In spite of myself, I watched the last two health-care speeches Cheerleader-in-Chief Obama gave. I have to admit this guy is Teflon slick. He could sell iceboxes to Eskimos without breaking a sweat.
If you happen to know me personally, you know my watching any politician’s scripted lies is just something I don’t do, because I end up screaming at the TV and carrying on to the point that I’m sure the neighbors wonder if they should call the cops. I can’t stand it when the pols totally ignore the questions and just spout “their message.”
Obama is certainly the king of “staying on point.” It doesn’t matter what anybody asks him, he just nods his head (pretending to care about the question) and then spouts propaganda. Anyway, I watched him and screamed at the TV until I was hoarse, but at least the cops didn’t come.
Speaking of calling the cops, did you catch the fluff about Obama calling the policeman stupid for arresting the evidently obnoxious black professor? There are two important points in this. First, is Obama’s attitude. Again, he stopped short of apologizing for his arrogance (or ignorance), depending on why he shot off his mouth in the first place. And secondly, as is his habit, he minimized the whole thing.
Once again, Obama was “surprised” by the outcry. Whenever anyone dares to call him on anything, he scoffs at the idea that he is offensive. He is “surprised.” Just like he was “surprised” that people were outraged by his nasty comments about the people he claimed “cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren’t like them” out of their bitterness over lost jobs. Just like he was “surprised” over the outcry over his plan to generate extra budget money by forcing wounded veterans to pay for service-related injuries (Washington Post, May 2009). What unmitigated gall!
This guy has taken the stand that he can say or do anything, and if anyone calls him on it, there is something wrong with them. Anyway, since we have sort of gotten back to health-care “reforms,” I propose that there are critical questions somebody should be held responsible for answering about this stuff.
Here they are: Mr. Obama, is it true that you are lying when you promise that “if you like your health plan, you can keep it”? According to both the current bills, the “reform” you are going to create will be a new government bureaucracy to determine “qualified plans.” How can you then say people can keep their insurance when you are going to decide which are “qualified”? Isn’t it also true that people will have to be in one of your plans within five years at the most?
Mr. Obama, isn’t it also true that the five-year thing is a smoke screen as well, since if there is any change in people’s insurance at any time, they will have to immediately stitch to your plan? Again, be careful how you answer, since it is in black and white on pages 16 and 17 of the house bill.
Is it true, Mr. Obama, that a person like me, who chooses not to buy insurance because I have found that it is MUCH cheaper for me not to have it will now be denied that freedom of choice? Isn’t it true that pages 167 and 168 provide for a huge fine for me when I file my income tax if I cannot prove that I am in one of your “qualified plans”? What a coincidence that that fine will be the equivalent of the cost of your plan for me and that I will then be forcibly enrolled in the plan of YOUR choice!
A couple of questions about the cost of this fiasco … Is it true that you plan to pay for this so-called “reform” by (1) taxing the “rich” and, if so, are you not smart enough to know that this will kill a corresponding number of jobs (about a half-trillion dollars worth)? And (2) Isn’t it true that the other half of your trillion-dollar boondoggle will come from cutting Medicare?
While you are trying to come up with a witty reason to cut the service to the most needy recipients, would you like to comment on the fact that you don’t even intend to pass those “savings” along to health care, but instead you are cutting seniors benefits to spend a huge amount of money on creating another bureaucracy so you can hand out government jobs for “community transformation grants,” and for “home visits” and “services for migrant workers,” and for new government councils, programs and advisory boards?
These are the critical issues, folks.
Since I have only this small column, which doesn’t amount to a thousandth of the size of the health-care bill, I’d like to ask just one last question: Mr. Obama, since we all know that the last few months of a person’s life is when they run up the highest health-care costs, and since your bill calls for mandatory “counseling” for seniors (Pages 425 to 430), “counseling sessions” where they, regardless of their state of mind, I presume, will be given “alternatives” for end-of-life choices such as not receiving antibiotics or “artificially administered nutrition or hydration”… Are you not trying to target the elderly for quicker, cheaper and more convenient death?
If so, at what point will there be assisted-suicide machines available in medical facilities, and will their use be a matter of choice for the individual, or will you be helping with the decisions? Ridiculous? We’ll see. But before you write me off as a crackpot, don’t forget, folks, Obama has already proved by his dedication to abortion that he has no respect for life. Why wouldn’t cheap death be a major facet of future “health care”?
Rick Coddington is a third-generation native New Mexican. He attended UNM and studied political science. He has lived in Socorro since 1974. His opinions do not necessarily represent the Mountain Mail.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment