It is plain to see that Fox News had hit an all-time low in terms of ridiculousness. With their recent drop in ratings becoming all the more obvious, Fox News must be attempting to get people’s attention by being as ridiculously outlandish as possible. Their latest ploy has been a desperate attempt to piggyback on the success of Michael Moore’s SiCKO movie and equate the idea of a National Healthcare Service with radical Muslim terrorism.
I am not making any of this up. Here, have a look for yourself.
National Review Online Columnist Jerry Bowyer was the guest of honor and he explained his theory that Britain and France have experienced so many terror attacks is because they have socialized healthcare- a proven breeding ground for terrorism!
A post from The Carpetbagger pretty much summed it up when they quoted one of Bowyer’s most ridiculous comments, ““[I]f one of your guys is a jihadist, if one of your doctors is spending all the time online reading Osama bin Laden fatwas, someone’s going to notice that. But the National Health Service is more like the post office, you know there’s a lot of anonymity, it’s easy to hide in the bureaucracy.”
Ahh, of course, international terrorists are known for their love of bureaucracy. The posts author skewered Bowyer and Fox news with the closing comment, “so let this be a lesson to all of us. National health care may offer better care to more people for less money, but that won’t matter because your doctor will be an Al Qaeda mole.”
Thinkprogress’s post quoted Bowyer a bit further and noted his explanation for terrorists apparent infatuation with western-style bureaucracy, “A state run health care enterprise is bureaucratic, and I think the terrorists have shown over and over again, whether it’s dealing with INS or whether it’s dealing with airport security, they’re very good at gaming the system with bureaucracies. They’re very good at getting around bureaucracies.”
Wow.
Now, folks, Fox News is free to talk about whatever it wants as it is guaranteed to them by our countries constitution. However, it’s a fact that this type of commentary does a disservice to everybody by lowering the debate and essentially turning it into farce. How can we debate the merits and detriments of socialized healthcare when the so-called “conservative” standpoint is so blatantly ridiculous?
