From the glaring contradictions between earlier and later professions Obama voiced at subsequent appearances during his campaign, to the string of grandiose promises that he made up on the stump but obviously never had any intention of fulfilling once in office, to the omnipresent cloak of darkness enshrouding his current executive operations, Barack Obama plainly considers himself to be above the rigors of normal scrutiny by which the American people have historically kept their leaders in check.
What seemed at first to be a major gaffe by Attorney General Eric Holder has since manifested itself as yet another flagrant pronouncement from the executive branch that it no longer considers itself answerable to the American people on any issue. Rather, it operates from a belief in its absolute moral and philosophical superiority, and asserts virtually unchecked power as a result.
On May 14, when appearing before a Congressional Committee, Representative Ted Poe (R-TX) asked Holder if he had read the actual text of Arizona S.B. 1070, the enormously controversial "Immigration Bill." Holder explained that he had not, but has been willing, both before and since his testimony, to ascribe racist motives to it and generally deride its scope and purpose.
The initial public amazement over the impression of Holder's poorly planned appearance on Capitol Hill exponentiated only a few days later when Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano made a similar profession. Yet both Napolitano and Holder have been extremely vocal in their criticism of the law. Although its text runs barely ten pages, they flatly state that they have no first-hand knowledge of its contents.
In truth, their actions represent neither poor planning nor botched public appearances. Rather, they are purposefully telling the nation that they, along with the entire Obama cabal, have no need to deal with the specifics of this issue. In essence, the law is bad because they say so, regardless of its contents. Such a stance reveals much more sinister undercurrents that constitute a burgeoning threat to the nation.
The incomprehensible arrogance of the American Left, defined and empowered by its canon of "political correctness," places it beyond any necessity to deal with the specifics of the Arizona law, or any inconvenient law for that matter. It is enough to simply categorize the law as incompatible with the Obama definition of what America is, or what he envisions that it should be. From that point forward, and on that basis alone, it is to be disparaged and condemned. The liberal point of view is simply superior, and no further discussion of the details on this, or any other issue, is necessary.
From the glaring contradictions between earlier and later professions Obama voiced at subsequent appearances during his campaign, to the string of grandiose promises that he made up on the stump but obviously never had any intention of fulfilling once in office, to the omnipresent cloak of darkness enshrouding his current executive operations, Barack Obama plainly considers himself to be above the rigors of normal scrutiny by which the American people have historically kept their leaders in check. The Constitution notwithstanding, his electoral majority in 2008 conferred on him unlimited power, and he daily exhibits his intention of exercising it in this manner.
This was the underlying message of Obama's relentless installation of his cabal of "czars" to handle tasks that are traditionally consigned to a presidential cabinet. Disdaining the entire Senate confirmation process (and undoubtedly knowing that many of his cohorts could never withstand even cursory examinations of their past associations and activities), he merely ignored the entire process and emplaced them where he wanted them, conferring immense powers on them despite having absolutely no constitutional authority to do so. And in service to this tactic, he brazenly touts them and their edicts to this day, giving no indication that the practice will abate.
Abhorrent as such activity is in the nation's highest office, it is spreading like an infectious disease throughout the entirety of the liberal governing monopoly on Capitol Hill. Thus, the "Healthcare" circus, by which the medical industry and eventually every conversation and transaction between private citizens and their doctors will be strangulated within the tentacles of the "nanny state," was enacted into "law" through a series of legislative gymnastics that abominate the notion of "government of, by, and for the people."
But of course Americans are protected from the unilateral imposition of these tyrannical tactics. In such cases aggrieved parties can resort to the nation's courts. Except that here also, Obama is emplacing an army of compliant minions who can be fully expected to hand down decisions supportive of his agenda. The clouded and mystifying circus surrounding Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan represents more of the same. Rather than allowing her confirmation process to be steered towards any real consideration of her regard for the constitutional authority undergirding any law that might come before the high court, such specifics are being deliberately kept under wraps.
Hence, the question of her "fitness" for office will never be allowed to rest on concerns over whether she will uphold the nation's founding charter. Rather, her conduct when appearing before the Senate, along with her worthy "credentials" (as assessed by the liberal political machine) will be touted as incontrovertible proof of a sterling legal pedigree. And who would dare oppose her confirmation after that?
It has become inescapably obvious that, in stark contrast to the great former presidents who regarded their position in office with awe and deference, Obama believes himself to be the recipient of an opportunity to seize power and, through any means necessary, remake the country into his twisted leftist image. Like so many despots before him, he clearly intends to continue running roughshod over his opposition, and amass governing authority by every means available to him.
But the good news is that the his sinister strategy, dangerous and effective though it may be, is defenseless against a principled stand from an energized opposition. The awakening of grassroots America, as evidenced by the phenomenal "Tea Party" movement, may well be his political undoing.
“But the good news is that this sinister strategy, dangerous and effective though it may be, is defenseless against a principled stand from an energized opposition.”
There are several pitfalls that manifest themselves in this challenge to progressive authoritian rule. First; republican committees across the nation aren’t going to take the T.E.A. Party lying down. As a friend of mine who used to post quite a bit her has said several times; “It’s all about who gets to pull the levers of institutional power.” (Speaking of such; Phillip where have you gone?) These chapters know that this is a ‘perfect storm’ type of year; and they intend to ensure that their candidates rule the eventual roost. T.E.A. Parties across this nation need to be particularly aware of this. If the T.E.A. Party coalesces around the republican candidate, that’s OK. If the T.E.A. Party fields its own choice, these republican chapters will work diligently behind the scenes to attempt to ensure that candidate’s primary defeat.
While the author is correct in his assessment of a grassroots (I’ll add the word conservative to the description) movement sweeping the country; GPO activists are just as enamored of their candidates as democrats are and will go the distance to elect their kind of people. T.E.A. Party chapters fielding their own choices will have to learn the ground game of campaign strategy both well and fast.
Second; while the hauteur of superiority does indeed permeate the progressive movement; equally distributed in the mix are hubris and an unmatched ability to ridicule all opposition. By far, the most powerful of these characteristics is ridicule.
Remember Saul Alinsky’s fifth rule “Ridicule is mans’ most potent weapon. It is almost impossible to counteract ridicule. Also it infuriates the opposition, which then reacts to your advantage.”
Ridicule has been part and parcel of this administration since the inauguration. Whether the subject was bailouts, the takeover of GM, health care, illegal immigration, financial regulation, energy policy, foreign policy, or any other aspect of domestic policy; the play book follows a predictive course. Find a problem, blow it into a crisis, set up a ‘straw man’ argument to promote the administration preferred solution, and excoriate any and all who dare to express an opposing opinion. The real payoff in this is the constant hope of creating that ‘infuriating reaction’ from the opposition.
Progressive have been wringing their collective hands for weeks over the certainty of an eventual violent response from those that oppose their takeover of America. Each night before bed they pray to whatever deity they acknowledge top please, please just sent them one violent reaction they can directly tie to a T.E.A. Party activist or member. While we may never use any arm of the federal government to secure a border state from illegal immigration; you can bet the farm that the full weight and power of every conceivable department of the federal government will descend on the entire T.E.A. Party movement, across the country, as soon as such a connection can be made.
They need this to completely reverse the theme. Forty years ago, they were the bomb throwing radicals trying to change the system from the outside. In the last forty years they’ve learned that to overthrow the man you must become the man. They are almost there. All they need is to be able to point to a competing group as a radical, outside the mainstream, uncompromising, dangerous, violent rabble rousers. Then they have all the reason the squash this group that threatens ‘normalcy’. Although it will them that defines what is ‘normal’.
Find a problem, blow it into a crisis, set up a ‘straw man’ argument to promote the administration preferred solution, and excoriate any and all who dare to express an opposing opinion.
Conservatives employ the exact same tactics. Don’t act as if they don’t.
The conservatives really need to take a page from Bismarck. The most effective way to stop the Progessives from being “the man” is to co-opt the least distatseful of their programs to steal all their thunder.
The Democrats should be a trivial obstacle to overcome. They are completely inept. This is why I think that conservatism will win in America, but lose on the global stage, ultimately diminishing American power and living standards.
At the same time,the Tea Party is not going to end up being an effective route to promote conservatism due to many of their self-immolating beliefs.
“Conservatives employ the exact same tactics. Don’t act as if they don’t.” They don’t. There’s a difference between; “Cindy is obese and cannot get health insurance, so we have to take over health care in this country for all the poor Cindys out there.” and; “We’ve got to stop Obamacare because these progressives are trying to place 17% of the US economy under their mailed fist!”
See two arguments one correct and one not. Gee I wonder which YOU think is which? The overwhelming majority of reasonable people would say; “the first argument (poor, poor Cindy) is the straw man and the second (progressives taking over ANYTHING) is a true danger to the republic that should have attention drawn to it.
See two arguments one correct and one not. Gee I wonder which YOU think is which? The overwhelming majority of reasonable people would say; “the first argument (poor, poor Cindy) is the straw man and the second (progressives taking over ANYTHING) is a true danger to the republic that should have attention drawn to it.
So again, is every republic with national health care in danger somehow? Know what? It doesn’t even matter.
The point is that conservatives resort to the same kind of nonsense arguments, made-up facts, and outright lies just as much as the liberals. I think at this point it is difficult to objectively say who is worse, but the moral high-horse that conservatives often try to ride is a major turn-off.
Reply to Martel732
You don’t understand: the “moral high-horse” is precisely what conservatives must ride. They have no other steed available to them. And with conservatives, the cry is always that those nasty liberal fascist progressives are turning the US into a tyranny. Funny, somehow that big transformation never happens, although most conservatives imagine themselves to be living in a Stalinoid dictatorship. Remember, conservatives are people who can’t tell the difference between federal aid to American agriculture through the land-grant colleges from Hitler’s deathcamps, and cannot distinguish between the public schools hot lunch program and Stalin’s gulag. The inability to recognize clear differences is crucial for the ideological mind of the conservative. Now Mr. Wavering or someone else will lambaste me, saying, in effect, yes, yes, it’s really, really, abso-frickin-lutely true that Americans today live under an evil tyrant. Needless to say, if this tyrant was a tyrant, don’t you think his minions would have shut down this website, or landed black helicopters in Mr. Wavering’s front yard, or, at the very least, sent a black ops team to take down Rushbo? I mean, what’s a tyrant if he doesn’t tyrannize?
And what makes all these hysterical, yet clearly infinitely appealing, fantasies work so well is the high moral tone of conservatives.
It is remarkable to live in a time when an appreciable percentage of the American people thinks it’s living under one of the most dreadful, oppressive regimes in the memory of the human race. To listen to conservatives, you’d think it was impossible simply to vote for Palin in 2012 and bring our national nightmare to an end. Oh, I forgot–many conservatives have fever dreams in which Obama prevents the next election and declares himself Messiah for Life.
Gestell
You’ve got that Alinsky ridicule thing down pretty well, but I ain’t buying….
Moral high horse
Stalinoid
Gulag
lambaste
abso-frickin-lutely
black ops team
Palin
…and a few others.
Your rant was just to tyrannize and it did not work.
My ridicule thing is as much Rush as Alinsky. I’m pleased to see that you agree that “Palin” is an ugly thing to put in a post. And if you can’t see in my comments things that lots of conservatives believe then you just aren’t looking hard enough into that mirror.
“So again, is every republic with national health care in danger somehow? Know what? It doesn’t even matter. ”
Yes, Martell, it’s effectively a largely unfunded mandate that will, in the estimation of all intellectually honest economists, bankrupt the US in short order.
Why doesn’t it bankrupt other nations then? Australia spends about half the %GDP on health care that we do, and yet it rates superior in most metrics.
I’m not talking about Obamacare. I’m talking about people who know what the hell they are doing.
Don’t quote economists to me either. Economics is a pseudo-science, passed off as a real science. It is not.
Have you been scrutinizing what’s occurring in Europe as we speak? Greece essentially bankrupting their own nation by all of the very same giveaways you’d mentioned. In point of fact, the IMF has set several alterations in the Greek budget to qualify for a bailout, one of which is that they abandon their national health care system. Spain and Perhaps Portugal to follow.
Take national healthcare, pensions, and social security here. Together they require up to 100 Trillion dollars for all of the promises made to be fulfilled. Yet the entire national worth of the US, stocks and physical plant, everything, is only worth 50 Trillion.
So tell me, where does the additional 50 Trillion come from? Near as I can tell from the rhetoric from the Obama administration, they have no idea how to fund this, they merely expect – wishful thinking and self-delusion on their part – that it will just “all work out.”
Actually, yes I have been scrutinizing it. And your analysis of the situation is lacking. As the Germans have discovered by forcing the Greeks to open their books, Greece has a horrible tax evasion problem.
There is money in Greece, but most of the richest citizens have been paying far too little in taxes by lying. This, combined with years of an ill-advised arms race with Turkey, has bankrupted them.
Also, look at who bailed them out. It wasn’t the all powerful United States with our all powerful free market. It was Germany, another socialist nation. Just because one socialist nation is a bunch of fuck-ups doesn’t mean they all are. You can bet the books add up in Germany at least as well as they do here.
So tell me, where does the additional 50 Trillion come from?
It doesn’t come from anywhere. We are going to go the route of China, Brazil, and Australia and put price controls on health care and dictate what can be charged. Period. Practically everyone in health care is overpaid and everything in health care is overpriced.
If doctors and drug companies don’t like it, they are free to go do business somewhere that doesn’t have price controls… oh wait, there IS no where else that doesn’t have price controls. The US is the last bastion in the world that lets the health care sector rape its economy in exchange for mediocre results.
Once again, let me repeat this: I’m not talking about Obamacare. I’m talking about people who know what the hell they are doing.
Why is this message so difficult to comprehend?. Please quit talking about Obama. He is a loser. He is a horrible socialist and a horrible capitalist. Therefore, he makes no one with any sense happy.
Still don’t take state capitalism seriously? See what a fellow conservative has to say:
http://online.wsj.com/video/the-end-of-free-markets/B46355CA-1E03-4186-91CB-47769B6DA4AC.html?mod=WSJ_article_related
Martel732 & Gestell,
I enjoyed my Memorial Day Weekend with family. Don’t you guys have anything better to do? Martel 732 says; “So again, is every republic with national health care in danger somehow? Know what? It doesn’t even matter.” And Gestell follows up with; “the cry is always that those nasty liberal fascist progressives are turning the US into a tyranny. Funny, somehow that big transformation never happens,”
It does matter, each time we improve the ride on the ‘entitlement’ train without even trying to be honest about how we’re supposed to PAY for it; we further push this country toward a financial precipice. Iceland is done, do is Greece. Spain just had their debt downgraded. Portugal is next, with Ireland close behind. The UK’s not looking all that chipper either. Can anyone explain to me why on God’s Green Earth if all these social democracies are going broke because of underfunded entitlements (health care immediately comes to mind) why we would want to emulate them? Because going broke to support non-producers is the fashionable thing to do?
Gestell it somehow never happens because the country, in the past, has always awoken up in time to stop you before the transformation is irreversible, that’s why.
Happy Memorial Day everyone
I was in a computer lab doing school work all weekend. When I wasn’t working in a damn warehouse. So no, I don’t really have anything better to do. It’s my break from an endless sea of biochemistry.
I don’t get to see my family; I’m too busy WORKING like a good little wage slave.
Can anyone explain to me why on God’s Green Earth if all these social democracies are going broke because of underfunded entitlements (health care immediately comes to mind) why we would want to emulate them?
Because the United States is going broke too, and I am not getting anything out of the deal. If I’m going to be in a country going broke, I’d like to at least get some free stuff first.
Because going broke to support non-producers is the fashionable thing to do?
I’m a producer (I produce mindless labor for Amazon, AND tutor), and I still can’t afford health insurance. So I guess I’m just selfish wanting health care. Sorry. I guess I’ll just go get sick and die over in this corner. Just hope I don’t infect anyone you know.
Martel732
“Because the United States is going broke too, and I am not getting anything out of the deal. If I’m going to be in a country going broke, I’d like to at least get some free stuff first.”
So we’re not supposed to even attempt to return to fiscal sanity until you get your ‘fair share’ of free stuff? How selfish! “I want MY free stuff.” That cry will be the death knell of this republic.
Countries across Europe are learning, the hard way. What Margret Thatcher meant when she said; “The problem with socialism is eventually you run out of other people’s money.”
I believe we’ve had this discussion before; “I was in a computer lab doing school work all weekend. When I wasn’t working in a damn warehouse. So no, I don’t really have anything better to do. It’s my break from an endless sea of biochemistry.” If what you are pursuing isn’t fulfilling your ‘requirements’ then demanding your share of ‘free stuff’ from a bankrupt federal government isn’t any way to go about it. Develop a new skill set.
Or to quote Vox Day; “In 1986, the year I graduated from high school, the average annual tuition at private and public universities was $13,094 and $2,781 in constant 2009 dollars. In 2010, these averages had risen to $26,273 and $7,020, an increase of 101 percent and 152 percent, respectively. During that time, the number of full-time students enrolled in American universities increased 32 percent faster than the general population, thus rendering a degree roughly one-third more common than it had been 24 years ago.
Since enrollment in private universities and colleges makes up 18.7 percent of total college enrollment, combining these two factors indicates that at current prices, the average college degree has lost 72.5 percent of its value since 1986. While this most certainly does not mean that no college degree is worth obtaining, it strongly suggests that it is absolutely vital for recent graduates to sit down and seriously take a look at the question of whether the specific college education they are thinking of purchasing is worth the time, money and opportunity cost.”
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=160401
You’ve mis-classified yourself. Producers actually pay taxes; much like I have by writing a check to ‘Uncle Sugar’ every year since the middle 80’s. I don’t think you are selfish for wanting health care (I believe we pretty much explored the depths of each other’s regard for this subject previously) I think you are selfish for wanting FREE health care as if it was some type of entitlement. Something that should be bequeathed to you just because you were lucky enough to be born. Here’s an idea: You want free health care and an actual education tossed in for good measure. Follow me; join the USMC for almost a decade. I’ll guarantee you ‘free’ health care and a giant dose of the ‘real’ world to boot. Although you may not care to pay the ultimate ‘cost’ of either item.
You can best believe that I will sit down with my son and look at the benefits of college when the time comes. At this point, I plan on encouraging him to be an auto mechanic or something that doesn’t require college. Unfortunately, most of my talents lie in the academic arena.
So we’re not supposed to even attempt to return to fiscal sanity until you get your ‘fair share’ of free stuff? How selfish! “I want MY free stuff.” That cry will be the death knell of this republic.
And what if a return to fiscal sanity involves huge military cuts as well? I’ll tell you what. I’ll give up my idea of large social programs when the US military’s share of the GDP is cut down to pre-WWII levels. Having a huge military budget and no social services is called a military dictatorship. Especially when said military has no legitimate opponents.
You’ve mis-classified yourself. Producers actually pay taxes; much like I have by writing a check to ‘Uncle Sugar’ every year since the middle 80’s
I do pay taxes on the money I earn. The federal income tax is the ONLY tax I get out of. I still have to pay local tax, state tax, and social security tax. But you know what? These taxes together are only half of what health insurance for TWO people would cost. So which is a bigger tax?
Follow me; join the USMC for almost a decade. I’ll guarantee you ‘free’ health care and a giant dose of the ‘real’ world to boot. Although you may not care to pay the ultimate ‘cost’ of either item.
What about the people not cut out for the military? What are they supposed to do to gain all this wisdom? It’s easy enough to say, but most people are not physically/mentally capable of this.
Martel732
In an effort to return this country to fiscal sanity, I don’t think ANY part of the budget should be sacrosanct. I would be 100% behind an effort to slash programs and agencies 15% across the board (military included), but I think we’d still be spending at deficit rates.
The taxes you pay amount to a transfer payment to already retired seniors. I would suggest that you read Federalist #10 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federalist_No._10 or check out this article on oftwominds.com as it does a fairly good job of explaining the current situation in this country. That should give you reference as to where you belong in the dance being conducted in this country. http://www.oftwominds.com/blogapr10/taxes-complicity04-10.html
“What about the people not cut out for the military? What are they supposed to do to gain all this wisdom? It’s easy enough to say, but most people are not physically/mentally capable of this.” I guess you’ll just have to trust me when I say that no one can possibly be prepared for the physical and mental rigors of entering USMC Boot Camp. Believe me; I thought I was ‘ready’. It took about 10 seconds after I arrived to begin seriously thinking “What the $%*& have I gotten myself into this time?” The ‘change’ happens over the course of the training. You experience new thresholds of endurance (both mental and physical), discipline, motivation, inter-dependence, self-reliance, and trust. Hard to describe to an uninitiated individual. How about this; by the time I left Basic Training, I was positive that I could, if ordered, strike a match on a bar of soap under ten feet of water. I know, I know, sounds stupid, but this is how single-minded and self-motivated you become. You exit that phase of training believing you can accomplish anything. Temper that with a heavy dose of the real world and you are firmly planted on the road to accomplishment in whatever endeavor you choose in life.
I’d imagine the lessons are instilled almost as well in the basic training programs of the other active services.
“Can anyone explain to me why on God’s Green Earth if all these social democracies are going broke because of underfunded entitlements (health care immediately comes to mind) why we would want to emulate them?”
I suppose I could reply, “venal stupidity,” which yes, does factor into it. But I think the real reason is that the Democrat Party is addicted to squandering vast amounts of money on gigantic social-engineering projects. Further, they are the party of wishful thinking – “not to worry, we’ll work it out, we’ll find the money somehow.” Witness the honest cost projections for national health care versus the mindless drive to pass it regardless, and tell me that I’m wrong.
“Follow me; join the USMC for almost a decade. I’ll guarantee you ‘free’ health care and a giant dose of the ‘real’ world to boot. Although you may not care to pay the ultimate ‘cost’ of either item.”
Army, six years, and service-connected disabled here. I am absolutely with you on this one, Brother.
Sorry. Meant to conclude the following as:
“But I think the real reason is that the Democrat Party is addicted to squandering vast amounts of money on gigantic social-engineering projects – the consequences of which they cannot possibly know.”
As another example, I’d certainly hold up the recent analysis of the Head Start program – one of LBJ’s cherished, feel-good, Democrat projects of the nature I’d mentioned. There was a piece on that independent educational groups had shown that since it’s inception, it has had little or no effect, but over it’s entire life-span, has cost 166 Billion dollars.
I guess you’ll just have to trust me when I say that no one can possibly be prepared for the physical and mental rigors of entering USMC Boot Camp.
No, I trust you. In fact, out of respect to your particular branch, I will freely admit that there is a 0% chance I would make it through. Air Force training, though, I might be able to get through.
In an effort to return this country to fiscal sanity, I don’t think ANY part of the budget should be sacrosanct. I would be 100% behind an effort to slash programs and agencies 15% across the board (military included), but I think we’d still be spending at deficit rates.
I can certainly agree with that. Fair’s fair after all. A 15% cut might even things out, but it’s bad that we are not even sure that that cut would be sufficient. I would be willing to sacrifice as long as it was a team sacrifice, not a directed sacrifice.
Further, they are the party of wishful thinking – “not to worry, we’ll work it out, we’ll find the money somehow.” Witness the honest cost projections for national health care versus the mindless drive to pass it regardless, and tell me that I’m wrong.
No, I agree, because all they passed was a subsidy to health insurance companies, not cost control. But the Republican solution of “do nothing” is not going to work either. What happens when over 50% of Americans can not afford health insurance premiums?
“No, I agree, because all they passed was a subsidy to health insurance companies, not cost control. But the Republican solution of “do nothing” is not going to work either. What happens when over 50% of Americans can not afford health insurance premiums?”
Politician 1: “SOMETHING MUST BE DONE!”
Politician 2: “This is something”
Politician 1: “Let’s do that then”
Doing nothing is infinitely preferable to doing something which wont succeed just to be (seen to be) Doing Something tm (unlike those worthless layabouts on the other side).
“What happens when over 50% of Americans can not afford health insurance premiums?”
The government stops preventing health insurance providers from selling to interstate customers.
Colloquy;
Politician #1 (republican) – “Hey; I’ve got a really crappy idea!”
Politician #2 9democrat) – “And I can make that idea even crappier!”
Regarding Americans not being able to afford health insurance. I know plenty of people who have 65 inch HD TV’s and no health insurance. Gee; I wonder what’s more important to them? I think there are plenty of people that want health insurance, but feel that they shouldn’t have to actually lay out any money for it.
I used to live in a gated community where the overwhelming majority of the property owners were retirees. They were all so in favor of Bush’s prescription drug plan. Why? Because they figured that they had worked hard all their lives and their saved money shouldn’t’ be going to pay for drugs to extend the quality of their lives, not when there were cruises to go on. Actually heard more than one senior say this. “My money is to enjoy my retirement; no to fork over to some drug company just to extend my life. The government should do something.”
I’m positive it’s the same way with health care. The majority of us plan it as an expense. Some deliberately eschew health care because they have other priorities. Others are shrewd enough to know that a hospital cannot refuse to stabilize your condition.
I had an acquaintance of mine that was diagnosed with a brain tumor. The only method available to stabilize him was surgery. Since he’s already disabled and drawing only disability; the hospital negotiated his bill to the point where he pays @ $20 a month on the charge. They’ll finish collecting on the debt somewhere around 2210.
I seem to remember addressing this health care fiasco before on this site. My point then was that a health insurance card used to be an unspoken promise of ability to pay. Under this new federal program, not so. The government may give 30 million people an insurance card, but that doesn’t mean that any of them will actually walk into an emergency room with the deductable in hand.
It’s been our experience when dealing with the local hospital’s emergency room that once you present your health insurance card, they want you to pay the deductable immediately; probably because you’re the only one there that has two freakin’ nickels to rub together; not to mention being the only one’s there to whom English is a primary language.
The government stops preventing health insurance providers from selling to interstate customers.
Assuming this ever happens, what happens then when employers refuse to offer health insurance because of its cost?
I know plenty of people who have 65 inch HD TV’s and no health insurance.
I am not one of those people. I don’t even own a TV, much less a 65 inch HD TV. These people you describe are very short-sighted.
The majority of us plan it as an expense
Maybe the majority of the people YOU know, but there is no way the majority of Americans plan anything. There are too many that live paycheck to paycheck and then don’t forget to add in those that COULD plan, but choose not to.
I’m seeing a definite pattern develop here. All these counter-arguments are great and grand, but no one seems to address the working poor. Not the “layabouts”. You know, the people who work jobs that don’t pay anything. Like me. And the numbers of such people are increasing, not decreasing.
Politician 1: “SOMETHING MUST BE DONE!”
Politician 2: “This is something”
Politician 1: “Let’s do that then”
The current system is completely unsustainable. Like the federal goverment, the health care industry needs to be put on a huge diet. Except instead of a 15% cut, a much larger cut needs to take place. Remember, almost everyone in health care is overpaid and all the products are overpriced.
reply to Martel732
Of course, a libertarian could never say that ‘almost everyone in health care is overpaid and all the products are overpriced,’ because such concepts as ‘overpaid’ and ‘overpriced’ can have no meaning at all.
Now, the question arises: why overpaid/overpriced? One very big reason is fee-for-service payments. If health care providers are paid on this basis, they have every incentive to increase the number of expensive procedures they perform. In my view, Obamacare cannot be taken seriously as health care reform because it does not address this issue.
Is the alternative to fee-for-service some version of nanny state nationalization? Not at all. Places like the Mayo Clinic do not pay physicians on staff on a fee for services basis. They are instead salaried.
My biggest problem with just about everyone, regardless of ideology, when it comes to thinking about health care, is a refusal to think outside the box. American-style health care is pricey because, so far, there is very little incentive for anyone to try to contain costs in ways that do not have adverse impacts on patients.
As a former Biomedical Engineer, I can tell you that vastly inflated costs for various medical device technologies are a real part of the problem. For example – a story I use to highlight this – when once maintaining a NICU (Neonatal ICU), my main failure item was the DC fan motors for infant incubators.
This motor would cost (1990 dollars) about five dollars from Radio Shack. However, due to the sheer number of regulatory agencies – and medical companies perceiving a gravy train – that same motor would cost me two hundred and twenty five dollars. Each.
Same motor. No difference between the two.
Former? I thought biomedical engineer would be a good gig.
As a former Biomedical Engineer, I can tell you that vastly inflated costs for various medical device technologies are a real part of the problem. For example – a story I use to highlight this – when once maintaining a NICU (Neonatal ICU), my main failure item was the DC fan motors for infant incubators.
Thank you for backing me up on this. In the single payer system of say, Australia, they could just force the use of the five dollar motor to keep costs down.
I would first try to go after overpriced materials like this before I actually started looking at salaries of health care workers. I know health care workers work very hard, and I would prefer to avoid pay cuts in any more sectors if possible. I can pay a lot of salaries by saving 220 bucks a pop for motors.
Furthermore, pay cuts would have to be accompanied by tort reform so expensive insurance is no longer a necessity. This would lessen the blow. You know, just like they have it in Germany.
My biggest problem with just about everyone, regardless of ideology, when it comes to thinking about health care, is a refusal to think outside the box. American-style health care is pricey because, so far, there is very little incentive for anyone to try to contain costs in ways that do not have adverse impacts on patients.
I’m afraid the incentive will be when no one can pay health insurance premium.
Yeah, “Former.” Frankly, I left the field (early 90s) around when the major rise of the HMOs came about (referred to in the industry then as “Capitation,” e.g. cap costs).
I had a few experiences with an employer (as Chief Dialysis Technician) that convinced me – seriously – that they would compromise patient safety and care over profits, and should any mistake occur, I would be who they would likely try to throw under the bus (remember I am the one documenting that these devices are safe for patient use).
Also, at that time, there were sub-professions within the medical field that bean-counters were trying to squeeze every excess dime out of. Mine was one. I got very tired of being treated as some glorified auto mechanic, paid less than other allied professionals, and in particular having to maintain multiple clinical units all by my lonesome. My department even once had a hospital “eel” tell us bluntly that if we ever tried to unionize, they would figure out a way to have us all terminated, period.
When I left where I’d maintained the NICU (a well-known teaching hospital here in Boston), I was responsible for 14 clinical units, including the ER, and 6 or 7 ICUs. And an entire research building. And a few other units added on for good measure.
I gfave the field a good 13 years, but then it was enough.
I’m sorry to hear that. This is why I feel that health care is one of those industries that should not be a free market commodity. We’ll see how it all works out.
My only response to that is, become a Veteran and use the VA Healthcare system. If you believe governmental run medicine is so swell, you WILL find out all about “Socialized Medicine.”
And trust me, you will not like it one whit.
Perhaps the current establishment is incapable of managing such an enterprise. Just because the VA sucks, does not mean socialized medicine has to suck. I have heard really dichotomous stories about VA health care, though. I wonder why that is.
I would start by literally photocopying Australia’s system and then changing parts that are not applicable or adding things on to address issues specific to the US. I’m sure this is not how any of our socialized medical systems are implemented.
I would choose Australia, since they are more similar to the US in terms of a spread out population. Many of the European deployment models would not work here because of population density issues.
“Current Establishment?” I have been in the VA system for well over two decades. So this isn’t, per se, endemic to any particular political party. It’s virtually designed for inefficiency and apathy.
As to your experience of hearing two widely diverging stories about the VA, I have previously worked with Veterans (profession post Biomecical Engineering, how’s that for a real switch?). Thousands of them. And the clear majority are of the “VA = dysfunctional” nature.
Eight months to obtain a simple exam? I have had this occur to me, and more than once. Apathy? Disinterest? Inefficiency? Blatant laziness? All of it.
“Current Establishment?” I have been in the VA system for well over two decades. So this isn’t, per se, endemic to any particular political party. It’s virtually designed for inefficiency and apathy.
By current establishment, I mean the US political set up of post-WWII.
If it designed for inefficiency and apathy, then it can be redesigned. Veterans should get first rate treatment in my opinion.
As to your experience of hearing two widely diverging stories about the VA, I have previously worked with Veterans (profession post Biomecical Engineering, how’s that for a real switch?). Thousands of them. And the clear majority are of the “VA = dysfunctional” nature.
Yeah, some people have told me its great, and others have stories worse than yours. At any rate, at best it is grossly inconsistent.
The only people who would tell you that the VA health care system is “great” are people who either have never been a part of it or people who do not use it for primary medical care. I have several family members and friends who have relied upon the VA system for their primary medical needs who could tell you very convincing stories attesting to the complete and total failure of the VA medical system if you had ears to listen (or even the capability of comprehending, which given your previous comments on this subject, I hardly take as a guarantee).
Comparing Australia’s population for the purposes of health care administration to the United States is a comical testament to how little honest examination you have given to the issues you wish to discuss. Australia’s total population is 22.3 million people – about 3 million more than New York City. The United States’ total population is 309 million – nearly 14 times more people. Which is rather irrelevant anyway. Socialized medicine is proving to be a financial nightmare everywhere it has been implemented, eating enormous portions of national budgets and consuming more wealth in the form of taxes than just about any other single program. The premiums you have to pay to secure your own health care in the United States are infinitesimally small compared to the taxes that other people have to pay to secure your health care in a socialized system. Nothing is “free” in socialized economies – the cost is just masked from the extremely ignorant because it is withheld preemptively. Essentially, you want the government to be your conservator – and if your comments on other topics are any guide, this wish is hardly confined to the area of healthcare. A conservatorship makes a lot of sense when you’re 90 years old and have lost your faculties, but flying solo was actually one of the pats of adulthood I always looked forward to as a lad. I didn’t realize that was such a unique desire until much later in life.
[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by David Briggs, IC Politics. IC Politics said: Obama To America: I Am Not Accountable: From the glaring contradictions between earlier and later professions Obam… http://bit.ly/9qE3sg [...]