Albatross (a1batross) wrote, @ 2009-09-21 21:20:00

Inside the Mind? of Newt Gingrich


I read the headline of Gingrich's commentary with profound confusion, that only intensified when I continued into the article.

"Newt Gingrich: Alzheimer's: The fight that matters. Subheading: We could save -- lives and money -- by funding brain science research."

I mean, don't get me wrong - yes, let's fund Alzheimer's research and find a cure! But as the Republicans have been standing four-square against any kind of health care reform, Gingrich's comments and justifications are weirdly at odds with his party's platform. His call for Alzheimer's research dollars contrasts with his party's long-standing opposition to stem cell research, which many predict will yield advances in that field.

While you plan for retirement, checking your 401(k)s, do you consider the costs of long-term care? With Alzheimer's, the cost of life is staggering. In 2008, the economic value of the care provided by family and other unpaid caregivers of people with Alzheimer's and other dementias was roughly 9.9 million people at a cost of $94 billion -- not to mention the devastating emotional impact.

While curing Alzheimer's disease will be a wonder when it happens, the approved course of treatment will follow years of clinical studies following the discovery of a cure. Between then and now, how are we supposed to survive unless we have - what do they call it? - health care insurance?

Imagine the savings to you, your family, and quite frankly the entire country, if we could slow the rate of Alzheimer's.

Uh, okay, now let's generalize that...

Imagine the savings to you, your family, and quite frankly the entire country, if we could slow the rate of all diseases.

I'm sorry, is it just me, or does this sound a LOT like a call for universal health insurance coverage, so that EVERYBODY can see a doctor and EVERYBODY can get healthier?


Next Newt attempts to lay the blame for what he apparently considers unsatisfactory progress at "1600 Pennsylvania Avenue,"

The problem resides on Capitol Hill and at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. Cumbersome bureaucratic red tape and lack of support are often the culprits.

This is strange considering that President Obama, who lives at that address, signed legislation legalizing stem-cell research only six weeks after taking office. And what did Newt have to say at the time?

Former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich told The Washington Post he thought Obama's policy reversal on stem-cell research was an "ideological sideshow."

As laudable a goal as improved Alzheimer's treatment is, a cure would only be available to Gingrich, with his government-sponsored tax-paid Congressional health plan. For those of us who pay our health insurance out of pocket, the treatment would remain prohibitively expensive. If Gingrich is announcing his support for government involvement in research and universal health care, then I welcome him back to the world of ideology-free reality. Otherwise the manifold hypocrisy of his position is as confusing as everything else about his party these days.

Gingrich being who he is - that is, the man who presented his wife with divorce papers while she was recovering from cancer surgery - I can only assume that his sudden interest in Alzheimer's research was prompted by receiving a diagnosis that he has a pre-Alzheimer's condition. I hope this isn't the case, as I would not wish such a fate on even the worst political foe, but narcissism seems much more likely than altruism as a motivating factor for Newt...