It will doubtless come as a surprise to the right-wingers among you, who apparently believe your own bullshit, but there is concern ranging from disappointment to anger among the sentient beings of this country that Obama is perhaps not the progressive they took him to be, but rather a middle-of-the-road, business-as-usual corporatist who will prove either unable or unwilling to shepherd through some of the fundamental changes so vital to the long term ethical and economic interests of the nation; specifically in the area of health care.
In fact, there was a provocative Frank Rich column in the NY Times yesterday that asked whether those of us in the center/left had been misled, or as Rich colorfully phrased it, "punked".
But of course, it's Obama who is getting punked. He's doing exactly what he said he would do during the campaign; attempting to reach across the aisle, striving to move beyond partisanship, searching for common ground and consensus. And as many had predicted, he's finding it somewhat akin to trying to compromise with a spitting cobra; a really agitated, really determined, really stupid spitting cobra.
I think of Obama as the NY Times of political figures. Both are cogent, civilized and rational. And both -- apparently stung by accusations of 'liberal bias' -- have bent over backwards to disprove such assertions, thus allowing the voices of un-reason to effectively emasculate them. And what has been their reward for their earnest, respective efforts? Obama is branded a traitor, a baby-killer, a foreign born hence illegitimate president, a racist and a crypto-communist; and the NY Times is still referred to as Pravda by the no-nothings of the right and their plutocrat manipulator/masters.
I've given up on the Times ever getting beyond characterizing the patent, factual untruths promulgated by the Republican party with adjectives less mealy-mouthed than "disputed", but I still hold out some vague hope for Obama, in part because only six months into my last new job, I still didn't know where they kept the extra paper clips.
My ever diminishing hope is mostly predicated on my perception of his intelligence and character for which I still have high regard. But sadly I've pretty much concluded that the game is unalterably rigged and the entrenched interests arrayed against him are too rich, powerful and implacable to allow for substantive change.
Congress is bought and paid for on both sides of the aisle, and almost as bad as the Republican brownshirt tactics and disinformation squads (death panel, Ms Palin; really?), will be the inevitable crowing and beating of the chest by Democrats when they give us the watered-down, ineffective health care reform that is so clearly and tragically in the offing.
No significant progress will be made as long as the insurance lobby has anything to say about it; and their massive "campaign contributions" (read: bribes) speak volumes. They bring nothing to the table but an ever-growing appetite for money on the backs of the citizenry. Want to save $400 billion on health care? Take out the 'for-profit' middlemen that provide no service but obstruction.
I would like to comment as a Canadian, as someone covered under a "Socialist" national healthcare plan. The news coverage of the Obama health plan has recieved a certain amount of coverage up here, mainly due to the negative and reactionary comments by conservative commentators.
ReplyDeleteA few months ago there was a national survey of who was the greatest Canadian. When the final votes were counted, the clear winner was Tommy Douglas, the founder of of our national healthcare system. Despite all of the the negative portrayals of ours, the French and the British national systems, I can tell you that there is not an ice cubes hope in hell that we would ever change to a private system.
If you are interested in stats all three of the afore mentioned nations have higher life expectancies than the US. Considering the wealth of your nation, this is inexcusable.
I watched part of Senator Spector's (sp?) town hall meetings in Penn yesterday with a few friends and we were all completely confused by the content of the comments by those opposed to the plan. One person stood up and actually said "We live in the home of the Free and the Brave" and got a standing ovation. As a group, the only explanation we could come with to this comment was that the average American is free to have the HMOs bankrupt them or be brave to face their illness withour coverage. Sad on both accounts.
You may have seen Shona Holmes, a Canadian with a "brain tumor", showcased on some the the reactionary GOP TV ads. Just an FYI -she is not suffering from a brain tumor. In fact she has a benign growth and is trying to sue the Ontario Govt for the $97,000 she was charged by the Mayo Clinic for routine treatment.
On a personal note, my better half suffers from RA and diabetes. If I was in the US I would be unable to change jobs without accepting the prospect of no coverage due to Pre-X. As things are, we are free to decide our future as we see fit without the interference of others. In the end, freedom is all in the details.
Liberals will always be at a disadvantage vis-à-vis the inherently authoritarian right. We have a visceral indisposition to walking in lock-step; a concern for means as well as ends; a commitment to attempting to discern and speak the objective truth; the capacity to consider points of view we don't ourselves hold; an awareness of and appreciation for nuance. The right is burdened by no such restraints. It makes for an unfair fight and I'm damned if I know what to do about it.
ReplyDeleteBy the way, the charge that health care reform will create “death panels” (in Sarah Palin’s words) that will shuffle the elderly and others off to an early grave is a complete fabrication, of course. The provision requiring that Medicare pay for voluntary end-of-life counseling was introduced by Senator Johnny Isakson, Republican — yes, Republican — of Georgia, who says that it’s “nuts” to claim that it has anything to do with euthanasia.
ReplyDeleteTo the Canadian...
ReplyDeleteYou are welcome come south and have a tumorous lung removed in time to save your life. You will, of course, have to pay for the operation.
Pay 400 billion in profits rather than suffer higher costs due to the inability of the Feds to run a health program? You bet, in a New York minute!
ReplyDeleteAngry Andy
Bill Charles here (don't like this anonymous label)
ReplyDeleteRegarding traveling south of the line to have an operation. I do have that choice, but I wouldn't have to bankrupt my family to do so. Our current socialist system allows for us to have medical procedures performed in the US, the UK or anywhere else that perform a medically necessary operation if I decide to go there. My pinko coverage will pay the foreign provider of service an amount equal to the cost that the procedure would cost if it was performed in Canada. While the US charges will be higher for a similar operation up here, the difference isn't going to put my family on the street or destroy my retirement plans. The impact would be minimal.
I can tell you that my personal politics are decidedly conservative (at least in the Canadian definition), but there is not a hope in Hell that we as a nation would ever retreat from our national healthcare system. Is it perfect? Of course not, but we can and do as voters put pressure on our elected officials to make it more responsive and humane. Failure to do so can and has resulted in the defeat of governments. How much luck do you think the average Joe being denied coverage under an HMO would have in convincing their insurance company that there is an ethical issue in their decision making. This is the main cleft in our two nations thinking to date. We consider universal healthcare a citizen's right regardless of their situation and position in society. It seems to me that you have developed a system where full coverage is a privilege enjoyed by those able to afford it. I can only wonder if this opposition to a full national and universal healthcare plan is rooted in a deep mistrust of government in general.
"My pinko coverage will pay the foreign provider of service an amount equal to the cost that the procedure would cost if it was performed in Canada. While the US charges will be higher for a similar operation up here, the difference isn't going to put my family on the street or destroy my retirement plans. The impact would be minimal."
ReplyDeleteSomething here is illogical. If Canadians can come south and have badly needed medical procedures performed at no cost to them, why aren't our medical facilities crowded with you people who don't want to wait for treatment in Canada. Some of which may be life threatening if treatment is delayed too long. Methinks, my Canadian friend, you have not told all.
Andy
Hi Andy,
ReplyDeleteThere would be a cost if we came down to the US, as your medical costs for similar procedures are more than the fee guides allow physicans to charge for the same procedure up here. Having said that, I am only aware of one instance where someone I know went down to the Mayo to have treatment. Unfortunately this person passed on within 6 months of their treatment but importantly the difference in reimbursed cost did not put their family in financial difficulty. The reason your medical facilities are not crowded with Canadians is quite simply, our system works effectively enough to make such a choice an illogical option. Any pundit who is saying otherwise in your current national debate should be looked at with a healthy degree of skepticism.
Compare this with the volume of bus trips full of US seniors crossing the border into Canada to purchase prescription drugs they are being gouged for south of the border.
We have no HMOs, no depts in private insurance companies tasked with finding ways to deny coverage, no super expensive premium and deductible consumer market products that are the only option for those unfortunate enough to lose there jobs or have a medical issue prior to appying for coverage. And perhaps the most telling stat - we live longer than you.
We had a new neighbor move in down the street from us a couple of onths ago. He was trained at MIT as a biochemist. He was unable to get a job with coverage in the US because of a non life threatening but pre-existing medical condition and so took a job offered up here where he now is working in our National infectious disease research centre.
Hi Bill,
ReplyDelete"There would be a cost if we came down to the US, as your medical costs for similar procedures are more than the fee guides allow physicians (note spelling correction)to charge for the same procedure up here".
Amen, I rest my case...you did not tell all!!!!