What happened to "Mr. Hope"? Take a look at what others are saying:
Obama Revives 1993 Anti Hillary 'Harry and Louise'
I've just gotten off a media call from the Clinton campaign denouncing the mailer from Obama. They had a lot of help from experts. On the call they mentioned expecting this type of Republican talking points in the general election, but found Obama's mailer "very distressing" coming from a Democrat, going so far as to say it could damage the general efforts of getting universal health care going forward. On the call was a former John Edwards adviser on health care, Peter Harbage. He is not joining the campaign, and he had not talked to Edwards about being part of the call. However, he believed the Obama campaign mailer "drives to the lowest common denominator." The experts on the call accused Obama of trying to "demonize" Hillary Clinton. Len Nichols, director of the health policy program for the New America Foundation, who is also uncommitted, was particularly furious about the Obama mailer, which he feels uses the same language the insurance industry did to attack Hillary's plan in 1993. Nichols characterized the mailer as "so far over the line" that he was personally "outraged" by it. He said Obama should "retract it," retract the mailer. He went further to call it "disgusting," and called Barack Obama personally "disingenuous."
Which is More Important?
Exhibit A: Ezra Klein's analysis of Obama's proposed health care plan.
In the end, his plan is not universal, does not attempt to be, and is probably less generous in its affordability provisions than Clinton's. And even so, I wouldn't really care, as it's still a pretty good plan, except that he's decided to respond to the inadequacies of his own policy by fear-mongering against not only better policy, but the type of policy he's probably going to have to eventually adopt. It's very, very short-sighted.
Obama Attacks Universal Health Care With the Return of Harry & Louise
What the hell is Obama thinking?
Sen. Obama is sending this misleading (lying) anti universal health care piece of mail out to voters around the country. Those of us who lived through the health insurance industry's war against Hillary Clinton's 1990s universal health care plan have been here before.
15 comments:
And here I thought Obama was "The Uniter." But honestly, I supported this guy early on but after examining things more closely I discovered that instead of being a uniter, he's just your average sneaky politician. And worse, every page in his campaign comes from a Republican playbook.
I'm sorry, but Hillary's plan is not "universal" either, it's compulsory. I personally don't think it is in the public's interest to fine people for not getting insurance when they can't afford it. If it isn't free, someone isn't going to be able to afford it, especially with the way employee pay is stagnant against inflation. Massachusetts is already dealing with this problem and thousands of people are paying thousands of dollars in fines they can't afford.
Personally, I don't think either plan really goes far enough in the affordability, but I don't want to pay a fine for a personal decision.
The real problem with health care isn't the insurance, it's the care. There is no reason that I should be afraid to go to the hospital because it will cost too much - when I am insured. At least Obama's (and also formerly Edwards's) plan called for insurance companies to pay doctors based on results instead of just per procedure.
They need to go further and require that hospitals and related industries be exclusively not for profit. With these being for profit it becomes a "what is your life (or your loved one's) worth?" instead of "what is our service worth?" When a person has a choice of paying $300,000 or dying/losing a loved one they are generally going to go for the former. This is true of hospitals, pharmaceuticals, blood banks (trust me, I used to work at a Red Cross competitor here), and everything else in the field.
In the end, if Sen. Clinton gets her forced coverage, it will be a hand out to the insurance companies, the same way Medicare part D was a hand out to the pharmaceutical companies.
(and side by side, Obama has more cost cutting provisions, unless Clinton had more in a spot I couldn't find on her site.)
Clyde - I agree, and thanks for stopping by.
John - There is no defense of this Rove-slime ball tactic. It is politics of the WORST kind from a man who claims to want to "change" how we elected our president.
This speaks volumns about Obama the man, and says that he is NOT the "uniter" he claims to be, but just another politicial who will slink to any level to try and win an election.
Please don't even try to defend this to me, because trust me -- there is NOTHING you could say that would make me think what he has don't is okay. NOTHING.
BAC
Is it true? Will people who can't afford to buy insurance be forced to pay a fine to meet this mandate of Clinton's? If that is true, then pointing out that fact is not being divisive, it is being honest. If Obama was trying to lead 100,000 people off of a cliff, and Clinton told them that, she would not be divisive, she would be telling the truth.
If the statment that "Hillary's health care plan forces everyone to buy insurance, even when they can't afford it" is not true, show me and I will change my mind. But if it is true, I will support anyone who votes against it, because I don't believe in punishing the poor for having to chose between electricity and food. I HAVE BEEN THERE.
John - What part of indefensible don't you understand?
BAC
I'm not defending, I am asking you to show me if it is a lie. If you can show me that Hillary Clinton's plan does not fine people for not buying insurance, I will change my mind. I am not trying to change your mind; I am only trying to get the facts.
I have said two posts ago that neither plan, in my opinion, goes far enough.
Sen. Clinton mentioned in the debate exactly how people would be able to afford medical care, caps on premiums, making the system more efficient, therefore more affordable. Even John Edwards agreed that her plan was superior to Obamas. THAT is not the point of my criticism, however.
Obama is taking his cue from the Republican slime machine, in an attempt to frighten people.
You seem like an intelligent man. You must know that advertising is a trillion dollar business because IT WORKS. Back in 1993 the health care industry spent something like $300 million dollars to scare people into opposing universal health care. And noW OBAMA is doing THE VERY SAME THING!!!
It's disgraceful, and absolutely indefensible.
BAC
Actually, if the people doing creatives for Sen. Obama are at all like me (under 30, just recently - i.e. since Bush screwed everything up - interested in politics), they have no clue who Harry and Louise were.
Do you really think, after his Reagan comments were so horribly taken out of context and down right falsified, that he would intentionally mimic a Republican ad from 15 years ago? A corollary to Occam's Razor says that ignorance is more likely than malevolence. If I wanted to show a working family that couldn't pay the bills, that is the first picture that comes to my mind.
I oppose Hillary's health care plan because at times in my life even an extra $200 (heck, $100 would have been pushing it) a month was more than I could afford for health care. Unless she has a way of making it free, people won't be able to afford it and will face fines. Massachusetts is proof of this.
I personally do not believe that either candidate can claim "universal" health care. The only thing truly universal about Hillary's plan is that everyone will have to pay, whether or not they can really afford it. Senator Clinton's plans on reducing premiums are the exact same, according to their websites, as Senator Obama's - I have done the research. John Edwards has "endorsed" Clinton's plan because he too wanted mandates.
John - Look at the two images. The Obama campaign knew EXACTLY what they were doing ... and it's absolutely indefensible. We will NEVER get universal health care if these kind of scare tactics are used. Obama should be ashamed.
BAC
What image would you use to show a working American family that can't afford to pay the bills they already have?
We will never get universal health care passed through the Congress if, as Sen. Clinton implied in her interview today on This Week, when someone doesn't choose a health plan on their own, the government will choose one for them and take it out of their paychecks. That provision would be dead on arrival.
Your comment, and Obama's direct mail piece ARE THE PROBLEM. If you have ever negotiated you would know that you MUST ask for more than you think you might get in order to get as much as you possibly can.
Obama is already conceeding 15 MILLION PEOPLE before the negotiation even begins. That alone demostrates he is NOT ready for prime time.
John, I would strongly urge you to stop trying to defend the indefensible. It is simply not possible.
BAC
Asking for something that will kill the entire bill before it even reaches a committee is not going to help anyone.
As I have said before, I will support anyone that votes against the mandate, and even more vociferously against the government being allowed to force me to buy a bad insurance plan just to meet some arbitrary mandate.
John - Stop drinking the koolaid!!!!!!!
The Congressional Health Plan, which is what Sen. Clinton is suggesting, is an excellent plan. It's the one members of CONGRESS have. Do you HONESTLY THINK they would give themselves an inferior plan? Please get a grip here, guy.
NOT TO MENTION that it's very likely we will have a DEMOCRATIC CONGRESS in 2009. That makes it an all new ballgame.
Your man Obama is for mandates. If you have children Obama will force you to buy insurance for them, so how is that any different?
Please, I beg you, STOP MAKING YOURSELF SOUND FOOLISH here by DEFENDING the INDEFENSIBLE!!! From my sick bed I am begging you!!
BAC
I saw this the other day elsewhere, and it really reflects badly on Obama. He's getting enough criticism from the netroots I hope he stops.
Post a Comment