Paging Dr. Hillcare…
This photo of a Hillary campaign supporter in New Hampshire on Yahoo! News caught my eye. Does the doll look familiar?
It’s Dr Hillcare! Talk about a blast from the past. The collectible doll–a draft guard that you stuff under your door to protect against chill winds–was first sold in 1993 by a conservative company during the Hillarycare debacle. Now, Hill’s people have appropriated Dr. Hillcare for their own.
Speaking of retro-universal health care nightmares, the WSJ takes a look at HillaryCare vs. ObamaCare. You’ll remember that on Saturday she tried to out-liberal Obama by lambasting his lack of a so-called “individual mandate.” The WSJ diagnoses Hill’s strategy–and what GOP candidates must do:
For “progressives,” Mr. Obama’s lack of a mandate is a kind of betrayal. Their political goal is to use incremental steps to gradually achieve a government-run health-care system — and Mr. Obama’s steps aren’t grand enough.
At least by comparison to Mrs. Clinton. Her attacks are intended to appeal to liberals because they highlight one of the few cases where her triangulating produced a policy position more ambitious, and more leftward, than Mr. Obama’s. They also highlight her history as an agent of “change,” if you consider Mrs. Clinton’s calamitous 1994 failure with HillaryCare to be helpful experience. She’s betting that Democratic primary voters will give her credit for having tried.
The new liberal consensus is that her 1994 effort got the policy right but botched the politics. Now a progressive agenda will only be ushered in by “confronting” Republicans. That’s why Mrs. Clinton — and John Edwards — posits insurance and pharmaceutical companies as villains who must be vanquished for liberal reform to prevail. By contrast, Mr. Obama says a genuine health-care overhaul must be negotiated at a “big table” including industry. Such feints toward bipartisanship and reconciliation don’t appeal to today’s angry left.
However it turns out, this less than Grand Guignol ought to provide a warning to Republicans. Whatever the minor policy differences among Democrats, their major domestic ambition this campaign season is the government takeover of the health-care market. The Republican nominee will need a free-market alternative, and a way of explaining it that is more concise and compelling than we’ve heard so far.
See what others have said
Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.
Trackbacks
- Michelle Malkin » Maybe Chelsea should have kept quiet
- Michelle Malkin » SC Democrat debate: Punch, Judy, and Silky; Update Squabbling, mud-slinging, the gloves are off!
- Michelle Malkin » The swan song of Hillary Rodham Clinton?; Update:Clinton and Obama are now against the Secure Fence Act they both voted for; Update: Hillary snarks on Obama’s “words that you can Xerox;” Update: Hillary gets shrie
Comments
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Categories: Health care, Hillary Clinton
Gates of Vienna
» The Two Sides of America Observe July 4th
Gates of Vienna
» Schoolboys Punished for Refusing to Pray to Allahprotein wisdom
» Obama’s European Fans [Dan Collins]Redstate
» What Did You Do on Independence Day?TigerHawk
» RubeWatch: The Pivot!Stop The ACLU
» Jesse Helms aka ‘Senator No’, Dies at 86protein wisdom
» Polling patriotism for Independence Day [Karl]Pajamas Media
» Jesse Helms 1921-2008
We have the “Bill Clinton - Draft Evader” my husband got it out last night, it is even in the original box. This is from the first presidential race against Bush 41. I asked my husband if he was thinking about selling it and he said no way.
My point about bringing out this Dr hillcare there is a matching doll for her husband that isn’t at all flattering and maybe not such a great idea to remind people of Bill Clinton’s detractions. I mean if Hillary is going to run on Bill’s coat tails…well
Why is it that every time Hill’s health care comes up I feel a sharp lingering pain in my rear end?
Count me among the progressives who are angry about the lack of an individual mandate in Obama’s plan. It’s one of the primary reasons I support Senator Clinton.
An individual mandate sounds really scary, but it really isn’t. Governor Romney had no problem signing one into law in Massachusetts (it hasn’t gone into effect there yet).
This caught my eye:
That at least suggests that the current system isn’t working. I’ll be all ears if someone on either side of the aisle proposes this free-market alternative. But the system is so broken that any minor cosmetic changes won’t be enough.
But, yeah, that’s a pretty sweet HRC doll. I love old timey things like that. Maybe when Jeb runs in 2012 people will start breaking out the Bush dunce caps again.
Is it my butt or my wallet aching, or both?
ISN’T THAT WHAT ‘CHANGE’ IS ALL ABOUT. She has now accepted what was once a criticism. And to go back to the 90’s….oh so Clinton. Change my a.s.
Did anyone else see the CNN New Hamshire poll go from “Obama 33% - Clinton 33%” to
“Obama 38% - Clinton 28%” in less than twelve hours yesterday on Drudge?!
Was this CNN playing around with numbers, a misprint, or my eyes playing tricks?
Maybe if those that can afford insurance, but don’t pay it, were made to pay for it, then that would be an alternative to start with.
Oh wait…that would deny them the houses and cars they can’t afford either.
Which I think makes a great case for why universal health care is such a necessity. When it comes time to make the hard decisions on what can be afforded and what can’t, people are going to want the roof on their heads (and one of the few expensive things that usually appreciate in value…homes create wealth) and a vehicle to get to the store and to work.
One of the pleasures of universal health insurance is that the influx of customers makes insurance cheaper for those with and those without that safety net. The burden on those who can barely afford it now will be eased.
I am still trying to find a clause the in the Constitution of the US anything that allows the federal government to run, and especially to mandate, a federal government health care scheme. (I can’t find anything for Social Security either, but no one is going to touch that.)
For Rusty (#3), I don’t know what the Commonwealth of Massachusetts’s constitution says–it my allow the sort of mandate that Gov. Romney signed. States have more freedom on these matters than the federal government does.
Hillary and “chill winds”. You have to love the irony of the intended purpose of this item and the cold socialist rhetoric she spews on socialized healthcare and other topics. ROFLMAO
Rusty, in #8 you point out that people have a hard decision to make regarding the choices of health care, or a roof over their head.
The way I interpretted Tennessee Dave’s comment was that many people have overextende themselves by acquiring luxuries they really couldn’t afford, not that they were sturggling for basic housing, etc.
You have a point, for some people it may come down to a difficult choice. It has been my observation, however, that many people choose no health insurance becaue they would rather spend the money on something else, not that they are genuinely tapped out. I, for one, would not like to see universal health care for people that made the deliberate choice to pass it up.
Bingo SHoward.
Where does personal responsibility come in? Why should people who spend $3000 on a TV get a pass on health care? How about $30,000 on a vehicle when you can get a decent vehicle for half that amount? As long as people think they will get free health care, they will work to that end.
No, socialized medicine is for the birds.
Oh, sure, there are stories of Americans flying to India because it is cheaper. They are outnumbered 100/1 by the Canadians who come here for an MRI or CT scan because they have to wait extended periods of time.
Expand our government into health care and it will go the route of the IRS. They will create a beast that will be too big to kill later.
To SHoward,
That is how I meant it.
#8 Rusty said:
One of the pains is that the influx of customers makes service scarcer and more likely to be not there when you need it.
Also, an influx of customers (demand) tends to limit healthcare (supply) and therefore makes healthcare more expensive, not cheaper.
Unless you are referring to governments which artificially cap prices at certain levels (thereby artificially increasing demand and diminishing supply to black market levels)I don’t follow your economic model that alledges: increased demand for limited supply actually lowers price.
Your model certainly doesn’t work in England or Canada.
This is pure crap Rusty.
With 250M people being responsible and purchasing health care, the price is as low as its going to go in the current market dynamics. We need a free market across state borders so that the insurance companies have to compete so I can go buy insurance from a company in Iowa if it provides me with better features and/or price.
That doll looks more like Martha Stewart in prison garb.
And the Dems were b|tching about conditions at Walter Reed? The military health care system is “socialized medicine”, and they had those deplorable conditions at one of the finest medical facilities in the world. Just imagine taking that and making the kind of system the military has into a national thing. The government just can’t do it. Seems like every week, I hear more horror stories coming out of other nations’ socialized medicine. The latest were 2 stories from the UK’s Daily Mail about doctors lying on death certificates to hide the true number of British patients who die of infections that are the direct result of unsanitary conditions, and the other about the “devolution” of the NHS there, where, depending on which system you are in, the care you receive goes from bad to worse… Right now, I am uninsured because I am underemployed and no longer a college student (where I paid out-of-pocket for the group health insurance). However, if I get sick (earaches, bronchitis), I go to the local walk-in clinic and pay for it myself, not to the local emergency room to let the taxpayer pick up the tab…
Amen, mngirl.
And, funny how the Dems leave out the fact that a bunch of those “uninsured Americans” aren’t Americans at all, but illegal aliens…
Unfortunately this universal health care is catching on. The Colorado legislature is trying to force it upon the citizens of Colorado. A health care system that is paid for by the people , covering everybody regarless of citizenship or personal preferance.
Forcing government controled healthcare concepts on people and forceing them into one system that only favors a lack of care.
The second picture of Dr. Hillcare looks like Hillary in a straitjacket in a padded cell. A harbinger?
Rusty:
Read between the lines of this article from the Daily Mail (UK) and think about it.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=506512&in_page_id=1770
Do you REALLY want some govenment pencil pusher deciding what treatment you can get; when you can get it; or IF your “lifestyle” PERMITS you to get it???
Someone told me once that healthcare represented approximately 1/7th of our economy. Do you really think it’s a good idea to nationalise our economy to that extent?
The UK went socialist after WWII and nationalised much of their economy. The entire nation, and everyone in it, suffered for many years. High taxes; long waits for medical care; Businesses deciding to move production elsewhere because of extreme taxation; High unemployment due to lack of jobs. Shall I go on?
It took Margret Thatcher to undue SOME of what had been wrought by liberals/socialists. In the UK it’s still not completely undone. Do you REALLY want the US to go down this same path???
Think about it!
Yeah people have to wait in line longer in Canada. But at least those people have insurance. The extra wait is more than worth it to the people who wouldn’t have gone to the doctor in the first place without insurance.
As for the economics, universal health care would absolutely make health care cheaply. Say what you want about England and Canada, but they spend far less per person than the United States on health.
I’m not going to argue that Canadian health care doesn’t have its flaws. It has some big ones that American legislators will certainly avoid (namely this). But getting people insured should be America’s number one domestic priority. People giving birth in emergency rooms and avoiding doctor’s to their detriment because of cost concerns is embarrassing to me as an America. We can do better.
What total nonsense. Insurance has nothing to do with cost drivers in the healthcare industry. Insurance providers are financial intermediaries that exist to reimburse beneficiaries for the expenses they incur.
Rusty:
Why does your solution have to be “Universal” (i.e. from the Federal Government). Why not let the states (and their individual citizens) decide what’s right for them? If, for example, Montana decides they don’t want to offer insurance, they don’t have to. But, if New York decides that it does want to offer it they can?
I’m not saying I support such a plan, but offer the question to see your reasoning.
I’m currently doing battle with two separate government agencies over the treatment of a patient. Trust me, you don’t want government bureaucrats making your health care decisions. Bureaucrats love to make guidelines to follow for treatment. Imagine what happens if you or a loved one happen to fall outside the guideline? You don’t get treated and if the priovider treats you anyway they attempt to take his license away. Just say no to socialized medicine. And be leary of “outcome based” medicine as not everyone fits into the “outcome based” box.
I once asked my dentist why the British had such awful teeth. He said it was their
health care system. In order to have dental work performed, there had to be so
many “points” built up by the person needing the dental work. In other words,
the points were all used in routine maintenance and perhaps fillings, therefore,
you had no extra points for braces, etc. This is just one of the perks of socialized
medicine. As someone said, “If we have socialized medicine, where will the
Canadians go for health care”?
Socialized medicine would also cover illegals who have already taxed our health
care systems and dollars to the limit.
Why is that a virtue? If healthcare is a superior good, then it’s entirely reasonable to expect wealthier nations (and wealthier individuals) to spend more on healthcare than their poorer contemporaries.
TexasTiger:
EXACTLY!!!
If it wasn’t so sad, it would be hilarious to watch liberals espouse that less $$ for government run healthcare = greatness but turn around and argue that less $$ for government run schooling = evil.
I often wonder if there is any point in which these loonies will realize their inconsistencies, or (gasp!) learn something about economics…
While I am no fan of socialized medicine, I believe you mischaracterized the problem at Walter Reed. Walter Reed’s problems centered on the poor quality of the non-medical care (i.e., billeting, board processing times). The affected soldiers had nothing but high praise for the medical treatment they received.
I now must fully disclose: I am Type 1 diabetic. I also suffer hypertension. Actually, my new Doc here in SoCal has me on a plethora of crap. Two types of insulin, a third injectable and an oral, all for Diabetes. Then there’s the other junk….
Here’s my point: by paying for coverage through my company, I have the ability to acquire everything I need. Yes, sometimes I must pay completely out of pocket. But I can get it.
One of the many provisions of Hillary-care was that all pharmicies and clinics and MD’s and hospitals and everything else in medicine would fall under the government’s control. Then they could decide how much insulin I need. I absolutley do not trust the pinheads in governemtn to decide for me what I need.
As it is now, if my doctor thinks I should try something, but my insurance won’t cover it, I can still buy it. Under a governemtn solution, I likely couldn’t.
I really don’t feel like going black market for insulin and syringes.
I hear you, Rusty. Perhaps there is a better path we can find, but I strongly object to any solution giving the government too much control over care and medicine distribution.
So, you are saying that a person who has cancer should have to wait? That IS what is happening in Canada. How long is too long? Is an aggressive cancer given a higher priority than a non-aggressive type? Suppose you are stage 4 with a non-aggressive cancer? Do you get priority over someone who is stage one with an aggressive form. You want a pencil pusher to decide for you? These pencil pushers are the front line in your system. If you have never had to deal with the government, let me give you a clue.
Soap: “I need…”
Government employee who is sitting at the first desk: “No.” The end.
Don’t tell me that will not happen because I have lived it. Under the Americans with Disabilities Act, I was entitled to get benefits but I had the wrong skin color. To this day, I am still not able to get benefits and it sickens me to go to those government offices to apply and I can’t get past the front desk while “persons of color” go in and out.
You may think it okay to wait. Let’s hope someday you do not have a child with needs under a socialized system and you have to fight for him/her. Your tune will change.
P.S. I paid my bills not you and everyone else. I even sold my Corvette convertible to pay my bills. That, my friend, is how you do it.
I hate the idea of universal healthcare because as a believer in free markets and Ayn Randian objectivism, I don’t believe or like helping people in need.
Screws up the natural order.
Rusty,
No matter how sub-standard the care, the long waiting lines, lack of MRIs and other crucial diagnostic imaging machines that Canadians have to deal with, you somehow see a pot of gold at the end of the socialized medicine rainbow. You amaze me.
I will admit, though, I’ve been waiting for an eye appointment now for 2 months. Thankfully, it’ll be next week (and the swelling is way down).
Funny doll.
The R candidate should draft me to help formulate their health care policy. I’ve got the solution. Focus on controlling COSTS and you don’t have to worry too much about government intervention.
The HSA accounts are a step in the right direction, but the people need to be educated on it. I intend to work to educate people to sell them policies, but it needs to be more than just ‘consumer driven health care’ through Health Savings Accounts.
There are simple solutions that would have a broad impact. I recommend the R candidate hire me on this policy issue.
That’s not hard to do when you ration/withhold care. It’s a lot cheaper to let folks die on waiting lists than to actually provide them with the treatment they need.
Exactly. Canadian family I know had a family member with cancer. He wasn’t allowed a standard (in the US) treatment because the Canadian government considered it “experimental” - i.e., it was more expensive. He couldn’t come to the US for treatment, because he didn’t have insurance, he had nannycare. He died.
One reason your doctor has to charge you a lot, is that he/she is paying a small fortune in insurance premiums. Tort reform would reduce that cost. But most legislators are lawyers, and no one wants to close that stye (oink once if you agree with me John Edwards).
In Los Angeles, doctors in hospitals are paid a premium if they speak Spanish. I wonder why?
Native Americans have Federal healthcare, how good is that?
Tax deductions for health costs are - oh yeah, so low they might as well be none existent.
The package of your lifetime needs to be sent somewhere - do you want the US Mail or FedEx? Same with your health.
Nor do you want an HMO to make that decision. The government is the lesser of two evils.
I’m not talking about government expense. I’m talking about personal expense. It’s apples and oranges. So, less personal spending on health care by consumers would be fantastic. Same for public schooling.
Does Rusty realize that the US hospitals have upheld the socialist healthcare dream in Canada by serving as overflow lots? How many more Canadian babies have to be born in the US because of lack of space in their home country?! When our hospitals are full, then who do we turn to?
Socialism is great when you have a backup plan (i.e. the US), but not great when you have to make it on your own.
John Edwards made his fortune suing the pants off a company whose product was disemboweling children. What a bastard.
When a doctor takes out the wrong kidney or when an amusement ride cuts off a girl’s feet…are you going to be the one to tell them that your body parts worth has to be capped at only $250,000?
There is nothing about free markets that says you can’t help people in need. It’s your money(for now at least), you can do what you want with it. But there is nothing moral and just about stealing money from the hard working producers in this country to subsidize the lazy, or those who would rather buy plasma tvs instead of taking care of their family’s basic needs.
I pay out of my pocket for health insurance.
It makes me madder the hell to see illegals getting equal treatment not to mention waiting in “line”.
Those that pay should get to be first in line.
Rusty, perhaps you need to have a sick child, wife, etc., and have to pay not only for your family’s health care, but those that do not work too.
Tell me, what’s fair about that?
Why don’t you just give all your money to those that won’t work OR are here illegally.
Then preach to us about how great it is.
#3 Randy ignores the reason there are disconnects and price issues in the current health scene - government interferrence in the market place.
A couple years ago the government declared that gov. employee health insurance must provide equal costs and benefit maximums for mental health as for physical health (broken bones). That dictates what occurs in the marketplace. A doctor can tell you exactly how much it will cost and exactly how long it will take to mend a broken bone. You will never get such from a psycho babbler. So.. broken bone = $800, depression = $???,???,???.00. My monthly insurance has gone from $248 a month to $524 a month in one year. Same medical facilities, same doctors, same insurance.
There’s you problem. Why does it have to be either of the two?
I wouldn’t say government is the lesser of two evils though. Then again, I’m not beholden to government like some people.
it amazes me that people piss and moan about how inadequate our gov’t is, in education, fixing a pothole, garbage pickup, etc….but then are willing to give the gov’t yet another function to preside over.
this is yet another instance of people thinking the grass is greener on the other side. only, we have evidence that the other side (gov’t healthcare) is nothing but sand. the care deteriorates and the lines get longer…that’s it. if you doubt that, go to any free clinic in any city in this country.
If the amusement ride was considered health care yes.
In the doctor’s case, yes, no offense, but if there was a standard payout for mistakes, eliminating all the legal costs associated with reaching that figure would reduce the cost of medical care. If your legal team charges $1 million, then you want $3 million, and the doctor’s legal team is charging him $3 million and the hispital’s legal team is charging them $5 million, and …if we paid the guy with one kidney $2 million right off the standard error payout spreadsheet we’d still save. Why do you only propose $250k? Since you trust the government with your health so much, let some government employee decide your payout.
And yeah, John Edwards wanted to do good, and ended up doing well, very well…
We may not have to worry about “Hillarycare”. I just saw on Drudgereport.com that Hillary may be withdrawing from the race. I’m surprised I haven’t seen anything on here considering how the same thing about Fred Thompson was posted here. I love Michelle, but I just didn’t agree with that.
Rusty, where do you think the government gets its money? Unlike apples and oranges it all comes from the same place, the citizens. All government expenditures are in the end a personal expense for those that pay taxes.
The problem with this statement is that the HMO is a product you purchase. Don’t like the product, don’t purchase it and find one that has the coverage you like.
I was working in the Long Term Care setting (Nursing Home) and saw first hand patients abused because of bureaucrats demanding effective treatments be halted to meet government guidelines. The last person on earth I want involved in deciding what medical treatment I want is a government bureaucrat.
I really don’t understand why Universal Healthcare has to be the only solution for making health insurance affordable for all. Those on the left only want to talk Government controlled healthcare, when there are many examples in the world that this is not the answer. This is a republic, the answers to our problems will not be solved by handing it to the Government to control, rather by free thought, ingenuity and the free market. This is what the USA was founded on and should continue to be so.
The government is not the lesser of two evils, it is pure evil.
Fact is that only physicians and patients can make healthcare decisions. Financial intermediaries, such as HMOs, can make decisions about what they are contractually obligated to reimburse beneficiaries. That’s a financial decision, not a medical decision.
Having established that, I’d rather deal with a financial intermediary that has to compete for my business rather than with a monolithic, monopolistic government agency staffed by civil servants.
Go figure.
Why is it, like many Canadian and British citizens, that people think Hillarycare or Obamacare will be free? All that will be done is switch from a free market insurance to a gov’t messed up insurance. Payment will still be deducted from the paycheck…in some cases, more, if the employer paid for it. One is called a deduction, the other is called a tax. Who do you really think will pay for it? One way or the other, we still pay for it. One, voluntary, the other mandatory. My wallet is still grabbed, either way. Seeing the effect of socialized medicine in Canada, and Europe, I am very concerned.
Everybody here has had to deal with people in both the private sector as well as government agencies for various services. Which are the more helpful and willing to go the extra mile? I’d say those in the private sector, by a long shot. Ever try to get a government bureaucrat to give information or help that is not on their approved list/job description? The best you will ever get is “call this number”, if you are lucky. Never do you get “let me look into that for you.” The private sector is not perfect but if I feel I’ve been mistreated by a private company, I can and do take my business elsewhere. What option do we have with govt. agencies?
jsr, no options. You’re stuck. Let’s say you develop a cancer. You go to your doctor, see a specialist on a referral, see a surgeon, get it treated and home again, in 1-2 months. Now, in Canada or Britain, to see a specialist is a 20-26 week wait. Surgery wait is app. 10-12 months. That’s why cancer deaths are so high there and why Canadians come here and Brits go to India. Another point on so called “free healthcare”. Like socialized countries, ERs are packed with non-emergency patients, who find it a bother to go to a GP. Since care is “free”, every sneeze, ache, and stuffy nose is a trip to a doctor. Over New Year’s in Britain, there were ambulance calls every 8 seconds…mostly for passed out and binge drinking drunks.
Why can’t it be a choice? Those like Rusty can go ahead and have the government take care of their healthcare. And I can pay for the healthcare I choose, whether it be HMO, PPO, etc….
I will even accept that part of my taxes will go to help Rusty and his friends on the left go to the clinic for their care.
Texas Tiger~
I guess I should have taken a little more time to clarify re: WRMC. I know the care there is top-notch. But my point was, that hospital is being run by a government entity with (presumably) some sort of budget it is required to stay within. As a result, some of the facilities were in a deplorable state. And this with a (relatively speaking) small “customer base” of military patients. Now, take the governmentally mandated budget with a exponentially larger “customer base” (every American and all the illegals, too), and many things that are taken care of in private hospitals and clinics today (like janitorial staffing) will be cut or eliminated. And that is just one thing that will be cut. I know I don’t want to go to a dirty hospital…
I’m going to take a minute to go find the piece David Asman of Fox News Channel wrote after his wife suffered a stroke while they were vacationing in London and post the link after I do (as well as links to those UK Daily Mail articles I mentioned (I think on this thread?).
From David Asman:
An Up Close and Personal Taste of Socialized Medicine
And from the Daily Mail:
How doctors lie on death certificates to hide the true scale of the toll from hospital infections
Devolution has created four different NHS systems - and England is ‘poor relation’
Another link on socialized medicine.
http://socglory.blogspot.com/