Monday, October 08, 2007


Ann Coulter

The only "crisis" in health care in this country is that doctors are paid too little. (Also, they've come up with nothing to help that poor Dennis Kucinich.)

But the Democratic Party treats doctors like they're Klan members. They wail about how much doctors are paid and celebrate the trial lawyers who do absolutely nothing to make society better, but swoop in and steal from the most valuable members of society.

Maybe doctors could get the Democrats to like them if they started suing their patients.

It's only a matter of time before the best and brightest students forget about medical school and go to law school instead. How long can a society based on suing the productive last?

You can make 30 times as much money as doctors by becoming a trial lawyer suing doctors. You need no skills, no superior board scores, no decade of training and no sleepless residency. But you must have the morals of a drug dealer. (And the bank wire transfer number to the Democratic National Committee.)

The editors of The New York Times have been engaging in a spirited debate with their readers over whether doctors are wildly overpaid or just hugely overpaid. The results of this debate are available on TimeSelect, for just $49.95.

"Many health care economists," the Times editorialized, say the partisan wrangling over health care masks a bigger problem: "the relatively high salaries paid to American doctors."

Citing the Rand Corp., the Times noted that doctors in the
U.S. "earn two to three times as much as they do in other industrialized countries." American doctors earn about $200,000 to $300,000 a year, while European doctors make $60,000 to $120,000. Why, that's barely enough for Muslim doctors in Britain to buy plastic explosives to blow up airplanes!

How much does Pinch Sulzberger make for driving The New York Times stock to an all-time low? Probably a lot more than your podiatrist.

In college, my roommate was in the chemistry lab Friday and Saturday nights while I was dancing on tables at the Chapter House. A few years later, she was working 20-hour days as a resident at
Mount Sinai doing liver transplants while I was frequenting popular Upper East Side drinking establishments. She was going to Johns Hopkins for yet more medical training while I was skiing and following the Grateful Dead. Now she vacations in places like Rwanda and Darfur with Doctors Without Borders while I'm going to Paris.

Has anyone else noticed the nonexistence of a charitable organization known as "Lawyers Without Borders"?

She makes $380 for an emergency appendectomy, or one-ten-thousandth of what John Edwards made suing doctors like her, and one-fourth of what John Edwards' hairdresser makes for a single shag cut.

Edwards made $30 million bringing nonsense lawsuits based on junk science against doctors. To defend themselves from parasites like Edwards, doctors now pay hundreds of thousands of dollars in medical malpractice insurance every year.

But as the Times would note, doctors in
Burkina Faso only get $25 and one goat per year.

As long as we're studying the health care systems of various socialist countries, are we allowed to notice that doctors in these other countries aren't constantly being sued by bottom-feeding trial lawyers stealing one-third of the income of people performing useful work like saving lives?

But the Democrats (and Fred Thompson) refuse to enact tort reform legislation to rein in these charlatans. After teachers and welfare recipients, the Democrats' most prized constituency is trial lawyers. The ultimate Democrat constituent would be a public schoolteacher on welfare who needed an abortion and was suing her doctor.

Doctors graduate at the top of their classes at college and then spend nearly a decade in grueling work at medical schools. Most doctors don't make a dime until they're in their early 30s, just in time to start paying off their six-figure student loans by saving people's lives. They have 10 times the IQ of trial lawyers and 1,000 times the character.

Yeah, let's go after those guys. On to nuns next!

But Times' readers responded to the editorial about doctors being overpaid with a slew of indignant letters -- not at the Times for making such an idiotic argument, but at doctors who earn an average of $200,000 per year. Letter writers praised the free medical care in places like
Spain. ("Nightmare" in the Ann Coulter dictionary is defined as "having a medical emergency in Spain.")

One letter-writer proposed helping doctors by having the government take over another aspect of the economy -- the cost of medical education:

"If we are to restructure the system by which we pay doctors to match
Europe, which seems prudent as well as inevitable, we must also finance education as Europeans do, by using state dollars to finance the full or majority cost of higher education, including professional school."

And then to reduce the cost of medical school, the government could finance "the full or majority cost" of construction costs of medical schools, and "the full or majority cost" of the trucks that bring the cement to the construction site and the "the full or majority cost" of coffee that the truck drivers drink while hauling the cement and ... it makes my head hurt.

I may have to see a doctor about this. I should probably get on the waiting list now in case Hillary gets elected.

That's how liberals think: To fix an industry bedeviled by government controls, we'll spread the coercion to yet more industries! (TDC; The Liberal Democrat way of dealing with failed policy is to do the same thing over again and hope for a different result! They raised income taxes and revenues went down so they want to cancel out Bush’s tax cuts which raised revenues hugely and raise taxes again. Get it?)

The only sane letter on the matter, I'm happy to report, came from the charming town of
New Canaan, Conn., which means that I am not the only normal person who still reads the Times. Ray Groves wrote:

"Last week, I had the annual checkup for my 2000 Taurus. I paid $95 per hour for much needed body work. Next month, when I have my own annual physical, I expect and hope to pay a much higher rate to my primary care internist, who has spent a significant portion of his life training to achieve his position of responsibility."

There is nothing more to say.


By Doug Patton
October 8, 2007


Recently, radio talk show host Rush Limbaugh was attacked by Democrats on the floor of the United States Senate. Why? Their claim was that Limbaugh had referred to military personnel who disagree with our country's policies in Iraq as "phony soldiers." The statement, put forth by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nevada, and Sen. Tom Harkin, D-Iowa, is a lie designed to lay the groundwork for reinstatement of the so-called "Fairness Doctrine."

Limbaugh was referring to soldiers who have been lionized by the Left as heroes for claiming to have witnessed atrocities in Iraq, only to later be discredited as liars. One individual, who claimed to have been an Army Ranger in Iraq, was exposed as a washout after 44 days in boot camp. ABC news had done a story on this man and others like him just days before Limbaugh made his statements on the radio.

But it really doesn't matter, because liberals will commit whatever perfidy necessary to reinstate the Fairness Doctrine.

Repealed in the 1980s, the Fairness Doctrine was a federal communications law on the books for the better part of forty years. In essence, it forced radio stations to "balance" their programming in such a way as to present opposing political points of view. It is debatable whether it was ever necessary, even in the 1940s. In the diverse 21st Century communications marketplace, it is as redundant as the phrase "liberal Democrats." Yet there are those in Congress who want to bring it back.

When anyone expresses a point of view contrary to theirs, liberals want to silence that person. In this case, it is Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Laura Ingraham, Michael Savage, Glenn Beck, Michael Reagan, Neal Boortz, Michael Medved, Dennis Prager, Mike Gallager and a host of lesser known radio talk show hosts who have flourished in the marketplace of ideas over the last twenty years since the Fairness Doctrine was repealed.

Democrats have ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, The New York Times, The Washington Post, The Boston Globe, The Los Angeles Times, The San Francisco Chronicle (and most other big-city newspapers), the faculties of most universities and the left-wing blogosphere.

Balancing all this, Republicans have Rush Limbaugh and those who have followed in his footsteps down the trail he has blazed on AM radio over the last twenty years. It can also be argued that without Limbaugh, conservative Internet bloggers and the balanced format of Fox News might never have come to prominence.

Today's Dems cannot abide the popularity of conservative talk radio. They are reminiscent of similar authoritarians who have gone before them. Those who fight their tactics and express opposing points of view must be silenced.

But where are the Republicans of the United States Senate? As Harry Reid and Tom Harkin were spewing erroneous talking points fed to them by left-wing web sites, I heard nothing from the GOP side of the aisle. Meanwhile, Rush Limbaugh was left to deal with Reid's and Harkin's prevarications on his daily radio show for two solid weeks. Others on radio and on cable television came to his defense, but did anyone hear a peep out of the Senate Republicans?

Rush Limbaugh has been one of America's staunchest defenders of our military for twenty years or more. He has also been the best friend Republicans in Congress have ever had. Where were the Senate Republicans when their friend was being viciously attacked? Where were they when Rush Limbaugh and others were pointing out the hypocrisy of Democrats who demean our troops and their mission?

Democrats believe so fervently that they have next year's presidential and congressional elections wrapped up that they are pushing an agenda of censorship against their opponents in the only media not doing their bidding - talk radio. And why wouldn't they believe that? Their genteel "colleagues" on the right side of the aisle are so concerned about being liked by the mainstream media they have forgotten who their real friends are.


Doug Patton is a freelance columnist who has served as a political speechwriter and public policy advisor. His weekly columns are published in newspapers across the country and on selected Internet web sites, including Human Events Online, and, where he is a senior writer and state editor. Readers may e-mail him at