Skip to comments.Justice Sonia Sotomayor's Shocking Ignorance
Posted on 03/31/2012 10:49:09 AM PDT by jazusamo
The liberal Supreme Court justices have demonstrated profound and shocking ignorance of the American health care system. Here's one of the most jarring examples:
"What percentage of the American people who took their son or daughter to an emergency room and that child was turned away because the parent didn't have insurance," asked Sotomayor, "... do you think there's a large percentage of the American population that would stand for the death of that child -- (who) had an allergic reaction and a simple shot would have saved the child?"
I have a precise answer for Justice Sonia Sotomayor.
The percentage of American people who took their son or daughter to an emergency room and were turned away because the parent didn't have insurance is exactly zero.
No person, whether American or not, is ever turned away from an emergency room for lack of health insurance. Ever.
This simply does not happen.
1. It's illegal.
It's disheartening to note that Justice Sonia Sotomayor, as profoundly ignorant as she is, will be making a monumental decision about a 2,700 page health care law. Justice Sotomayor needs to have a talk with her brother.
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
If we can take both the House and Senate, I can be done.
It's already too late...The train has left the station and heading down the tracks full speed ahead pedal to the metal to that washed out bridge spanning the gorge...
All the multiple warnings signs on the track have been ignored...because the bridge has always been there and the leaders distracted the populace by giving them all sorts of goodies or by telling them it was the train company fault for not maintaining the bridge the government owns...
The pillars of the country have been hollowed out and are cracking and bending under the stress of the weight of ignorance, stupidity, entitlements, slothfulness and incompetence....
Another four years of this administration and will be finished...
Good....there is hope!
The Wise Latina ain’t so wise.
The same way that Obama did.
Asked, and answered : )
Unfortunate for the USA many judges including SC judges are not representative of the citizens of the USA or of the the full knowledge and intentions of the Founding Fathers and their Constitution. Nor do these people give a plugged nickel and/or deliberately want to ‘change’ what most citizens believe to be the heart and soul of this exceptional Nation.
In defense of Red Sonia:
Perhaps I am the only one who listened to the arguments in their entirety and noticed that Red Sonia is quoted out of context and so as to distort even her craven meaning.
When she said the excerpted things she was, as I recall, making a straw man argument to the effect that the constitutional approach only allowed medical facilities to deny health care to poor little children and that the people would not stand for that. So the only alternative was to trash the constitution and implement the basic statist approach...
So, she never said what her quote was recast to mean. The M.D. who misquoted her deserves to be taken out for a caning. We don’t need straw men and misquotes to distract from the real issues.
You may be correct but the transcript is confusing.
Starting at page 98 Mr. Carvin was talking with Justice Ginsburg and Justice Sotomayor cut in to ask a question.
Mr. Carvin comes back to Sotomayor with, “One of the more pernicious, misleading impressions that the government has made is that we are somehow advocating that people could get thrown out of emergency rooms,” etc.
It’s not quite clear to me she was making a strawman argument.
It should have been clear (at least it was when I listened to it) that she did not believe that denying care was current practice or even possible. It sounded to me that she wished to tar those that opposed the mandate with advocating that solution or leaving only that solution. She was as Carvin implied, regurgitating the government’s strawman argument.
Declaring your enemy to be stupid (as liberals traditionally do with conservatives) is satisfying in the short term but it limits your ability to anticipate their next action and puts you at a disadvantage.
She might be venal, evil, despicable (dangerous pun lurking) but she is not _that_ stupid.
I was reading along with the transcript while listening to the audio at some points and noticed how hard it was to get the interjections in the right places. You even might get a different understanding in some cases. (The court reporters do an almost miraculous job for a ‘flash’ transcript. Linear text does not deal well with people talking over each other.)
Really? Check the link at post #58.