Flabbergasted. That is the only word that can come to describing my reaction to BO’s latest spin on his government-run health care “option.” Yep, he has the audacity, the unmitigated GALL, to dare evoke (and quote from!!!) the Judeo-Christian bible and say that anyone who doesn’t want government-run health care is “immoral” and “bearing false witness.” He’s implying that supporting this travesty is “the Christian thing to do.” WTF? Sorry, but how immoral is it to suddenly “find” God again? It’s bad enough when he changed his rhetoric mid-campaign to start thanking God and saying “God Bless America” (a thing he’d refused to do until polls showed that people disliked this stance, so LO! “God Bless America” pops up in his campaign speeches.). But THIS? He has the friggin’ nerve to say that I (and yes, I do take it personally) am immoral for thinking that THIS health care reform would be a complete disaster for this country? How dare he? I am absolutely disgusted to the core of my being by this. I really can’t even describe how despicable and creepy and downright sleezy this is.
Strap yourselves in, we’re in for a bumpy ride. BO adamantly stressed that he would accept no health reform without a public option (which means government-controlled health care, the “public” “opts” into this when they have no other choice due to the tax incentives to employers to push you into it), then one of his peeps wanted to put her finger to the wind and see if we’d buy it (pretty much the same thing, the same results anyway) as a “co-op” (we didn’t), so now it’s back to having to have it. The democrats have the numbers and can push it through without any republican votes, they may.
But BO is floundering, and he’s not sure what to do now that the entire country isn’t swooning over his empty rhetoric. He has to have answers now, a plan, a way to explain it to people, a way to convince us that his goal of a single-payer healthcare system (this sounds innocuous, but it *means* socialized medicine, nothing more, nothing less). He tried catering to republicans by “selling” it as a way to increase competition and cut costs. The trouble is that he has no idea how a free market system works, and he was way out of his league. The republicans (and many independents, for that matter, and a smattering of dems) collectively rolled their eyes and pointed out the obvious. The government is not “competition” in a free market system. The government writes the laws, including those that might regulate, tax, and otherwise “beat” the competition. D’oh.
So then it was the co-op thing, which BO was careful not to endorse but rather waited until he got a feel for the reaction. It was bad. Dems AND reps hated that one. So now, word is that he’s going to appeal to our emotions and morals by putting it out there as a “moral issue.”
Let’s think about this. BO wants to get people healthcare who don’t have access to it within the current employer-based system. That sounds great. I want that, too. But what is the benefit of dragging down the middle classes to “help” lower classes? Forcing everyone within a certain salary scale (probably below his famous $250k) onto a government health plan that cannot hope to be as good as many of them already have with BlueCross or (in MA) Tufts improves whose life or healthcare exactly? Sure, some people will have coverage, but at a huge cost to everyone else (and no, I don’t mean taxes). Their health care quality and quantity will plummet, there is no way the government can provide the same coverage and access to medical care that Blue Cross can.
It’s like having two children, one of whom is very bright and the other of whom is of average intelligence. Rather than encouraging the bright child and nourishing his or her abilities and promise, we discourage him. We tell him that he’s got to give up his dreams because it’s “not fair” that he has more potential than his sibling. While we’re at it, let’s perform some sort of surgery (lobotomy perhaps?) to ensure that he stays at the same level as his less-able brother. This makes sense how? This encourages and rewards excellence how? It doesn’t. And how do you think that bright child will feel being dragged down through no fault of his own? Happy and fulfilled or resentful, bitter, and angry? (well, pre-lobotomy, I suppose).
Why not encourage and support both kids at their own level? You know, nurture them both and help them both to succeed. Give extra tutoring and spend more time reading to the average kid? Likewise, why can’t we help people who don’t have healthcare without ensuring that everyone (making less than, say, $250k) has substandard healthcare. But, hey! Look at all the people who have coverage (crappy coverage, but look! The numbers are happy-making).
But that’s what we are being asked to do. Why would we disable ourselves in order to cover more people? Especially when that’s not the only and no where near the best option? Obama’s “my way or the highway” on the one hand, and the weak, waffling, grasping attempts he’s making to sell it to blue dog dems are making me seriously, truly upset.
And to make the day all the better, I got an email from the Obama camp stating that only people associated with (or presumably brainwashed by) special interests dislike or oppose Obama’s healthcare reform plan. Oh really? I’m not a special interest; I’ve never been contacted by one. First, anyone who disagrees with him is called by the government a “security threat” and “potential domestic terrorist” ala Timothy McVeigh, then anyone who disagrees with him should be “reported” to the White House by their neighbors, and now anyone who disagrees is immoral? I find the whole thing distasteful. I’m not only immoral, but I also can’t think for myself. No wonder I had no ideas, values, or ideological base prior to the launch of Fox News in 1996. I was an empty vessel just waiting to be filled up with rightwing “lies.” PUH-LEASE! The guy’s a jerk. That’s all there is to it.
Next, it’ll be that I’m a racist for opposing it. Just you wait.