As explained by Hillary Clinton in testimony to the Senate Finance Committee on September 30, 1994, the Administration’s socialized medicine plan would not deny treatment unless "it is not appropriate," meaning that in the view of government regulators, it "will not enhance or save the quality of life." What of doctors who took their Oath of Hippocrates seriously and sought to provide treatments not covered by the federal plan? Under HillaryCare, if doctors provided "unauthorized" treatment on a fee-for-service basis, they would have been subject to fines as large as $50,000, forfeiture of their property, and — in some cases — life imprisonment. When such horrific provisions received widespread publicity, the HillaryCare scheme was defeated — apparently. It is not widely understood that the Administration’s rejected plan to socialize health care merely amplified the statist trend presently undermining our health care system. That trend is best described as "corporate socialized medicine" — or, if one prefers, medical fascism.
Under the ethics of Hippocrates, physicians place the interest of the individual patient above that of the practitioner or society at large. But under corporate socialized medicine, or what is more commonly known as "managed competition," the physician is required to place cost considerations and the interest of third-party payers — such as insurance companies and Health Maintenance Organizations (HMOs) — above the concerns of the patient. This leads to the adoption of what Swiss physician-philosopher Ernest Truffer calls the "veterinary ethic," in which the human patient is treated like a pet and provided with the type of medical care determined by the "master" — in this case, the person or corporation responsible for paying the medical bills.
Even without the enactment of Hillary Clinton’s ghastly socialized medicine program, America’s health care system is in serious danger of being shackled with the worst aspects of HillaryCare — rationing of health care and the criminalization of transitional medicine. For the first time in the history of American medicine, physicians are being coaxed or coerced — depending on the stubbornness of the practitioner — into rationing health care by restricting their patients’ access to specialists or to specialized treatments.
What hillary proposed was clearly socialist, not anarchistic. She wanted vastly expanded government control of the health care private sector, along with government restrictions on individual health care choice and a new layer of bloated government bureaucracy to regulate and enforce these new edicts of hers. That is big government socialism any way you slice it. It is not "anarchy." The added dimension of corruption and personal favoritism which would undoubtedly accompany any such scheme by her does not alter the fact that hillary's initiatives and legislative proposals all tend toward central government control and a broad assault on individual rights. Everything she supports, from "gun control" to "internet gatekeeping," proves this.
She is no anarchist.
Main Entry: an·ar·chy
Pronunciation: 'a-n&r-kE, -"när-
Function: noun
Etymology: Medieval Latin anarchia, from Greek, from anarchos having no ruler, from an- + archos ruler -- more at ARCH-
1 a : absence of government b : a state of lawlessness or political disorder due to the absence of governmental authority c : a utopian society of individuals who enjoy complete freedom without government
2 a : absence or denial of any authority or established order b : absence of order : DISORDER <not manicured plots but a wild anarchy of nature -- Israel Shenker>
3 : ANARCHISM
See AlohaRonnie's post #39.
BTW, our argument is enjoyable; politics is messy.