I admit I didn’t see the president’s speech tonight. I was on a plane to Washington DC to appear tomorrow night in a Webcast put on by the Family Research Council on Obamacare.
But I have read it. I’m tired and have to get up early tomorrow, and so I don’t want to write a long missive since there was really very little that was new. But a few points stick out in their sheer disingenuousness (and I am being polite). From the speech:
And one more misunderstanding I want to clear up – under our plan, no federal dollars will be used to fund abortions, and federal conscience laws will remain in place.
But one of the first things his Administration did was to move to revoke the Bush conscience clause! His “support” for conscience may result in existing protections for dissenting health care workers being materially eroded.
Reducing the waste and inefficiency in Medicare and Medicaid will pay for most of this plan.
Oh sure!
Everyone in this room knows what will happen if we do nothing. Our deficit will grow. More families will go bankrupt. More businesses will close. More Americans will lose their coverage when they are sick and need it most. And more will die as a result. We know these things to be true.
Beyond the rank–and desperate sounding–fear mongering, there he goes again. The choice isn’t between this monstrosity and “doing nothing,” and POTUS knows it.
He offered an equivocal commitment to investigate whether to support “tort reform,” and is squishy on the public option. But having read the speech, I still don’t know exactly his “my plan,” consists of. And he didn’t suggest opening health insurance to a nationwide market that would really ramp up competition and bring down prices. No, he wants companies–some of which are non profit, by the way–to remain locked in the same closed system and compete with the government.
Odd: Even after this speech and all its anger, in many ways, the president remains aloof.
September 10th, 2009 | 1:18 am
Abortion is in the bill and Obama knows it. It’s not an SHS issue, but it shows how relevant that issue is. He has to hide his record and cover up what he intends to do about it with health care reform.
September 10th, 2009 | 1:39 am
Your comments are unsubstantiated. They are your negative comments, to a plan. What is your plan, and add your motivations. Do your motivations emerge from a desire to improve the quality of life of our citizens, or does your motivation come from fear? What is your plan, not your grunts and groans?
September 10th, 2009 | 9:44 am
Helping the Family Research Council with its propaganda efforts? Wesley, until now I had respect for your integrity. I’m afraid that’s no longer possible now that you’ve decided to become a shill for the extreme right wing. You ought to be ashamed.
September 10th, 2009 | 10:53 am
Dear Mr Smith,
The President very eloquently described the problems some patients have had with cold, heartless, insurance company bureaucracies.
What he did not do was explain why things would be better if we replace those competing bureaucracies with one single cold, heartless bureaucracy backed up by the State’s monopoly of violence.
Heaven help us.
P.
September 10th, 2009 | 11:16 am
>>Odd: Even after this speech and all its anger, in many ways, the president remains aloof.<<
Come on HW, let the one without sin cast the first stone!
I hear ya HW! Where would he be without sinner vic's "IT" man to help him out?
HW! I'll have you know that LOT a people like "Boloney" :)
Peace
September 10th, 2009 | 1:24 pm
“We cannot afford to do nothing” is the President’s favorite straw-man argument.
September 10th, 2009 | 2:10 pm
If abortion coverage is not in the current plan, our dear Sen. Stabenow (Mich) assured me in a misdirected reply that she will make sure it is:
“You can count on me to fight to protect women’s reproductive health services. As a member of the Finance Committee, which is drafting the health reform bill, I am working to ensure that this bill does not restrict access to abortion services. As health reform continues through the legislative process, I will continue to push for comprehensive health services for all women.”
September 10th, 2009 | 3:40 pm
History Writer–Would you please construct a well written essay explaining the details of the Obama Health Care Plan– maybe even compare and contrast those details with the current system–Remember what you’re in favor of will impact 300 million people–If you can’t then shame on you!
September 10th, 2009 | 5:11 pm
HW, how does pointing out BHO’s BS and errors make anyone a shill for FRC? You sound more like a shill for BHO, the shrinking president.
September 10th, 2009 | 6:23 pm
Response to L.Price, HistoryWriter, Victor et al:
One does not have to espouse ‘right wing’ values, nor disclose personal motivations or propose a ‘plan’ to see what your government intends.
As a Canadian, we have a ‘plan’ that covers all of our medical costs (including hospitlization). However, we have paid a very dear price for all the freebies. Many, if not most, Canadians do not have a doctor. Our health care system is in shambles.
Our government, wisely realizing the impending Baby Boom crunch, is not opposed to either passive or active euthanasia to ’solve’ it’s problems. One might call it Canada’s ‘Final Solution’.
What I propose: read by all means the regular media to find out what the government wishes you to believe will be the ‘plan.’ After that, read alternate media to discover opposing views. Then, using the wonderful gift of reason, sift through the information presented, and form your own conclusion, without ‘left’ or ‘right’ wing bias.
The truth is there if one wishes to see it.
Oh, how I wish my fellow citizens had taken notice of what our government’s true intentions were . . .
Perhaps, if more people had noticed, my wife and I might have had a doctor today.
Wake up, brothers and sisters in the USA. Time is short.
September 10th, 2009 | 10:17 pm
How many warnings from Canadians and Brits will it take to wake people up?
September 10th, 2009 | 11:23 pm
Why is it everytime someone questions or disagrees with those on th left, that person is automatically branded a “right wing extremist” or some such nonsense?
You libs are a hoot!! LOL
-Richard
September 11th, 2009 | 10:23 am
Richard: Why? Because, in this case, “you can tell a man who boozes by the company he chooses…”
September 11th, 2009 | 10:29 am
“How many warnings from Canadians and Brits will it take to wake people up?”
What warnings? Besides a handful of anecdotal stories, we Canadians live longer, have lower rates of child mortality and have better cancer survival rates. I’ve lived in Australia too, where many complain about the changes that were made to Australia’s health system. The difference there is that the government privatized it and it became more expensive for the same services.
Where are these warnings exactly? As a Canadian I haven’t stumbled across them and I definitely haven’t had to face them in my times in hospital.
Mr. Smith, as a first time reader of your blog, I got very little from reading your responses to Obama’s speech. I’m not sure how a speech you read could be defined as “angry”, that’s more a physical presentation thing than word use. I’m also not particularly convinced by rebuttals such as “Oh sure!”. Oh sure what?
September 11th, 2009 | 9:27 pm
Unless Andre Dubuc is living on an ice floe off the coast of Baffin Island, he must be hallucinating and should start taking his medicine again.
Six out of seven Canadians have a regular family doctor. And whether they have one or not, in most cities there are walk-in clinics that are almost as common as Starbucks. They’re called “walk-in” because you just walk in off the street, no appointment necessary.
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/life/health/canadians-happy-with-primary-health-care-study-says/article1229169/
From the article: “The study found that 95 per cent of Canadians with chronic health conditions had a regular place of care, either a family doctor, or community health centre. … Dr. Johnston said she was heartened by the study’s many optimistic findings, including the relatively short wait times. Eighty-five per cent of adults requiring immediate care for a minor problem were seen within a day.”
September 12th, 2009 | 1:49 am
This must be why Canadians travel to Detroit and Cleveland for surgeries.
September 15th, 2009 | 1:56 pm
Don’t you mean speeches?
Links
Blogs
Find Us
Contact