Free Markets, Free People

Trying To Sell The Big Lie

Mona Charen distills the big lie contained in the version of “health care reform” that the Obama administration is trying to sell:

He also claimed that his plan will 1) extend coverage to all; 2) force insurance companies to cover “at no extra charge” routine check ups and screening tests like mammograms and colonoscopies; 3) place limits on how much people can be charged for out-of-pocket expenses; 4) forbid yearly or lifetime caps on coverage — and 5) spend less than we are currently spending!

I touched on that yesterday in my post about Nancy Pelosi in unicorn land – “There’s a cap on what you pay in in premiums. There’s no cap on what you receive back.

Everyone understands that such thinking is what got us into the mess we’re in now with unchecked government spending piling up huge deficits. The fact that such thinking is still prevalent in the leadership of both the Congress and the Executive branch is what is scaring people more than anything. We know it, but they seem to not realize it yet. And we don’t understand how they can be that clueless.

The majority of the public knows what is being offered is just as unsustainable as Medicare and Social Security. And they recognize that the same entity that has mismanaged those programs is now aiming toward a takeover of the rest of health care. They also know that because what is promised is unsustainable, at some point in the near future new revenue is going to be required to pay for it. Finally, they know that the claim that it “won’t add a dime to the deficit” and “it will mostly be paid for by eliminating waste and abuse” in the present system is a lot of hot air.

In other words, most of the public knows inherently that as presented, this version of reform is all a grand but telling lie. Telling because it underscores the extent to which this Congress and this President are willing to go to pass their agenda. And it has become an issue of trust – or in this case, distrust.

It has also become a test of wills between a petulant president not used to being denied, a Congress run by the extreme left who are determined to pass their agenda while they have a chance and a people who are worried sick about the level of government spending and intrusion.

President Obama’s speech really did nothing to address those rising concerns or to allay those fears. In fact, he most likely increased them. And it was pretty ironic to hear the president lecturing others about lies when in fact he engaged in 45 minute lie.

What is being planned is not and cannot be “deficit neutral”. It will end up costing taxpayers billions if not trillions of dollars. What is being planned will not introduce “competition” or “choice”, but will in fact decrease both. And what is being planned will introduce a governmental bureaucratic nightmare in which privacy concerns will be completely disregarded as the IRS and others trade your information without your consent to ensure you’re not “gaming” the system or failing to follow orders.

As has been said in the past, it is clear that Americans want to see health care reformed. But it should also be clear that what Democrats are offering is not the reform the majority of people want.

A humble public servant dedicated to serving the people would have picked up on that by now. He or she would step back, reassess and, if necessary, start over. He or she would understand that an undertaking this large and complicated can’t be rushed or made to conform to some arbitrary legislative deadline. And, wanting what is best for the country, he or she would take the time necessary to propose, debate and craft legislation that meets the needs of the country and not his or her party.

A party politician would do precisely the opposite – and that’s what we’re seeing now.

There is a path to common sense reform that will, in fact, increase both competition and choice. The problem, of course, is it doesn’t involve much government. I say problem because it seems clear, despite glib assurances otherwise, that any solution this administration and Congress are going to come up with will include government to an extent never before seen – come hell or high water.

More government is not the solution to health care reform. Less government is. And until that is realized by those in power, they will continue to see a push back. They’ll also be called liars for as long as they continue to push the big lie they’re now trying to sell.



Tweet about this on TwitterShare on FacebookShare on Google+Share on TumblrShare on StumbleUponShare on RedditPin on PinterestEmail this to someone

17 Responses to Trying To Sell The Big Lie

  • But I like unicorns…please don’t take them away.

  • You are in an alternate reality. “Cranks” are defining the GOP these days. And you are one of them, not surprising, since you are an ex-military basket case who came back permanently emotionally scarred and therefore unable to feel anything for those poor unfortunates with no health insurance.

    You are literally totally backwards on your read of this. I decree it. You are so far away from reality on this, it’s almost a caricature. And yes, I know I’ve said that on every healthcare thread since the speech, but you dense righties just get me so darn mad with how wrong you are that I can’t help it. And it’s not either to lecture down to you guys and feel superior and thereby promote my shaky self-worth, so stop saying that!!

    I’m going to be laughing at you guys in a few months. Of course, if I’m wrong you “win” this one, you’ll get your worst possible outcome in a few years. So you thick righties should get on board right now, or things will get much, much worse. And no fair talking about how a complete crash of the whole country’s financial system due to entitlement debt would be the worst outcome. That won’t happen under wise leftists like Obama and Geitner. I decree it.

    You’re in a no-win situation — unless you decide to act with rationality and agree this is a problem and work towards compromises that can address this without falling into ideological BS. Yes, your ideology is BS. I decree it. It’s because of your unfeeling nature towards people who have no insurance, like I said before. But my ideology is good and pure and pragmatic and ideal – all of us in the faculty lounge agree on that, so I know I’m right about it.

    The alternative is the status quo. And stop bringing up all the tort reform and selling insurance across states and other ridiculous schemes. The GOP reforms aren’t serious. I tell you, if you don’t do what Obama wants, the status quo is the only alternative! And it’s horrible, don’t you see, horrible!

    If this doesn’t pass, or the GOP doesn’t compromise on something that can pass, then you get the status quo. Why that is when the Democrats have big majorities in both houses of Congress is a complex political sciency thing, but I decree that the GOP must compromise, or the alternative is just horrible. Watch and learn — you may end up learning that your insults really should be directed at yourself. And not at me, the way you mean righties do all the time.

    Or perhaps people can start working together, put aside ideology, and deal with the country’s problems. Of course, that doesn’t mean the left needs to put aside their ideology of socialist control of society, oh no! Because we have such good and pure motives. Unlike you vicious righties. Yes, you should put aside your ideology and embrace the glorious march to socialist salvation. Republicans have to recognize the Democrats have a majority so the GOP will have to compromise a bit more. And stop bringing up the whole Democratic majority thing! That’s not fair! Those Democrats who won’t bow down and, uh, I mean vote for Obama’s wise plan, whatever it is, are just influenced by mean, evil righties who have convinced them not to do the right thing. Won’t you please compromise a bit? Please? That would atone for your evil sins in influencing those well-meaning Democrats to go back and do whatever Obama says! Don’t you think you owe that to the rest of the country?

    You are not coping with the reality that the system as it stands is unsustainable. It is, it is, it is! And stop bringing up how Medicare and Medicaid are unsustainable. If we just combined everything into one huge bucket, it would all just work out! Don’t you see? And even if reform is halted, more and more people will lose coverage, have expanding costs, and bloat the deficit. Yes, if we can’t throw a whole bunch more people into the bucket to soak up the Medicare and Medicaid deficits, we’re in big trouble. And don’t you worry a bit about someday getting deficits in the overall program that make our current deficits look like pocket change. It won’t work out that way, because we wise leftists will get it right this time. Just give us one more chance! It’s all we need!

    Even if you manage through fear, misinformation and bluster stop this, it’ll come back in an even more government-intrusive form in the future. I decree it! Just as certain as the violence in Iraq was going to increase in 2008, this is certain too. You’ll just hate it if you don’t go along now! So submit, for your own good! This is a battle you ultimately will lose; all you can do is delay defeat. Because we wise leftists never, ever give up, and the press and academia and the entertainment industry are all on our side, so you dense righties wailing about “freedom” and “responsbility” are just out of touch and you need to give in for your own good. You can work with the Democrats, find compromises, focus on holding the administration to promises about deficit and bureaucratic inefficiencies, and be part of the solution. Wouldn’t that be better? We wise leftists would stop talking about how evil you are for at least a week. Wouldn’t that be worth it?

  • I got my daily dose of “I decree it!” I feel re-energized!

  • How many times will Obama repeat this “lie” and how are conservatives handling him in congress?

  • When the real lemonade stand Ward Churchill shows up after a pre-emptive Scerbing he is faced with the prospect of his own lemons having been pre-squeezed.

    But, seriously, stop for a moment, step outside the everyday laughing matter, and ask anew the question of what Scott Erb does.

    Despite all of the appearances that it is so, I think that there’s more to it than incredible innocent stupidity with psychological complications.

    • I’m baffled by it myself, Martin. He’s like someone from a Twilight Zone episode.

    • Oh man! You mean Erb lied to me about smaller government units and states deciding their own healthcare? Should I stop waiting for an explanation of how centralized healthcare leads to these? I was looking forward to learning how that works.

      • I wouldn’t hold my breath while waiting if I were you.

        But who knows? You might be the one that can figure out how to have a productive discussion. I rather doubt it, given the many who have tried and given up. If you want to invest the time, though, there’s no learning like learning from personal experience.

        • I doubt it, too. I suspect Erb has studied Nietzsche and taken him too seriously to have a productive discussion. It’s possible he’s practicing Alinsky’s socialism by stealth but since he would see how bad he is at it he’d give up, so I don’t think that’s it.

          Regardless of his beliefs, I do think the mixed messages and logic come partly from not communicating well. Nearly everyone has this problem, myself included, and can improve with practice. If one is going to shill for the collective, one might as well be good at it.

  • McQIt has also become a test of wills between a petulant president not used to being denied, a Congress run by the extreme left who are determined to pass their agenda while they have a chance and a people who are worried sick about the level of government spending and intrusion.

    You left out one other group: all the liberal bloodsuckers who want to ram this through because they see some benefit to themselves in the form of:

    (A) Health care that they don’t have to pay for (remember that simpering idiot back during the campaign who supported TAO because she firmly believed that, once he was elected, she wouldn’t have to pay for gas or her mortgage anymore?);

    (B) Feeling good and kind and virtuous because they’ve given something to “the poor”, or;

    (C) Feeling orgiastic triumph over the pharm industry, the insurance industry, and all the other “rich b*stards” who – at last! – will be made to pay their fair share.

    • Driving the “rich b*stards” to the state of “poor b*stards” wouldn’t be enough for most of them.

  • There is a simple solution to the “Big Lie”. Simply have any overages of the healthcare system made up by the salaries, pensions and personal property of those who voted for it.

    The Founding Fathers put “our lives, our fortunes, our sacred honor” on the line for the country, so there is a tradition involved here that should be upheld.

  • Assuming these lies are, in fact, lies, Obama must be neck-deep in this nonsense. It is frightening to hear him first lie, then shoo away the implications by using Ted Kennedy and a very emotionally-charging story as a cruddy defense of their tactics.

    But, really, I find this whole reform issue to be completely blown out of proportion. Sure, our system is flawed, but as long as people choose to make unhealthy or health-risking choices, there will be major bills to pay. That’s obviously due to the medical profession hiding behind their occupational shield and letting their profession sway people to think they’re primarily in it out of love, compassion, etc.

    Perhaps having more reasonable expenses to pay would be a major step forward. But, because that will never happen, there must be some focus on the opposite party’s part in the financial concern of this all. Unfortunately, whenever people do come out, the uncontemplated life of the left asserts a lack of compassion on the former’s behalf, while their dumbed-down, mood-based notion of compassion is what allows a foolish person to have care he is doing nothing for.

    Logically, that is clearly an error in the structure. The lack of care to people with pre-existing conditions, however, seems to be an “ethical” problem specific to individual “medical professionals”, not the system. ( tell me if I’m wrong, though.)

    The system, really, is only tainted by individual corruptness, not its structure. I can’t figure out how lefties don’t see this when they bash those striving for an ideology in this area. The only reason an ideal system supposedly wouldn’t work is because there is no where near enough personal accountability from any party ( in a conceptual, not political, sense, I mean).

    I’m sure I’m preaching to a choir when I say this, but — don’t blame an idea because people of your sort aren’t willing to co-operate ( for whatever horrible reason) with it. That just means YOU are the one unwilling to compromise. Under the assumption something is ideal, it logically follows we shouldn’t compromise any of its parts. The inconvenience inherent to it is just the underlying principle of prosperity in anything: work and long-term goal determination.

    Sorry for the long reply. I know it loses sparks after about the second paragraph.

    • That’s obviously due to the medical profession hiding behind their occupational shield and letting their profession sway people to think they’re primarily in it out of love, compassion, etc.

      Allow me to suggest that you familiarize yourself with one John Edwards (son of a mill-worker, you know), who would undoubtedly tell you that he is not, NOT hiding behind his shield as he builds houses made on channeling dead children to the point that caesareans are commonplace. The costs to doctors and those oh-so-evil insurers are obviously frivolous.

      Sorry for the long reply. I know it loses sparks after about the second paragraph.

      Didn’t take quite that long. Charge your battery before trying to get spark.