So, trailing by 4 with 3.2 seconds left in the game, Hillary goes for her desperation heave this weekend, castigating Barry Obama for an inflammatory campaign flyer.
An enraged Hillary Clinton has dramatically ratcheted up her attacks on rival Barack Obama, telling him "shame on you".Yikes! I haven't seen a black man get his ass handed to him like that since Tyson vs McBride. Never mind the fact that the mailings in question have been out there for over 6 weeks now. I guess Hill just conveniently got angry about this now that the latest polls show Obama gaining momentum in the Buckeye state. I just can't figure out why she did this on a Saturday, when hardly anyone (but me) is home watching CNN. Monday wouldn't gotten more run, but hey, I'm talkin' about it, soooo....
Desperately fighting to salvage her White House campaign, Senator Clinton fiercely accused Senator Obama of distributing "blatantly false" leaflets about her healthcare plan and views on the North American free trade agreement. Senator Obama coolly dismissed her attack as a political ploy.
The former first lady, who is badly trailing Senator Obama in the US presidential race and must win the next contests in Ohio and Texas on March 4, challenged him to "meet me in Ohio and let's have a debate about your tactics". She said she was deeply disappointed by the use of the "false and discredited" information because Senator Obama had promised a new style of politics.
Senator Clinton went a step further, saying he was adopting the tactics of Karl Rove, former key strategist of US President George W. Bush.
That said, once you get beyond the entirely inappropriate condescending tone ("Shame On You!"? Who does this broad think she's talking to? A 3rd grader?) I wonder if Clinton's plan is actually better than Obama's, so I did a little investigative reporting and whatnot.
I'mma be 100 with ya'll, healthcare is not one of my Top 5 issues. Not by far. I've worked
The general economy (and specifically my mutual funds, 401k's, profit sharing, and 529 plans for AverageToddler), well, that's a whole nother' story, and it's one I haven't heard anyone voice real solutions for.
Note to all candiates: Everybody's issue ain't just home foreclosure.
[Editor's Note: Again, I know this sounds shortsighted and selfish, but I don't really see this as being a prevailing issues in whom I'm voting for. And after all, voting is pretty much the most selfish of acts you can commit, because, hey, everyone gets the opportunity to do so, so why not vote for what you want most, others be damned? I'm just sayin', think about it.]
Anyways, in the interest of being non-biased (since some of you have accused me of being a homer), I decided to look more in depth on each candidate's plan, which lead me to a helpful article in today's Post.
Both candidates want everyone to have healthcare. Hillary advocates a plan of "individual mandates", which means you don't really have a choice, you must purchase healthcare. If you either don't want coverage (it happens, especially in my line of work when you're talking about independent contractors or new college grads) or can't afford it, you'll be hit with a penalty, which is likely going to mean garnishment of wages or federal tax refunds.
Obama's plan focuses more on forcing healthcare providers to reduce the cost of coverage, while mandating that only children be required to have coverage.
You could make arguments for either side. States already require you to have auto insurance, so why not make you pay for health insurance as well? States are forced to cover the costs of the indigent, and if more people had their own coverage, this wouldn't be as much of a drain.
On the other hand, why can't you choose to have no coverage if you don't want or need any? People, for better or for worse, drive around all day, erryday without car insurance. And if you can't afford coverage, doesn't hitting you with a financial penalty just push you that much further away from being able to eventually get insurance?
I guess at it's root, the differences in these two plans come down to the classic Republican vs Democrat debate: do you want more government or less?
Question: After learning more about the differences in each candidate's healthcare plans, which plan (assuming you care) appeals to you more? If you don't know enough about the plans, peep the link below first. Also, if healthcare isn't the biggest issue you're concerned about, what is?
Watch Hillary completely emasculate Obama in the video below. Damn, I wonder how bad Bill caught it after that whole Lewinsky snafu.
Simple Question Defines Complex Health Debate [WaPost]
Average Email
Average FAQ
Average Bio
AB @ AOL BlackVoices
AB @ NPR
AB @ WashingtonPost
Posts
11 AverageComments™:
In response to your statement " States already require you to have auto insurance, so why not make you pay for health insurance as well? States are forced to cover the costs of the indigent, and if more people had their own coverage, this wouldn't be as much of a drain." I live in NYC and although I have a car, I really do not need one. This is not the case for many Americans who do not live in metropolitan areas. Healthcare should be offered to all and subsidized for those who cannot afford premiums. Maybe the government could pay off the debt of doctors and specialist if they sign into a universal program. We should also look abroad to recruit talent. Many other countries do that now and it puts pressure on their homegrowns to step up their games.
I am completely against any mandate to have medical insurance. It smacks of a poll tax (being taxed simply for being alive).
I definitely think that neither plan addresses the obscene greed of the pharmaceutical and medical equipment industries to my liking, which in my mind, is the real reason that most people can't afford the insurance in the first place.
I would consider supporting a universal healthcare plan that covers a finite amount of medical services for all Americans, paid for by tax revenues. And if one would like more complete coverage, they could elect a plan and pay for it themselves.
Anyway, I doubt that either of their plans would make it past Congress.
We heard all about "Hillarycare" in the 90's and it didn't pass muster with a Democratic led Congress.
It's the term "universal health care" that scares me. What's next universal id implants? Maybe what's really needed, for over-taxed hard working Americans, is low or no cost preventive care, portability of coverage and oversight, to stop insurance companies from denying people access to life saving treatments.
The reality is we are the only wealthy, industrialized nation that hasn't been forced to subsidize universal health care.
So the options are, if not now, when?
@SheCodes said... I would consider supporting a universal healthcare plan that covers a finite amount of medical services for all Americans, paid for by tax revenues.
---------
I agree, but the list of services covered need to expanded to include some of the basic services that many plans do not cover now. (well-women's care, birth control, mammograms, etc...)
AB, I too am covered by a somewhat decent employer plan. But in the course of the many jobs I've had throughout the years, I've had some pretty (for lack of a better word), sh***y coverage. So many plans don't cover birth control, which I find ironic, since there is always so much political hubbub re: abortion. Why not make sure women who desire birth control have affordable options and that those expenses are covered? I'd like the canidates to elaborate on prevention and alternative medicine. My mother has an acqaintance who was recenlty diagnosed as being diabetic(among other things). The nutritionist came in for approximately 2 minutes with some rubber food props, and a photocopied diet plan. (I was there, witnessed it with my own eyes.) The poor woman is totally confused, doesn't really understand what the hell she can eat and when. And has to wait over two weeks before she can participate in a diabetes education class, which probably will last about as long as the nutritionist's consult did. To top it all off, the woman was released from the hospital with prescriptions that will cost her over $400 out-of-pocket because her plan doesn't cover what she needs. The whole system needs an overhaul. There needs to be a focus on education and preventive medicine. And also a consideration for those who prefer alternative medicine. I for one am not much of a pill-popper,I'd rather use an herb or an oil.
I've been out of work for about 4 days now (sick time, be damned) due to the flu. My BOSS actually came to work sick--and proceeded to transmit his germs to me--despite my repeated warnings and insistancy that he go home (and get the hell out of my office) before he got any one else sick. I even called our HR manager and asked her to release a policy statement cautioning people to stay home when they are ill. (Can you belive in the midst of a 48 state flu-epidemic this dizzy B actually questioned why I called her? And on that note--why is it that white folk are the only ones who come to work sick!?) Anywho, thank God I have coverage(and sick time to use). I couldn't "afford" to be sick otherwise. And that I guess is precisely the point.
And about that Hillary temper-tantrum...Mr. Obama stood by those statements because they are true. SMDH @ Hillary back peddling on NAFTA. Shame on her for "flip-flopping". She really needs to shut-up before her a** gets "swift-boated".
Less government, please. I've lived in a nation with "universal" healthcare, for 4 years (Ireland) and it was abyssmal. 1 clinic in the whole country for cancer treatment. 2 year waiting list for a tonsilectomy. Substandard primary care. Outrageous costs. Government strikes. Children dying while they wait for operations. No, I'm not exaggerating.
One thing not talked about here is the cash economy - it will be bigger. If you were getting your healthcare for free and all you had to do to avoid the extra tax was have your boss pay you out of the till every night... why fill out a W-4? The people who will benefit most are the people least likely to contribute: Costs skyrocket upward as millions of illegal aliens and uninsured citizens start making regular use of the system, while the middle class pays more money for worse care (more patients using finite resources = worse care, especially when you can sue your doctor and the federal government if he makes a mistake).
Q: What do you call a guy who graduated last in his class in medical school?
A: Doctor.
Health care is not my biggest concern. I'm concerned about the economy; the wars in Irag/Afganistan and our current Immigration positions.
I live in a state, (CT) where health care is available, especially if you can't afford it. I believe there should be mandated healthcare available for all children; I also believe that preventative health care has to be affordable to those who can't afford it.
In response to your Hillary 'madness'- I don't think what Senator Obama (or his campaign workers) did is worth the debate. I think once again Senator Clinton appears to be 'whining'. It further perpetuates the view 'out there' that a woman couldn't handle any 'real' crisis...I think that Senator Clinton should remove herself gracefully, especially now that Mr. Nader has decided to widen the pool selection.
Spool32 is correct. Universal healthcare has not worked in other countries that have it. It breaks the government.
You have to think about the costs generated by illegal aliens and others in the population that don't have insurance. Someone pays, guess who it is! If someone steals, who pays, those that don't steal.
AB you are fortunate, enjoy it while it lasts. I use to have free coverage, I now pay.
Interesting point to add...
Photo of Senator Obama dressed in the traditional clothing of Kenya is circulating today on the internet. This photo was taken in 2006...and the Clinton camp is trying to down play the significance of this photo...but at least they're admitting that it comes from them...again I say if this is as bad as it gets for Obama...then I might actually live long enough to see our country elect a Black President.
@ cinco,
Indeed. The whole "photo" thing is just tired. Peep it here....
http://jackandjillpolitics.blogspot.com/2008/02/hillary-campaign-circulates-photo-of.html
Turns out one of Hillary's fiercest supporters may be a wolf in sheep's clothing.
Tavis Smiley's state of the black union may have had an ulterior motive.
http://ravingblacklunatic.blogspot.com/2008/02/selling-out.html
Who's still listening to Tavis Smiley? Or the 'leaders' represented in his forum? I rarely did years ago. Now I don't even bother to watch any of his programs...as his agenda has changed.
Post a Comment