FWDAJ-Xtra: The Debut
by Roger Benningfield on Aug.21, 2009, under Podcast
Greetings, FWDAJ Fans. I’m Roger, Jane’s long-time friend and occasional political opposite. I promised her months ago that I would try to crank out a (relatively) brief, podcastic response to FWDAJ, and after much procrastination, I’ve finally followed through. Don’t know yet if there are more to come… we’ll see.
Needless to say, it’ll be a bit different than what you’re used to hearing here. Hope it isn’t an overwhelming shock to the system.
August 21st, 2009 on 9:54 pm
Fabulous Roger.
I intend to respond but it will take me til next week. You certainly have given Dick a run for his money.
August 24th, 2009 on 11:56 am
Okay Roger, I’ve had a chance to listen to you again – and it still didn’t piss me off. But I will remind you, you are not allowed to say “fuck you” on the radio.
I can barely read my notes, but let me try and respond point by point.
You seem to be under the impression that an “administrator’ is a doctor. He’s not. A government administrator, whether in Great Britain or Arkansas is a bureaucrat. There is a huge shortage of doctors in Great Britain and there will be here as well if the government takes over health care. First of all, there will be no incentive to go into medicine, and those who already have will undoubtedly look for greener pastures. Surely you don’t think that the 4th largest employer in the world – is actually employing doctors.
I didn’t read your London Times article, but I got my info from Daniel Hannan who is a member of the British Parliment,and should know.
As for the Town Hall guy who wanted a referendum, what makes you think he doesn’t know that it is not outlined in the Constitution? Watch out or I’ll starting listing all the errors about the Constitution made from our Constitutional-law- professor-president. BTW, last time I looked there is absolutely no authority in the Constitution for the government to take over 1/6th of the economy. If you can find it let me know.
In your attempt to spread the blame of the fiscal crisis past Barney Frank and onto Phil Graham, you forgot to mention that President Bush called for regulation of the financial markets in his state of the union address in 2006, and Barney Frank, in charge of that regulation told him essentially to pound sand. At that point, Phil Graham had been out of the senate for years.
I’m glad you brought up the death panels. Did you happen to see Chris Wallace catch Tally Duckworth in a lie yesterday about the VA death brochure? “Feeling depressed Lieutenant? Let me recommend the Hemlock society.”
With respect to government run healthcare, if they convene a death panel for you, there is no place to go. Under private healthcare you can find a new insurer, or pay for it yourself – even start a charity to pay for it if you need to. That doesn’t work for Government healthcare. If they want you gone, you will be gone.
Finally, you want the government to eliminate waste? Let them start with Medicare. Wake me when they’ve got it down to a manageable level. Of course more than likely, by then, you will be waking me from the dead.
If I ever get my own show, want to be a guest?
August 24th, 2009 on 2:17 pm
RE: “fuck”
That’s the advantage to not being on the radio.
RE: “You seem to be under the impression that an ‘administrator’ is a doctor.”
No… I think a health care administrator is a health care administrator, as in “masters degree in health care administration”. But the people crafting standards would be made up of both doctors and the aforementioned folks who specialize in running hospitals and large clinics.
RE: “what makes you think he doesn’t know that it is not outlined in the Constitution?”
Because I had two choices in interpretation: he’s a knowing hypocrite, or he’s ignorant. “Ignorant” seemed more charitable.
You can’t be both a Constitutional originalist *and* someone looking to overturn the Constitution just because you don’t like how an election went.
RE: “Watch out or I’ll starting listing all the errors about the Constitution made from our Constitutional-law- professor-president.”
Go ahead. Obama saying something stupid doesn’t make Town Hall Guy any smarter.
RE: “there is absolutely no authority in the Constitution for the government to take over 1/6th of the economy.”
Setting aside for the moment that I do not support a “take over”, and that I have not seen such a thing proposed… the interstate commerce provision pretty much allows Congress to do anything they want in a vast, networked, multinational economic environment.
RE: “In your attempt to spread the blame of the fiscal crisis past Barney Frank and onto Phil Graham”
You misunderstand. Without the Community Reinvestment Act, we don’t get where we ended up in 2008, and I seriously doubt Graham was ever in favor of the CRA. If we’re going to slather on blame, the folks who voted for it back in ‘77 deserve plenty. And yet, the CRA –by itself– is not a bad piece of legislation.
Meanwhile, despite the fact that I think rolling back Glass-Steagall *was* bad legislation, in isolation, it doesn’t create an ‘08 meltdown, either. You still need a Barney Frank and others to put temporary political concerns ahead of common sense to complete the puzzle.
My point is that it isn’t about one guy… it’s about a systemic failure.
RE: “With respect to government run healthcare, if they convene a death panel for you, there is no place to go.”
Again, “death panels” are fairy tales, particularly in the context of something convened for an individual. My point about private “death panels” was to illustrate that if you insist on calling a Federal health care reimbursement schedule based upon cost/benefit statistics a “death panel”, then you must use the same language when discussing the cost/benefit/profit statistics used by private insurers.
And as has been pointed out by folks actually working in government healthcare programs, there is *always* someplace else to go. That’s the nature of the beast… there’s always someone else to whom you can plead your case.
RE: “That doesn’t work for Government healthcare.”
Who says? Maybe I missed something (and I say that sincerely), but since when can people on Medicare not seek extended care financed by their families, churches, or whatever?
August 24th, 2009 on 8:59 pm
Roger,
I’m getting ready for tomorrow’s show so I can’t address everything, but IMO the Commerce Clause doesn’t allow for the takeover of health care. I know Obama couldn’t care less about that, and given his performance to date I’m not sure he even knows what the Commerce Clause is, but I think there is a legitimate question of whether the takeover is constitutional.