Monday, July 13, 2009

Dennis Kucinich Acting Like Bill O'Reilly



Dennis Kucinich is a complete ass in this video. His point can be made without continually interrupting the witness who is simply trying to answer the question. Not to mention, Kucinich's final question is a bullshit one. It pre-supposes the cause of the high cost of health insurance in the United States is due to the insurance companies even though there are credible arguments that suggest the high cost of health insurance is a result of government intervention. Referring to biased government statistics doesn't help his argument any further. Anyone I have ever met in Canada that has needed elective surgery has had to wait much longer than 4 weeks.

A larger point is also being missed in the argument for national health-care in the US. Most innovations that have occurred in health care have occurred in the United States. This is directly related to the profit incentive (greed) that is an institution of free markets. Up until the late 60s, believe it or not, the US has an actual free-market health care system, and it was the greatest health care system in the world. The rest of the world, the socialized systems in Canada and Europe, greatly benefited in the past from the free-market system in the US; unfortunately the US system now just acts as a government-legislated money grab by insurance companies and the free market has been effectively eliminated while failing to provide even the level of health care socialized countries provide.

The United States government spends a greater portion of its budget every year on health care than any western country with socialized medicine and the American people get the least bang for their buck. People are pissed off. So incompetent government intervention will lead the way for further incompetent intervention.

14 comments:

Christopher said...

Going on the offensive does not = Bill O'Reilly, Josh. And his arugment is sound. Morons in the US regularly quote numbers about the Canadian system that do not exit in the Canadian system or that are taken out of context. Cheers, Kucinich.

And, no, before the HMOs there was not a golden age of free market health care. There were those who could afford it and those who could not, much like the system today, except now many of those who can afford it are being capitalized on by greedy insurance companies.

Christopher said...

Gratzer has been called out before for using crappy stats:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Gratzer

What a liar.

Josh said...

Not trying to defend Gratzer. I don't know anything about the guy other than the fact that he showed up to this hearing to be asked questions he wasn't given time to answer.

Typical leftist hypocrisy: criticize Bill O'Reilly when he shouts and interrupts his guests without allowing them to answer, pushing his own conclusions without substance; call it "going on the offensive" when one of your own does it.

I generally like Kucinich. In this video he was a big deutsche-bag though.

He should take a lesson on manners from his colleague, Dr. Paul :).

Christopher said...

No one criticizes O'Really because of his temper, though it is funny. People criticize O'Really because he makes stupid comments over and over again.

Gratzer is your typical O'Really clone who uses sophistry to hide his lack of knowledge. For example, when Kucinich asked him what the median, MEDIAN, waiting period for MRIs was, the pinhead tried to answer the question with sophistry. Kucinich did not ask what the median waiting time was for "certain cancers", but what the median waiting time for MRIs is.

Obviously these two don't like each other and obviously they have butted heads privately. What would have been outrageous would have Kucinich giving this guy respect. He is a lowlife sophistic who twists arguments to achieve his goals. People like this should be aggressively attacked. Cheers to Kucinich! Finally, a democrat going on the offensive.


No, Josh, polemic is not = to Bill O'Reilly. It has existed since the beginning of politics.

"Typical leftist hypocrisy: criticize Bill O'Reilly when he shouts and interrupts his guests without allowing them to answer, pushing his own conclusions without substance; call it "going on the offensive" when one of your own does it."

Kucinich was quoting Statscan, Josh. There was a shit load of substance. The problem is that the Gratzer guy is a sophist who can't answer the questions Kucinich straightly, because Gratzer doesn't give a shit if 50 million people don't have health insurance or if 1 in 4 insured American citizens don't get treated. He has to slightly change the subject, because he is a piece of shit O'Really clone.

Christopher said...

"I generally like Kucinich. In this video he was a big deutsche-bag though."

Douches are very useful.

Josh said...

LOL Everyone criticizes O'Reilly because of his temper, because he doesn't let his guests speaks, because he yells at them and over them. Because he pre-supposes conclusions in questions. Because of everything Kucinich does in this clip.

Kucinich continually asks, "How many insured americans go without needed care due to high cost of health care which is due to health insurance companies?" Before asking the question, First, Kucinich points out Gratzer is supposed to be an expert on the Canadian healthcare system, so why ask him a questions about the american? Second, the question is invalid. It suggests that the argument that the high cost of health care in the US is due to health insurance companies is fact, which it is not. Third, while asking this question he never gives Gratzer an opportunity to answer and continually speaks over him and interrupts him. Kucinich simply asked the question to hear himself speak in a disgraceful attempt to make Gratzer look bad.

If Gratzer is the tool you say he his, he'll make himself look bad simply by speaking; Kucinich doesn't have to pull an O'Reilly.

Furthmore, Kucinich continually quotes the "median" wait time for an MRI in Canada is. Who the fuck cares? The median is not important. The important stat is the MEAN plus or minus within a specific percentage of probability. The median serves no real meaning, but it sounds nice to those who don't understand statistics and make Kucinich feel smart. GOOD WORK!

Chris said...

"LOL Everyone criticizes O'Reilly because of his temper, because he doesn't let his guests speaks, because he yells at them and over them. Because he pre-supposes conclusions in questions. Because of everything Kucinich does in this clip."

No, they make fun of him for doing that. They despise and criticize him because he does that and is wrong. If he were right, it might be a bit of a different story. Usually, though, serious politicians reserve polemic for important issues at key times.

"Kucinich continually asks, "How many insured americans go without needed care due to high cost of health care which is due to health insurance companies?" Before asking the question, First, Kucinich points out Gratzer is supposed to be an expert on the Canadian healthcare system, so why ask him a questions about the american? Second, the question is invalid."

Not at all. Nope. Gratzer is a critic of the Canadian system, not an expert. If he criticizes the current Canadian system, he should have a) an alternative and b) knowledge of the alternatives. If he doesn't, he is either lying or incompetent.

" It suggests that the argument that the high cost of health care in the US is due to health insurance companies is fact, which it is not. Third, while asking this question he never gives Gratzer an opportunity to answer and continually speaks over him and interrupts him. Kucinich simply asked the question to hear himself speak in a disgraceful attempt to make Gratzer look bad."

It's a polemical speech. Don't be stupid.

The high costs are the result of patents, of a non-nationalized system. But that's not what is at issue. What is at issue is the INSURED Americans who are being DENIED care.

"If Gratzer is the tool you say he his, he'll make himself look bad simply by speaking; Kucinich doesn't have to pull an O'Reilly. "

It doesn't work that way. Libertards and conservacrites will bob their heads up and down in agreement with him, even though he is a retard. Yup, I agree, Kucinich had to blast this guy. He doesn't know the facts, he is a kind of virus that spreads disinformation.

"Furthmore, Kucinich continually quotes the "median" wait time for an MRI in Canada is. Who the fuck cares? The median is not important. The important stat is the MEAN plus or minus within a specific percentage of probability. The median serves no real meaning, but it sounds nice to those who don't understand statistics and make Kucinich feel smart. GOOD WORK!"

Actually, it is the median that allows statisticians to find a mean for skewed data, but that is beside the point. I am under no illusion. Kucinich is not a statistician, not should he be. He is merely reading some stats he found on Stats Can's website. Mean, median, it does not matter. Both stats show that the average wait is not that long.

Josh said...

"If he criticizes the current Canadian system, he should have a) an alternative and b) knowledge of the alternatives. If he doesn't, he is either lying or incompetent."

Watching that video you'd never know as he never has a chance to speak. Kucinich said he was an expert, not me. My point is, if Kucinich sees him as an expert of a Canadian system, why is he asking him questions of a system he is not an expert of. I'm not defending Gratzer.

"But that's not what is at issue. What is at issue is the INSURED Americans who are being DENIED care."

No, whats at issue HERE is whether or not Kucinich acted like a big deutsche bag; the obvious answer being yes, yes he did.

"Actually, it is the median that allows statisticians to find a mean for skewed data, but that is beside the point. I am under no illusion. Kucinich is not a statistician, not should he be. He is merely reading some stats he found on Stats Can's website. Mean, median, it does not matter. Both stats show that the average wait is not that long."

If Kucinich won't take the time to understand what he's saying, he shouldn't say it. This is another characteristic of O'Reilly.

Josh said...

The ends do not justify the means, ever.

Christopher said...

"Watching that video you'd never know as he never has a chance to speak. Kucinich said he was an expert, not me. My point is, if Kucinich sees him as an expert of a Canadian system, why is he asking him questions of a system he is not an expert of. I'm not defending Gratzer."

He rolled over him, because he is a liar. A proven liar. He lies and lies some more because he doesn't like paying taxes. I'm glad this little fucker was steamrolled.

"No, whats at issue HERE is whether or not Kucinich acted like a big deutsche bag; the obvious answer being yes, yes he did."

Nope, the only douches are those who critique the Canadian system without a firm understanding of the alternative. But, oh, wait! Gratzer did have an understanding! He just didn't want to answer because a) he knew the stats were true and b) he is a liar.

"If Kucinich won't take the time to understand what he's saying, he shouldn't say it. This is another characteristic of O'Reilly."

Nothing Kucinich said was wrong. Hew was right on the money. The median and mean waiting times in Canada are not as dramatic as the liars say it is. Sicko is a great example of a steamroll of the little fuckers.

It is not an end, Josh. It is called a polemic. And, yes, bitter polemics are justified when an opposing speaker knowingly distorts the truth. This Gratzer fuck head is one of them.

Josh said...

"He rolled over him, because he is a liar. A proven liar. He lies and lies some more because he doesn't like paying taxes. I'm glad this little fucker was steamrolled."

I wouldn't know if he's a liar. He didn't have a chance to speak.

"Nope, the only douches are those who critique the Canadian system without a firm understanding of the alternative. But, oh, wait! Gratzer did have an understanding! He just didn't want to answer because a) he knew the stats were true and b) he is a liar."

Great defense of Kucinich! Oh wait...you didn't really defend him...you just claimed he was right and that the other guy was a moron...are you pulling an O'Reilly?

"The median and mean waiting times in Canada are not as dramatic as the liars say it is. Sicko is a great example of a steamroll of the little fuckers."

The mean waiting time serves no purpose in the context he brought it up other than to fool those who are ignorant of statistics. If the mean isn't that bad, use it, otherwise he's lieing or he's ignorant.

Yea...Michael Moore...that's a fantastic source of reliable data...I typically like to use propagandists to support my arguments too.

Christopher said...

"I wouldn't know if he's a liar. He didn't have a chance to speak."

He has a history, which is why Kucinich steamrolled him. You not knowing is irrelevant.

"Great defense of Kucinich! Oh wait...you didn't really defend him...you just claimed he was right and that the other guy was a moron...are you pulling an O'Reilly?"

Do you really want to go over the questions that Kucinich asked? There is only one answer to each of them. No buts. Buts are second.

The mean waiting time serves no purpose in the context he brought it up other than to fool those who are ignorant of statistics. If the mean isn't that bad, use it, otherwise he's lieing or he's ignorant."

Nope. I'm pretty sure the median and mean are not that different.

http://www1.gnb.ca/0217/surgicalwaittimes/index-e.aspx

75% of surgeries are performed within 3 months in New Brunswick. Since most cancers are PROCESSES, this makes sense. Cancers generally develop in stages, which means there is a logical waiting time..

Yea...Michael Moore...that's a fantastic source of reliable data...I typically like to use propagandists to support my arguments too.

Christopher said...

http://gov.ns.ca/health/waittimes/data/diagnostic/breastBiopsy.asp

80% of women who need a biopsy have one done within 60 days. That's not fucking bad considering that the ENTIRE NATION is covered and that cancer is a PROCESS.

Christopher said...

Like to know which part of Sicko was false, Josh. Can you tell me?