Klavan, "Health" Panels & Goldsteins – UPDATED

I’m still in a retreat after-glow that has me only half attending to the world around me, and I am still pushing politics away in the manner of a King’s daughter being offered boiled tripe: “- ewww, away with that!”

But this piece by Andrew Klavan floated across my email and by the second paragraph I wished I’d written it. It needs a deft touch, though, and can’t you just see the movie version?

…the logic of this moment was inevitable. Once government got its fingers on the health-care system, it was only a matter of time before it took it over completely. Now there’s one limited pool of dollars while the costs are endless.

“You have the luxury of thinking only of yourself, but we have to think about everyone,” says the professor of ethics. He’s a celebrity and waxes eloquent every Tuesday and Thursday on Bill Maher Tonight. “This isn’t the free market, after all. We can’t just leave fairness to chance. We have to use reason. Is it better for society as a whole that we allocate limited resources for your operation when we might use the same dollars to bring many more high quality years to someone, say, younger?”

“I’m only 62.”

He smiles politely.

“Look, it’s not just about me,” you argue desperately. “My daughter’s engaged to get married next year. She’ll be heartbroken if I’m not there for it.”

“Maybe you should have thought of that before you put on so much weight,” says the medical officer. “I mean, you people have been told time and again . . .”

But the chairwoman is uncomfortable with his censorious tone and cuts him off, saying more gently, “Perhaps your daughter could move the wedding up a little.”

When you get to the end of Klavan’s piece, “this is evil!” then the natural jump will be to this piece by David Warren:

Candour is when you tell a truth that is disturbing, in language so unambiguous that persons in polite company will not want to hear you. It is a way to lose the respect of the genteel — of those who are “respectable” in the shallowest sense. Rude language is quite unnecessary to this end: the hard truth itself, spoken plainly and publicly, will give sufficient offence.

Thuggery is unrelated to this. It consists not of candid argument but of naked intimidation.

Thuggery is such a harsh word. But unambiguous, no?

Yes, Sarah Palin’s “death panel” remark was deliberately provocative and unambiguous, but it was not rude. Wasn’t intimidating, either. But the notion that so many have needlessly died in the UK due to their socialized medical program deserves consideration. Ted Kennedy’s dreadful prognosis was delivered in May of 2008. One cannot help but wonder what the last 15 months of his life would have been like under such a system – or if, indeed, he would have managed another 15 months in the bosom of his family.

But what am I saying? Clearly, our “public servants,” (like our academic betters, our sparkling celebrities and the sabbath gasbags of our pundit-class) will not be subjected to the same lines and limitations as we great unwashed, we the hoi polloi. I have an image in my head of Nancy Pelosi, Rep. Jerrold Nadler (to whom your opinions are unwelcome) and Obama’s creepy “science czar” (of whom the press remains incurious) all comfortably seated in a taxpayer-supplied limo, zipping along to yet another Obamaganda Rally (which you will watch, from your lines, on the nearest jumbotron). Pelosi, Nadler and Creep-Czar will deign to make power fists out their darkened windows, enjoining the masses to “keep it real” on those long lines for shoes, toilet paper and antibiotics. “Fight the nazis who want to rile you up and shout us down,” Nadler may encourage.

Nadler was rather busy back when students at Columbia university and elsewhere were shouting down invited speakers with whom they disagreed, but he now knows a nazi when he sees one, and a hawk from a handsaw!

Moving on – you’ll want to read this bit from yesterday.

Wes Pruden writes:

The president signals a change in tactics, not objectives. His concession that the so-called “government option” is temporarily dead does not mean the dream of “postalizing” health care, of making it as responsive as the Post Office, is dead.

Hey, the government cash for clunkers program is running so well, we should all be reassured. Shouldn’t we? And um…we should also feel perfectly secure about our private information. Of course we are.

We’re in for a long battle, but we’re learning to deconstruct the language and the shifting terminologies, and we’re finally updating the tactics.

Too late for permanently-demonized George W. Bush, and some others, people are also – finally – catching on to the 2-minutes Hate. Bush is still their Emmanuel Goldstein, of course, but as Kimball notes, anyone can become Goldstein as a situation requires. You can be Goldstein. I can be Goldstein. Our McCarthy-izing press can make it happen in a flash. Zap! You’re today’s Goldstein, reviled and ultimately ignored.

On the horizon: More czars and “Diversity Officers.” Does it seem to you that the Obama administration makes up titles and offices the way Bluto made up new names for Animal House Pledges?

“You’ll be…the Chief Diversity Officer!”

“Why?”

“Why the hell not?”

Indeed. When you’ve “won” and you’ve got both houses, (and soon the SCOTUS) and you’ve taken control of the census, why the hell not? Now go shut those guys up!

We’ll just have to be each other’s Huckleberries.

Or, as Dalrymple suggests, put cameras on the leadership. Someone, after all, must guard the guardians.

UPDATE I: The just-passed Robert Novak said: “Always love your country — but never trust your government!”

Seems to me a lot of mediafolk used to think that way.

UPDATE II:
Read the summary and more when you have time.

But my father was not the customer; Medicare was. And although Medicare has experimented with new reimbursement approaches to drive better results, no centralized reimbursement system can be supple enough to address the many variables affecting the patient experience. Certainly, Medicare wasn’t paying for the quality of service during my dad’s hospital stay. And it wasn’t really paying for the quality of his care, either; indeed, because my dad got sepsis in the hospital, and had to spend weeks there before his death, the hospital was able to charge a lot more for his care than if it had successfully treated his pneumonia and sent him home in days.

Should be a must-read.

Related:
American Papist: Bishop Nickless Critically Evaluates Obamacare (H/T New Advent)
Yes, the goal: is to end private insurance
Obama’s 2 faces: Yes, he wants to protect you from your doctors
Our Incurious Press: Shameful Propagandists

Don’t Understand: what’s so hard to understand
Free Speech: We likes it
Refresher: NY Times: “Why We Must Ration Health Care”
Andy McCarthy: Palin was right, after all
Kaus: That’s some Plan B
Pavement Babies: Those wacky Brits & their Healthcare!
Gaius: Iceberg, straight ahead
JPod: Those Death Panels & Obama
James Pethokoukis: A Health Care Plan to Save a Presidency
Sisu: Gov’t Behaving Badly
Wesley J. Smith: We need more primary care doctors
Mona Charen: Canada, Health Care and More Less surgery
Frank J: Aren’t Obamites tired of calling people racists? More on that here and here, but read Frank’s last line.
WSJ: Why is Obama underwriting Offshore Oil Drilling for Brazil? Can we say “incoherent policies?”
Deacon Greg: More on Novak

"Brilliant. Despite lots of coffee, I just don't come up with such clarity of thought ..."

Pope Francis Has Set a Confrontation ..."
"While I haven't followed any of the brouhaha, I would like to say that what ..."

Pope Francis Sets a Confrontation in ..."
"I love Fr. Barron's take- miseria et miscordia, misery in mercy. Because mercy *requires* both ..."

Pope Francis Sets a Confrontation in ..."
"There is something positively medieval about the theologians letter. Sadly, not in the good sense ..."

Pope Francis Sets a Confrontation in ..."

Browse Our Archives