Today, I watched a video by former ABC News correspondent and current communications director for the White House’s Health Reform Office, Linda Douglass, talking about the “fishy” mis-information traveling the internet and email about Obama’s health care reform bill. She cited one example, a subject line, of this mis-information, then showed us a couple sound bites of Obama promising not to touch private insurance options. I could feel Linda pinching my cheek and patting me on the head the whole time, but the clincher came when she whispered to me (okay, she didn’t whisper, but it’s the sort of thing Red teachers whispered to their little Chinese students) to snitch on my fellow Americans who are blogging and complaining about Obama’s plan. So here’s my snitch:

I’ve been reading all these fishy websites talking about the health care plan. They seem to think Obama is fishy when he says if we like our health insurance programs we can keep them, if we like our doctors we can keep them—when they are concerned that the nationalized program along with taxes on private insurance companies could make our private insurance premiums skyrocket, subsequently making good health care affordable only to politicians and the rich. The elites, and you, will get the best care, while the rest of us will be left with table scraps.

I think this is a good concern. Where is your specific response to that? Will you put price caps on private insurance companies so that, along with the decrease in cost, the quality of care goes down too? Will you get things to the point that there is virtually no difference between the quality of private and public care, making the transition to public care all that much easier? How can you make the specious claim that employers have five years to phase out their insurance plans when plans are renovated every year, making it possible to disqualify them as providers? What is the criteria for a “qualified” plan? No one is saying health care doesn’t need to be overhauled, but so far, it seems there is precious little to like about this new bill.

Your blog is a deep embarrassment to you, although I’m not sure the word “deep” should be used at all in describing it. Why are you blathering about “fishy” information? Why do you cherry pick a couple precious things Obama said? Why are you asking private citizens to spy on other Americans, reporting them to you?

It really does not matter if private citizens go nuts, call you Marxists, and pull out the ad hominems. You represent the government. You are supposed to be above that. If you could set aside the hysterics yourselves, and offer good, intelligent responses to direct, legitimate questions from people, it would help. But you are the other child on the playground, fussing and fighting. Until now, all you’ve done is expose the shallowness of your arguments and the chip on your shoulder. Grow up. And act like the populace is a bit more intelligent and sophisticated than peat moss. There are a whole lot of us out here—we just don’t get any press. And we are waiting. Dazzle us.

Sincerely,

*The Hipster*

Filed under: Politics
by The Hipster