This is a fascinating interview of Martha Coakley this morning on a local TV station, focusing mostly on health care. Note how Martha Coakley dismisses the concerns that voters have about health care by claiming the voters are too “unfocused,” don’t really understand this issues involved, etc.
In particular, watch her adamant response to the question about the fact that 61 percent of voters in the Suffolk poll don’t think we can afford government-run health care. “Are they wrong?” the interviewer asks.
“They ARE wrong,” Coakley practically shouts—it’s her most passionate moment in the interview. She then suggests the issue is too “complicated” for the voters to grasp. She also shows she has no idea how health care works, erroneously claiming (among other things) that more medical screenings will save money. As everyone who has covered this issue knows, more screenings mean MORE money and higher costs (it’s that crazy “supply and demand” thing, Martha).
Don’t believe me? Here’s what the CBO had to say about it: "Researchers who have examined the effects of preventive care generally find that the added costs of widespread use of preventive services tend to exceed the savings from averted illness."
They can also save lives, so it may be good policy. But claiming preventative care will cut costs shows you don’t know what you’re talking about.
So once again we’ve got an elitist, establishment liberal calling everyone else stupid, while demonstrating that she doesn’t understand even the most basic elements of ObamaCare.
Keep talking, Martha. You’re the best friend Scott Brown ever had.
She proceeds to reiterate
When Congress required most Americans to obtain health insurance or pay a penalty, Democrats denied that they were creating a new tax. But in court, the Obama administration and its allies now defend the requirement as an exercise of the government’s “power to lay and collect taxes.”… Administration officials say the tax argument is a linchpin of their legal case in defense of the health care overhaul and its individual mandate.
