Is Out-Bushing Bush and the Quote, Unquote Left Will Not Act
From the New York Times, I read: Coverage Now for Sick Children? Check Fine Print 26 Mar 2010 Just days after President Obama signed the new health care law, insurance companies are already arguing that, at least for now, they do not have to provide one of the benefits that the president calls a centerpiece of the law: coverage for certain children with pre-existing conditions... To insurance companies, the language of the law is not so clear. Insurers agree that if they provide insurance for a child, they must cover pre-existing conditions. But, they say, the law does not require them to write insurance for the child and it does not guarantee the “availability of coverage” for all until 2014. William G. Schiffbauer, a lawyer whose clients include employers and insurance companies, said: “The fine print differs from the larger political message. If a company sells insurance, it will have to cover pre-existing conditions for children covered by the policy. But it does not have to sell to somebody with a pre-existing condition. And the insurer could increase premiums to cover the additional cost.”
And so we see the true P.o.S. (Piece of Sh*t) the health care 'reform' bill of 2010 really is, crafted by the insurance cartel and its functionary, Barack Obama.
True, the bill does include a few actual nuggets of reform. But, as a constitutional law scholar, would not President Obama realize that a copious amount of lawsuits would arise in the aftermath of the passage of this bill, and the High (Corporate) Court would rule nine times out of ten in favor of the insurance cartel? Of *course* he would.
Obama ensured that the public option was not included, so that the insurance companies could continue to run amok and serve as the *actual* 'death panels' for thousands of Americans. There is no 'change,' except for the fact that Americans will be forced to buy their overpriced, unnecessary, deeply flawed product. Oh. That and the fact that health stocks soared after the 'reform' bill passed.
The Tea Party protests and violent outbursts are serving as a weapon of mass distraction and cover for the unbridled growth of corporate power and lack of (promised) reform under this Administration. No one dares to mention these facts, yet alone acts on them.
Also, has everyone forgotten the nuclear industry bailout (aka billion$ more in corporate welfare) Obama recently pledged? Apparently, Obama has never met a nuclear reactor - leaking or not - he didn't like. Remember the Exelon bailout 'n sellout?
Obama is out-Bushing Bush. The quote, unquote left is afraid to protest, as Barack Obama is the first African American president. The 'left' does not want to demonize and protest Obama as they did to Bush/Cheney, even though Obama is carrying out the same anti-democratic policies (nay, often exceeding, 'out-Bushing,' if you will) the outrageous boundaries set by the previous regime. I cannot think of any other reason(s) why - after hundreds of lies and deceptions, the 'left' isn't vigorously protesting the Obama Administration. (See: Barack Obama: Change We Can Deceive In --A critique from the Left By Lori Price 19 Aug 2010.)
At this stage of the game, the 'left' should be poised for revolution. Goodness knows, I am.
Permanent URL for
Email this page to a friend