Twitter
StumbleUpon
Facebook
Delicious
Digg
Newsvine
Google
Yahoo
Technorati“If Stephen Hawking Lived in England” and Other Great Points the Left Doesn’t Want You to Know
Fellow Patriots,
Here are some important things to keep in mind when those blood-suckers from the left try to spread their lies about health care!! Print this out so you can bring it to a town hall.
1.) If Stephen Hawking lived in England, he'd be left to die. Thank God he's safe at the University of Cambridge in Massachusetts.
2.) If the government was capable of ensuring health care for seniors, they would have done it decades ago.
3.) If we didn't have a free enterprise health care system in America, then we would not be able to achieve all those advances in medicine funded by the National Institutes of Health.
4.) When the people of oppressed countries like Canada, Britain, France, Italy, Germany, Sweden, Denmark, Israel, Australia and New Zealand finally get democracy, they can vote out their socialized health care systems.
5.) England's capital is the ultimate proof that national health care kills free enterprise. That's why London has no stock exchange, no banking district, no tabloid newspapers, no big musicals, and no expensive real estate.
6.) Even the World Health Organization agrees that "America has the best health care system in the world"; the WHO ranks the American health care system at the very top part of its list, right after the first part where 36 other countries rank higher.
7.) Free enterprise is the greatest system ever invented and government can't even come close. What else but private industry could have split the atom, or gotten a man on the moon?
8.) If you drove 100 miles on the interstate freeway you still couldn't come up with one good thing that government has done.
9.) I'm writing an urgent letter to my Senator about the health-care issue. I'm explaining how the government never does anything right. I'm sure the Post Office will deliver it in a day or so.
10.) The last thing anyone needs is a government official getting involved with health. I look after my own health. For example, I always make sure I eat at restaurants rated "A" in the window.
11.) I really resent the government thinking I need any assistance from them. I buy my FDA-approved medication on my own.
12.) If health care were available to all at government expense, people would over-consume, using it when they don't really need it. As in the common phrase: "It's Saturday night, honey. Would you rather go to a movie, or shall we have our gallstones removed?"
13.) For some reason, the lunatic left can't understand that the most important thing in health care is consumer choice. When you're in a car accident and you've lost pints and pints of blood, what you really want to do is to sit down, think over how much you want to spend and where, and comparison-shop. And if you happen to choose an incompetent surgeon, well, he damn well won't get your business next time, will he?
54 Comments so far
Show AllWhen is the American taxpayer going to realize that funding for research in health care is funded by taxes? Without this funding, private enterprise could not exist. And who owns private enterprises? The rich and powerful. Not the rest of us.
Who do you think funds the National Institute of Health? Taxpayers! We pay for the research and then private industry takes over.
This is clearly a joke.
6) Isn't the WTO basically a US invention?
7) Didn't the Soviet Union pioneer most of the first space missions? (So, the US technically got a man on their first, but the Soviets had the first craft to land). And besides, it's a pretty twisted perspective that champions space travel over taking care of the local community.
8) What about all those subsidies and rule-bendings in favor of the corporations?
But I see the author has studied theater. Good work! ;)
To your first point regarding Stephen Hawking is alive today due to help from generous private donors that pay for his healthcare. He is also an internationally renowned scientist and philosopher--no clerk in the British Health System is going to deny him funding for care. He is not some store clerk's child or husband that the state can easily dismiss.
You will need to qualify that by noting that Stephen Hawking started developing Lou Gehrig's disease 47 years ago when he was 20 and was an absolute nobody scraping through his first degree.
The National Health Service (it is not called the British Health System) in the UK, while not perfect, doesn't work like an American Medical Insurance Corporation with 'clerks' whose job it is to deny or whittle down as many claims as possible.
There are countries whose social medical systems are considered superior to the UK's - some European countries -France for example. Japan's system is intriguing but Americans generally (CD readers excepted) are probably too insular and too believing in American exceptionalism to research outside their borders except to insult, without knowledge, countries like Canada and the UK.
"Jennifer Epps is an L.A.-area political activist, writer, producer, and director who studied theatre and has written several hundred film reviews."
This just about sums it up for me! It's obvious that fantasy and science fiction are her favorite genre.
As for that "anti-war" movie that she's got on the works. Oh, bruther! It probably promotes that war should be opposed...unless it's for oil, in that case, it should be supported!
ROFL!
Trailing Begonia, other than the statements in your first line, which prove conclusively your ability to cut and paste, you haven't actually said anything.
The rest is noise and ad hominem attack and therefore falls in the logical fallacy category.
While you are rolling on the floor laughing maybe see if there is an educational book or two on logical fallacies or skills in articulate writing that might have fallen there.
CD isn't a Fox News type tabloid blog and you will need greater skills than you have demonstrated so far to survive here.
Yup -- when you don't have facts on your side, just go for smearing the source. There is bound to be a rube somewhere who will mistake it for a winning argument.
In any profit making organization, along the lines of the mafia trad,
Those who keep it going, have to be paid, or the whole thing will go bad.
The CEOs, the middle men, insurance guys and congress party hacks, all takes their cuts.
The only way to get change is to deprive them of their sucks.
It takes the best part of an oppertune young persons life,
taken up with training, lying, and climbing the ladder of corporate strife.
Deny the corrupt career paths for young persons on the go,
And soon your health exploitation systems will be on death row.
Like any mafioso head, the presidential office must satiate,
The money lusts and disciplines of give and take.
Like any contractual arrangement of price negotiate,
any legislative orgasm at the end is purely fake.
Amusing but way, way too subtle to have an impact on the extremists on the right. Think about it -- if they could actually read and understand details, if they grasped nuance and/or fact-checking, they probably wouldn't be rightwingers in the first place. They'll just see the catch phrases they have been trained to salivate to, and they'll cheer and pass it on.
well that was put nicely ....most of the other comments seem to miss the point ....
So I did as the author suggested and sent this to my right-wing pen pal.
He wrote back and said, "At last you've seen the light! I've been telling you these things over and over and now you're finally beginning to understand it."
Priceless!
Now that's funny. Flew right over his head.
The US postal service is quasi-private to the extent that they muct be self-supporting with the fees they charge and they are allowed to advertize. Like any government agency they contract stuff out - like the air/truck/rail delivery of the mail. I believe the employees still work under the US Civil Service Syatem. Overall, the USPS is still a federal agency.
Thanks for the clarification...
Public/private partnerships confuse me...
It is difficult to determine how much of the profits are private...
and how much of the cost and risks are public...
Wasn't the federal post office privatized in the eighties...?
The property is still public, but the service was chartered to a private company...?
Please Correct me if I am wrong...maybe I am confusing it with Federal Express, which is no more "Federal" than The Federal Reserve, and just as privatized as the Internal Revenue Service...
When I was a kid I NEVER heard of the "freedom to choose". I think that only really started when Reagan was in office and we became nothing but bottomless pockets in the eyes of the wealthy. We didn't retain a "right to not get screwed by big business", but we sure got talked into the "right to choose" pretty easily. If we liked choosing so much, then why do we allow stores like WalMart to come into our towns and run off every other store in the area? Within a couple of years, your "choice" is anything sold in WalMart.
As to what gov't is capable of, yes, it CAN do things properly. What about your public transportation systems, for example? Social Security has made life at older ages and when injured MUSH more livable for tens of millions. Medicare does the same. Water systems, hospitals BEFORE Reagan decided that EVERYTHING should be up for profit making, and literally hundreds of other things.
It's ONLY when republicans vet into office that gov't goes to hell in a hand basket. Just like they TOLD you it would. Is that any kind of a coincidence? I don't think so. If you put someone in office who doesn't believe that the office is worth anything, then by the time you have to fumigate it when they leave, it WON'T be worth anything at all. And once again, the righties have proved that gov't won't work when you have a bunch of monkey wrenchers in it. Why on earth would anyone EXPECT it to work?
The truth is that when it's someone OTHER than the republicans in charge, things happen. What do we REALLY have to show for the last 8 years of republican rule? Have we invented anything? Have we invented new industries? Have we opened up new diplomatic arenas? Have we innovated in ANYTHING? Not that I can see.
In that time, we dismantled our manufacturing sector, driven our financial sector into the ground, increased the disparity between the rich and everyone else, we've cost ourselves trillions in wars that we have NO business in, we've turned our country's traditions and laws on their heads and we've destroyed our entire way of life for the benefit of those who already had too much.
This article is cute, but those that I'm sure it was intended to reach have made up their minds and they will NEVER be turned away from their preconceived "ideas".
The 'freedom of choice' Reagan had in mind was the freedom of your health insurer to choose to dump you once you get sick.
"When I was a kid I NEVER heard of the "freedom to choose". I think that only really started when Reagan was in office..."
Ah, one of those infinitely flexible neocon talking points---note how quickly they'll change the subject if you ask whether a woman has "freedom to choose" the trajectory of her fertile years.
But we have the "freedom to choose" between candidates from two corporate-controlled parties.
I forwarded this to my conservative father-in-law. Here is what he said,...please someone help me with a rebuttal.
"There will be no consumer choice if the public option or a trojan-horse public option like cooperatives drive all private health insurance companies out of business as Obama in the past and numerous Democratic members of congress like Barney Frank have publicly stated is what it is intended to do. I can guarantee you that Hawking gets more health care than provided by England's system, which limits everyone to $32,000 a year, far less than he obviously receives. The atom was not split on federal money. Most of the other examples are natural monopolies where anything but government action is impossible. Switzerland and Japan have excellent health care systems, with full competition, without the government running it.
I await your rebuttal!"
Thanks.
Hawking's views on the NHS can be easily found, by simply typing in "stephen hawking NHS" into any search engine.
For example, from the UK Daily Mail, which is a right wing tabloid:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/
article-1205953/
NHS-branded-evil-Orwellian-high-level-US-politicians.html
"Prof Hawking, who suffers from Lou Gehrig's disease, said: 'I wouldn't be here today if it were not for the NHS.
'I have received a large amount of high quality treatment without which I would not have survived.'"
And you should also point out that there would be no internet without government funding. And it wasn't just the internet that was built on ARPA / DARPA funding, research conducted in public universities. Much of computer science is based on, built on publicly funded research, at publicly funded universities, from institutions such as UC Berkeley, University of Illinois Urbana Champaign.
The $32,000 a year figure is pure fantasy. I live in the UK. My wife was well over that figure two years in a row. If there was a limit and it was that low our life expectancy here would be that of a third world nation.
As for Hawking, point out to your father in law that he lives in England, not in the US - he started getting NHS care far exceeding $32,000 a year long before he was a well known physicist. If there really was a $32,000/year limit he'd be dead.
From the Wikipedia Article on the Japanese Healthcare program:
"In the Japanese health care system, healthcare services, including "free" screening examinations for particular diseases, prenatal care, and infectious disease control, are provided by national and local governments. Payment for personal medical services is offered through a universal health care insurance system that provides relative equality of access, with fees set by a government committee. People without insurance through employers can participate in a national health insurance program administered by local governments. Since 1983[1], all elderly persons have been covered by government-sponsored insurance. Patients are free to select physicians or facilities of their choice...
Public health insurance covers most citizens/residents and pays 70% or more cost for each care and each prescribed drug. Patients are responsible for the remainder (upper limits apply). The monthly insurance premium is 0–50,000 JPY per household (scaled to annual income). Supplementary private health insurance is available only to cover the co-payments or non-covered costs, and usually makes a fixed payment per days in hospital or per surgery performed, rather than per actual expenditure. In 2005, Japan spent 8.2% of GDP on health care, or US$2,908 per capita. Of that, approximately 83% was government expenditure."
So, while quasi-privatized, this still sounds far more "socialistic" than anything your father (Or Obama or Congress)probably has in mind.
If private insurance companies deliver such excellent health care, they should not have anything to fear from a public option. Of course, they'll have to turn the heat down in their glass towers in the winter, and set some limits on executive compensation, and slash their dividends to shareholders, but that shouldn't be much of a problem, should it? Do you suppose a little competition from a public option might change their behavior for the better? Why are they terrified of competition?
A lot of the research involved in splitting the atom was carried out at the University of Chicago, a private insitution, no kidding.But a lot of that research was funded by the Government.The feds have always funded research at private universities.And this practice continues to be controversial, but that's the way it is.As for Japanese or Swiss health care, I can't comment.Is anybody talking about the Japanese or Swiss model in this debate? I didn't think so.The assertions about Hawking and the $32,000 'limit' are too off the wall to waste any time on.
If private insurance companies deliver such excellent health care...
They don't deliver healthcare. They take your money and then decide whether they will PAY for the healthcare that medical professionals provide.
And they often don't do that.
My husband injured his shoulder at work. His doctor said he needed surgery, referred him to an orthopedic specialist. So far, so good. The specialist concurred: my husband needed surgery. That's when the nightmare began.
The insurance company ran us up one wall and down another. They insisted my husband bring signed papers to their office on the day he received them or they would dismiss the claim. (What if he had been bedridden?) They were rude on the phone (on the rare occasions when we could reach his rep) and radiatated an attitude that said we were frauds trying to steal their money. They lied on official documents and said his primary care doctor refused to talk to them, so they were dismissing the claim. (His doctor was furious. He said he would have been happy to speak to them -- they had never contacted him in writing or on the phone.)
The insurance company sent it to their "appeals committee" who stalled for weeks. They tried to dismiss the claim. We protested. They sent it to *another* appeals committee, who also tried to dismiss the claim.
Both of my hubby's docs were baffled. The x-rays were clear, the procedure was routine. We finally took it to a state appeals board which quickly and easily agreed with my husband's physicians. The insurance company started dodging our phone calls. Finally, on the day before we would be able to sue if they refused to comply with the state arbitration, they suddenly agreed the procedure was needed and they would pay.
We were naive at the time. We thought that was unusual -- the hell it is. The state board is overwhelmed with cases exactly like this. We were told by people who deal with it every day that it is par for the course. The insurance company just hopes sick people will give up and/or die before they have to write a check and if my husband had a terminal disease instead of a hurt shoulder, he may well have kicked the bucket before we got this all settled. As it was, it just meant months of disability and pain for him before he got the treatment he needed.
With results like that, it STUNS me that anyone can say a for-profit insurance company should be at all involved in the healing process. Single-payer health care system: everybody else has one. We should, too.
What I can't understand in this response and elsewhere is why anyone would want "consumer choice" in the purely prefunctory task the insurance companies do such a poor job at - that of paying the doctors and hospitals. Choice of doctors and hospitals? yes. But how they are paid? I could care less! Do people want consumer choice in the size and shapes of their curency?
Also, can your father in law cite the source of the $32,000 per-year figure? It looks like a rather nonsensical allegation on it's face, for several obvious reasons.
I think an article like this is the original source for that figure:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2552690
/Nice-should-be-abolished-expert-claims.html
The figures listed in this article:
"Generally, Nice approves drugs that cost less than £20,000 for every extra year of improved quality of life they provide, known as a Qaly or Quality Adjusted Life Year. Between £20,000 and £30,000, Nice committees need to be persuaded of the benefit; above £30,000, the drug is usually turned down. "
Are then translated into figures of $32,000 by political blogs in the U.S.:
http://smartgirlnation.com/2009/05/27/will-health-
care-reform-spawn-the-next-great-culture-war-in-america/
"The older you are, the sicker you are, the more disabled you are, the less cost effective it is to treat you. And if the cost per QALY of a medical intervention you need exceeds £20-30,000 (around $32,000 - 48,000), you’re out of luck. Drugs, particularly end-of-life treatments, are routinely rejected for use due to poor cost-effectiveness. And screening tests, like the mammograms American women take for granted, are severely restricted to ensure expenditures remain under the cost per QALY threshold."
And don't forget, the UK Telegraph is owned by Rupert Murdoch, and is a favorite reference of people like Rush Limbaugh.
Yes, but the right wingers don't seem to notice that those proposing abolishing NICE are not at all proposing abolishing the NHS - in fact, abolishing NICE would lead to a large expansion of the budget of NHS to cover all the marginally effective to ineffective treatments.
And what is the big deal about something like NICE? Remember the #1 axiom of economics - resources are limited. Better to ration those resources based on helping the most poeple instead of only the rich.
"Better to ration those resources based on helping the most poeple instead of only the rich."
Good luck getting a conservative to believe such a SOCIALIST concept :-)
Uppercut:
Does your father-in-law have Medicare? If so, point out to him that the only choice limitations he might have in his government run program come from the "preferred providers" listed in his Medi-gap (private) insurance.
Your F-I-L is bluffing. Call him on it.
First of all, ask him who funded the Manhattan Project and who directed and controlled it, if not the US Government? Los Alamos National Laboratory was certainly a government run research lab.
Stephen Hawkings claims: "The NHS saved my life." He wasn't a famous scientist when he contracted ALS at age 20.
The big problem here is that we need to unplug the right-wing nut-jobs from their blogs and crazy news channels that brandish and administer fear like a drug to their faithful. Conservatives are addicted to the belief that they are fighting for survival and fear keeps them from thinking critically. They stay in a reactionary mode most of the time. It is a very effective form of voluntary mind control. Keep'em scared and they will stay in fighting mode indefinitely.
I find it amazing that the left wing is far more critical in its political approach than the conservative party. For example, I watched Farenheit 911 and Farenhype 911 back to back taking careful notes on both film's allegations and found the following surprising results: although Micheal Moore's film exploits emotional arguments from time to time, the right-wing rebuttal to his film rarely employed any other method beyond nasty ad hominem attacks and emotional tactics while ignoring the majority of Moore's allegations.
I believe this whole thing is orchestrated by the conservative think tanks' talking points (distributed nationwide to conservative pundits). Most media outlets are owned by conservatives. The think tanks are awarded hundreds of millions in tax dollars to survey and study our (minds) hot buttons and then they mercilessly push our buttons so that we mindlessly allow the masters behind the curtains to execute their will (Iraq War).
Look at your F-I-L's comment "there will be no choice...if all private health insurance companies (are driven) out of business". Isn't that scary language? NO CHOICE! Americans are very protective of our right to choose, say the think tanks. So that is where conservatives must attack to provoke irrational stances against constructive reform that axes insurance company profits.
Just watch how obedient and homogenized the media will be when they go after Iran. They will use fear mercilessly and they will not pursue the toughest questions beyond mentioning them.
I hope I helped somewhat.
I'd also like to point out that when you get your health care from an "HMO", you already have no, or extremely limited, choices - you have to get your medications and other care from entities on a list. Being Canadian, and having choices - lots of 'em - I was shocked at that: it seems so corrupt, or at minimum, so prone to corruption. Some choice!
Here, in socialized-medicine-Canada, I'm now scheduled for blood tests, urine tests at any clinic I want, echocardiogram, spirometry, ultrasound, stress test, ecg, basal metabolic rate testing, diabetes counselling, prescriptions from any pharmacy I want, x-rays at any clinic I want, nutrition counselling, psychological counselling, stress management workshops, exercise classes, complete physical - any doctor I want. And on top of that, home care if I request it for as long as I may need it. (now, to be honest, we do have a doctor shortage, so it's hard to switch if you don't like your doctor; but it would be a mistake to latch onto this detail and let it blind you to the rest. If you don't have a doctor, or even if you do, and s/he's inconvenient, we also have walk-in clinics. And if something happens in the middle of the night, we have a phone-in service to help.) BTW - my knee surgery will follow in a few months - as it is not a fatal condition, that's not a serious defect.
I had a potentially fatal condition a couple of years ago - I went to emergency and they took me in within minutes. Twice.
But look what we've got here. Socialized. And better options.
You want perfect? You don't get perfect. Nobody gets perfect. But why does it have to be so outrageously awful in America?
The corporations are calling providing of medical care a service - to your face; but to them it's really just another extractive industry - like credit card and bank fees, mining, and factory farming.
Borrowed from a friend on Facebook:
This morning you were awoken by your alarm clock (powered by electricity generated by the public power monopoly regulated by the US Department of Energy). You then took a shower (in the clean water provided by the municipal water utility). After that, you turned on the TV (to one of the FCC regulated channels) to see what the national weather service (of the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration) determined the weather was going to be like (using satellites designed, built, and launched by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration). You watched this while eating your breakfast of (US Department of Agriculture inspected) cereal and taking your blood pressure medication (which have been determined as safe by the Food and Drug Administration).
At the appropriate time (as regulated by the US congress and kept accurate by the National Institute of Standards and Technology and the US Naval Observatory), you get into your (National Highway Traffic Safety Administration approved) automobile and set out to work (on the roads build by the local, state, and federal departments of transportation), possibly stopping to purchase additional fuel (of a quality level determined by the Environmental Protection Agency), paying in cash (legal tender issued by the Federal Reserve Bank). On the way out the door you deposit any mail you have to be sent out (via the US Postal Service) and drop the kids off at (public) school.
After spending another day not being maimed or killed at work (thanks to the workplace regulations imposed by the Department of Labor and the Occupational Safety and Health Administration), enjoying another two meals (which again do not kill you because of the USDA), you drive your (NHTSA) car back home (on the DOT roads), to your house (which has not burned down in your absence because of the state and local building codes and fire marshal's inspection, and which has not been plundered of all it's valuables thanks to the local police department).
You then log on to the internet (which was developed by the Defense Advanced Research Projects Administration) and post on www.freerepublic.com, www.redstate.com and fox news forums about how SOCIALISM in medicine is BAD because the government can't do anything right.
What this piece clearly demonstrates via humor is something that as an atypical American (have a passport, traveled and worked abroad, can speak a language other than US English), far too many of my countrymen & women vie with Third World ghetto dwellers in the ignorance sweepstakes.
Personally, I have always found third world ghetto dwellers to be much less ignorant in the ways of the world than the average educated American.
And the most shocking think is how these levels of ignorance are so predominant among many rather wealthy people - particularly the non-urban sunbelt-suburban wealthy. The latter generation Bushes come to mind.
6.) Even the World Health Organization agrees that "America has the best health care system in the world"; the WHO ranks the American health care system at the very top part of its list, right after the first part where 36 other countries rank higher.
What is truly amazing about this statistic is that the US spends far more per capita on "healthcare" than any other country on earth. So I would guess that per dollar spent, the US system is likely not only last on earth in delivering healthcare, but several standard deviations below second last.
I object!
Government IS able to be competent, nurturing and compassionate.
Just look at the way it jumped in to save the huddled masses of brokers and bankers from those lazy, shiftless, mortgage-defaulting socialists who tried to ruin their economy!
Excellent satire!
Regarding No 7, it was hard-working American Free Enterprise that invented the internet and world-wide-web too!
But I agree, much of this would go right over the heads of the far-too typical USAns residing outside of it's major urban areas. Never has ther been such a class of affluent yet stunningly uneducated, ignorant, and culturally retarded people as those one find in the mcmansion belts outside the cities.
According to Wikipedia PJD412
"the origins of the Internet reach back to the 1960s when the United States funded research projects of its military agencies to build robust, fault-tolerant and distributed computer networks. This research and a period of civilian funding of a new U.S. backbone by the National Science Foundation spawned worldwide participation in the development of new networking technologies and led to the commercialization of an international network in the mid 1990s"
So where do you get your information?
MDM
I take you have never heard of ARPA, which is where the internet originated.
This is satire; I'm pretty sure he has heard of ARPANET. The web was designed in Europe, I believe at CERN.
Yes, it was called DARPAnet - Defense Advances Research Project's Agency.
And the WWW protocol was developed by CERN - the European Nuclear Physics organization.
Um, yes he knows that. He was pointing out a missed opportunity for the author to satirically claim the government had nothing to do with the development of the internet.
Zmann, I thought the internet was invented by Al Gore, along with the paper clip, the hula hoop and microwave popcorn....
This article demonstrates that irony is not dead in America. If the Democrats were to argue the opposite of these points then their tepid public option plan might actually become law. Unfortunately that will not happen since the Democrats, the [alleged] party of the people, are not, unlike the Republicans, a united body with the Blue Dog Democrats acting more like Republicans than Democrats.
Perhaps Ms. Epps could have added a #14 which would be how grateful the American people should be for having the insurance and the pharmaceutical companies take care of their health as that would be another example of the free enterprise system at work. If people are denied medical coverage for their health needs, it simply means that the insurance companies want to spend their hard earned dollars on people who are not as much of a high end risk to them.
On a more serious note, it is just beyond belief that every day one comes to the realization of how reluctant the most [alleged] democratic nation on earth is to implement not even a lukewarm public option plan as opposed to a much more efficacious health care plan such as a single payer system. When Bush was in office the Democrats used the excuse that they did not have a majority in Congress to get things done. Now that they have a majority in both houses they still cannot find the will power and/or enough votes to join the rest of the civilized world in caring for its citizens.
A sterling example of [alleged] democracy in action. Pathetic.
Thanks for the morning humor!
I agree :-)
This might be too subtle for most of the dimwits that show up for TownHell Meetings. Half of these entries will have them bobbing their heads in agreement. University of Cambridge......Massachusetts! HAHAHAHAHA!
No, University of Cambridge, England. Who's the dimwit?
That was the joke, that he's actually in the UK but mistakenly thought to be a beneficiary of the US health system.
Uh...the whole piece is tongue in cheek...but I think you didn't get that.