From: tcox@ssrl01.slac.stanford.edu (Tony Cox - (415)926-3105)
Newsgroups: talk.politics.medicine
Subject: Re: HIAA and Reform
Date: 14 Dec 92 14:20:00 -0800
Organization: SSRL, Stanford Synchrotron Radiation Lab
NNTP-Posting-Host: ssrl01.slac.stanford.edu

In article <50389@shamash.cdc.com>, rjv@a2.cim.cdc.com (Rene Valdes) writes:
> In article <1992Dec8.171033.1@ssrl01.slac.stanford.edu>,
> tcox@ssrl01.slac.stanford.edu (Tony Cox - (415)926-3105) writes:
> 
> |> > I find it perfectly fair to pay today my share of whatever it takes to
> |> > cover each American, regardless of my level of risk, so that I can rely
> |> > on having medical care later, when I really need it, for the same price.
> |> 
> |>    This sounds good. So you have found a health care plan which
> |>    meets you needs. Fine. How much are your premiums?
> 
> You misinterpreted me.  But I am not surprised.  Since you obviously
> are only able to think about yourself and your narrowly defined self-
> interest, you can't understand that someone would care about the fate
> of the poor, the elderly, and the ill.  I have definitely not found a
> plan that meets my long-term needs.  As is the case for most Americans.

   How on earth do you come to that conclusion? I have not _anywhere_
   in _any_ of my posts said _anything_ that could possibly support
   your attack. I have merely asked fundamental questions which all
   have the same root - what to _you_ intend to do with those people
   who dont want to be used as hapless pawns in your `caring' scenario.

   Your answer is plain. You want to force _me_, under penalty of law,
   to submit to _your_ scheme. Now you are attempting to raise a smoke
   screen by bringing in the poor, the elderly, and the sick. I havn't
   addressed indigent care. Seems to me that you are having enough
   trouble sticking to the point as it is, without diversifying into
   other areas.

   I'm not sure what picture you have of me. Actually, I live quietly.
   My girlfriend loves me, so do my dogs and cats. I used to do part
   time volunteer work for the elderly; now I help rescue sick animals.
   You don't have a monopoly on morality.

   What you _do_ appear to have is the fanatical belief that _you_ have
   the answers to what makes people happy, and goddamn it, you are
   going to _make_ them happy in _your_ way, like it or not. _And_ you
   want others to pay for it. I hate personal attacks, but you started
   it.


> 
> Fortunately, the American people are sick and tired of the health care
> crisis and have elected a president who is committed to do his best to 
> take care of it.  Under the Clinton administration, a health care plan 
> that meets the needs of the American people will become a reality.  I 
> will continue to do my best for this to happen sooner rather than later.
> 

   Hum. When the Clinton chariot comes galloping into the stadium on
   Jan 20th, laden with doctors, insurance agents, AIDS activists,
   flanked by politicians and tax collectors to fill in the details,
   please do something for me?
   Take time off from your fanatical cheering to give a thought for the
   poor twits in its path. For I see the wild eyes and flared nostrils,
   crazed with lust for power and money.

   And in '97, when President Pat Robinson removes federal funding for
   AIDS, abortion and contraception, where do _you_ intend to turn for _your_
   health care, with your single-payer national health plan?


Tony Cox, Stanford CA