Purely on mechanics, the "by any sensible definition" clause does make this a classic "no true Scotsman" argument.
What you probably wish to argue is something like: "Those unique 'American freedoms' that ostensibly result in such a crappy health care system --- and the inevitability and necessity of this is highly debatable --- do not contribute nearly as much to actual freedom as you seem to think."
What you are actually arguing is: "There exists no sensible definition of freedom wherein the citizens of the United States are free and the citizens of France are not."
A disagreement which continues from this point will devolve quickly into an argument about when and how ideas are "sensible". This is perhaps a really interesting topic when pursued in its own right, but the assertion has, at that point, effectively derailed future debate about the different freedoms enjoyed by the French and Americans.
What you probably wish to argue is something like: "Those unique 'American freedoms' that ostensibly result in such a crappy health care system --- and the inevitability and necessity of this is highly debatable --- do not contribute nearly as much to actual freedom as you seem to think."
What you are actually arguing is: "There exists no sensible definition of freedom wherein the citizens of the United States are free and the citizens of France are not."
A disagreement which continues from this point will devolve quickly into an argument about when and how ideas are "sensible". This is perhaps a really interesting topic when pursued in its own right, but the assertion has, at that point, effectively derailed future debate about the different freedoms enjoyed by the French and Americans.