Ted Cruz, future candidate for US prez ...

will renounce his birthright to "soshalist" benefits and advantages that his family members fully exploited when they lived in Canada, where little Ted was born.

Senator Cruz is leading a crusade to repeal Obamacare because it smacks of socialism even though it expands health-care insurance coverage to millions of Americans.

The petition on his website reads: “I do NOT support socializing health care in America. I understand that, in every other nation that has socialized health care, the result has predictably been poorer quality health care, a crushing tax burden, scarcity and rationing, and complete government control of individual medical decisions.”

You’d think that a Canadian citizen who was born in a Canadian “socialist” hospital would know better.

By late 1970 when Ted was born, Alberta had finally joined the national medicare plan. The Cruzes would have received all medical care, including delivery of baby Ted, for next to nothing. Even before 1970, the Alberta government had provided free maternity care under a version of health-care insurance known at the time as Manning Care.

And despite what Cruz says about complete government control of individual health decisions, I am sure his mother got to choose the obstetrician and pediatrician she wanted and that no one would have interfered with the decisions taken by her and those doctors.

But then again if you were born in Canada but you want to be president of the United States it’s important to shuck that left-wing taint.

And you certainly wouldn’t want anyone to know that you actually benefitted from all that socialism.

So, renouncing one's Canadian citizenship is easy-peasy, not so much US citizenship which is time-consuming and requires a lot of form-filling as well as forking money over to Uncle Sam.   

Less facile for Cruz is that inconvenient bit about NOT being physically born in the US, which is constitutionally required of all presidents.

Among critics of Barack Obama, there is a whole lunatic contingent known as "birthers" because they claim that the current POTUS isn't a legal natural-born citizen, that his birth certificate is fraudulent.

Confused yet?

This should be helpful, for understanding the issues.

Many hope that the place of birth question will disqualify Cruz, as some think that he's a more dangerous Joe McCarthy.


 

Harper Government Has Angered the CMA

Remember this?

That scene, a physician disrupting a CPC government event or interrupting a Harper Cabinet Minister, occured several times as Bill C-31 with provisions that reduce the quality of healthcare that refugees could receive when in medical crisis, is challenged.

The Canadian Medical Association's annual general council meeting is currently being held in Yellowknife. Yesterday it passed this motion.

[...] delegates called on the federal government to reject attempts by a Conservative backbench MP to amend the Criminal Code [...]

“This constitutes the criminalization of abortion or any form of contraception,” said Dr. Geneviève Desbiens, a urologist from Valleyfield, Que.

“This change could even prevent a pregnant woman from travelling or taking certain drug treatments,” she said.

Dr. Desbiens also warned that doctors who counsel or provide abortion services could become criminals.

Currently, subsection 223(1) of the Criminal Code states that a fetus “becomes a human being within the meaning of this Act when it has completely proceeded, in a living state, from the body of its mother…”

Stephen Woodworth, a Conservative MP from Kitchener-Centre has tabled a private member’s bill to have the part of the Code changed. Motion M-312 is slated to go to a vote in Parliament this fall.

The CMA, which represents the country’s 76,000 physicians, interns, residents and medical students, has a policy saying that abortion is an ethically acceptable medical practice as long as the fetus is not viable.

Dr. Robin Saunders, a family physician from Sooke, B.C., and chair of the group’s ethics committee said M-312 is a “backdoor path to enacting restrictions on abortion.” The CMA has a long history of supporting free choice.

The CMA has called as well for

a full diagnosis of the health and environmental effects of natural resource development — particularly in Alberta’s oilsands — as a national debate continues to rage over energy issues.

Delegates to the Canadian Medical Association’s annual general council meeting overwhelmingly endorsed a resolution asking for public and timely access to all government and industry data on the potential human health effects of “natural resource extraction projects.”

Physicians also backed a call for better monitoring of the environmental and health impacts of such initiatives.

Whether there is any effect from the oilsands is unclear, but the issue has become “a hugely emotional and highly politicized” one, Yellowknife physician Dr. Ewan Affleck said Wednesday.

“When our patients come to us and say, ‘Everyone in our community is getting cancer and we’re scared,’ we’re not sure what to answer,” Affleck said. “Maybe they’re right, maybe they’re wrong. There hasn’t been clarity.

“All we’re asking for — it’s not a blameworthy thing — is our hope to just have data in order to provide effective care to our patients, because it’s unclear whether there is a health effect.”

Members of the Harper government have also been singled for scrutiny on public health issues: Kenney - as mentioned and MP Kellie Leitch for her support of asbestos export.

The Minister will be disrupted ... members of the Conservative government will be distupted ... by Canadian doctors across this country.

If the video above cannot be viewed here, please go to the youtube page where it was posted. There were nation-wide protests organized by doctors last week to protest Harper's cuts.

From The Edmonton Journal:

An Edmonton doctor says people will die if planned cuts to refugee health benefits go ahead.

"It would be hard to imagine how that wouldn't happen," said Dr. Stan Houston, a professor of medicine and public health at the University of Alberta.

The Interim Federal Health Program, which provides temporary health insurance to refugee applicants who aren't eligible for provincial or territorial coverage, will be pared back, starting June 30.

The program will no longer include vision, dental or supplemental health benefits for asylum seekers. Most pharmaceutical benefits will also dry up.

Some claimants will still have access to hospital services, doctors and nurses, ambulances and medications or vaccines in urgent or essential situations.

Others, including those whose claims have been rejected, will have access to services only to "prevent or treat a disease posing a risk to the public health or a condition or public safety concern."

In Edmonton, the cuts could mean pregnant women will have labour complications because they haven't had any prenatal care, people with chronic illnesses, such as diabetes and hypertension, will be left untreated, and disabled people will not be able to participate in their lives and the economy, Houston said.

Refugees come from places where their lives are in peril and they need a "full spectrum" of health care, said Erick Ambtman, executive director of the Edmonton Mennonite Centre for Newcomers. About 1,500 refugees used the centre last year, for everything from therapy to parenting classes.

Compare the facts presented by these physicians with Harper cabinet Minister Oliver's dissembling and prevaricating.

The Hippocratic oath is said by medical students upon the completion of their course work and before they begin the practice of medicine. It says, in part:

I will remember that I do not treat a fever chart, a cancerous growth, but a sick human being, whose illness may affect the person's family and economic stability. My responsibility includes these related problems, if I am to care adequately for the sick.

I will prevent disease whenever I can, for prevention is preferable to cure.

I will remember that I remain a member of society, with special obligations to all my fellow human beings, those sound of mind and body as well as the infirm.

The physician and the medical student who stood up to denounce cuts to the refugee health program said doctors tried to meet with government ministers but were refused access. They chose this *uncivil* and *dramatic* recourse to ensure that the factual information Cons deliberately silenced would be known.

More about Dr. Chris Keefer, who practices family medicine at the Brampton Civic Hospital, and medical student Faria Kamal, here.

Shrieeek! Union destroys hospital! And Timmies!

This is what passes for news reporting, in the Sun tabloids.

A hospital Tim Hortons in St. John's that was supposed to make hundreds of thousands of dollars to offset the cost of delivering health care is going fully private after years of losing taxpayer money.

Eastern Health, Newfoundland and Labrador's largest health authority, announced this week that it will hand over all its non-patient cafeteria services — including the red-ink-stained Timmies — to private companies.

How many prevarications did you spot in those opening paragraphs? Tim Hortons are franchised; whoever has a contract with the head company is required to hand over a large chunk, if not ALL the profits to the corporate owners. Hospitals are not-for-profit but you'd think that somebody in Accounting might have been able to crunch those numbers for Eastern Health before agreeing to a venture that lost money to private industry.

"We cannot continue to subsidize those non-direct care services when we know they can be provided more effectively and efficiently," Eastern Health CEO Vickie Kaminski said.

Words taken directly from the CONservatives' standard talking-points manual. Will Eastern Health soon be asking patients to launder their own bedsheets and clean the bathrooms? That's *non-direct care services*, right?

When the Tim Hortons opened in 1995 in the Health Sciences Centre, Newfoundland and Labrador's biggest hospital, authorities promised it would net a profit of up to $300,000 a year, enough to "pay the salaries of seven nurses," then-hospital administrator Gladys Peachy told CBC News at the time.

Instead, Kaminski revealed this week the chain lost $260,000 last year alone, despite the fact it's a very popular spot, with huge lines every day.

Hmm how interesting. Could it possibly be that the budget advanded in the Tim Hortons' franchise template was based on part-time, minimum wage, no benefits staff salaries? And Eastern Health probably has regulations that require workers within its complex belong to a union.

But while the coffee shop itself is privately managed, its workers are unionized hospital employees, earning about $20 an hour, plus benefits.

What the Sun's union-bashing propaganda piece neglects to mention is that any revenue "lost" by Eastern Health went to Tim Hortons' investors and shareholders. And earning $20 an hour plus benefits, working in a busy high-stress environment seems appropriate to me.

Interestingly enough, it appears that none of the infotainment flaks who work for the Sun chain have expressed outrage about this.

The bill [C-38] increases Gov. Gen. David Johnston's salary from $137,500 to $270,602 starting on Jan.1, 2013 — but he's no longer exempt from paying income tax. His salary was hiked to offset the taxman's bite.

His salary was doubled. Some *taxman's bite*. Remember, the governor general lives for free in luxurious housing including housekeeping staff and travels first-class to exotic locations - all paid by our taxes. Where's the shriEEEK, Sun Media?

Meanwhile in BC - as illustrated by the photo above - the customers' seating area outside the Tim Hortons' located in a hospital was temporarily used for patients arriving at Emergency during an unusually demanding health care critical period.

Canadian Health Care: Another Story

Dr Dawg writes about his recent experience of the Canadian healthcare system. He says we should add our stories of the really not-bad system we've built.

Here's one. A couple of days ago, my sweetie had a very nasty head cold. And a giant stoopid gig requiring many hands and not many dollars (for him). Cold got worse (so did gig). After a terrible sleepless gasping night, he figured he had pneumonia -- he's had it within the last few years -- and took himself to the emergency department of his fave hospital.

The crew (I was part of it) kept beavering along. With travel time, he was gone a total of five hours. During which he was assessed, tested, diagnosed (Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease), given a bunch of inhalers, scripts for more drugs, and let loose.

Dr Dawg's experience, while longer, was similarly pretty damn good. Complicated, serious illnesses identified and treated. Snappily. And at no direct cost to the patient. (I picked up sweetie's scripts -- just under $200.)

Yes, there are lots of horror stories.

But, I'd wager, there are many, many more like Dr Dawg's and sweetie's. Effective, humane, universally available.

Just as we envisioned, built, and now need to protect and sustain.

Irony: one of them evul librul polysyllabic words.

From CC's Irony, one learns that $arah Palin does not actually know or understand the meaning of the term ironic. Otherwise she might not have chosen to share that personal tidbit of information about herself. From here:

The vocal opponent of health care reform in the U.S. steered largely clear of the topic except to reveal a tidbit about her life growing up not far from Whitehorse.

"We used to hustle over the border for health care we received in Canada," she said. "And I think now, isn't that ironic."

One wonders if the Palin family hustle also included providing false information in order to receive "free" benefits from the Canadian publicly funded health care program. If Palin's parents paid cash for the medical services they got for themselves and their children, what motivated them to travel to Whitehorse? Superior quality of health care? Convenience? Anonymity?

The real story behind Palin's extemporaneous comment could possibly be quite revealing.

Where Are the "Pro-lifers"?

Check out this blogpost. Cathie from Canada dissects this editorial and its callous misrepresentation of why it's important to investigate the preventable deaths of infants, babies and other vulnerable human beings, to ensure that such tragedies do not keep happening, and to demand accountability.

Here is the story of Mason Fullerton's death.

Where are the "Pro-lifers"? At Lifesite.ca, there's a button link that keeps flashing the message: "Healthcare reform should save lives, not destroy them." A search for the term Mason Fullerton came up empty.

"Pro-lifers" remain silent about the death of this BAY-BEE!!! because their extreme concern is all about The Fetus©™. BAY-BEEZ!!! no longer in residence inside their Fetal Support Unit (aka pregnant women) are not the focus of their ideologically-driven crusades.

Palin not bailin', but. . .

Sarah Palin is still coming to speak at a fundraiser in Hamilton, but the beneficiary of the event has been switched.

Amid a barrage of criticism, organizers of a fundraiser featuring former Alaskan governor Sarah Palin have decided the event will no longer benefit public health care.

Instead, funds from the April 15 gala will go to the Charity of Hope, an organization that helps children.

"The attention became a health-care debate when the attention should've been on ... an event that benefits the community," said Dennis Concordia, one of the co-chairs of the event.

Paying, reportedly, $200,000 to a Merkin dimbulb who had recently dissed the Canadian healthcare system to speak at a fundraiser for the Canadian healthcare system created controversy? Who coulda seen that coming?

Apparently not Mr. Concordia.

"I don't think we could have predicted the backlash, not necessarily here in Hamilton but across North America," Concordia said.

Speaking of dimbulbs.

So what is this Charity of Hope?

The concept for The Charity of Hope, according to a message on its website from its president Sam Mercanti, started among friends at the local YMCA. They hope to grow the charity each year.

But if Sawah is going to speak at its annual fundraiser, it appears that an actual Canadian activist on behalf of children, Craig Kielburger, will be bumped.

Presumably the young and accomplished Mr. Kielburger wouldn't charge anything like $200,000 and would likely donate whatever the fee is to the charity he founded while just a kid, Free the Children.

So, has the switch of charities quieted the controversy? Um, no.

Here's a screenshot of the current poll at the Spectator:

Palin for fundraiser? Brilliant, actually.

Blob Blogging Wingnut got all pissy hissy about the fun Progressive Bloggers are having with the news that a Hamilton hospital will hold an April fundraiser with Sarah Palin as speaker.

SHE asks:

"If public healthcare is such a hot idea, why should Sarah Palin even have to raise money? Shouldn't public revenue be able to cover all the medical costs of running a hospital."

As it so happens, government funding only covers the basics such as the salaries of physicians, specialists, nursing staff and other health care professionals, building maintenance and some administrative expenses. Every budget item approved by a hospital's board of directors and not covered by the provincial parameters must be covered by revenue generated from fundraising activities.

Thus the choice of Palin for this fundraiser as well as the brouhaha it's generating are guaranteed to nab the support of those who would shrieeekkk Socialism!! and Communism!!! if our taxes fully funded healthcare establishments like St. Peter's and the Juravinski Cancer Centre. These rightwing soCons, fundamentalist religious zealots and teabagger sympathizers are the target of the fundraiser. They're the ones who will descend upon Hamilton for the "pleasure" of hearing the Quitbull deliver a boilerplate speech. And also to fork over more money to be photographed with her? You betcha.

One rubber chicken plate: $200.

Sarah Palin's speaker fees: $200,000.

Delicious irony to be savoured: priceless

-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-/-

The photograph above was found here ; the blogpost is titled "American Evita".

Nyuk-nyuk-nyuk. Freeping iz FUN!

What to think when the voting and the comments don't line up in an online poll? Is the poll at The Spec asking whether people would pay to hear Sarah Palin being freeped?

Yup.

Here's the managing editor on the matter:

Wondering about the numbers behind the percentages in our Sarah Palin poll? To the question "Would you pay to hear Sarah Palin speak", 1,252 respondents (31.2%) said yes as of Satruday evening. But 2,887 respondents (69.7%) voted no.

The controversy over Palin's visit is driving Spectator web traffic to unusually high levels, and tracking software suggests much of that traffic is coming from outside Canada, a rough indicator of how passionate people are on the subject of the former Alaska governor and possible Republican candidate in the next U.S. presidential election.Visit Have Your Say to join the lively discussion.

-- Howard Elliott, Managing Editor

Currently (about 10:30 a.m.), about 71% say they would not pay to hear her, 29% would.

And while Palinistas have invaded the comments, sentiment there is strongly against her visit to Hamilton.

Canadian Healthcare. Again.

The discussions are fascinating. At YouTube, there are insults to Canada and Canadians (and hockey of course). Stuff like this:

Hey canada, you are not USA, stay the fuck out of our political business.

There are speculations that these are actors. There are assertions that it would cost more in the US, because the population is so much larger. Assertions that it would cost more because Americans would abuse it. (A particular group of Americans is what this commenter means, I guess.) Assertions that the people in the video and the Canadian commenters at YouTube are simply lying.

Compare with the discussion at The Huffington Post. There, the discussion is calm and rational -- with much better spelling too. Personal stories, facts, history, no abuse, no insults.

Some commenters wonder at the lack of trolls though. The reply to that: 'Trolls can't handle the truth'.

Here is my original posting of this video with some more good Canadian healthcare stories.

UPDATE: Well, there you go. A few minutes after I posted the above, a commenter at The Huffingon Post offered this:

In Canada you have a great health care system. Enjoy it and leave our business to us. And please don't say we dragged you into it because I read every day on these post critizism of our economy,war everything we do. Worry about yourselves not us.

Tad touchy, no?

As gord is my witness, I will never understand 'my country, right or wrong'.

MORE BONUS: Go read Doctor Pale on who's trying to destroy our healthcare system.

To our American cousins: This is healthcare in Canada (open thread)

This great vid is getting a lot of play in the Canadian blogosphere.

Invitation to Canadians: tell your healthcare stories -- minor, major, funny, frustrating -- here, and/or at one of the other Canadian sites hoping to inform our southern friends:

Unrepentant Old Hippie

Canadian Cynic

We Move to Vancouver.

This is my boring story that I posted at UOH:

In the hopes that Americans are visiting here, here’s an account of my encounter with the Canadian healthcare system this week.

I got an infected toe (don’t ask). I was treating it — soaking, antibiotic cream. But by Monday, I had to admit it wasn’t getting better. Called doc, asked if I could come in the next day. Yup. Zero wait in waiting room. Doc said I needed systemic antibiotics. Doc pulled out scrip pad. Moi: You got any samples kicking around? Doc: I’ll look. Yup, he did and handed them over.

Upshot — total cost: two transit fares. No waiting. No problemo. Not a bureaucrat in sight.

I wrote about that just because it was so minor and mundane. If I were uninsured in the US, as I surely would be, I'd think twice, thrice, and so on, before spending I-have-no-idea-how-much-dough on a doctor's visit. A minor ailment would become worse, more painful, perhaps dangerous, certainly more expensive to treat, more wasteful of my time and that of a bunch of trained professionals.

When heathcare is accessible and cheap/free, people take better care of themselves. They seek and get timely, cost-effective care.

Canadians live longer than Americans.

QED.

ADDED: The Huffington Post has this video. Lots of comments!

Romanow to Obama: 'Three words -- Medicare for everyone'

From the Globe: 'Canadian health care advocates fire back'.

There are no death panels, no reference to “Obamacare” and no Shona Holmes. But vocal advocates of Canada's health-care system have shot back at American detractors with a tamer brand of YouTube video, intended to correct what they see as misconceptions about Canada's health resources being batted about in the heated United States health-care debate.

Now, for a laugh, go read Audrey II at Enormous Thriving Plants on A Canadian Healthcare Admission.

That Shona Holmes Ad?

It worked.

The Angus Reid poll, conducted last week, found that three in five Canadians (58 per cent) described the ad as "deceiving," 32 per cent called it "unfair" and 32 per cent called it "offensive."

In the United States, meanwhile, 68 per cent of respondents called the ad "informative," 44 per cent said it was "honest" and 35 per cent believed it was "true."

While respondents in both Canada and the U.S. agreed that health care can be delayed in Canada (77 per cent in Canada; 68 per cent in the U.S.), almost half of Americans agreed with the ad's assertion that health care can be "denied" in Canada. In contrast, only 21 per cent of Canadians agreed.

And while only seven per cent of Canadians agreed with the ad's statement that "The Canadian government says patients aren't worth it," more than a quarter of Americans (27 per cent) said they thought that statement was true.

The poll surveyed 1,010 randomly selected Canadians and 1,005 Americans using an online questionnaire. Jaideep Mukerji of Angus Reid says the online format worked well for this survey since it allowed respondents to view the entire clip of the Holmes ad online before they offered their responses.

He says the poll elicited a number of interesting findings. For example, it found that two-thirds of Canadians have a "very" or "moderately positive" impression of their own health system. About 43 per cent of Americans also have a positive view of Canada's system.

In contrast, a full 65 per cent of Americans have a "moderately" or "very negative" view of the American system. Canadians agree; a full 79 per cent of respondents on this side of the border had a negative impression of American-style health care.

Maybe her rightwingnut paymasters will reward her with a bonus.

Many good Canadian -- and American -- bloggers have been all over this. Drs. Pale and Prole have been outstanding. Go read the latest from Dr. Prole.

And if you're one of the three or four people in Canada who haven't seen the ad, it's here.