3 ms·
So what? Is a medical surgeon not qualified to have an opinion on ObamaCare? Or are you suggesting he is not permitted to be against ObamaCare?
by bmmayer1 13y ago
So what? Is a medical surgeon not qualified to have an opinion on ObamaCare? Or are you suggesting he is not permitted to be against ObamaCare?
- jacobolus 13y agoYou would be rightly skeptical of an athlete’s endorsement of a brand of shoes they are being paid to sponsor, even though a disinterested athlete would be well qualified to comment, as a professional. Similarly, in this case “paid for by the Koch brothers” is the most relevant part of his qualification here, not “surgeon”.
- bmmayer1 13y agoJust because he is allied with the Koch brothers doesn't mean he's wrong.
- JohnTHaller 13y agoBut it does mean his facts are more likely to be wrong. Or lacking the full story and the other facts that disprove his point and are conveniently left out. Remember, the Cato Institute (Koch brothers) and News Corporation (Murdoch) are intentionally biased organizations that design studies and stories to make specific points that further their agenda. This anti-'ObamaCare' piece in the WSJ carries about as much weight as a pro-'ObamaCare' piece in a left-biased rag.
- millstone 13y agoIt carries no weight. The article casts aspersions on Obamacare, but does not give a single example of how Obamacare has or will affect this patient. We are told that this patient chose a low-cost health insurance policy due to his financial situation. He is exactly the sort of person who is likely to benefit from Obamacare when the subsidies kick in.
- amalag 13y agoI think the Wall Street Journal (because of NewsCorp/Fox/Murdoch) would not give space to a pro-ObamaCare message on its article.
- jrockway 13y agoPeople that disagree with me shouldn't be allowed to own a newspaper or write for one, especially if they disclose their affiliations at the bottom of the article.