Obama's Deceptive Governance

It's been awhile since my last post, but that doesn't mean I'm not paying attention. I learned in July that I will need to have the mitral valve in my heart replaced. The valve has caused me to have to deal with a bout of congestive heart failure, which means that I'm pretty much exhausted all the time. I'm back in Ohio to have the surgery done and now I'm waiting to be scheduled for it. The resting has done me some good. So much so that today I feel like blogging.

It's unfortunate for me that I've been sick during what has been one of the most exciting times to be a news and politics junkie. The health care debate has obviously taken center stage and nothing is about to change that. But with the death of Ted Kennedy, the Tea Parties, the White House czars, the Blue Dogs, Cash for Clunkers, stimulus confusion, comments from Osama Bin Laden, Town Hall Meetings, and uncovered terrorist plots I have been overwhelmed. At one point I told myself just to back away from it all and try to see a bigger picture instead of trying to focus on each little event or topic. I wish I hadn't done that. I found myself harboring a deep distrust of my own president.

When I looked at the direction of the country under Obama, I began to feel some sense of dread. Do I think he's the anti-christ? No, I really don't. He and I are both Americans who have a vision of what our country should stand for and how we should go about reaching our goals. And we agree on very little there. He is an advocate of a large and powerful national government that controls our lives from Washington instead of at the state and local level where the founding fathers placed most of the power, and where I believe it should reside today. It's why we send our federal tax money to Washington from our state, and Washington decides how much of it we get back, and in many cases tells the state how they have to spend large amounts of it. Not the intent of the countries founders. And when a president leans toward a powerful national government, they will build their agenda for the country around that ideal.

Back to Obama. I listened intently to both sides of the debate surrounding health care. I read as much of the bill HR3200 as I could understand. I found myself checking out the Canadian health care system, the British system, and the French system. I listened to the pros and cons of each from thier citizens, and tried to imagine that system replacing our private, employer based insurance. I came away wanting nothing to do with a government run system like these. Single payer (government) plans took away choice and quality of care in every instance. It may be cheaper at point of service, but what those people pay in taxes and quality of care is entirely too much for me.

My biggest problem with the Obama/Congress plan was the public option. It made me nervous because it could lead to the bankruptcy of the private insurance companies and leave us with a government run health system. But when Obama gave speeches on the topic, I would listen to him and be lulled into a sense of guilt for questioning his motives. His rhetoric is so smooth and reassuring. But all this unraveled when I heard him at a Town Hall Meeting in New Hampshire on August 11, as he answered a question about single payer. A man asked him if he didn't at one time support the single payer concept like the Canadian system. His response was that he had not supported any single payer plan. Following the meeting the news anchors began jumping all over the fact that as a candidate for the US Senate in 2003, Obama had indeed indicated he was for a single payer plan. In a You Tube video, Obama is heard saying, "I happen to be a proponent of a single payer health care program. I see no reason why the United States of America, the wealthiest country in the history of the world, spending 14% of it's gross national product on health care cannot provide basic health insurance to everybody. A single payer health care plan, a universal health care plan. That's what I'd like to see. But as all of you know, we may not get there immediately. Because first we have to take back the White House. We've got to take back the Senate, and we've got to take back the House." Over the years he has adjusted his opinion, but only because he feels that the transition from private based could be "disruptive" if done too quickly. How convenient for the public option to come along and pave the way.

But I got to thinking about how deceptive this kind of governance is. Tell the people one thing, while knowing full well that you have something entirely different up your sleeve. It was telling when Obama insisted that the congress have the bill on his desk by the end of July. There would have been no way the American people would hve had a chance to see what was actually in it. The congress hadn't even read it. Disgusting. But as I'm learning, not unusual.

I fear that my country is going to be a very different place in four years. Or even worse, in eight. Clearly, the spending going on by this government is unsustainable. It is recognized by our citizens as well as governments around the world who now eye our economy with suspicion. We are getting lectured by the Chinese to watch how we spend. And they own most of our debt. The Obama administration wants us all to believe that we can have health care for all, bail out banks and car companies, lots of new spending for social wefare and education programs, job training, wind and solar energy projects, expanded mass transit, and increase number of soldiers and their pay and benefits. And all of this without raising my taxes by "one dime" (I'm under $250k). This country will be so deeply in debt by 2012 that we may lose our stellar AAA rating. We'll could be in a position to have to print money to cover our debts. This leads to rapid inflation and the economy would tank in a matter of months. But it doesn't have to be that way. In 2010 we can take back the congress. And I've decided that wherever I am, in Ohio or in Florida, that is what I'm going to be working on. As everyone know, I am not much of an advocate of the GOP, since they played a vital role in getting us where we are now. But if we could get the majority of both houses of congress, then this race to the edge of the cliff is stopped. Even if we don't take them over, but make the majorities very small for democrats, we could make a difference.

And I mean we. If you are concerned about the direction of the country, and worry about what it will look like if if our current leftist government maintains control and begins to push through it's agenda, then you have some obligation to act. Follow the news, educate yourself on an issue you have an interest in, vote, campaign.

I didn't mean for this to become a soap box event. But this is what happens when my president loses my trust. Try to fool me on health care and I want to know what else you're planning to sneak past me.

Here is a quote that I have memorized and recite whenever I get tired of the fight. I hope we never get there....

If we fail to dare, if we do not try, then the next generation will harvest the fruit of our indifference; a world we did not want - a world we did not choose - but a world we could have made better, by caring more for the results of our labors. And we shall be left only with the hollow apology of T.S. Eliot: This is not what I meant at all. This is not it at all."

Hope Delayed...and Why That's a Good Thing

Barack Obama's dream of getting the health care bill he wanted is dead. And he can only blame himself. By pushing the House and Senate to rush the bill through committees for a floor vote before the congress left Washington for August recess, he raised some eyebrows. Mine included. With many members of congress complaining that they didn't have a chance to read or even see the bill, Obama played the "trust me" card and continued to insist that the bill be voted on. A group of conservative democrats, called Blue Dogs, decided that they weren't going to play that game. They were going to read the bill and be heard on issues like how to pay for the monstrosity. Speaker Nancy Pelosi was furious, and kept promising Obama that he would have his bill out before they left town. But it wasn't to be. And when average Americans began to question the big hurry, Pelosi and Obama realized the jig was up. They knew they were in trouble now.

My own opinion of the big hurry was that Obama didn't want the details to get out. I know I'm not alone in thinking that, and having now seen some of those details, I know why they were in such a hurry. Conservative think tanks, radio talk show hosts, bloggers, and average citizens are reading the bill and those details are getting out. And the more they get out, the less people like what they say. Polling on the healthcare legislation is going on daily, and the numbers are not good for Obama. The White House has already begun to spin some of what is in there and it is reported that the liberals in congress are scurrying to make changes to the bill already.

The biggest changes will need to be made to the "public option," which is drawing most of the wrath from the Blue Dogs and the conservatives. This was the part of the bill that the president and the liberals insisted must be included. It is the federal governments health insurance plan, paid for by you and me. The president would not sign a bill that didn't have a public insurance option. Why? Okay....a little history lesson.

When in the US Senate, Barack Obama was a proponent of a single payer health insurance plan for Americans. That would be a total takeover of the healthcare system like they have in Great Britain. The government owns the hospitals, sets pay for the medical staff, and government employees set policy about all forms of treatment. There is no private insurance because the government pays for everything. Read about British healthcare sometime. See if you think you'd like that here. Seriously, do your homework. There is still strong support for this kind of healthcare system among liberals in congress. I believe the president is among those who still support it. This is where I find my greatest dissapointment in Barack Obama.

When the president takes time to hold Town Hall meetings about his healthcare plan, he is always sure to insert one very important point. He tells his audience that if they like the insurance they have, they can keep it. He makes sure to reiterate that point, and adds that nobody is going to take your private insurance away. Nobody is going to force you to join the government plan. What he doesn't tell them is that his "public option" insurance plan is designed to bankrupt their private insurance company. He knows that the federal government has the resources to undercut the costs that insurance companies have to charge to stay in business, forcing them out of the market. So the government won't force you to give up your insurance and join theirs...the insurance company will have to give you up as they go into bankruptcy. This is why he insisted that there be a public option in the bill. Nice and clean, huh? Well he's telling the truth, isn't he?

There are plenty of problems with the healthcare bill, and you'll be hearing about them over the next few weeks. Some of them will make you want to scream. Some of you might actually decide to join one of the many protests that are taking place this month. And there will be a few that will choose to attend a Town Hall meeting with your congressman or senator. Here is where I get in trouble with my conservative freinds. I'm asking for restraint. Really. I have heard and seen stories about "mobs" showing up at these meetings, screaming, stomping, blowing whistles, and generally causing mayhem. They seem to think this is going to get them on the evening news and show the people just how much they oppose this healthcare bill. Many times they do not even allow the representitive to answer a question. Now to me, this is just stupid. If all we can do is go and be disruptive, we look like uneducated yeehaws who have no idea how to ask an intelligent question. And that's what we should be doing. Asking tough questions. Make them answer, too. And if you don't like the answer, follow up. This is how we educate the rest of America. We need to be diligent in making them face us and satisfy our discontent. Save the activism for the ballot box.

In the meantime, get online and find a copy of the healthcare bill. Study it. It's tough reading, but if you find a section thats easy to read and makes your blood boil, make that your niche issue. For me it was a section that talked about the government having access to all of my financial records, including bank accounts, for purposes of ensuring I could pay any out of pocket expenses I might incur. Um, I don't think so, Uncle Sam. And I'm sure I'll find other sections that concern me too. We have the whole month of August to read it and see what they didn't want us to see. Sorry about the delay, Barack. But this is transparency in action.

Hope Delayed...and Why That's a

Hope Delayed...and Why That's a

Hope Delayed...and Why That's a

Beyond Tea Parties

The big news in Washington this week has been President Obama's huge push to get his health insurance bill passed before Congress takes it's August recess. He is using much of the same retoric that was used to rush through the stimulus bill, and we can see how "urgent" that spending turned out to be. The truth is that Obama and the Democrats don't want the American people to have time to hear what's really in this bill. They must know that if we found out their real plans, we'd have the capitol surrounded with angry voters, demanding the thing be destroyed. So rush it through before the unwashed masses get a clue and let the chips fall where they may. It'll be too late for us to stop them. Rolled again.

To thier credit, the liberals have not come up for air since taking power in Washington. The pace with which they have carried out their power grab has been stunning. It's only been six months, but they have managed to take over the auto industry, the banking industry, passed a huge stimulus package, alienated our ally Israel, buddied up with socialist dictators in Latin America, and now are on the verge of getting their universal health insurance bill passed. Whew! Quite alot accomplished. In my opinion, there's just one thing wrong here. Every one of these things is harmful to America.

I was afraid that when Obama got elected, he would ram through his agenda without much resistance from the Republicans. In most cases, this is what has happened. They have watched most of this damage being done to our country with an occassional, "but...but...", but nothing of any real substance. That's why I was so relieved and excited when I first heard about "Tea Parties." They were going to be a conservative, grass roots protests and opposition to the liberal agenda that would otherwise have free reign in Washington. I made my plans to attend one in Allentown, Pa. Surely the politicians in DC would hear us loud and clear, and now we would be a force to be reckoned with. I couldn't wait.

I'm not going to be specific about what I saw at the Allentown Tea Party. I will say that it seemed typical of what happened in other small cities and towns around the country. Lots of good intentions, but not much enthusiasm for the cause. As I read the following days news accounts of Party's around the country, I was disappointed. Stories that recorded "40 or so folks turned out," or "around 200 people showed up for what looked like a small family reunion," made me wonder just what went wrong. There was serious bickering in some places as to whether politicians should be aloud to speak. In other places, the event was sponsored by a political party, driving legitimacy down. The same things happened again during Tea Party events on the 4th of July.

Hey! We're not getting anywhere like this! We're losing steam at a time that we need to be building it. Network and local coverage of Tea Party's is evaporating because we appear to be so disoraganized and, well, boring. We need to come together to figure out what we are trying to do. My understanding was that we were protesting against liberal and socialist policy coming out of Washington. But even more, to stop these policies from seeing the light of day. Instead, we're gathering together for cookouts, seeing who can come up with the wittiest sign, playing ad nauseum "I'm Proud To Be an American," and listening to politicians rail against what they're doing to us in Washington.

I, for one, would like to make the future rallies and protests a little more meaningful. I would like to see us organize a bit differently in order to be more effective with our representitives. Party's or no Party's, our voices are still not being heard. We're not getting through. When the left protests, whether here, or in a foreign land, they get results. They are heard. They rally enmasse. They get in your face. On the right, we have cookouts and sing patriotic songs. Can we learn something about protesting from the left? I say we must.

Among the things I see as needed in the future is the absolute refusal of a political party sponsorship. I don't care how much money they can put toward the cause. And it's no surprise that when I say that, I'm referring to the Republican Party. I read about Tea Party after Tea Party that allowed GOP candidates to speak at the rally. And the vast majority of them sat in the House of Representitives and voted to let George W. Bush spend us into huge deficits. And I'm talking domestic spending. Here they were at the Tea Party howling about Obama and his spending. But they glossed over the fact that they were a big part of the problem. We just gave them a campaign speech opportunity, and they took advantage of us all. This is why I am against letting politicians from any party speak at a rally.

This country needs to have a huge, loud, active opposition to Obama and his liberal congress. I want to see us move beyond the Tea Party and organize in strength and numbers that will shake the halls of Congress and the pillars of the White House. If you have the same feelings I do, then contact me at ecksbox1@gmail.com. Lets stop them before they destroy that which we have fought for, died for, and wish to pass on to our children.

National Health Care and the Age of Responsibility

No matter where you stand on the issue of National Health Care, it's coming soon in one form or another. So, I've been talking to freinds about how they would like to see it handled, and some ideas deserve some consideration. Here's one in particular that my room mate and I discussed.

If the main concern of government in this debate is getting everyone covered, then roll all of Medicaid and Medicare into the national insurance system and provide a basic coverage for all citizens. This coverage is basic, and while it's free, it has some strings attached. I'll get to those in a minute. This coverage is mainly for health maintanance, and includes visits to the doctor for routine physicals, emergency room treatment that qualifies as a true emergency, programs for smoking cessation and weight control, diabetic supplies, and other such basic medical needs. Again, this coverage is available to all citizens, regardless of status.

This would be the "public" coverage that Washington and the Obama administration keep talking about having. Any citizen who desires to purchase medical coverage over and above this level would be able to do so. Private insurance companies continue to operate primarily the same. Costs should be lower due to the government taking over paying for emergency treatment and many other common costs. Costs will also be lowered because of those "strings" I mentioned earlier. And here they are....

Part of being able to partake in the government health program is that citizens will be responsible for their own healthcare. When joining the public plan, everyone will be expected to do what is necessary to be in optimal health. If your doctor tells you that you need to stop smoking and lose 25 pounds, you will be given all the resources you need. Counseling is covered, a gym membership, specialists like nutritionists and those who will help you quit smoking are all part of the program. Then you have two years to follow through. If, at the end of two years, you return to the doctor and are found in the same condition, having made no effort to improve your health, you can be removed from the insurance rolls. Um, yeah, really.

An entire nation of citizens who are taking care of themselves can bring down the overall cost of health care. Cases of diabetes, cancer, cardio-pulmonary disease, heart disease, and osteoparosis would be reduced. And two years is certainly enough time to make some progress in ones health. But if you choose to do your own thing and not take care of yourself, why should the rest of us have to do it? We live in a society that tells itself "someone else will be responsible for me." Combine that with living under the current administrations aim to take care of every societal ill that effects us, whether self-inflicted or not. It's the "Nanny State Syndrome." This is a very expensive train wreck we're heading toward.

So in summary, I think there is a way forward. This plan would cover basic medical care. It would encourage all Americans to focus more on their own health and provide resources and incentives to do so. It offers an option to increase coverage through private insurance companies who can lower their costs. Physicians can opt out of the public program just like they can for Medicare and Medicaid or any private insurance. Patients using the public system will be encouraged to get healthier if they plan on maintaining eligibility. And those who are detemined to need more extensive treatment will have the option of obtaining the additional private insurance at any time, regardless of past medical history. There could be a private fund set up for those on the bottom rung of the economic ladder who absolutely cannot afford private insurance.

And the bill in congress that puts this in motion will include a clause that does not allow additional coverage for this group or that. This bill should contain nothing more than the parameters of coverage and be un-amendable. I know what congress would do if they were able to add to it down the road. And this is just an idea. Attainable? I don't know. It seems too simple in a time when congressional bills and laws are printed with well over a thousand pages. This could be written on 20 pages. It would take courage to put something like this in place, and I frankly don't think many in government have it anymore. They would have to ignore the unions, lobbyists, and social scientists who would insist that their constituents are getting screwed by the simplicity of the program. If they are so concerned about covering everyone, then they should be ready to sacrifice their own seats to get it done. Where's Patrick Henry when we need him?