Chris Matthews lies, "Ron Paul would let someone die if they did not have health insurance."

Sorry, guys. I thought this comment would be a reply to a comment. I logged in clicking "log in" below a DPers name to reply to that person. Moderator, if you want to delete this comment, please know I welcome you to do it.

Thanks,
ABBA

So, the 30-year-old man in the example doesn't have a family that could help him out? It's never stated one way or the other in the question.

He doesn't have any friends who might be able to, say, help him raise the necessary funds for a procedure? Does he attend a place of worship?

Why is this kid, who has a "good job," such a hermit all of a sudden? And if he is a hermit... would anyone be the wiser if he did end up dying? Wolf Blitzer certainly wouldn't care about it.

The fact that those criteria aren't even addressed shows that this is a totally fallacious question in the first place; nothing more than an argument from pity.

this afternoon. They are trying to trap him up in what he did to help Ken Snyder from his campaign who passed away at 49 a couple years ago.

at a church hospital - and never turned anyone away.

Great interview here on the subject with Larry King:
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2009/10/29/intervi...

Excerpt:
Paul: "...But we don't have a history in this country of this happening, even before government started managing health care. I practiced medicine in both circumstances in the early '60s. We didn't have managed care, and I worked in a Catholic hospital.

I made three dollars an hour and nobody was ever turned away and there were many, many church hospitals and you had Shriner hospitals and a lot of free care was given.

Today, even with managed care, they complain about, oh, somebody doesn't have health insurance and somebody's going to die because they don't have health insurance. But, really, people don't get turned away.

I mean, accidents happen. Man's imperfect. For the most part, anybody, including anybody illegal, can go to the emergency room and they always get taken care of. They just don't get thrown out in the street.

KING: Are you saying you like the current system?

PAUL: No. I probably dislike it as much as Michael Moore does. But he's complaining about it being part of capitalism. It has nothing to do with capitalism. This is corporatism. The corporations -- I agree with him, corporations run things.

The drug companies' lobbyists, the insurance companies' lobbyists, the hospital manager companies' lobbyists, the AMA lobbyists, and that's all managed care and we have a system where money and bigness influences the government. But that's corporatism. That's not capitalism. What we want are free markets.

KING: OK. How do you change that?

PAUL: Allow free markets to work. There's an example of free markets, and I might have even heard it on CNN today, of the example of somebody that was going to be charge 100,000 dollars for surgery, and they went to Singapore and got it for 25,000 dollars. And the main reason they gave what they could afford to do it was that they didn't have horrendous malpractice payments to make, and there was a market. There was a market.

So the patients are leaving this country. They're going to India. But that's the market working. So we have put our charity hospitals out of business. At the same time, because of inflation and management and all the mischief of government, we have pushed these prices up.

Pumping money into a system doesn't improve quality. It increases prices. Look at our educational system. We pump in money, prices go up, the quality of education goes up. The quality of medicine has not gone up by just pumping more money in.

KING: Lyndon Johnson once said, the probable answer is that a government's going to have to be half capitalistic and half socialist. You have to have some. Social Security is socialism. You have to take care of those who don't have. Pure capitalism can't work. Would you agree with that?

PAUL: No, not really. It's sort of like I practice OB/GYN, I never tell my patients they had a touch of pregnancy. You're either pregnant or you're not. You either have government intervention messing up the markets or you don't. You either believe in freedom and believe in voluntary choice.

Just look at this disaster with the Swine Flu vaccine. They took over the whole project. We pump in billions of dollars. And they come up with shortages. The distribution is lousy. And they're talking about forcing people to take them in places like New York. And who -- nobody's even proved that it's necessary yet. We have still a lot of deaths from ordinary flu far surpassing Swine Flu. So central economic planning in anything fails, and especially in medicine it fails."

almost the same thing today. Only playing the short clip of DR Paul first Response instead of playing the full reply. They did this several times today.

First off, it sounded like only 2 or 3 people cheering Blitzer's question anyway and Dr. Paul CERTAINLY did NOT say yes. Aren't medical doctors in the business of saving people? Chris Matthews, you outdid yourself this time. That is such a blatant lie, even non-supporters who saw the debate would know you were lying and become curious why you'd go there.

People were saying the same thing on a Yahoo article and here's what I posted there:
I see many comments here that seem to indicate that if there was government mandate, those without money insurance would have no choice but to die. Did you just read the headline and not listen to Paul's full response? He (a doctor) said that before the days of medicare and such, he never turned a patient away. Oh, and his son Rand Paul, also a doctor, also performs medical work for free:http://www.wkyt.com/news/headlines/Sen_Paul_performs_free_surgeries_in_Kentucky_128162148.html?ref=148
In a free society, you are not forced by government do to anything, and that includes paying taxes for the supposed benefit of someone else. And when you have more money to yourself, you have more freedom to do voluntary and charitable work. Think about it - if suddenly you longer had to pay income tax or property tax or payroll tax, would you be more likely or less likely to donate your money and/or time to charitable causes? I invite anyone reading this comment to view a couple videos that discuss how in the book Democracy in America, Alexis de Tocqeville stated that not only are civil associations (such as those who would like to provide healthcare for the needy) good for self-government, they are a necessary component of it:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hoG-5sJdb5o
example: Hearthside Cats - a group of concerned cat owners that provide shelters for stray cats and do a superior job to government pounds:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MSv1XG2dwyQ
And no, it's not just cat lovers that provide care - see voluntary health care for the needy in action here in the U.S.:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GWnSjKrWSdw
And imagine how much more common that would be if we weren't forced to pay taxes (at gunpoint, if necessary) for the supposed good of others.

Should've been matthews.

I really can't stand a liar. Sad that he has to MAKE CRAP UP to sully Dr. Paul. All the other candidates don't have to have lies made up about them or what they said, as they have a litany of stuff that could be used.

In my experience, hospitals and doctors are happy to treat a person without insurance if that person agrees to pay for the care. Paying with cash is not required. A credit card is ok. For a big bill you can get a loan to pay the hospital, then pay back the loan over time like with a car or expensive vacation. For a really big bill, it would be more like a house - but people manage to pay for houses. (There is even a tax deduction if your medical bills exceed a certain percentage of your income.) If you don't want to pay then go bankrupt and the debt will be wiped off. If you don't want to take the risk of going bankrupt, then buy major medical insurance as Dr. Paul recommended in the debate. If the well-off 30 year old in the hypothetical was too cocksure to buy insurance, then he would have paid off the loan or gone bankrupt. So what? There is no way any hospital would refuse to treat in a case like that.

Chris Matthews comes immediately to mind.

He blatantly lied. Ron clearly said NO. Did he bother to even watch it?