it’s broken.

    You’re not even being sneaky about it. You’re cutting the fuel line in broad daylight.

  • cactuswren

    A few years ago the RNC did a push-poll suggesting that registered Republicans should be afraid of being denied health care on the basis of their political alignment; maybe he’s trying to imply something similar.

  • http://polrant@blogspot.com democommie

    @Janiceintoronto:

    “Time to duct tape these fools mouths shut, handcuff them and bring them to Gitmo to see how successful enhanced interrogation works.”

    Sorry, it was just sitting there.

    I can see why Santantrum hates the VA. It treats soldiers and others it deals with compassionately and without regard for color, religion, sex or sexual orientation or political stripe. It has lots of problems providing care for a significant portion of its patients because they don’t want to participate in the program or only participate to the extent that they will show up when there’s an emergency and require much more in the way of resources for having waited. This is sorta the way that any single payer system will function unless it has very draconian rules–which is something that the freedumb luvin’ teabase jes hatez!

    I have some issues with the way my doctors and others deal with me. I just had something occur yesterday which threw me for a bit of a loop because it was a bolt out of the blue. Otoh, the nice lady at the imaging unit of the Syracuse VA center told me what I needed to do if I was going to be having a problem with claustrophobia when I get my MRI next month.

    If it was up to the likes of L’il Prick Sanscrotum I wouldn’t have anything to worry about, because I wouldn’t be seeing any doctors who would tell me what was wrong.

  • chrishyland

    It makes (slightly more) sense if you assume that government health are health care is necessarily terrible and doesn’t actually treat a massive amount of conditions that people die of. In other words I don’t think he’s saying the government is going to purposefully not treat republican voters, just that so many people will die you’ll end up with a population of people who are fine under socialised medicine by some kind of natural selection.

    I guess if you are speaking to people who are going to automatically agree with everything you say you don’t need to explain any of your premises.