Palin utilized “socialist” Canadian health care system

This is the very definition of irony:

Former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin — who has gone to great lengths to hype the supposed dangers of a big government takeover of American health care — admitted over the weekend that she used to get her treatment in Canada’s single-payer system.

“We used to hustle over the border for health care we received in Canada,” Palin said in her first Canadian appearance since stepping down as governor of Alaska. “And I think now, isn’t that ironic?”

The irony, one guesses, is that Palin now views Canada’s health care system as revolting: with its government-run administration and ‘death-panel’-like rationing. Clearly, however, she and her family once found it more alluring than, at the very least, the coverage available in rural Alaska. Up to the age of six, Palin lived in a remote town near the closest Canadian city, Whitehorse.

“Socialist” Canadian health care…good enough for Sarah Palin and her family, but not good enough for the rest of America!

Share:

Related Articles

8 thoughts on “Palin utilized “socialist” Canadian health care system

  1. This is not irony. Irony is defined as “the use of words in the opposite of their literal meaning” or “an outcome of events contrary to what was, or might have been, expected” (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/irony)

    You are confusing what you deem to be hypocrisy with irony. It would be ironic if a man stepped aside to avoid being hit by a sprinkler, only to fall into a pool.

    In this case, there is no irony. You may be able to claim hypocrisy, however that, too is a stretch for the following reasons:

    1) She was 6 and had never even formed an opinion on Canadian health care, thus could not contradict it

    2) As a minor of 6 years of age, she had no control over any aspect of her life. It seems petty of you to make accusations of this nature against a 6 year old. You may criticize her parents, but not her, on this issue using these facts.

    3) Palin has never stated that in 100% of cases is health care better in the US. In this case, they utilized the most modern facilities they had access to, as would any rational actor. Were they residents of Anchorage, your argument may have some validity.

    4) Canadian socialized medicine as it exists today was not even in place in 1970 or before. The Canadian law of the time allowed each province to utilize the HIDS (Hospital Insurance and Diagnostic Services) act. This act was enacted originally largely in response to a shortage of physicians in rural areas of Saskatchewan. These laws did not prevent doctors from billing patients separately. That was ended in 1984, putting in place the system that exists today, which is significantly different from that of 1964 – 1970 (when Palin lived in the area described).

    You are better than this. Your accusations are both literally and intellectually false.

    I expect a correction and/or retraction some time soon.

  2. Nathan, Ms. Palin used the word ironic first…and the article Zach reprinted used it…Zach did not.

    And although the current Canadian version of universal health care was passed in 1984, all of the provinces had universal coverage funded 50% by the Ottawa government by the early 1960s.

  3. And Zach, you need to do a better job of attribution for stories you repost on the blog.

  4. Um, Ed, did you read the first line of the post? “This is the very definition of irony.”

    Zach actually claimed this as a perfect example of irony, which it is clearly not.

    Beyond that, are we now at the point that we expect that public figures be consistent in their beliefs and actions all the way back to the age of 6?

    If not, I do not understand the reason for this post.

    Or, maybe we are to expect such purity from only the people the left DOESN’T like.

    I lean towards the latter, especially on this blog. Liberals are the world leaders in double standards, after all.

    1. Yeah I saw the headline and it was very similar to the ones that lead the article in the ‘regular’ press, so I wasn’t holding Zach’s feet to fire on that…but he should attribute where he quotes his stuff from.

      And I don’t expect a 6 year old to be responsible for decisions her parents make, but Ms. Palin brought this up and there must have been a reason she did. She had to know it would pull negative press and I don’t think she was just being folksy with the Canadians when she said it.

      Look, I’ll discuss stuff with you all you want. You can call me a lib, progressive, socialist, I don’t care. But lay off stuff like this “Liberals are the world leaders in double standards, after all.” cause I think we can find enough members who sit right of the aisle who have some problems living family values or abstinence before marriage or drugs, etc, etc, etc…

      1. If I wasn’t trying to attribute, I wouldn’t have provided a link to the source material. I think the fact that I provided a link made it pretty clear where the information came from.

  5. Zach…it’s hard to tell the link is there. It doesn’t look like a typical link and is nearly the same color blue as the headline. If you don’t roll your mouse over it the casual reader, like me, wouldn’t see it. I just had to scroll my mouse across the page to find it.

  6. Ed: Touché on the double standard comment. I would offer that there is a difference in that the “John Edwards” of the right are usually heavily criticized in the media (sometimes for their entire lives) and run out of the herd at the same time. On the left, we get all kinds of excuses (it’s just sex, etc.) and you don’t even run out tax cheats and former KKK leaders. Maybe that’s a fine line, but I see a difference.

    And I think the attribution part is a bit picky. The offset shows it is sourced material, and you were able to find the link. There was no effort to disguise it. I’ll side with Zach on this one.

    Wow, that’s twice in a week. I should see a doctor or something! 🙂

Comments are closed.