The debate has consumed hour upon hour of every cable news network to the point that if I see healthcare in the little box on the bottom of the TV, over to ESPN I go! Everyone who has a political "iron in the fire" seems to be manipulating and morphing their statements as they continuously encounter "adverse" constituents at Town Hall meetings. Mostly because they are deathly afraid that these people yelling at them won't forget this when they get to the ballot box and vote the the bums out! On a side note, that alone might actually make things better. Yep. Could be easier than we thought after all!
I am not writing to discuss death panels, rationing, Medicare, or any of the other numerous talking points brought up by both sides of this national schism, but rather it is the "talking points" that I take issue with.
The "talking points" have been talked to death over the past six weeks! But in a maze of information and opinion it appears that clarity is lacking. Not that I expected clarity in politics, but one may always hope.
What exactly are we, as a nation, getting for the dump trucks of money we are going to spend, and will it be better than what we have? The President has played a political game, walking a tight rope that has frustrated concerned average Americans, and generated massive revenues for talk radio hosts and a myriad of political pundits. He has demanded that Congress put healthcare legislation on his desk, though has had multiple deadlines for that legislation, with a strong sense of urgency.
I fail to understand why President Obama doesn't make a solid case as to why these proposals (there are multiple bills being debated in the legislative branch) will make things better. There are many examples worldwide of countries that have imposed stronger regulation up to and including socialized healthcare. He would be much better off to show us examples of better systems, that treat higher percentages of populations, and have higher quality.
Show America objective examples of success. Point out their strengths that we would impose, and their weaknesses that we would discard when implementing our own system. We're big kids and we can understand this. Besides I don't really trust a government bureaucrat to break it down into bite sized portions for my digestion.
To date, the President has campaigned for his flagship legislation, but the campaign ended in November. Not that I liked the "Hope and Change" stuff last year, but I'm positive that statement is absolutely and positively WORN OUT! The American people aren't stupid, and they are ready for some facts on what our government wants to do with our vital healthcare industry, not more campaign "talking points".
If President Obama honestly believes that his proposals on health care will improve our system, this is an argument Americans will understand. If President Obama is playing a political game (I strongly hesitate to guess what his motivation would be) his oath of office requires him to abandon this reckless proposal.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteDom, I like where you are going with this, the president seems to be using the same strategy to pass his "health care reform" (This is apparently supposed to offer images of positive change) as he did with the stimulus bill. Why is it that the only way to reform the way our health care system operates, is to impose MORE regulations and give the government MORE responsibility in another field that they are not experts in or even proficient? I think your last afterthought (you don't know what his ulterior motives are) might be viable. I don't like sounding paranoid or conspiracy theorist, but come on people! You have to ask yourself, "why is this guy so full of it?"
ReplyDeleteI find it Ironic that the majority of the same people who chastised Bush for "hating black people" and for not foreseeing the collapse of the New Orleans levy system, want bigger government. If we really want equality in this country then the government (more so the federal government) has to stick to what they are mainly there for, protecting our country and enforcing the law. Forcing virtuousness from the tax payers is not in the constitution, and by that I mean health care is not a right, there is the Shriners hospital for a reason, churches offer many charitable events/services, maybe if government kept their noses out of it, more organizations that recognize these needs would spring up.