I often wished, Obama had taken a long term approach to controlling cost in health care by flooding the market with technical medical staff and allowing competition among facilities for customer service. Taking on the cost burden of educating a generation of care givers seems like a useful trade off to me.
Yeah, he would of had the obligatory objectors, but the country would have been so much further ahead in the long run.
Politics "do" get in the way of common sense.
He did.
He lost his spine when a bunch of fucking racist, ignorant fuckers showed up with tea bags in triangular hats accusing him of being a Muslim, Socialist dictator and handed it off to congress who fucked it up.
Further a Senator named Joe Lieberman who lost his primary and was on his way out decided to Fuck his party, his country and and sense of morality by voting against the public option. Just so he could retain a position in congress and bank in on his position before leaving.
The Republicans who got 150 of their amendments into the bill and then voted against it for strategic reasons had their chance as well. But all they could proposes was ideas that only helped their corporate sponsors not the people who rely on healthcare.
We already went thru this healthcare debate 2 decades ago.
Let me know if this playbook strategy sounds familiar
Simple Criticism is Insufficient. Simple, green-eyeshades criticism of the plan--on the grounds that its numbers don't add up (they don't), or that it costs too much (it does), or that it will kill jobs and disrupt the economy (it will)--is fine so far as it goes. But in the current climate, such opposition only wins concessions, not surrender. The president will lobby intensively for his plan. It will surely be the central theme of his State of the Union Address in January. Health care reform remains popular in principle. And the Democratic Party has the votes. After all, the president's "tax fairness" budget, despite unanimous Republican opposition and rising public disapproval, did pass the Congress.
Any Republican urge to negotiate a "least bad" compromise with the Democrats, and thereby gain momentary public credit for helping the president "do something" about health care, should also be resisted. Passage of the Clinton health care plan, in any form, would guarantee and likely make permanent an unprecedented federal intrusion into and disruption of the American economy--and the establishment of the largest federal entitlement program since Social Security. Its success would signal a rebirth of centralized welfare-state policy at the very moment we have begun rolling back that idea in other areas. And, not least, it would destroy the present breadth and quality of the American health care system, still the world's finest. On grounds of national policy alone, the plan should not be amended; it should be erased.
But the Clinton proposal is also a serious political threat to the Republican Party. Republicans must therefore clearly understand the political strategy implicit in the Clinton plan--and then adopt an aggressive and uncompromising counterstrategy designed to delegitimize the proposal and defeat its partisan purpose.
-William Kristol 1993