President Barack Obama addressed a crowd in Portsmouth, NH today, focusing on his proposal for health care reform.
Showing posts with label Barack Obama. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Barack Obama. Show all posts
Tuesday, August 11, 2009
Let’s talk about health care reform
We all know that health care costs are climbing at an alarming rate, consuming a share of our Gross Domestic Product that simply cannot be sustained. Businesses are struggling to afford the cost of employee health insurance, the number of personal bankruptcies attributable to medical expenses is at record levels and mounting, and virtually every branch of government is trying to come to terms with employee benefit costs that are breaking their budgets.
Add to that the rising number of Americans who have no health insurance and instead have to forego treatment or avail themselves of hospital emergency rooms for even the most routine care, and you have a recipe for disaster.
Obama is correct in demanding that our nation reform its health care system. It’s become an enormous black hole, sucking in every available resource. And yet despite this overwhelming spending, the success at treating patients in this country lags far behind other nations that spend a mere fraction of what we do.
A real key to successful health care reform is making certain that everyone is covered. Yes, even those who believe they don’t need health insurance.
I realize that there are many who object to any laws that would force people to have health insurance. Yet virtually every state, including New Hampshire, has laws that require drivers to carry liability insurance. Admittedly, New Hampshire is a rarity, in that it doesn’t mandate that all drivers carry liability insurance. It limits the requirement to certain classes of drivers, including those who’ve been convicted of D.U.I.’s or other significant moving violations. The vast majority of states, however, insist that all drivers be insured and offer proof of insurance whenever stopped by a law enforcement official.
Moreover, every bank and/or lender requires collision insurance on any vehicle being financed. And in case you haven’t noticed, every mortgage lender requires homeowner insurance as well. From worker’s compensation insurance, to product liability insurance and even malpractice insurance, there are all sorts of insurance mandates with which individuals and businesses already comply.
Another key to successfully reforming our health care system is introducing competition. In New Hampshire there are essentially three insurance providers that cover over 90-percent of employer-based benefits. WellPoint (Anthem-Blue Cross) alone has 51 percent of the market, with Cigna and Harvard Pilgrim capturing the rest. The same scenario exists throughout the country, with only a handful of companies dominating the field.
Obama wants to offer a public option that would strengthen the competitive field and subsequently bring down costs. Naturally, the insurance companies are fighting competition. None of them are anxious to end the gravy train they’ve been enjoying.
Now, many fear government involvement in health insurance. Yet nearly all of our seniors are enrolled in Medicare, which is a government sponsored health insurance program that produces exceptional results. And many of our poor and disabled are enrolled in the government supported Medicaid program, though because of funding issues its success has been more marginal.
Add to that the Veteran’s Hospitals, the military’s health care system, and SCHIP, which covers children, and you’ve already got major government involvement in providing health insurance and health care services. It isn’t as if the government hasn’t produced a viable track record in providing health care for its citizens.
Ironically, many people express concern that health care reform will require dealing with government bureaucrats who will come between them and their doctors. Has anyone not dealt with insurance company bureaucrats? Talk about a staff trained to look for loopholes to deny coverage!
Another concern frequently heard is that government will ration health care, leaving the aged and infirm to die. Come on, people. The whole point of Medicare and Medicaid is to prevent that from occurring.
But yes, some constraints will be placed on spending, just as is true with private insurance companies which always cap the benefits they offer. Unnecessary tests that serve only to inflate the bottom line of providers will be eliminated, as will the prescription of some patented medications for which generic brands offer the same benefits at a much lower cost.
Call it rationing if you must, but from my perspective it’s good financial management. We should not be providing Cadillac coverage as part of a public program when a Chevrolet plan will achieve the same objectives, albeit without the same level of luxury. If people want a more luxurious plan, they can pay for it out of pocket.
That’s precisely what occurs now in our private health care plans. WellPoint offers several different levels of coverage, with premiums that reflect the costs of the benefits. And several insurers offer supplemental coverage above and beyond what Medicare covers. Nothing in Obama’s proposals seeks to curtail those options.
What Obama’s plan is attempting to achieve is ensuring that all Americans have access to basic coverage at a cost that doesn’t break the bank. A public option, that affords more competition in the marketplace, is a key to its success.
My advice is to learn the details of the various plans working their way through Congress, and to the president’s vision for the future of the health care industry. Oh, and don’t be motivated by fear, nor unduly influenced by those who have a vested interest in maintaining the status quo.
We know the current system is seriously flawed. Now is the time to change it while we still have a chance.
Add to that the rising number of Americans who have no health insurance and instead have to forego treatment or avail themselves of hospital emergency rooms for even the most routine care, and you have a recipe for disaster.
Obama is correct in demanding that our nation reform its health care system. It’s become an enormous black hole, sucking in every available resource. And yet despite this overwhelming spending, the success at treating patients in this country lags far behind other nations that spend a mere fraction of what we do.
A real key to successful health care reform is making certain that everyone is covered. Yes, even those who believe they don’t need health insurance.
I realize that there are many who object to any laws that would force people to have health insurance. Yet virtually every state, including New Hampshire, has laws that require drivers to carry liability insurance. Admittedly, New Hampshire is a rarity, in that it doesn’t mandate that all drivers carry liability insurance. It limits the requirement to certain classes of drivers, including those who’ve been convicted of D.U.I.’s or other significant moving violations. The vast majority of states, however, insist that all drivers be insured and offer proof of insurance whenever stopped by a law enforcement official.
Moreover, every bank and/or lender requires collision insurance on any vehicle being financed. And in case you haven’t noticed, every mortgage lender requires homeowner insurance as well. From worker’s compensation insurance, to product liability insurance and even malpractice insurance, there are all sorts of insurance mandates with which individuals and businesses already comply.
Another key to successfully reforming our health care system is introducing competition. In New Hampshire there are essentially three insurance providers that cover over 90-percent of employer-based benefits. WellPoint (Anthem-Blue Cross) alone has 51 percent of the market, with Cigna and Harvard Pilgrim capturing the rest. The same scenario exists throughout the country, with only a handful of companies dominating the field.
Obama wants to offer a public option that would strengthen the competitive field and subsequently bring down costs. Naturally, the insurance companies are fighting competition. None of them are anxious to end the gravy train they’ve been enjoying.
Now, many fear government involvement in health insurance. Yet nearly all of our seniors are enrolled in Medicare, which is a government sponsored health insurance program that produces exceptional results. And many of our poor and disabled are enrolled in the government supported Medicaid program, though because of funding issues its success has been more marginal.
Add to that the Veteran’s Hospitals, the military’s health care system, and SCHIP, which covers children, and you’ve already got major government involvement in providing health insurance and health care services. It isn’t as if the government hasn’t produced a viable track record in providing health care for its citizens.
Ironically, many people express concern that health care reform will require dealing with government bureaucrats who will come between them and their doctors. Has anyone not dealt with insurance company bureaucrats? Talk about a staff trained to look for loopholes to deny coverage!
Another concern frequently heard is that government will ration health care, leaving the aged and infirm to die. Come on, people. The whole point of Medicare and Medicaid is to prevent that from occurring.
But yes, some constraints will be placed on spending, just as is true with private insurance companies which always cap the benefits they offer. Unnecessary tests that serve only to inflate the bottom line of providers will be eliminated, as will the prescription of some patented medications for which generic brands offer the same benefits at a much lower cost.
Call it rationing if you must, but from my perspective it’s good financial management. We should not be providing Cadillac coverage as part of a public program when a Chevrolet plan will achieve the same objectives, albeit without the same level of luxury. If people want a more luxurious plan, they can pay for it out of pocket.
That’s precisely what occurs now in our private health care plans. WellPoint offers several different levels of coverage, with premiums that reflect the costs of the benefits. And several insurers offer supplemental coverage above and beyond what Medicare covers. Nothing in Obama’s proposals seeks to curtail those options.
What Obama’s plan is attempting to achieve is ensuring that all Americans have access to basic coverage at a cost that doesn’t break the bank. A public option, that affords more competition in the marketplace, is a key to its success.
My advice is to learn the details of the various plans working their way through Congress, and to the president’s vision for the future of the health care industry. Oh, and don’t be motivated by fear, nor unduly influenced by those who have a vested interest in maintaining the status quo.
We know the current system is seriously flawed. Now is the time to change it while we still have a chance.
Thursday, April 30, 2009
David Souter To Retire From Supreme Court
National Public Radio is reporting that Supreme Court Justice David Souter plans to retire at the end of the court's term this year.
The former NH Attorney General and NH Supreme Court Justice was nominated to serve on the nation's highest court in 1990 by then President George H.W. Bush at the urging of former NH Governor John Sununu, Bush's Chief of Staff, and former U.S. Senator Warren Rudman (R-NH).
Souter has disappointed conservatives since his appointment to the court, frequently aligning himself with the court's few moderate members. He's made it clear over the years that he doesn't enjoy being in Washington, nor serving on the court, so the announced retirement comes as no surprise.
Souter's departure will provide President Barack Obama with his first opportunity to make an appointment to the nation's highest court. It isn't likely, however, to much alter the court's dominance by conservatives.
Tuesday, January 20, 2009
Our Long National Nightmare Is Over
Today we witnessed history being made as Barack Hussein Obama was sworn-in as the 44th President of the United States of America.
After taking the oath of office, he addressed the nation:
After taking the oath of office, he addressed the nation:
Sunday, January 18, 2009
This Is Your Land
A revival of the American Spirit was evident on The Mall in Washington, D.C. today as tens of thousands gathered for a concert celebrating the upcoming inauguration of Barack Hussein Obama as the 44th President of the United States. Legendary folk singer Pete Seeger led the crowd in a spirited rendition of "This Is Your Land".
Friday, January 2, 2009
A Party Of Whiners
New York Times columnist and Nobel Prize winning economist Paul Krugman does a great job of dissecting the GOP and offering a diagnosis for its recovery in a column that appears in today's Times.
Krugman traces the ills of the Republican Party to its "Southern Strategy", which has left it with nothing more than a strong, but limited base in the "Old Confederacy." And he parses no words in identifying the strategy as being race based.
Serving such a narrow constituency, the Republican Party, Krugman asserts, lacks the power to effectively obstruct the Obama administration's initiatives. He concludes:
As the new Democratic majority prepares to take power, Republicans have become, as Phil Gramm might put it, a party of whiners.
Some of the whining almost defies belief. Did Alberto Gonzales, the former attorney general, really say, “I consider myself a casualty, one of the many casualties of the war on terror”? Did Rush Limbaugh really suggest that the financial crisis was the result of a conspiracy, masterminded by that evil genius Chuck Schumer?
Krugman traces the ills of the Republican Party to its "Southern Strategy", which has left it with nothing more than a strong, but limited base in the "Old Confederacy." And he parses no words in identifying the strategy as being race based.
Where did this hostility to government come from? In 1981 Lee Atwater, the famed Republican political consultant, explained the evolution of the G.O.P.’s “Southern strategy,” which originally focused on opposition to the Voting Rights Act but eventually took a more coded form: “You’re getting so abstract now you’re talking about cutting taxes, and all these things you’re talking about are totally economic things and a byproduct of them is blacks get hurt worse than whites.” In other words, government is the problem because it takes your money and gives it to Those People.
Serving such a narrow constituency, the Republican Party, Krugman asserts, lacks the power to effectively obstruct the Obama administration's initiatives. He concludes:
Mr. Obama therefore has room to be bold. If Republicans try a 1993-style strategy of attacking him for promoting big government, they’ll learn two things: not only has the financial crisis discredited their economic theories, the racial subtext of anti-government rhetoric doesn’t play the way it used to.
Will the Republicans eventually stage a comeback? Yes, of course. But barring some huge missteps by Mr. Obama, that will not happen until they stop whining and look at what really went wrong. And when they do, they will discover that they need to get in touch with the real “real America,” a country that is more diverse, more tolerant, and more demanding of effective government than is dreamt of in their political philosophy.
Wednesday, December 24, 2008
I Know Why Obama Picked Warren. But Why?!
The Washington Post's Jonathan Capehart tackles the controversy surrounding President-elect Obama's selection of the Rev. Rick Warren to deliver the invocation at is inaugural by reflecting upon the opinions expressed by his colleagues Richard Cohen and E.J. Dionne, Jr. and engaging in a discussion of the issue on MSNBC's "Morning Joe" program.
From Capehart's blog entry on the Washington Post website:
From MSNBC:
From Capehart's blog entry on the Washington Post website:
I have been vexed into paralysis by President-elect Obama's selection of evangelical pastor Rick Warren to lead the invocation at his inauguration next month. Sure, I understand politically why Obama chose to give such an honor to Warren. A terrific explanation came from E.J. Dionne today.....
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
And because symbols matter, I personally found the choice offensive. That's why Richard Cohen's column today was so soothing.
From MSNBC:
Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy
Saturday, December 6, 2008
Bleak Employment Numbers Indicate Recession Is Worsening
With nearly 2 million jobs lost so far this year the prospect for any kind of economic recovery is bleak. Consumer demand for goods and services has plunged, corporate investment has tanked, the housing market is in a shambles, and automakers have been humbled into begging taxpayers for a bailout.
From the New York Times:
Significantly, the loss of jobs has affected men, more than women, due largely to the heavy concentration of women in the healthcare field, education, and other social services.
From economist Dr. Mark Perry:
President-elect Obama's desire to provide economic stimulus by investing heavily in infrastructure should provide a boost to employment in the construction and manufacturing sectors. In addition, it's been reported that he wants to provide some relief to states in the form of increased Medicaid funding and education funding, which would likely aid women.
From the New York Times:
Workers Give Up
By David Leonhardt
How bad was today’s jobs report? The unemployment rate rose to 6.7 percent, its highest level since 1993 — and that understated the weakness in the labor market.
According to the Labor Department, the number of unemployed workers rose by 251,000 in November. But the number of people who were outside of the labor force — that is, neither working nor looking for work — rose by much more: 637,000. These people aren’t counted as unemployed in the government’s statistics, because they are not looking for work. Many of them, presumably, have stopped looking for work because they didn’t think they could find a good job. ...continue reading
Significantly, the loss of jobs has affected men, more than women, due largely to the heavy concentration of women in the healthcare field, education, and other social services.
From economist Dr. Mark Perry:
According to today's BLS report, the U.S. economy has lost 2.352 million jobs in the last year (Nov. 2007 to Nov. 2008). Further analysis shows that 82% of the job losses (1.932 million) were jobs held by males, and only 18% of jobs losses (430,000) were jobs held by females (see top chart above). Further, the November unemployment rate for men is 7.2% vs. only 6% for women, and the gap in jobless rates between men and women has been increasing for the last six months (see bottom chart above).
What's going on?
According to this May 2008 BusinessWeek article:
Men have the misfortune of being concentrated in the two sectors that are doing the worst: manufacturing (70% male) and construction (88% male). Women are concentrated in sectors that are still growing, such as education and health care (77% female). ...continue reading
President-elect Obama's desire to provide economic stimulus by investing heavily in infrastructure should provide a boost to employment in the construction and manufacturing sectors. In addition, it's been reported that he wants to provide some relief to states in the form of increased Medicaid funding and education funding, which would likely aid women.
Thursday, November 27, 2008
Tuesday, November 25, 2008
Inside the Transition: Melody Barnes
An introduction to Melody Barnes, President-elect Obama's Director-designate of the Domestic Policy Council:
Obama and Bush Working to Calm Volatile Market
From the New York Times:
Obama and Bush Working to Calm Volatile Market
CHICAGO — President-elect Barack Obama sought to seize the reins of the economic crisis Monday as he and his new economic team worked closely with President Bush to inject confidence into the trembling financial markets, which rallied and erased most of last week’s losses.
The coordination between Mr. Obama and Mr. Bush was taking place among aides, as well as in direct talks about the rescue plan for Citigroup and unresolved details of the overall Treasury bailout plan. The president said his successor would be informed of every “big decision” that was made, adding, “It’s important for the American people to know that there is close cooperation.”
To calm anxious markets, the Federal Reserve and the Treasury plan to announce a major lending program on Tuesday to jump-start frozen loan markets, administration officials said. The Treasury had signaled earlier this month that it was considering such an action for consumer loans, but the action to be announced will broaden the program to include business debt. ....continue reading
Obama and Bush Working to Calm Volatile Market
CHICAGO — President-elect Barack Obama sought to seize the reins of the economic crisis Monday as he and his new economic team worked closely with President Bush to inject confidence into the trembling financial markets, which rallied and erased most of last week’s losses.
The coordination between Mr. Obama and Mr. Bush was taking place among aides, as well as in direct talks about the rescue plan for Citigroup and unresolved details of the overall Treasury bailout plan. The president said his successor would be informed of every “big decision” that was made, adding, “It’s important for the American people to know that there is close cooperation.”
To calm anxious markets, the Federal Reserve and the Treasury plan to announce a major lending program on Tuesday to jump-start frozen loan markets, administration officials said. The Treasury had signaled earlier this month that it was considering such an action for consumer loans, but the action to be announced will broaden the program to include business debt. ....continue reading
Sunday, November 2, 2008
The Socialists Are Coming -- And They Are Us
WARNING! WARNING! THE SOCIALISTS ARE COMING! BARACK OBAMA WANTS TO SPREAD THE WEALTH!
Of all the scare tactics employed in this election season, this latest gambit by the McCain-Palin ticket is among the most ludicrous, and would be amusing if it were not for the seriousness with which some people are fearing Armageddon.
Come on, people. Sharing the wealth has always been an American tradition. Sometimes it’s achieved through the largesse of individuals. On other occasions religious and charitable organizations undertake the task of distributing generous donations collected from individuals and businesses. And frequently, we rely upon government to assist us in spreading around the wealth.
Nor is our socialization limited to sharing the wealth. We’re also a nation given to sharing risk and to collectively carrying the burden of catastrophe or disaster. That’s a major part of what defines us as a civilization.
In a little over a month our community will unite behind one of the most incredible annual acts of generosity in which each of us takes pride - the Annual WLNH Children’s Auction. Literally hundreds of local residents volunteer their time, energy and money to this charitable endeavor, and hundreds more anxiously await the opportunity to bid on items they don’t necessarily want or need, frequently donating them back for resale, or providing them for use by other charitable organizations and groups.
This year each of us will be asked once again to pay a share of our income to support the County Nursing home, committed to ensuring our elderly a safe, secure and healthy life no matter their economic or familial circumstances. I’ve not met anyone who believes we should turn these people out on the streets to fend for themselves.
Each month thousands of seniors in the Lakes Region rely upon a check arriving in the mail from Social Security. Get the name? Social Security? It’s socialism, my friends. We’re all asked to contribute a portion of our income to ascertain that seniors and the disabled are not abandoned to poverty. All of us contribute during our working years to support those generations that came before us, and we expect that ensuing generations will continue that tradition.
And what is Medicare but socialized medicine? Again, we all contribute to the pot because we don’t believe being old should mean being denied health care services that are beyond one’s ability to pay.
Let’s look at insurance. All insurance. The purpose of insurance is to share the risk and the costs. It’s a socialization of risk. I’ve driven an automobile for over forty years, dutifully paying my insurance premiums which have amounted to tens of thousands of dollars. Yet the only claim I’ve ever filed cost the carrier $450 and that was in 1970. Nevertheless, I still regard insurance as an important expenditure.
Rarely does a day pass when I don’t traverse at least a segment of our streets and roadways, crossing bridges, passing beneath viaducts, all on a complex network built by shared contributions.
When I awaken in the morning the first thing I do is flip on the kitchen light and brew a pot of coffee, trusting that electricity will flow into my home unless some dastardly storm or errant vehicle has somehow interrupted the transmission system. Like you, I share in the cost of supporting the nation’s electrical grid, aware that it’s highly unlikely that I’d be able to generate my individual energy needs without incurring monumental expenses.
Within minutes of pouring my first cup of coffee I’m greeted by the outdoor sounds of children heading off to school, another collective cost that we share. Yes, our schools are expensive, consuming a large slice of our local tax dollars, yet few of us fail to recognize that public education is a necessary and valuable investment, providing lifetime rewards.
Over the past five years New Hampshire has sacrificed 23 lives in Iraq and another five in Afghanistan. Laconia residents have contributed in excess of $30 million to the costs of the wars. It’s a collective burden, borne most heavily by those families who’ve lost loved ones, yet apportioned to all of us.
Barack Obama has come to the conclusion that too much of the shared burden has fallen upon the middle class, and that for eight years the Bush administration has shifted much of the onus onto future generations, compiling nearly $5 trillion in debt that will be a millstone around the necks of our children and grandchildren. That kind of irresponsibility must stop.
We face serious and expensive problems, from two wars to crumbling infrastructure, and from energy dependence to a financial meltdown. Fixing these problems is going to be costly and necessary. And it can’t be done by bankrupting the middle class.
So yes, the wealthiest among us are going to have to pay a bit more. That’s the American way. We’re all in this together, sharing the same ship of state. It’s time to set aside the petty bickering and senseless name calling and recognize that each of us has a responsibility for our nation’s future. And if John McCain is so opposed to sharing burdens perhaps he should give up his government funded health insurance and disability pension. After all, he and his wife are worth an estimated $150 million.
Of all the scare tactics employed in this election season, this latest gambit by the McCain-Palin ticket is among the most ludicrous, and would be amusing if it were not for the seriousness with which some people are fearing Armageddon.
Come on, people. Sharing the wealth has always been an American tradition. Sometimes it’s achieved through the largesse of individuals. On other occasions religious and charitable organizations undertake the task of distributing generous donations collected from individuals and businesses. And frequently, we rely upon government to assist us in spreading around the wealth.
Nor is our socialization limited to sharing the wealth. We’re also a nation given to sharing risk and to collectively carrying the burden of catastrophe or disaster. That’s a major part of what defines us as a civilization.
In a little over a month our community will unite behind one of the most incredible annual acts of generosity in which each of us takes pride - the Annual WLNH Children’s Auction. Literally hundreds of local residents volunteer their time, energy and money to this charitable endeavor, and hundreds more anxiously await the opportunity to bid on items they don’t necessarily want or need, frequently donating them back for resale, or providing them for use by other charitable organizations and groups.
This year each of us will be asked once again to pay a share of our income to support the County Nursing home, committed to ensuring our elderly a safe, secure and healthy life no matter their economic or familial circumstances. I’ve not met anyone who believes we should turn these people out on the streets to fend for themselves.
Each month thousands of seniors in the Lakes Region rely upon a check arriving in the mail from Social Security. Get the name? Social Security? It’s socialism, my friends. We’re all asked to contribute a portion of our income to ascertain that seniors and the disabled are not abandoned to poverty. All of us contribute during our working years to support those generations that came before us, and we expect that ensuing generations will continue that tradition.
And what is Medicare but socialized medicine? Again, we all contribute to the pot because we don’t believe being old should mean being denied health care services that are beyond one’s ability to pay.
Let’s look at insurance. All insurance. The purpose of insurance is to share the risk and the costs. It’s a socialization of risk. I’ve driven an automobile for over forty years, dutifully paying my insurance premiums which have amounted to tens of thousands of dollars. Yet the only claim I’ve ever filed cost the carrier $450 and that was in 1970. Nevertheless, I still regard insurance as an important expenditure.
Rarely does a day pass when I don’t traverse at least a segment of our streets and roadways, crossing bridges, passing beneath viaducts, all on a complex network built by shared contributions.
When I awaken in the morning the first thing I do is flip on the kitchen light and brew a pot of coffee, trusting that electricity will flow into my home unless some dastardly storm or errant vehicle has somehow interrupted the transmission system. Like you, I share in the cost of supporting the nation’s electrical grid, aware that it’s highly unlikely that I’d be able to generate my individual energy needs without incurring monumental expenses.
Within minutes of pouring my first cup of coffee I’m greeted by the outdoor sounds of children heading off to school, another collective cost that we share. Yes, our schools are expensive, consuming a large slice of our local tax dollars, yet few of us fail to recognize that public education is a necessary and valuable investment, providing lifetime rewards.
Over the past five years New Hampshire has sacrificed 23 lives in Iraq and another five in Afghanistan. Laconia residents have contributed in excess of $30 million to the costs of the wars. It’s a collective burden, borne most heavily by those families who’ve lost loved ones, yet apportioned to all of us.
Barack Obama has come to the conclusion that too much of the shared burden has fallen upon the middle class, and that for eight years the Bush administration has shifted much of the onus onto future generations, compiling nearly $5 trillion in debt that will be a millstone around the necks of our children and grandchildren. That kind of irresponsibility must stop.
We face serious and expensive problems, from two wars to crumbling infrastructure, and from energy dependence to a financial meltdown. Fixing these problems is going to be costly and necessary. And it can’t be done by bankrupting the middle class.
So yes, the wealthiest among us are going to have to pay a bit more. That’s the American way. We’re all in this together, sharing the same ship of state. It’s time to set aside the petty bickering and senseless name calling and recognize that each of us has a responsibility for our nation’s future. And if John McCain is so opposed to sharing burdens perhaps he should give up his government funded health insurance and disability pension. After all, he and his wife are worth an estimated $150 million.
Wednesday, October 8, 2008
The American Insult
By Lynn Lagasse
While the focus of attention, debate and criticism continues to center primarily around Sarah Palin, the real issue remains obscure and less tangible to many voters, that being John McCain’s selection of a Vice-Presidential running mate. His motivations stridently defended are a thinly veiled disguise for political grandstanding intended to bolster up a floundering campaign.
Palin’s nomination while pandering to the base, targeted disaffected Hillary supporters yearning for a woman on the ticket and a means to defuse the groundswell of criticism and suspicions of elitism over the discovery of McCain’s eleven or so houses. (Really, after the first five or six does it really matter how many he has?) In this ill advised, unprepared and inappropriate choice, John McCain has dealt the American electorate the ultimate insult and in doing so has revealed his true colors. Motivated whole-heartedly by self-promotion and personal aspirations, John McCain chose marketing over substance, selling out his party, his constituents, his supporters and the American people, not to mention Sarah Palin herself, who is in way over her head but too afraid to blink.
As a campaign strategy, Sarah Palin’s obvious appeal is her astounding success story juxstaposed on a backdrop of “everyman” credentials complete with small town upbringing, beauty queen good looks, working-class lifestyle and family values. When this well woven storyline began unraveling over a daughter’s teen pregnancy and a quarter million dollar annual income the campaign managed to diffuse attention from these facts, by shifting greater focus to Ms. Palin’s maverick credentials, feisty attitude and tomboyish appeal as an avid hunter and outdoors enthusiast. While her well documented hunting exploits are especially appealing to sportsmen, I do not personally know a single hunter whose experience includes hunting from an airplane, helicopter or any other aerial device short of a tree stand, which most real hunters find far too exotic and elitist.
Sarah Palin’s role is more spokes-model for the McCain campaign, providing the perfect vehicle for connecting with average folks by delivering up a brand of plain speak and homespun zingers that John McCain could not possibly pull off. As a matter of fact, Sarah Palin barely gets away with it but she seems to combine all the right qualities of base appeal, gutsy feminism and “uncut gem in the rough” to turn out crowds of so-called supporters but I wonder how many are really supporters or just curiosity seekers.
Hell, I’d be tempted to attend a rally if she came to town just for the sheer novelty of seeing her in person. Chances are I probably wouldn’t find the marketing of Sarah Palin as deeply offending if there were a substantive, informed, prepared Vice-Presidential nominee behind the façade or if she were not so “in your face” with the sassy, girl-next-door, plain speak which I am positive has been coached to grating perfection on the Straight Talk Express.
The last time I heard the expression “Golly-gee,” was on a rerun of the Andy Griffith Show or Gomer Pyle and I can honestly say, I’ve never heard those words used in real life until they came out of Sarah Palin’s mouth. The gosh darnit, geewiz, down-home, back-slappin’, “gettin’ folksy with ya’ll” routine was already wearing thin on me when the final blow was delivered.
An apparent attempt to connect with us common folk down here on Main street, at the kitchen table or wherever else we ordinary people are storied to be found, the McCain campaign has come up with catchy nicknames for the American electorate which Sarah Palin used in addressing us during last week’s debate when she said, “for all you Hockey-Moms and Joe Six-Packs”. My blood immediately began to boil not because of the words used per-se, but because their meaning disclosed the darkest of truths about the McCain campaign. In those words a revelation of how John McCain and the Republican Party view the average American citizen became crystal clear.
These one-dimensional, unsophisticated, over-simplified characterizations describe who the McCain campaign thinks they are speaking to when they ask for your vote. To anyone who remains undecided I say, John McCain does not deserve your respect for his politics, your consideration for his candidacy and least of all your vote for our country’s highest office.
As a registered Independent for 30 years, I voted for John McCain in the 2000 primaries, considering him a man of principles, representing higher ideals in government and non-partisan politics. Admittedly a liberal leaning voter, I enthusiastically became a registered Democrat two years ago and now have absolutely no regrets, remorse or second thoughts about not supporting John McCain. How could anyone support a candidate who would trade our future, our security and our country’s best interests for personal gain, ego and self-promotion? John McCain is an insult to the intelligence of a nation and the dignity of its people.
My support and my vote goes to the candidate that respects the American voter and respects us enough to be honest, clear and straight forward about our circumstances and the difficult choices and sacrifices we will all have to make in the days ahead. The “Dumbing Down” of America encouraged and exploited by the current administration tells us that “The world is a scary place, we should fear evil doers and terrorists who would harm us - but not to worry, go about our business, live our normal lives, don’t be concerned with the war, the economy – they’ll take care of everything”.
Great leaders instead are straight with people, inspire people, ask people to participate in the solution, enabling everyone to be part of the process. I believe that Barack Obama is one of those great leaders who possess the qualities that inspire, unite and build up. In that, there is only one choice for us to make at a time where change in leadership is so desperately needed and only one candidate that can deliver on that tall order – our Democratic Presidential Nominee, Barack Obama.
While the focus of attention, debate and criticism continues to center primarily around Sarah Palin, the real issue remains obscure and less tangible to many voters, that being John McCain’s selection of a Vice-Presidential running mate. His motivations stridently defended are a thinly veiled disguise for political grandstanding intended to bolster up a floundering campaign.
Palin’s nomination while pandering to the base, targeted disaffected Hillary supporters yearning for a woman on the ticket and a means to defuse the groundswell of criticism and suspicions of elitism over the discovery of McCain’s eleven or so houses. (Really, after the first five or six does it really matter how many he has?) In this ill advised, unprepared and inappropriate choice, John McCain has dealt the American electorate the ultimate insult and in doing so has revealed his true colors. Motivated whole-heartedly by self-promotion and personal aspirations, John McCain chose marketing over substance, selling out his party, his constituents, his supporters and the American people, not to mention Sarah Palin herself, who is in way over her head but too afraid to blink.
As a campaign strategy, Sarah Palin’s obvious appeal is her astounding success story juxstaposed on a backdrop of “everyman” credentials complete with small town upbringing, beauty queen good looks, working-class lifestyle and family values. When this well woven storyline began unraveling over a daughter’s teen pregnancy and a quarter million dollar annual income the campaign managed to diffuse attention from these facts, by shifting greater focus to Ms. Palin’s maverick credentials, feisty attitude and tomboyish appeal as an avid hunter and outdoors enthusiast. While her well documented hunting exploits are especially appealing to sportsmen, I do not personally know a single hunter whose experience includes hunting from an airplane, helicopter or any other aerial device short of a tree stand, which most real hunters find far too exotic and elitist.
Sarah Palin’s role is more spokes-model for the McCain campaign, providing the perfect vehicle for connecting with average folks by delivering up a brand of plain speak and homespun zingers that John McCain could not possibly pull off. As a matter of fact, Sarah Palin barely gets away with it but she seems to combine all the right qualities of base appeal, gutsy feminism and “uncut gem in the rough” to turn out crowds of so-called supporters but I wonder how many are really supporters or just curiosity seekers.
Hell, I’d be tempted to attend a rally if she came to town just for the sheer novelty of seeing her in person. Chances are I probably wouldn’t find the marketing of Sarah Palin as deeply offending if there were a substantive, informed, prepared Vice-Presidential nominee behind the façade or if she were not so “in your face” with the sassy, girl-next-door, plain speak which I am positive has been coached to grating perfection on the Straight Talk Express.
The last time I heard the expression “Golly-gee,” was on a rerun of the Andy Griffith Show or Gomer Pyle and I can honestly say, I’ve never heard those words used in real life until they came out of Sarah Palin’s mouth. The gosh darnit, geewiz, down-home, back-slappin’, “gettin’ folksy with ya’ll” routine was already wearing thin on me when the final blow was delivered.
An apparent attempt to connect with us common folk down here on Main street, at the kitchen table or wherever else we ordinary people are storied to be found, the McCain campaign has come up with catchy nicknames for the American electorate which Sarah Palin used in addressing us during last week’s debate when she said, “for all you Hockey-Moms and Joe Six-Packs”. My blood immediately began to boil not because of the words used per-se, but because their meaning disclosed the darkest of truths about the McCain campaign. In those words a revelation of how John McCain and the Republican Party view the average American citizen became crystal clear.
These one-dimensional, unsophisticated, over-simplified characterizations describe who the McCain campaign thinks they are speaking to when they ask for your vote. To anyone who remains undecided I say, John McCain does not deserve your respect for his politics, your consideration for his candidacy and least of all your vote for our country’s highest office.
As a registered Independent for 30 years, I voted for John McCain in the 2000 primaries, considering him a man of principles, representing higher ideals in government and non-partisan politics. Admittedly a liberal leaning voter, I enthusiastically became a registered Democrat two years ago and now have absolutely no regrets, remorse or second thoughts about not supporting John McCain. How could anyone support a candidate who would trade our future, our security and our country’s best interests for personal gain, ego and self-promotion? John McCain is an insult to the intelligence of a nation and the dignity of its people.
My support and my vote goes to the candidate that respects the American voter and respects us enough to be honest, clear and straight forward about our circumstances and the difficult choices and sacrifices we will all have to make in the days ahead. The “Dumbing Down” of America encouraged and exploited by the current administration tells us that “The world is a scary place, we should fear evil doers and terrorists who would harm us - but not to worry, go about our business, live our normal lives, don’t be concerned with the war, the economy – they’ll take care of everything”.
Great leaders instead are straight with people, inspire people, ask people to participate in the solution, enabling everyone to be part of the process. I believe that Barack Obama is one of those great leaders who possess the qualities that inspire, unite and build up. In that, there is only one choice for us to make at a time where change in leadership is so desperately needed and only one candidate that can deliver on that tall order – our Democratic Presidential Nominee, Barack Obama.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)