Tuesday, November 12, 2013

WHO'S SORRY NOW?

Sorry? Not the president---unless you count his most recent statement on his attempt to smooth over his earlier, uh, mis-statement. or less than precise words on whether we could keep our insurance if we liked it.  Mr. Obama seems to have an aversion to meaningful apologizing---and can parse words like Clinton, only better. It was the president's second attempt to do damage control and give an apology without actually giving one. Instead, he said he was "sorry for those who found themselves" without insurance. We are too, Mr. President, we are too.  Because you see, those folks didn't just find themselves in medical jeopardy, you put them there. Worse, back in 2010, when you were selling Obamacare to the public, you assured us that things would remain the same, if we chose to stay with our previously chosen insurance and in control of our own medical decisions. There was no qualifying or equivocating on whether one's insurance policy met your standards. No, that would have given us pause, but it would have said it like it was---which could have eventually caused a revolt.  But that one sentence, which he so boldly and comfortingly uttered, over and over again, was the grand closer, the big kahuna, the final nail that put this life altering piece of legislation over the top without a whimper from most of the American people---we trusted his words. After all, he is the president. But it was, and let us not parse words here--- a con job, and a big fat lie. Because there are now thousands of people who have indeed lost their insurance due to the fact that it did not match up to the standards set by the new Affordable Care Act. There are meetings being held now to find a way to rectify this situation, but that isn't really the point---which is, we were suckered into a deal under false pretenses.

Not only was it a lie, it was deception, even fraud, at the highest level in terms of sneaking a law by the people which was radical, controversial, and counter intuitive enough to our gut instincts, that it was thought it best to not tell the whole truth---sugar coat it, leave out a few details, do whatever it takes, but get it done. If you doubt that, you are the ones Obama and team were and are counting on. It is a documented fact  now, that Obama and his advisors knew very well that the "you can keep your insurance" statement was not totally true, i.e. the sin of omission, and that they discussed the matter thoroughly, knowing that it could come back to bite them.  But it was decided to gamble on the magic allure of Obama, and  go with it anyway---it was the means to an end, which they felt justifiable, even if was obtained by misleading the very people it would most affect. It was breathtaking arrogance, audacity, and a miscalculation of the American public's gullibility---or was it? Can we forgive and forget? Or will the sting of this betrayal lose the extraordinary luster of a once adored president?

 The law is the law now, and we are left to deal not only with the debacle of signing up, which is a comedians' joke treasure trove, but the fact that the whole plan is not working out well at all.  The so called electronic "glitches" are in the hundreds, and experts have been called in to work a registration fix by November 30th, but even if they succeed, the signs of systemic failure are looming larger every day. Young people, the ones who must  buy insurance in huge numbers, in order to float the economic load of paying for all the heretofore, extra uninsured, are not showing up.  Premiums and deductibles are rising. Employers are cutting people and hours. Insurance companies are balking, and  doctors are declining in numbers. The theory of insurance for everyone, paid for by those who do not want or can afford it,  the young and the middle class---appears to be an idea whose time may have come, but whose implementation lacked depth, experience, and pragmatism--- and perhaps most importantly, an idea too foreign and dichotomous to the American mind set to fully grasp, let alone fly.  But the train has left the station--the fix is in, and we must deal with this gargantuan plan, one way or the other, or watch it fall apart in pieces---a train wreck of epic proportions. And the attempted repair or undoing of such a calamity may be worse than the actual cause.

What next?  Look for more presidential speeches to shore up the president's falling popularity, Democrats joining Republicans scrambling to delay and redesign the plan, in order to protect their election chances. And next, though not least, prepare for higher taxes. It has to come. No such thing as free lunches or Utopia. We are there ---change has come, as it was promised. Hope? Not much, unless you were hoping for a more socialistic, European, welfare state, call it what you will---it's ever closer. The Affordable Care Act was one big giant step forward to that end---the bigger one yet to come, and it's called "one payer system.  Say hello to Uncle Sam---he wants you. Not your military service, but you, your labor, your money, and your healthcare choices. Sam's current personification is Barack Obama,  and change is his game.  He believes devoutly in what he's doing, enough to sacrifice his own integrity, perhaps even his  legacy.  But no matter, he will continue to do whatever it takes. His ideology precedes even his honesty. Sorry? Not even close----the goal, is change, and hang the cost.

 Have you heard the quiet lately?  Is it the silence of surrender or the speechlessness of outrage?    Are we sorry now,  and are we watching a president and his signature law go down in flames, taking with it our healthcare and consequently an even more weakened economy? But what about those who are actually being helped by the new law? Well, yes, there are those, a precious few---just not enough of them to foot the bill, and that could be a medical and financial disaster for all of us. Who knows where it all goes next---but the rumors are flying---from an extended delay of the bill, to a complete repeal. It should not be forgotten that other alternative plans were offered by the opposing party, but never considered, much less studied. Will they now get a second chance? When pigs fly. That would be called co-operation, compromise, rising above differences for the public good. Much easier to refer to the Republicans as "the party of no". Sort of like the insurance mis-statement---not really true, but a means to an end.

Gossip has it that those rascally Republicans secretly wish for Obamacare to fail, and that's why it's happening---all those bad vibes are causing the glitches. Really? Excuse me while I laugh out loud , as if the Republicans had that much power. That's about as outrageous as the other theory making the rounds---that President Obama also wants his own law to fail, so that the insurance companies will disappear under the burden of enforced payouts, with not enough incoming new customers, resulting in the final solution. You got it-----a one payer system, with the United States government in total control of our healthcare needs. Incredulous? Excuse me while I shudder to think---

And this just in---Bill Clinton, lead spokesman and top parser of the Democrat party today said that Barack Obama should honor his promise of allowing people to keep their insurance if they like it.  Wow---is that the sound of Dems breaking rank? Maybe pigs do fly. Because other heretofore lip zipped, loyal Democrats are expressing grave concerns over the signs of pending doom for the  new healthcare law.  It is looking more and more like an idea which was conceived with good intentions, but borne out of political expediency---and may very well die a premature death, due to delivery complications, and causing considerable grief and turmoil.

We're all truly sorry---most of us like the idea of better healthcare for more people.  We don't even mind paying a little more for it---we just don't like being coerced into it, without balanced representation, and kept from reading the fine print. Good always catches up with bad.  Here's to our health, and happier, more honest days ahead.





   

19 comments:

  1. We should expect glitches at the beginning of a huge program like this. I'll reserve judgement for a few more months.
    As for the underinsured who are forced into a real health insurance program, they were as good as uninsured. Not all policies qualify as actual health insurance, and who would want an Affordable Care Act that didn't define what is meant by "health insurance"?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The point is that people should be allowed to choose whether they wish to be under or over insured---not the government. But the bigger point of the above blog is that the whole truth was not told---because it was too potentially too foreign a concept to the American mind, which doesn't like to be told what to do.

      Glitches yes, but massive malfunctioning??? We shall see----

      Delete
  2. People ought not be allowed to choose substandard coverage any more than they should be able to choose to not be insured at all.We all pay their costs when coverage is inadequate. We don't allow builders to erect substandard buildings. Same thing....

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You are still missing the point of the blog, but granted, part of the conversation ---but to the point,there was gross misrepresentation and misleading in order to make this law palatable. Whether people ought to be allowed to choose substandard coverage is a matter of opinion--- not fact, and we as a people are still hashing that out.
      But the enforcement of this law, by not giving us the true and total facts, precluded and prevented us from drawing our own conclusions and deciding for ourselves how we wish to proceed as a country. That was/is very troubling and so against our principles---it was an example of what's to come if we continue to slant to the left and surrender our individual rights to those who claim to know what's best, but don't have a clue as to the repercussions of asking a few to pay for the many---in this case, there simply isn't enough of the few, and the remainder of the cost of Obamacare will come from the young and the middle-class----call it what you will, it is taxation without representation, and whether you agree philosophically or not, it was deceptively put in place, and has socialism written all over it. Kellee

      Delete
  3. Well, it seems the Obama team is caving to the Repubs aniyway, so you should feel well represented (in spite of the chaos). But you have finally pushed me to object that your man "W" and his team were certainly lying about WMD as a pretext for killing thousands of American soldiars and hundreds of thousands of Iraqis. It is my belief that the former was an oversight while the latter was deliberate (and far more lethal!).

    ReplyDelete
  4. Interesting response. There's always the blame Bush defense, and that particular one will always be a matter of opinion. George Bush, himself, would probably love to have a second chance to do things differently. He went with the information, which turned out to be wrong, but which was all he had at the time. Obama had the correct information, but chose not to disclose it---big difference.

    ReplyDelete
  5. How is it that so many of us had better information than George Bush? We knew there were no WMD!

    ReplyDelete
  6. Really? You should have spoken up!! Of course they would have asked for proof against evidence to the contrary. Did you have that? How is it that both the Senate and House approved the attack on Iraq based on evidence that pointed to wmd's----this was a calculated response by a nation that had just been hit hard, trying to fight back against a vicious enemy bound to strike again. Bush may have acted not quite as you would have wished, but
    his motives to protect the country from further harm were noble, not devious---and we nor our embassies were attacked again during the remainder of his term.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Hooray! The filibuster has been busted (partially, at least).

    ReplyDelete
  8. Wait till the shoe is no the proverbial other foot. Oh wait, it has been--the Repubs. considered at one time, much to the fury and outcry of Obama, Joe Biden, Harry Reid, etc., etc. Difference is that the Repubs. did not go forward with this attempt to change the way our system was set us by the founding fathers in order that the party in power could not run rough shod over the minority, thereby upsetting the balance of power. The Nuclear Option should be stopped cold, or it's one more step to completely make a mockery of our 2 party system.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Congratulations to Kerry & Obama for a first step away from nuclear proliferation--at least in Iran.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Fingers crossed----but is it enough? Apparently many in congress, not just the Republicans, Israel, Saudi Arabia, and others are very concerned it is not. Who knows at this point---I liked Kerry's comment--verification is key. A soft stick and hands off policy may be the way to go, but who will take our place, and will they carry a mean stick, and fists in our face?? Time will tell---

    ReplyDelete
  11. Same to you! And may I add, Merry Christmas, Happy Hanukkah, Kwanzaa, and Happy New Year to all!!!!

    Thank you for your readership----may the new year bring lots of conversational fodder---about the miracle of co-operation!!

    ReplyDelete
  12. On what grounds is Michele Bachmann calling for the impeachment of the President?

    ReplyDelete
  13. "Impeachable offenses". Ms.Bachman feels strongly that Obama plays fast and loose with the constitution, using and abusing it to suit his agenda. And she's not alone or insane----there is a rising tide of outrage that may eventually transcend politics.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Specifics, please!

    ReplyDelete
  15. You need to ask Ms.Bachman----her quote, not mine. While I feel Obama is one of the most partisan, divisive, presidents ever, and over uses his executive privileges---impeachment of an American President is pretty hard to pull off---unless you are Nixon, and ironically, h Watergate pales in comparison to.other possible impeachable offenses by this and other presidents after Nixon.

    ReplyDelete
  16. The American people elected Obama and now must live with the president he became---for better or worse. In my opinion, that affordable healthcare act was in many ways unconstitutionally presented to us and implemented against a majority of people---then all sorts of changes and exemptions made without congressional approval. Impeachable offense?? How about Ben Ghazi and the pres. still not forthcoming on the details??? The IRS scandal, and now comes Gates' revelation that Obama based a huge military decision on political reasons when sending more of our troops to Afghanistan for the surge---impeachable offenses??? Perhaps not----but certainly very good reasons for his flagging popularity and support---More importantly, that perhaps the peoples' choice , while popular and historically satisfying, and idealistically well meant, was not in our long term best interests----as exemplified by almost any measure, but mostly by our still fragile economy-and high unemployment figures. We are suffering the excruciating pains of too much tinkering and change ---adrift and taking on water. SO.S.

    ReplyDelete