"that's right, it was medicare... a govt run program that represents all the protestor objects to... it was medicare that treated him."
To which we would respond: so what?
The victim was 65 years old. Under the current system, he's covered by Medicare. Already short a finger, should he cut off his nose to spite his face? For Shuster, the fact that Medicare was involved is some kind of proof that government programs are the way to go. Where's the logic? The question is what is best for the country going forward.
