Posts Tagged 'Obama'

Health Care: What a Bother

I saw a report this morning about health care. A doctor who was interviewed said that he was skeptical about President-elect Obama’s plan to bring health care to all Americans. His objection to the plan: there are so many people who are uninsured and who don’t go to the doctor NOW that if we give them all access to health care, there won’t be enough doctors to go around!

Am I to supposed to, then, believe that having 40 million uninsured Americans is a good thing? This doctor seemed to be saying so. Maybe if we triple the cost of health insurance instead of making it available to everyone, this doctor could spend less time in the office and more time on the golf course but still make the same amount of money. It certainly would be less work for him.

Is this really a good reason to purposely put health care out of the financial reach of so many of us— because doctors will have too much work? My own doctor works 4 days per week for 7 hours per day and 1 day per week for 3 hours. My guess is that there are many other doctors who work these types of hours. Perhaps, then, they could join the rest of us who work 40 or 45 hours per week—-which is considered to be a normal work week—–and travel less, recreate less, and run their errands in the evenings like the rest of us. Maybe more people will be encouraged to go to medical school. Maybe by having more access to health care, people will be able to take better care of themselves and thus actually go to the doctor less instead of waiting until there’s a major health problem that requires a great deal of time and energy. Maybe having access to health care will give all of us more peace of mind, thus creating less stress, which is the cause of so many diseases. Maybe there are doctors who would like to help more people but can’t because of the financial burden. Maybe……..

But to not be supportive of a plan to help more people because perhaps he doesn’t want to rock his own boat is reprehensible. It’s especially irritating to hear something like this from a DOCTOR——-someone who has taken the Hippocratic Oath, someone who, we all assume, wants to help as many people as possible. Most of us, I believe, think of doctors (and nurses) as people who have a “calling” to help others. Quite frankly, doctors such as the one I heard today seem to be in it more for the money. Not only that, but I don’t remember hearing him offer a better plan than Obama’s. We should all remember that health is not a commodity to be bought and sold——-although many of us obviously appear to see it that way.

Advertisements

McCain Attacks Obama for Not Funding the Troops

I’m not just talking about John McCain, who, while looking down his nose, likes to tell his audiences that Barack Obama voted against funding the troops. Cindy McCain is now out there on the campaign trail, telling people that it sent a cold chill through her body when she found out that Obama had voted against troop funding. Cold chill? First, is there any other kind of chill than a cold one? Second, how many cold chills did she get when she found out that her own husband was against funding the troops? Their own son was in Iraq at the time, so she must have been uncontrollably outraged—and chilled to the bone—to find out that the young man’s own father would have voted against helping him, right? No, not really. She left out that little detail in the video that I saw. Perhaps she mentioned it later.

In May 2007, Senator Obama did, indeed, vote against authorizing billions for the war—because he not only wanted to help our troops with money, but he wanted to get them out of Iraq, and without a timetable, that wasn’t likely to happen. He said, “We must fund our troops. But we owe them something more.” He called for “a clear, prudent plan to relieve them of the burden of policing someone else’s civil war.” By the way, I’ve never seen Obama shy away from talking about his vote on that issue or responding to McCain’s attacks about it. What the McCains don’t tell you is that every other time, Obama voted ‘yes’ to fund the troops. This time, he thought that it was time to do more than just extend their stay in hell.

Something else that the McCains don’t tell you is that there had been a bill earlier that both funded the troops AND provided a non-binding plan for withdrawal, which the overwhelming majority of Americans wanted. This is the bill that Senator Obama supported and voted ‘yes’ on. But more important, this is the bill that John McCain urged the President to veto. McCain, himself, was conveniently absent for the vote, but he urged the President to veto the bill, which Bush did. So, McCain was against troop funding. Not only was he against troop funding in this instance, but he voted against the troops many other times (but that’s for another day—-very soon).

It’s all in your perspective, isn’t it? If you support the troops and want them to come home, then you boast about Obama’s vote. If you want the troops to stay in Iraq indefinitely, then you boast about McCain’s urging the President to veto the bill.

Senator McCain likes to remind his audiences that we need truthfulness from our next President. Then why isn’t he, McCain, being truthful? And if he does become the next President, will he continue an administration of lies? Haven’t we already had 8 years of that?