Samantha Bee on Catholic hospitals

Several readers sent me this clip from Samantha Bee’s comedy show “Full Frontal”, concentrating on the expanding Catholic healthcare system in America, and the invidious restrictions that places on women’s healthcare. It’s both funny and scary; get a load of how the Catholic men (viz., “Friar Suck”) justify Catholic healthcare policy. I’m lukewarm on Bee, but here she’s right on, showing a mixture of comedy and political passion not seen since Jon Stewart left The Daily Show.

35 Comments

  1. eric
    Posted October 25, 2016 at 12:35 pm | Permalink

    I’m lukewarm on Bee…

    I like John Oliver better…at the moment. But I have to admit she’s growing on me. I don’t know if her routine is getting more polished/practiced with time, or whether its just my own preferences changing, but I’m liking her show more and more as time goes on.

    • Pikolo
      Posted October 25, 2016 at 2:41 pm | Permalink

      You’re probably becoming less attentive. Samantha Bee is an expert at avoiding topics she disagrees with. She managed to give a whole episode to Gary Johnson and avoid saying the name Jill Stein even once through her 6+ month coverage of the presidential campaign.
      She is in the pocket of Clinton, and that disqualifies her as a source of information.
      John Oliver is a lot more objective and has a much broader range of subjects. Oh, and he noticed there are more then 3 candidates out there.

      • eric
        Posted October 25, 2016 at 9:36 pm | Permalink

        I have no idea how your opinion is relevant to my comment. Are you saying she missed something in the RCC coverage?

        If not – if you’re just saying that she doesn’t cover all political subjects with equal time, but that the ones she covers she does well…then my response to that is…zzzzzzzz

      • Heather Hastie
        Posted October 25, 2016 at 10:01 pm | Permalink

        Samantha Bee is a comedian. She has no responsibility to cover politics in a particular way. This exposé of Catholic hospitals, which I’d already seen, is great.

        Personally I love her, though I haven’t been watching her for long.

        I love John Oliver too, and I find his coverage balanced, but I only know it’s balanced because he’s not my only source of information. I’ve learnt that I can rely on him by watching him long term and continuing to find out stuff for myself.

    • esfoster2015
      Posted October 29, 2016 at 1:36 am | Permalink

      I love Oliver… I’m up waiting for the new videos on YouTube every Sunday night.

      But Bee bothers me for the same reason Trevor Noah’s “moment of zen” intro bothers me: No desk. I feel like this comedy news format needs the “anchor” to keep the traditional chair and desk set-up for maximum effectiveness.

  2. Kevin
    Posted October 25, 2016 at 12:58 pm | Permalink

    John Oliver was better, but I do like Samantha, and I paraphrase, sometimes a mother and child will die….that time was the Middle Ages. 😊

    Jesus Christ, why are any women Christians.

    • yiamcross
      Posted October 25, 2016 at 1:42 pm | Permalink

      I can only assume for the same reason there are women who will vot Trump. Abuse affects the brain, they’re made to believe they’re second class and deserve it.

    • Ken Elliott
      Posted October 27, 2016 at 7:36 am | Permalink

      I’ve never been more flummoxed in my middle aged life as I am now with the realization of how intensely adamant so many people are that Donald Trump is a viable leader of any sort. Previously, my perplexity was fixated on women who are devout christians. I simply cannot understand how any woman could be, yet I have many wonderful family members who are exactly that. All of them, too, are Trump supporters.

  3. rickflick
    Posted October 25, 2016 at 1:05 pm | Permalink

    The Catholic Church is a dangerous anachronism. How can we buy back those hospitals and put them in to secular hands. Could a law suit be filed to the effect that they provide inadequate, medieval care? Or why can’t they be required to provide a secular space within their walls for emergency and other services?
    Give me a break! What if the Christian Science Church took over the only hospital within 100 miles…
    Hurrah for Samantha.

    • yiamcross
      Posted October 25, 2016 at 1:44 pm | Permalink

      Did I hear right, these hospitals get to avoid taxes and get subsidies too? They should lose their special status if they withhold commonly accepted treatments and or go against medical best practice for religious reasons. They should not be allowed to own hospitals unless they conform fully to est medical practice.

      • rickflick
        Posted October 25, 2016 at 3:30 pm | Permalink

        Hippocrates beats Jesus, that’s for sure.

        • frednotfaith2
          Posted October 25, 2016 at 9:03 pm | Permalink

          Catholic hospitals live by the hypocritic oath, revering the life of an unborn fetus over that of the post-born.

          • rickflick
            Posted October 25, 2016 at 9:21 pm | Permalink

            Your right. What have women been complaining about? ‘Do no harm’ simply means, when your in doubt, do nothing and let the patience die.

    • boggy
      Posted October 26, 2016 at 4:43 am | Permalink

      In France, since 1905 when the law of laicité (secularity) was enacted and the Church had to keep its holy nose out of healthcare, education and administration. France has today probably the best healthcare in the world, and also as a result of the same law, the State takes over the care of the fabric of all churches that existed in 1905.

      • rickflick
        Posted October 26, 2016 at 6:52 am | Permalink

        Very happy France provides a good model to emulate. It will take a while before the US shakes itself free of the heavy yoke of religion.

    • Diane G.
      Posted October 26, 2016 at 1:07 pm | Permalink

      An old article but a must-read:

      https://www.rationalresponders.com/how_many_hospitals_have_atheists_built

      • rickflick
        Posted October 26, 2016 at 5:35 pm | Permalink

        I had not seen this essay. It says a lot. Let the ACLU take note…oh, I think they already have. Thank God.

  4. Posted October 25, 2016 at 1:13 pm | Permalink

    sub

  5. yiamcross
    Posted October 25, 2016 at 1:39 pm | Permalink

    And this is why protecting beliefs so quickly becomes an obscenity.

  6. Ken Kukec
    Posted October 25, 2016 at 3:18 pm | Permalink

    I’ve been watching Sam Bee regularly for the past couple months. I’m all in with her now. She’s fierce.

    • Historian
      Posted October 25, 2016 at 3:44 pm | Permalink

      I have watched Samantha Bee occasionally and I’ve liked everything I’ve seen. She really knows how to hit the right wing.

  7. ThyroidPlanet
    Posted October 25, 2016 at 3:23 pm | Permalink

    I thought PCC(E) was busy traveling today – there’s a post every hour!

    • Diane G.
      Posted October 26, 2016 at 1:09 pm | Permalink

      When I’m “busy traveling,” I find myself sitting on my butt 90% of the time…😉

  8. nwalsh
    Posted October 25, 2016 at 3:57 pm | Permalink

    I would not have been too upset if she had replaced Jon Stewart.

    • Claudia Baker
      Posted October 25, 2016 at 7:37 pm | Permalink

      Ditto. She would have been great.

      The Catholic Church is a moronic and misogynist institution. Sam B. nails it.

    • eric
      Posted October 25, 2016 at 9:39 pm | Permalink

      John Oliver – good. Samantha Bee – good. Stephen Colbert – obviously good. Larry Wimore – meh.

      Where’s the love for Jessica Williams? She was awesome.

    • Ken Elliott
      Posted October 27, 2016 at 7:51 am | Permalink

      Samantha or Jessica would have been tremendous replacements for Jon. I find that I can’t quite appreciate Trevor Noah at the mantle.

  9. Christopher
    Posted October 25, 2016 at 5:17 pm | Permalink

    I’m certainly not against what she had to say, just the way she said it. Perhaps with time she’ll get better at reading a teleprompter, but that was a dreadful, flat performance. Nice to know I’m not missing anything by watching Brit comedy news/panel shows.

  10. infiniteimprobabilit
    Posted October 25, 2016 at 6:53 pm | Permalink

    I remember Full Frontal as an (obviously unrelated) Aussie satirical TV series of a couple of decades ago. It was very good, and wasn’t afraid to bite the hand that fed it. That is, they mercilessly parodied the more stupid TV ads of which there was, then as now, an almost unlimited supply.

    (Sure enough it’s on Youtube)

    One thing I do remember, they did a skit on the then-new and still loathsome phenomenon of ‘reality TV’. The ‘interviewer’ asked ‘what is the outstanding feature of this new format?’ and the ‘TV executive’ replied “Cheap to make!”

    cr

    • Posted October 27, 2016 at 11:44 am | Permalink

      That’s an interesting question. The woman who Chekov talks to in Star Trek IV about the “nuclear wessels” was apparently a bystander, and to get her into the film she had to join the SAG. I wonder if that’s true of ‘reality show’ participants. (Or the equivalent if TV is different from movies unionwise.)

      • infiniteimprobabilit
        Posted October 28, 2016 at 2:29 am | Permalink

        I don’t know. I wasn’t so much thinking of those staged ‘reality shows’ with consenting participants, so much as those appalling ambulance-chasings things with titles like ‘road cops’ or ‘border patrol’ or ‘police pusuit’ etc etc etc which show in voyeuristic fashion the dealings of petty officialdom with their victims. I don’t know whether the victims have to sign a release to allow it to be aired (I should bloody well hope so, though I can’t imagine why anybody in their right mind would do so), but I’m sure they wouldn’t be further pressured into joining a union.

        But your comment raises another question – why would anybody ever consent to appear on ‘Judge Judy’ or ‘Jerry Springer’ or similar trash and be publicly humiliated in front of the whole world? Do they get secretly paid?

        cr

  11. JonLynnHarvey
    Posted October 25, 2016 at 8:51 pm | Permalink

    Of the 50 largest hospitals in America, only 2 are Catholic, and 10 others are either Protestant or Jewish, and both will do abortions. (The largest hospital in America is New York Presbyterian with many branches, and they definitely do abortion.)

    http://www.beckershospitalreview.com/lists/50-largest-hospitals-in-america.html

    However, one gets the impression from this video that Catholic hospitals are so ubiquitous in number that for many this is really their only convenient option.

    • JohnnieCanuck
      Posted October 26, 2016 at 12:07 am | Permalink

      Washington State is often mentioned as having so many hospitals bought up by the RCC that in some areas, there is no practical choice.

    • eric
      Posted October 26, 2016 at 12:45 pm | Permalink

      I believe the ACLU reports that about 1 in 6 maternity beds are in Catholic hospitals, and in one state at least that number goes up to 40%.

      In my area there are several big hospitals, but one of them specializes in child birth, meaning they do most of that part of the medical business for the entire area. This sort of specialization is one possible explanation for how a comparatively small percent of RCC hospitals might have an unexpectedly large impact on women’s health services.

  12. rickflick
    Posted October 26, 2016 at 5:19 pm | Permalink

    Here’s some good news. Perhaps the dam will soon break, with more law suits until the tables have turned:

    “ACLU Sues Catholic Health System for Denying Crucial Surgery to Pregnant Woman with Brain Tumor”

    http://tinyurl.com/j8vvx8q


Post a Comment

Required fields are marked *
*
*

%d bloggers like this: