Free Markets, Free People


Barack Obama’s Health Care Editorial

Barack Obama editorial in the NY Times is another part of cranking up the left wing scream machine in effort to counter the detrimental effect townhall protesters have had on the Democrat’s health care grab. It is mostly appeals to emotion and the repeating of discredited talking points (to include the “AARP supports this” nonsense). But these lines especially caught my attention:

We are bound to disagree, but let’s disagree over issues that are real, and not wild misrepresentations that bear no resemblance to anything that anyone has actually proposed. This is a complicated and critical issue, and it deserves a serious debate.

They totally contradict this line within the same editorial:

I hear more and more stories like these every single day, and it is why we are acting so urgently to pass health-insurance reform this year.

This is a familiar Obama tactic. Give lip service through high sounding rhetoric about “serious debate”, but in reality be focused on “urgently pass[ing] health insurance this year” and avoiding debate. It is supposed to fool you into thinking he’s committed to debate while in reality he’s trying to push this legislation through as quickly as possible.

Serious debates are not time sensitive – they go on until the debate is settled to everyone’s satisfaction. That is not at all Obama or the Democrat’s intent.

That takes us to the most disingenuous line in the op/ed:

In the end, this isn’t about politics.

That, of course, is nonsense on stilts. In the end, this is all about politics and that point is demonstrated by the rush to pass the legislation.

If, as Obama asserts, this is about “people’s lives and livelihoods” and also a “complicated and critical issue, and it deserves a serious debate”, then you have to ask – what’s the rush? Don’t “complicated and critical issues” deserve close scrutiny and extended debate?

On the other hand, if he actually believes it is about “people’s lives and livelihoods” and we must rush to accommodate the people, why does the bulk of the proposed legislation not kick in until 2013? If it’s not about politics, why is the implementation date one year after a second term would start? How does that start date support the rhetoric about the “urgency” of the matter?

In reality, there is no final bill and there has been no real debate anyone can point too in Congress. In fact it has taken the people going to townhall meetings and passionately expressing their displeasure to start the debate.

The “not about politics” is more of the glib Obama nonsense that people are beginning to see through. This is all politics – because he and the Democrats know that if they actually have a “serious debate”, this most likely wouldn’t pass. The rush to pass it is specifically to avoid that debate, gloss over the details and get it into law while Obama still has some political capital.

That effort, as we’ve seen through the polls, is in serious trouble now and Democrats can deny that or try to wave it away until the cows come home – but that won’t change anything.

However, and again despite Barack Obama’s rhetoric to the contrary (“But let’s make sure that we talk with one another, and not over one another.“), this op/ed is an attempt to talk over the opposition, not with it. And it is beginning of an attempt by the left to ramp up an effort to talk over the townhall protesters and lessen their obvious impact which has been negative for the administration. Again, if you don’t believe that, simply read where Obama contradicts his high sounding rhetoric by doing precisely what he condemns:

In the coming weeks, the cynics and the naysayers will continue to exploit fear and concerns for political gain.

Obviously, at least according to Obama, you can’t have a valid argument against his political health care prescription, but must instead be a “cynic” or “naysayer” trying to “exploit fear” for “political gain”.

And, of course, we all know Obama and the Democrats would never do that, don’t we?

~McQ

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn
  • Tumblr
  • Digg
  • Reddit
  • email
  • Print
  • Google Bookmarks

19 Responses to Barack Obama’s Health Care Editorial

  • From Saul alinsky’s Rule for Radicals:
    RULE 7: “A tactic that drags on too long becomes a drag.”

    Obama is fast approaching the limit for his push for the Socialization of Health Care in the US. His tactics are becoming dated and as a result, he is losing ground. What is even worse is there is no “opponent” in losing. He is losing due to his own hubris. Even the left are now questioning his tactics. For him to have such an insurmountable advantage in both the House and Senate and still be on the defensive has his own questioning his ability to lead.

    But then what do you expect from “Hope & Change?”

  • In the coming weeks, the cynics and the naysayers will continue to exploit fear and concerns for political gain.

    ***

    And racists! Don’t forget the racists also! And the “evil-mongers” deserve some love to, right Baracky?

  • Why did Obama write this editorial? It’s text is no different than any speech he’s given for the past 2 months. All promises (everyone will be covered for everything. And it’ll cost less!!! Everything’s going to change, unless you’re happy with what you got now in which case nothing will change.) with no actual details as to *HOW* he’s going to accomplish any of it.

    • If you repeat a story often enough, more and more people will fall for it.  After all, if you’re that insistent, it must be true!

      I’ll say this– when you think about the effort that has been made to push this through, you quickly realize that under normal circumstances, this entire concept would have been dead and buried by now.  Only the administration’s decision to press the issue to the limit has kept it alive so far.  I think they’ve reached the limit, though.  It is beginning to fall apart as portions of it get stripped out.  It looks as if the Republicans will help to craft a bill that omits the worst parts of Obamacare (which is to say, most of it).

      That won’t be the best conclusion to this (having the whole mess shot down would be) but it is possible that we wind up with a scenario where a far less damaging version of Obamacare passes, AND we get a President who has gone so far out on a limb for it that he’s effectively a lame duck just months into his first term.  Immigration reform won’t come fast enough to save him, and might just wind up being another disaster for him.

  • It seems there is now reporting that the White House is willing to drop the Public Option in lieu of an Insurance Cooperative because of – wait for it – REPUBLICAN PRESSURE!

    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/32437468/ns/politics-white_house

    LOL!!!

    • Baracky and his party are shameless liars. It’s more likely that they’ll drop it from public discussion and then stealth insert it during conference committe when the House and Senate hammer out differences.

  • “In the coming weeks, the cynics and the naysayers will continue to exploit fear and concerns for political gain.”

    I guess when The Clown™ says that if we don’t pass his Marxist takeover of health care millions of people will suffer, he is not “exploiting fear,” but telling it like it is.

    From The Liberal Playbook, Lesson 3:

    “When we liberals do something, it is always good, and is always based in fact. When the right does anything, it is always bad, and is never based in fact. Even if all we are telling are straight-up lies, this rule must always be obeyed, by the party apparatus and the media.”

  • Even if all we are telling are straight-up lies, this rule must always be obeyed, by the party apparatus and the media.”

    Yeah, the end justifies the means and any end they do is the right one and all of us are just too stupid to realize it.

    He is a friggin’ turd.  President Turd.

    • “He is a friggin’ turd. President Turd.”

      Hehe. Cute, but not accurate. After all, turds are not in charge of anything, and as they are sitting in the t-bowl, you can stare at them and realize that YOU have all the power over them. When you flush, the turd goes down the drain. End of turd.

      With The Clown™, you cannot stare too long while waiting, before he considering how to take over your business, dictate how much you can make, call you a piece of garbage for earning too much, tax the heck out of you, make you subscribe to a Marxist health care plan that includes abortions and death panels, all the while apologizing to the whole world about what a terrible place America is while he and his fantastically dim wife jetset around the world on our dime.

      A turd? Nah, a turd is powerless unless you give it power. The Clown™ has so much power, and he is using it to destroy this beautiful country that I love and that my relatives fought and died for. I wish we could flush The Clown™ down the t-bowl right now, but we have to wait until November 2010 to punish his party for their slavishness to him, and November 2012 before we can toss his Marxist fanny out of office and ship him back to his fellow Marxists in Chicago.

  • And now a commercial message:

    “A lot of people have been saying mean things about the Democrats’ plan to overhaul health care in the United States. These people haven’t even seen the plan yet. It’s not even written, and they’re against it.
    “Write your members of Congress. Tell them you are in favor of the Democrats’ plan to overhaul health care.
    “Paid for by the Democratic Committee of Faithers.”

    Genius!

  • “Yeah, the end justifies the means and any end they do is the right one and all of us are just too stupid to realize it.”

    I think its more specific that this.  Obama uses a couple of Clinton tactics almost pathologically.  The first is to flat out promise one thing and then do the opposite.

    The second is to accuse the opposition of what you’re doing or about to do.  Case in point, the astro-turfing accusation put the right on the defensive so that the left could deploy a true and obvious astro-turfing campaign.

    Among the right, it was expected almost laughable fare.  But that sentiment never reached the MSM because the left’s initial false accusation prevented it.

  • Did you ever see a politician that had seen the light (that just might save his personal political career) …
    “I will never vote for a bill to kill old people, period,” he said.
    For some context, here’s Ross responding to the attack ads he says he’s been seeing:

    I read the newspaper this morning. $57 million has been spent in the last six months, most of it in the last 45 days, trying to scare folks. I saw an ad the other night on TV. It scared the living daylights out of me. But I went back and watched it again. It used the word “could” six times in 60 seconds.
    [...]
    I can tell you, I’ve laid down my set of principles, so I will not force government-run health care on anyone. If there ever is government-run health care, the first ones to sign up should be the president and every member of Congress, including myself. You should be able to keep the insurance you’ve got today, if you like it, and always choose your own doctor. No federal funding for illegal immigrants or for abortion, and no rationing of health care. I will never vote for a bill to kill old people, period. [emphasis added]

    Just yesterday, Ross got a standing ovation when he bragged about standing up to President Obama and Nancy Pelosi.

  • You CAN have a valid argument against his proposal without being an exploiter of fear, but from my vantage point I have seen plenty of that as well. 

    I have an open letter about health care to my American neighbors on my blog, if you wish to read it.

  • An administration official said tonight that Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius “misspoke” when she told CNN this morning that a government run health insurance option “is not an essential part” of reform.

  • This was my favorite:

    “… reform will provide every American with some basic consumer protections that will finally hold insurance companies accountable. A 2007 national survey actually shows that insurance companies discriminated against more than 12 million Americans in the previous three years because they had a pre-existing illness or condition. The companies either refused to cover the person, refused to cover a specific illness or condition or charged a higher premium.”

    Who HASN’T The Annointed One demonized in his desperate attempt to ram this POS through the Congress??? He’s accused doctors of performing unnecessary surgery. He’s accused common citizens of being “astroturf”. He’s accused drug companies of profiteering. Now, he’s accusing insurance companies of “discrimination” because they (wait for it!) either won’t cover or else demand higher premiums from people who are ALREADY SICK.

    Wow. The nerve of those heartless b*stards!

    Hey, if I go crash my car or my house burns down today, would it be discrimination if an insurance company refused after the fact to issue a policy to pay for the damages?

    The business of suggesting that the “public option” might be off the table seems to me a transparent ploy to attempt to tamp down the protests, which is a tacit admission that TAO KNOWS that they are real and not “astroturf”. Even if the offer was genuine, I’d still oppose this cowpat of an idea because (A) Uncle Sugar has no role to play in health care and (B) I don’t trust that the dems wouldn’t sneak the option back into the legislation during conference.

    At any rate, TAO looks like a desperate fool in all of this, which isn’t surprising to those who’ve maintained that he is as woefully unqualified for his office as any man who’s ever held it.

  • “An administration official said tonight that Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius `misspoke’ when she told CNN this morning that a government run health insurance option “is not an essential part” of reform.”

    Whoops to Sebelius, but the thing is out of her hands now.

    On Fox News Sunday, Senator Kent Conrad (D-ND) said that there have never been enough votes to pass the “public option” and that “chasing after that rabbit” has been a waste of time.

    Sebelius can say anything she wants, but it is out of her hands. If Conrad says that the P.O. (for “Public Option” and not “Post Office”) is dead, then it is D-E-A-D.

    As in “doornail.”

    So Sebelius can, like every other thug in this criminal maladministration, suck it up. She has nothing to say that is worth listening to.

  • I think if Obama had not been in such a hurry to pass this before the August recess he would have more support on it from the voters. How can you be pushing to pass a plan that is not even finalized.

  • There are “Physics Foibles”.
    Chaos, Entropy, Heisenberg Uncertainty and Godel Incompleteness
    Recognizing the physics foibles has led to greater understanding.
    But physics believes in numbers “the supreme court of science”. There are “Medical Foibles” – numbers are ignored. The ratio of doctors to population has decreased in my life span. Half the med school populations are now female – where are the other male haves? The economic laws say that shortages demand higher prices.