In a Chicago Tribune article today that appears to open as an attempt at humor but quickly devolves into nastiness, NPR-dependent radio host and author Garrison Keillor, among other things, attacks social conservatives, blames them and not those who have brought legal actions for years-long fights over keeping religious symbols right where they are, and -- while conveniently forgetting that Republican Mitt Romney gave us the Massachusetts disaster known as CommonwealthCare that current Bay State Democratic governor Deval Patrick considers the model for ObamaCare -- ponders the pros and cons of cutting Republicans "out of the health-care system entirely."
There are few if any indications in the last 2/3 of his column that Keillor was attempting anything resembling humor. If he was, he failed.
Here are some paragraphs from the screed:
The so-called cultural wars over abortion and prayer in the schools and pornography and gays did nothing about anything, except elect dullards to office who brought a certain nihilistic approach to governance that helped bring about the disaster in the banking industry that ate up a lot of 401(k)s, and all thanks to high-flyers in shirts like cheap wallpaper who never learned enough to let it discourage them from believing that they had magical powers over the laws of economics and could hand out mortgages to people with no assets and somehow the sun would come out tomorrow. The anti-regulation conservatives enabled those people. We're still waiting for an apology.
Uh no, Garrison. The government's Community Reinvestment Act, Fannie Mae, and Freddie Mac did all that. And it will surely surprise social conservatives that they have controlled Wall Street all along.
And now here comes the U.S. Supreme Court, about to rule in the case of a little plywood cross erected, as it turns out, on federal land in the Mojave Desert as a memorial to the war dead -- could there be anything less pressing right now? But we shall have great legal minds wrangling over something that doesn't make a dime's worth of difference to anybody whomsoever.
Thirty-six years of bitterness over Roe vs. Wade and what has it gotten us? If the decision were overturned tomorrow, not much would change.
..... When an entire major party has excused itself from meaningful debate and a thoughtful U.S. senator like Orrin Hatch no longer finds it important to make sense and an up-and-comer like Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty attacks the president for giving a speech telling schoolchildren to work hard in school and get good grades, one starts to wonder if the country wouldn't be better off without them and if Republicans should be cut out of the health-care system entirely and simply provided with aspirin and hand sanitizer. Thirty-two percent of the population identifies with the GOP, and if we cut off health care to them, we could probably pay off the deficit in short order.
Actually, Garrison, you should be careful what you wish for. One could argue that GOP-identifiers are disproportionately productive compared to the rest of society and cost it less in entitlement and other benefits. If that is so, things might get worse instead of better. At your advanced age, I wouldn't take a chance like that if I were you. It would be a particularly good idea, assuming you're interested in quality care, to ensure that Republican doctors aren't among those you cut out of the system. Since 45% of all doctors are reportedly considering quitting if ObamaCare is enacted, and many of them are Republicans, perhaps even more than 32% of them, that should be of more than academic interest.
Rush mentioned Keillor's column on the air, and took passing offense that the Tribune was willing to publish it. The paper shouldn't have done it, and I daresay would not have published a column by a conservative proposing, supposedly in jest, cutting far-leftists out of the health-care system.
Cross-posted at BizzyBlog.com.