Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr

Forum Post: "What Is ObamaCare ?" by Paul Craig Roberts.

Posted 6 years ago on April 11, 2012, 8:10 a.m. EST by shadz66 (19985)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

"What Is ObamaCare ?"

by Paul Craig Roberts.

April 10, 2012 "Information Clearing House" ( http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/ )


Growing up in the post-war era (after the Second World War), I never expected to live in the strange Kafkaesque world that exists today. The US government can assassinate any US citizen that the executive branch thinks could possibly be a “threat” to the US government, or throw the hapless citizen into a dungeon for the rest of his or her life without presenting any evidence to a court or obtaining a conviction of any crime, or send the “threat” to a puppet foreign state to be tortured until the “threat” confesses to a crime that never occurred or dies at the hands of “freedom and democracy” while professing innocence.

It has never been revealed how a single citizen, or any number thereof, could possibly comprise a threat to a government that has a trillion plus dollars to spend each year on security and weapons, the world’s largest navy and air force, 700 plus military bases across the world, large numbers of nuclear weapons, 16 intelligence agencies plus the intelligence agencies of its NATO puppet states and the intelligence service of Israel.

Nevertheless, air travelers are subjected to porno-scanning and sexual groping. Cars traveling on Interstate highways can expect to be stopped, with traffic backed up for miles, while Homeland Security and the federalized state or local police conduct searches.

I witnessed one such warrantless search on Easter Sunday. The south bound lanes of I-185 heading into Columbus, Georgia, were at a standstill while black SUV and police car lights flashed. US citizens were treated by “security” forces that they finance as if they were “terrorists” or “domestic extremists,” another undefined class of Americans devoid of constitutional protections.

These events are Kafkaesque in themselves, but they are ever more so when one considers that these extraordinary violations of the US Constitution fail to be overturned in the Supreme Court. Apparently, American citizens lack standing to defend their civil liberties.

Yet, ObamaCare is before the US Supreme Court. The conservative majority might now utilize the “judicial activism” for which conservatives have criticized liberals. Hypocrisy should no longer surprise us. However, the fight over ObamaCare is not worth five cents.

It is extraordinary that “liberals,” “progressives,” “Democrats,” whatever they are, are defending a “health program” that uses public monies to pay private insurance companies and that raises the cost of health care.

Americans have been brainwashed that “a single-payer system is unaffordable” because it is “socialized medicine.” Despite this propaganda, accepted by many Americans, European countries manage to afford single-payer systems. Health care is not a stress, a trauma, an unaffordable expense for European populations. Among the Western Civilized Nations, only the richest, the US, has no universal health care.

The American health care system is the most expensive of all on earth. The reason for the extraordinary expense is the multiple of entities that must make profits. The private doctors must make profits. The private testing centers must make profits.The private specialists who receive the referrals from general practitioners must make profits. The private hospitals must make profits. The private insurance companies must make profits. The profits are a huge cost of health care.

On top of these profits come the costs of preventing and combatting fraud. Because private insurance companies resist paying and Medicare pays a small fraction of the medical charges, private health care providers charge as much as they possibly can, knowing that the payments will be cut to the bone. But a billing mistake of even $300 can bankrupt a health care provider from legal expenses defending him/her self from fraud accusations.

The beauty of a single-payer system is that it takes the profits out of the system. No one has to make profits. Wall Street cannot threaten insurance companies and private health care companies with being taken over because their profits are too low. No health-provider in a single-payer system has to worry about being displaced in a takeover organized by Wall Street because the profits are too low.

Because a single-payer system eliminates the profits that drive up the costs, Wall Street, Insurance companies, and “free market economists” hate a “socialized” medical care system. They prefer a socialized “private” health care system in which public monies flow into private insurance companies.

To make the costs as high as possible, conservatives and the private insurance companies devised ObamaCare. The bill was written by conservative think tanks and the private insurance companies. What the “socialistic” ObamaCare bill does is to take income taxes paid by citizens and use the taxes to subsidize the private medical premiums charges by private health care providers in order to provide “private” health care to US citizens who cannot afford it.

The extremely high costs of ObamaCare is not “socialistic medicine.” ObamaCare is high-cost privatized medicine that guarantees billions of dollars in profits to private insurance companies.

It remains to be seen whether such a ridiculous health care scheme, nowhere extant on earth except in Romney’s Massachusetts, will provide health care or just private profits.


fiat lux et fiat justitia ...


Paul Craig Roberts was Assistant Secretary of the Treasury for Economic Policy and associate editor of the Wall Street Journal. He was columnist for Business Week, Scripps Howard News Service, and Creators Syndicate. He has had many university appointments. His internet columns have attracted a worldwide following. - http://www.paulcraigroberts.org/ .

[Article copied verbatim under "Fair Use" from : http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article31047.htm .]



Read the Rules
[-] 3 points by shadz66 (19985) 6 years ago

PCR is of course bang on the button when he says :

  • "The American health care system is the most expensive of all on earth. The reason for the extraordinary expense is the multiple of entities that must make profits. The private doctors must make profits. The private testing centers must make profits.The private specialists who receive the referrals from general practitioners must make profits. The private hospitals must make profits. The private insurance companies must make profits. The profits are a huge cost of health care."

... and it absolutely bears repeating !!!

Recently a very close and dear friend living in The US, actually spelt it out to me (living in The UK) just what it is like to live in a country where one is living day to day in abject fear of falling ill. Most people living in 'The Developed World' are simply aghast at what Americans have to put up with on the matter of Healthcare and wonder on what grounds The U$A considers itself to be amongst 'The Civilised' nations.

Mendacious Corporate Propaganda manipulating words like "Socialism, Freedom and Choice" have given swathes of American a totally 'false conciousness' on the very important matter of Healthcare.

What "choice" and more importantly - cui bono ?!

What "freedom" d'you have when you're facing illness ?!!

Why do Turkeys get manipulated into voting for Thanksgiving ?!!!


ad iudicium ...

[-] 3 points by factsrfun (8628) from Phoenix, AZ 6 years ago

What you say is true, but what do we do? If we're smart we get rid of republicans.

[-] 1 points by shadz66 (19985) 6 years ago

Getting rid of 'The Replicants' is the very bare minimum !!!

Thereafter, all shoulders to the wheel in order to establish a 3rd Party that will truly represent 'American Labour and The 99%', as quite clearly both 'Republocrat and Demoblican' are really two dark factions of the same 'Corporatist, Imperial, Pro-WAR, 1% Party' !!

Thus -- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JiqhHRFD5PI !

per aspera ad astra ...

[-] 1 points by factsrfun (8628) from Phoenix, AZ 6 years ago

If you haven’t seen it you might like this, it’s about 25 years old, and a little hardcore, but I’m a little hardcore.


[-] 1 points by shadz66 (19985) 6 years ago

Thanx 'frf' : I absolutely did like these excellent tunes ...

and re 'The IMF' : ubi solitudinem faciunt, pacem appellant. = 'They make a desert and call it peace' !!!

[-] 2 points by factsrfun (8628) from Phoenix, AZ 6 years ago

I like "Keep them on the hook with insupportable debt" that's what the 1% are doing to the country, I say raise their taxes, let them pay the debt their henchmen ran up

[-] 1 points by factsrfun (8628) from Phoenix, AZ 6 years ago

I started listening to him about 25 years ago, this guy has been all over the world, before Bard Pitt et. al. (don't get me wrong anybody talking about what needs to be done is fine with me)

[-] 1 points by factsrfun (8628) from Phoenix, AZ 6 years ago

if third party were possible woulldn't we have one after Nader in 2000 why were there fewer third part votes in 2004 instead of more?

[-] 1 points by shadz66 (19985) 6 years ago

A tune for you too 'frf' and for all Americans who yearn for it :

multum in parvo ...

[-] 1 points by shadz66 (19985) 6 years ago

In the UK there are currently Members of Parliament from 10 (Ten) different political parties. Americans must start to look past the Faux Binary Construct of 'Demoblican and Republocrat' - both just two factions of the same Corporate WAR Party, only really representing 'Oligarchical Capital' and The 1%.

If Not a Third Party (in the very least) representing The 99% and American 'Labour' ... then what ?! More of the same ?!! Americans in general and OWS in particular must look beyond this November and The Election Cycle towards a new tomorrow of different and better possibilities.

dum spiro, spero ...

[-] 1 points by factsrfun (8628) from Phoenix, AZ 6 years ago

The UK has a parmintary system which is totally different than our system, the only way we ever have more than two parties for more than one election, is to have a consititutional convention and I don't trust that at all, not even if they let me in the room, so I think the only way we fix this is to dispose of the GOP so we can split the Ds into, we have to reduce the Rs to very little left then the new will spring forth, voting for a third party before killing the cons just puts the cons in power

billions will die because Nander put his name on the ballot in FL

[-] 1 points by shadz66 (19985) 6 years ago

I take on board what you say but there has to be some kind of change as there has been an utter failure of Western Representative Democracy which has mutated in The U$A in particular, into a Wholly Corporate Owned demoCRAZY deMOCKERYcy, further evidence of which I post below :

fiat justitia ...

[-] 1 points by shadz66 (19985) 6 years ago

Please take a little look at one American's view of Finnish Healthcare :

When Society is actually motivated by 'The Public Good' as well as efficiency and evidence ; reason and respect & 'love and logic' .. myriad marvelous opportunities may open up for all of The Citizenry !!

per aspera ad astra ...

[-] 2 points by Shule (2638) 6 years ago

The point on Obama care is well taken, but the fact remains the general public gets more benefits out of Obama care than no care at all. My thought is that instead of all those efforts to get rid of Obama care; i.e. going from Obama care to No care, we should refocus those efforts to go from Obama care to single payer fair care for all.

[-] -1 points by Dell (-168) 6 years ago

it is not going to no care. There are plenty of jobs that provide health insurance. Cheap too - it costs me $26.00 per month for a totally top shelf plan. oh wait - we have 15% unemployment - that's why we have no coverage.

[-] 2 points by Shule (2638) 6 years ago

Yeh, that may very well be a good part of it. I can't say everyone who doesn't have a good job isn't lazy, but I'll say most people who don't have good jobs can't for some fair reason like they are handicapped in some manner, they are in transition after the factory they were working at shut down, they may be too old to work, or never had an opportunity to learn any marketable skills, etc. , and there are only but so many good jobs to go around. There must be an element of compassion in a functional society to care for and accommodate those who can't fully care for themselves.

Besides, I have a good job which gives me a top notch healthcare plan too, and I must say with all the co-pays, exceptions, and other what not, the plan I have today is nothing like the plan I had 30 years ago when I first starting working that same good job; much was taken away over the years. And to think the people getting hired in now don't have the plan anywhere near what I get. They are really getting screwed. I think that is what the issue really is.

[-] -1 points by Dell (-168) 6 years ago

thats what medicaid is for "I'll say most people who don't have good jobs can't for some fair reason like they are handicapped in some manner," Compassion yes - entitlement no

[-] 2 points by Gillian (1842) 6 years ago

"It is extraordinary that “liberals,” “progressives,” “Democrats,” whatever they are, are defending a “health program” that uses public monies to pay private insurance companies and that raises the cost of health care".

......Yep, I'm with you on this Mr. Roberts. Except to say that some people believe that this is a first step toward universal healthcare. I can't see how this could possibly be a first step since we are further enriching big insurance and further entrenching them into an already failing for-profit system with poor health outcomes. If we were making strides to universal care, wouldn't it make more sense to slowly wean big insurance out of the picture?

[-] 2 points by beautifulworld (22863) 6 years ago

You are right, Gillian. Until the private profiteering of our health is ended things will remain much the same. The blatant, unjustified fear of anything that appears to be the least bit socialist is what holds this country back from creating a single-payer universal plan. It's just sheer ignorance.

[-] 2 points by Gillian (1842) 6 years ago

I'm currently watching this video ( again). Check this out: http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/03052010/watch.html

I just boil as I watch this- watch the female CEO of blue cross discuss her annual income, stock options and bonuses. She's nothing but a typical corporate monster robot. I wonder how she will feel when her children watch this video of her? Do you think she cares?

What most folks don't realize about Obama's reform was that, like his credit reform, he gave both the creditors and the insurance companies plenty of time to increase rates, increase fees, increase their unethical tactics in prior to the mandate taking effect. It's sort of like how retailers deliberately raise prices in order to put items on sale and con the buyer that they are getting a good deal. PLEASE people wake up!!!!

[-] 2 points by beautifulworld (22863) 6 years ago

I don't have time to watch the whole video right now, but I watched enough to see that woman. LOL. What a yucky person! You are so right, Gillian, she's a soulless, materialistic, entitled person. Unfortunately, no I don't think she'll care, she'll probably feel proud of herself, but her kids might not. Good grief! What is it going to take to get this nation to wake up to the idea that maybe people should come before profits?

[-] 1 points by badreadnaught (55) 6 years ago

The CEO received more than a million dollars in salary and more than eight million dollars in stock options. The stock options are the big rub, I think. Naturally, the more thst eight million in stocks are worth going forward, the more the CEO makes down the line. That's the big incentive for "justifying" rate increases of thirty-nine percent! It's such an obvious "in your face" moment! OMG!! What a calloused woman.

[-] 1 points by Gillian (1842) 6 years ago

It's all rubbing me the wrong way. What are they doing all day ( besides declining patient treatments) that deserves so much income? Sickening. Did you see that congress woman's face ( or was she a judge?). She was pissed!! She was probably just jealous.
Potter makes some good points, I think. However, I don't agree with him that this is reform is a step in the right direction. I think it's more of a lateral move and not anything forward. I'm very familiar with the health fair that Potter saw in Wise County and how traumatizing it can be to see that. I'm beginning to wonder if it wasn't just ' too' traumatizing for him since he sat in an office all day doing what that other CEO woman was doing and that guilt overcame him to such a degree that he's giving this reform too much credit. Just a thought.

[-] 1 points by shoozTroll (17632) 6 years ago

Wendell has, I believe been pointing that it is a kind of lateral move.

He also points out that it's better than the alternative.

Here's his latest take.


[-] 2 points by Gillian (1842) 6 years ago

Hi Shooz, I gave this article a few thorough reads and I can't say that I feel anymore optimistic about how this plan will transform wealthcare into healthcare. I suppose I have an entirely different perspective on ' health' and how it should be sustained. If this reform is approved, there is absolutely nothing about it that is designed to lower the cost of American Medicine and we will be working the same broken system on a different play ground, that's all.. My other concern is that anything the government subsidizes ( to the greedy corps) is typically of minimal benefit. On the other hand, IF the government were to completely commit to a national health system, then we would have enough money in our personal pockets to afford healthier foods, healthier lifestyles and other doctors who specialize in functional medicine who work to prevent and reverse disease vs. just managing disease. I found this article by Dr. Andrew Weil ( 2009) - the only person that I have heard address this issue with realistic, practical, intelligent insight. Ironically, just by transforming our current for-profit disease management system to a ' for profit preventive /functional medical system, we could actually save billions of dollars a year in healthcare. Of course, ideally, I don't think medicine should be as profitable as it currently is, but I'm just illustrating a different perspective. Ultimately, we've got to change the way we think about medicine and about health. Obama's reform, while a laudable attempt to insure more people, will not do that and I fear that by the time any type of ' real' reform is made, we will be bankrupt by epidemic diseases like diabetes. Here's the article:

"I am encouraged.

There was much to like in President Obama's Wednesday night health care reform speech to a joint session of Congress.

First, he promised to freeze out of the debate those who spew nonsense about death panels and similar claptrap. He thus exiled the bad-faith obstructionists to the outer darkness, where they belong.

Then, some necessary shaming: "Everyone understands the extraordinary hardships that are placed on the uninsured, who live every day just one accident or illness away from bankruptcy....We are the only advanced democracy on Earth - the only wealthy nation - that allows such hardships for millions of its people." Exactly right.

This was followed by the financial stakes. "Our health care problem is our deficit problem...nothing else even comes close." Spot on.

Finally, he laid out a system that would "build on what works, fix what does not, rather than build an entirely new system from scratch." Many are now focused on the president's ringing endorsement of a public medical insurance option: "If Americans can't find affordable coverage, we will provide you with a choice."

But as I have stated in my book, Why Our Health Matters: A Vision of Medicine That Can Transform Our Future, medical insurance reform of any kind is doomed without medical content reform. It doesn't matter if the insurance is provided by a private corporation, the federal government or any other entity. A health care system that costs $64,000 annually for a family of four in seven to nine years - as ours will, without radical change in medical practice - will quickly bankrupt taxpayers, policyholders, or whoever pays the premiums.

That's why a quick reference in the hour-long speech gets my most enthusiastic accolades. "We have long known that some places, like the Intermountain Healthcare in Utah or the Geisinger Health System in rural Pennsylvania, offer high-quality care at costs below average," the president said. He added that a special commission "can help encourage the adoption of these common-sense best practices by doctors and medical professionals throughout the system - everything from reducing hospital infection rates to encouraging better coordination between teams of doctors."


These weren't the most-well turned phrases and they garnered no applause, but to me, they were the vital heart of the speech. Everything the president proposed will fail, utterly, unless we transplant the "best practices" in the current system into medical facilities around the nation, too many of which are dysfunctional due to fear and greed.

To the two exemplary, physician-led medical systems cited by the president, I would add another valuable model: the clinical practices of integrative medicine, such as those we teach at the Arizona Center for Integrative Medicine at the University of Arizona in Tucson. The low-cost, high-return medicine we have developed there can form the backbone of a new, less costly, much more effective American medical system.

Now, would I have liked to hear more from President Obama? Absolutely. As I expected, when he mentioned specific medical content at all, he emphasized disease prevention via passive measures such as colonoscopies and mammograms rather than through lifestyle change and health promotion. I wish he had pledged to foster healthy living throughout our culture. For example, we must: Reverse the perverse farm subsidies that make the worst calories in the supermarket the cheapest.

Reinstate the slashed school fitness programs that have contributed to the child obesity epidemic.

Create incentives and disincentives to encourage more Americans to make healthy lifestyle choices.

Health care reform that doesn't address these issues will produce limited benefits. That's why such reforms are the basis of my health care call to action. I hope these are next on the president's agenda.

In the meantime, we cannot afford to wait on Washington. We must take responsibility ourselves to eat right, exercise, practice stress reduction and take the other necessary steps to maximize our own health and happiness.

While it frustrates me, I understand the president's measured approach. Given that every chief executive since Theodore Roosevelt has tried to reform the medical system and none, so far, has succeeded, President Obama's first major speech on the subject may not have been the time to overreach. If we can just move incrementally toward creating a system that spreads the efficiency, compassion and high-quality outcomes of our current clinical exemplars, we'll have done something quite profound.

And we'll have laid the groundwork for future measures that create a truly healthy citizenry."

I could not agree more with everything he says in this article.

[-] 1 points by shoozTroll (17632) 6 years ago

I couldn't agree more, however considering our current political and social climate, nothing as inclusive as what is suggested, would have gotten anywhere at all.

Obamacare, as it is, has already allowed for my daughter to be covered under my policy while she is away at university.

Considering the staunch, misguided opposition in Washington, and hundreds of insurance corporations, this was likely the only step that would have ever gotten through. I'm sorry to say.

[-] 2 points by Gillian (1842) 6 years ago

Shooz, You're right I suppose- I'm sure that the changes Dr. Weil proposed seemed too difficult for most to comprehend. But, what Dr. Weil suggested is not all that complicated, certainly not expensive and could have been implemented fairly easily if the big profits were not directed so ' one way'.
Do you know how much more you pay to have your daughter on your plan now and if it will decrease or increase? Just curious ( not trying to be nosy or judgmental) and trying to make sense of all this. If your daughter was not on your plan, how much would your policy decrease? I remember when I was in college paying BC/BS a very minimal premium every month....80 dollars a month I think. I'll bet it would cost me in excess of 200 a month now. Things were much less complicated in the early 80's. Many years ago when my husband and I had insurance we paid about 300 a month for both of us, never filed a claim and for no reason, it doubled and we decided it was a total waste of money since we never used it anyway.
Do you know how much anyone will have to pay under ObamaCare and how often they will pay and such? Are we going to be billed monthly? Annually? Weekly? I'm so in the dark about any of this.

[-] 1 points by shoozTroll (17632) 6 years ago

We are lucky enough to get HC through my retirement benefits, so adding our daughter cost us nothing. Co-pays have continued to go up though, while actual care has become less effective and more limited.

It's my belief, that the reason for the complicated HC bill, is to protect the "investors", as I'm sure they have a vested interest in keeping the HC "industry" viable for a little longer.

I hope you read some of Mr. Potters other essays, as the one about the CEO of Aetna is very telling about the state of the for profit "industry".

They know it's a failed business model, and are unable to conceive the paradigm needed to continue forward. This could provide an opportunity for bold plans like the one you outline.

As far as how Obamacare will go forward?

Time will tell, as I'm sure at least some provisions will continue to challenged as they near implementation.

I will try and keep my eyes open and my ears bent........:)

[-] 3 points by Gillian (1842) 6 years ago

I stay pretty hinged to Potter. I watch his interviews with Bill Moyers quite often ( the old ones). I also read/listened to his book, ' Deadly Spin' which is very good even though it will boil my blood. I can't listen to it and drive safely at the same time :)

Here are some other excellent books " Death by Medicine" and "Politics in Healing..." and " Medicine Cult" that will bring more clarity to the corruption of medicine and how to keep yourself safe and healthy in the current system. I've read just about every book out there dealing with politics and medicine and Integrative health.

Your copays will probably continue to climb until the big day ( if that happens). I'm sure the insurance companies are scrambling to gather as many nuts as they can before the winter comes.

[-] 1 points by shoozTroll (17632) 6 years ago

Thanks for being here Gillian......:)

It's nice to get more cogent input.

"Deadly spin", to me is a seminal work, that taught me much about how corporations operate to affect public opinion.

Even here it's hard to convey how "multi-pronged marketing/PR" is so effective for so many corporations.

Most of us are afraid to admit that propaganda even works.

[-] 2 points by Gillian (1842) 6 years ago

:D You said the " P" word. Oh my gosh.

I think it's human nature to deny how gullible an vulnerable we are. It's scary to know and to realize just how truly objectified and used we are from the day we are born to make money for this country. I remember back in HS art class learning about subliminal advertising and how it was used at drive in theaters to make people buy food and drinks. Remember that? My first husband was a psychologist that specialized in sensation in perception and he taught me all about how they flash messages and images on the screen in different dimensions to affect certain areas of our brain that excite us, make us hungry, etc... I'm tellin ya, it's not safe to watch TV!!! We are being subliminally controlled and manipulated all the time to buy things and buy into ideas. It's bizarre and if we think about how truly ' not' independent we are, we will drive ourselves mad. I started making a list one day of things I am completely free to do on my own without any external influence or tax consequence. The list was very short...blinking. :D

[-] 2 points by shoozTroll (17632) 6 years ago

They never really stopped using it.

Every one of those seemingly silly university behavior studies people like to pick on, are bought up by marketers and PR departments all over the World.

[-] 2 points by Gillian (1842) 6 years ago

You're right! They also fund those seemingly silly Uni studies. My husband and I worked together on one for a paper mill that was attempting to brainwash people into believing their polluted river water was pretty and healthy by using certain color additives.
My father always seemed paranoid and cynical to many, including myself but as I've aged, I realize that he was right..you can't trust any authority to know what is best for you and the best things in life are never advertised. :D But more importantly Shooz, just remember that the prettier the water, the deadlier it probably is!

[-] 2 points by Gillian (1842) 6 years ago

Thanks for that Shooz. I'll give it a good thorough read in the morning. I have to go have my dinner now and it's already past my bed time! :D

Take Care

[-] 1 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 6 years ago


[-] 1 points by ARod1993 (2420) 6 years ago

I don't know; I was thoroughly disappointed by the president's inability to replace the individual mandate with a public option when this thing was still being written. The law itself doesn't need to be struck down, but the individual mandate provision does; my feeling is that the creation of a captive market for health insurance only increases the chance that we as consumer are going to get screwed and that giving people the option of buying nothing at all forces insurance companies to remain honest.

[-] 1 points by Gillian (1842) 6 years ago

Did you watch the video ( link below in other post)? If not, it's worth watching. We've already been screwed. Obama gave big insurance so much time to be able to increase their prices, lower their coverage and add so many freaking loopholes that we are definitely screwed. Blue Cross raised their premiums 39 percent in 2010 just after Obama's announcement. I like Wendell Potter but I'm not sure Wendell is even aware of what the individual will be paying for minimal coverage under Obama's plan. Does he really believe that those poor folks out in Wise County, VA will be able to afford this coverage? They can't even afford to feed their children. Until any of us know that, how can we possibly know if this is a good thing. If I can't afford minimal coverage now, how can I possibly give up thousands of dollars a year that I don't have? And, there are some who tout that this is just like Romney care in Mass. and is a good thing. Hello? Is anyone watching? I'm just so sick and tired of dealing with this nonsense and being played for a fool by our elected officials who only do what they want to do anyway.

[-] 2 points by ARod1993 (2420) 6 years ago

At this point, DC seems to have devolved badly enough that it's hard as hell to look at what happened and either assign blame or figure out how things realistically could have been. Obama miscalculated by trying to work on healthcare in lieu of the economy (given that he probably could have held his coalition together better and made more permanent inroads into the problems with Wall Street had he focused there, the blue dogs in the House gave him hell over things that should have been simple, and the result was a bill that addressed some things but had enough flaws that nobody was particularly pleased with it. I don't think he was playing us for a fool; I think he made an honest error and I think he learned from it.

[-] 1 points by Gillian (1842) 6 years ago

Obama was working on the economy and as soon he got into office, he became a repeat of GWB by bailing the boys out after he criticized Bush for doing the same thing. He didn't neglect to work on the economy, he's been doing that all along. Remember his credit reform which was a joke..even an employee at the FTC was frustrated as heck with that whole charade because even more people got screwed even more severely during the interim. Gee, let's announce credit reform months before it's going to take place. Was Obama ' that' naive? Of course not. He's a people pleaser who can't commit to anything fully. Obama kowtows to industry and the people by giving industry what they need to carry on as usual and by throwing us a crumb to curb our appetite for a while and sadly, too many Americans believe that's sufficient. I won't dispute that he inherited a huge mess and he was up against some of the most corrupt politicians in this country but he must have already known this. As a woman, I can relate to him being a minority and surely he knew those on the R side were going to make his life a living hell while they used him for 4 years to fill a seat they did not want until they figured out how to address our current problems. He's been pigeon-holed as their scapegoat and he's allowed them to do this! The whole thing is disgusting to me. The longer Obama has been in office, the more infected he has become with the DC disease. He's one of them now.

[-] 1 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 6 years ago

"miscalculated"....You think anything these criminals do is a miscalculation? Hell no. They get you to think that, though.

They sold you out. And me too. They all sold us all out.

Wipe the slate, start new. New people. New parties. New systems.

All it takes is a public that wants change. And in this country, no one gives a shit. Thinkers are few and far in between.


[-] 1 points by TheMisfit (48) 6 years ago

As the wealthiest nation on the Earth, we are just paying our fair share. We pay inflated costs to cover drug and procedural developments that benefit the world. If we were to completely revamp our health care system into one that is not profit driven, then the innovations that we create will dwindle and the rest of the world will suffer for it. Our current health care system is the perfect model of the liberal/OWS plan; those who can pay more, do. Our "poor" in the US are better off than the truly poor of the world. Is it too much to expect them to pay a little into the system?


[-] 0 points by takim (23) 6 years ago

you confuse judicial activism with judicial review. judicial activism is when a court make law , they are not, under the constitution empowered to do so. they ARE empowered by the constitution to decide whether a law is constitutional or not.