Vodpod videos no longer available.
I was disappointed in Jon Stewart of the Daily Show and where he took this interview. What was the point? Why didn’t he assemble a few people including Ms. McCaughey and change the language so that it was crystal clear and everyone was satisfied?
I don’t know why he didn’t ask her a few days prior to the interview to rewrite the section she was unhappy with instead of wasting time arguing about misconceptions.
He could have also invited the actual person who wrote the bill and inquired what was meant by these words, what were the real intentions and if he/she would kindly read Ms. McCaughey’s revisions. That would have been the clear and logical thing to do. All Jon Stewart did was fall into the same old rhetoric, a circle jerk. How did this serve anyone?
I realize the Daily Show is entertainment, but this wasn’t funny nor did it push the conversation forward which as a regular viewer I think Jon Stewart would have wanted this to go.
Further on in the interview Ms McCaughey stated she wants everyone in the US covered by health care – that is a good thing and was nice to know. Why was Jon looking for an argument with someone who actually stated she cares?
Another contentious topic and something that could have been discussed is our endless concern with the costs of health care. This is the wealthiest nation on earth we have all the resources we need why can’t we give every single American the best Health Care in the world?
We don’t need to compare the US to other nations – we can certainly take examples of what works best from other countries, but we can make it work even better for us. This ridiculous banter from Republicans and the Private Insurance Companies calling caring for human beings Socialized Medicine and stopping at the examples of what doesn’t work or has failed elsewhere is mendacious. It manipulates the dialog and serves only lies and false exaggerations. Statistics are there to help correct, they don’t end at our failings.
On the topic of a system that will be inundated with greed or maliciousness, most people in this nation still have some semblance of right and wrong, if some professional along the way abuses the system stiff laws and penalties can be directly carried out. We already have many of these laws on the books that allow us to follow though.
However, the elephant in the room, what lies underneath all the hyperbole and where the real argument should be concerns the topic of profit. A person should never make a profit off the health and well being; the suffering and death of another human being, that’s slavery. Private Insurance Companies are concerned with risk not service and that is nothing short of gambling on human life. It is barbaric, uncivilized and I believe a good argument can be made that profiting off the existence of another human being is unconstitutional.
I also believe that a doctor, surgeon, nurse, all health care workers should be paid a fair wage based on their expertise and success with a broad spectrum of people. It’s unethical for a person to go into medicine just for money. There are plenty of ways to reward people for their efforts though respect and celebration. Money as the only motivating factor is a low ambition and doesn’t rank high in character and a person of low character should never be trusted with the life of another human being. This is common sense.
Hypertension is the number one killer in the US, this disease is a clear indicator that we need a shift in our values, to work towards putting an end to the rat race. That effort alone will reduce stress along with the other diseases that hypertension encourages and ultimately the costs of health care. This shift will also serve to remind us that we are not merely producers and consumers, but civilized upright human beings, not rats.
note: One of the foremost advocates of expanding Medicare end-of-life planning coverage is Johnny Isakson, a Republican Senator from Georgia. He co-sponsored 2007’s Medicare End-of-Life Planning Act and proposed an amendment similar to the House bill’s Section 1233 during the Senate HELP Committee’s mark-up of its health care bill. I reached Sen. Isakson at his office this afternoon. He was befuddled that this had become a question of euthanasia, termed Palin’s interpretation “nuts,” and emphasized that all 50 states currently have some legislation allowing end-of-life directives. A transcript of our conversation follows. more