Is this marriage worth protecting?

Is it prudent for a public figure to make sure his public life matches his private values? If he sets boundaries to make sure he stays true to his values, is that a bad thing? Apparently, it is, for some people. (Some of the same people who say you have no right to judge the bad behavior of their favorite public figures.)

A new report came out in England recently describing how the lack of new doctors is affecting health care there. When you remove the profit motive, you get fewer people in that field, and you get more deaths and longer waiting lines. But hey, it’s more “fair”, right?

And we hit a milestone as the Facebook page gets its 100th “like”!

Mentioned links:

Wall Street Journal Writer Blasts Mike Pence’s Relationship Rules As Fundamentalist ‘Terror Of Women’

7 Things You Need To Know About Britain’s Failing Nationalized Health System

Rationing of NHS services ‘leaving patients in pain and distress’, says new report

Getting some shopping done? If you're going to shop at Amazon, please consider clicking on my affiliate link. Thanks!

On Apple devices, you can subscribe to the podcast via iTunes.

If you're on Android, listen with Google Podcasts.

Stitcher Radio is another possibility for both Apple and Android devices. If you do download Stitcher to your phone, please use the promo code “ConsiderThis” to let them know where you heard about it.

Browser-based options are the Blubrry Network and

And if you have some other podcatcher or RSS reader, click here to get the direct feed and paste it wherever you need it.

I would love it if you would spread the word about the podcast! Click the Facebook, Twitter, and other icons (or all of them!) at the bottom of this post to recommend "Consider This!" to your social media audience.

Show transcript

We’ve seen it before; a politician whose personal life has overshadowed whatever else they’ve done. Usually it’s a man who carried out an affair, he got caught, and his political career unraveled, or at least he lost any moral authority. One would think, then, that a politician that would try to keep himself from such compromising situations, even those that would even just appear to be compromising, is one that people could appreciate. Whatever your thoughts about his policies, staying faithful would be a good thing, right?

Well, apparently not, and not surprisingly, criticizing such behavior generally means you are on the political Left. Vice President Mike Pence has some rules he follows with regards to his social engagements.

  • He won’t eat alone with a woman other than his wife.
  • He won’t attend any event where alcohol is served without his wife.
  • He won’t work late with a female staffer.

This is sometimes referred to as the Billy Graham Rule, after the evangelist who would not travel, meet, or eat alone with a woman other than his wife. Understanding how pastors and politicians have failed in this regard over the generations, you’d think that trying to avoid such a breakup of the family would be met with appreciation.

Instead, Pence has been called a misogynist for such rules; rules that he is not trying to force others to follow, by the way. This is “misogynistic” because it supposedly keeps women from his inner circle, unable to get one-on-one time with him. What is ignored in these criticisms is that this is keeping his marriage healthy and his reputation intact. It won’t help to have been in the inner circle of a Johnathan Edwards, or a Gary Hart, or a Gary Condit, or a Newt Gingrich, or an Anthony Wiener, if their political career is tanked because of inappropriate contact with other women.

Pence put his priorities this way, “I’ve lost more elections than I’ve won. I’ve seen friends lose their families. I’d rather lose an election.” If only more men respected their wives this way, the world would be a better place, and marriages would be stronger.

In the meantime, the Left can lionize their “rock stars” like Bill Clinton. We were told that we had no business judging his behavior, and it seems like those same people are now judging Pence’s steps to avoid it. What’s the real message here?

When touting socialized medicine, the Left love to hold up Britian’s National Health Service, the NHS, as an example of socialism that works. Well, it depends on what you mean by “works”. A new report out of Britian by a group called The  King’s Fund paints a bleak picture regarding financial strain, staff shortages and unprecedented demand, resulting in health care shortfalls, even with rationing in place.

They keep telling us that taking the profit motive out of health care will make it better for all. It’s just that, it never actually works out that way in practice. Here are some facts about what is really happening across the pond.

According to the UK Independent, district nurses declined by nearly 50% from 2000 to 2014, and 15% from 2014 to 2016. The NHS is also looking at the possibility of conscripting “hundreds of doctors from India” and Pakistan as well as requiring doctors to work in the NHS for five years once their training is finished to deal with doctor shortages. Yeah, that will encourage more people to become doctors.

A report from the Patients Association found that “tens of thousands of” patients seeking routine surgeries had to wait over 18 weeks; there was an 80 percent increase in elective surgeries from 2014 to 2015. Additionally, more major operations, such as hip and knee replacements, had average wait times of over 100 days. And this, of course, is what happens naturally after you discourage doctors from entering the field.

A study conducted by the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine concluded that around 750 patients a month die due to subpar quality of care, and that includes “inattentive monitoring of the patient’s condition, doctors making the wrong diagnosis, or patients being prescribed the wrong medicine.” In other words, incompetence. And this, of course, is what happens naturally after you discourage doctors from entering the field.

According to a study conducted by University College London and Columbia University, a little less than “ten percent of British patients died in hospital afterwards compared to 2.5 percent in America.” So then, is this the target we should be shooting for? Maybe just a little socialism would be good. I guess that would just get us a little closer to 10%.

There’s more at the links in the show notes. You can probably point to areas or instances where this worked for groups or individuals, but the general trend is down. That’s not some outsider pointing fingers; these are the British pointing out the flaws in a British system. And they are flaws that plague any socialist-style system. It’s an historic certainly.

They say those that don’t learn from history are destined to repeat it. Very true, but I’d also add that those who don’t learn from history will kill those who thought it sounded like a good idea, and even those who didn’t.

Filed under: GovernmentHealth CareMarriage