Obama care

[Weegee]

We live in an age of negativism, one in which our leaders' decisions seemingly must be scrutinized or faulted beyond reason. If Universal Health Care had been introduced in, say, 1962, nary a soul would have questioned JFK's motives, and most instead would have correctly assumed that he had the nation's best interests in mind. In contrast, this day and age's cultural paradigm dictates that every move our elected officials make is corrupt and subversive, and driven by some nefarious, ulterior motives.

The point is, while we obviously shouldn't follow our leaders blindly, we should recognize and respect their honest intentions. We should look at ourselves before dumping our blame on whoever we've elected to lead the nation.

[Luigison]

We live in an age of negativism, one in which our leaders' decisions seemingly must be scrutinized or faulted beyond reason. If Universal Health Care had been introduced in, say, 1962, nary a soul would have questioned JFK's motives, and most instead would have correctly assumed that he had the nation's best interests in mind. In contrast, this day and age's cultural paradigm dictates that every move our elected officials make is corrupt and subversive, and driven by some nefarious, ulterior motives.

The point is, while we obviously shouldn't follow our leaders blindly, we should recognize and respect their honest intentions. We should look at ourselves before dumping our blame on whoever we've elected to lead the nation.

Great post.

I think this "age of negativism" comes from our abundance of information and products.  The more choices* we have the more we think we have made the wrong choice.  This sort of negativism or often near paralysis happens over an abundance of video games, jeans, or even political decisions.  I've notice that this even happens with my three-year-old daughter.   If I offer her two books to choice from she almost always picks one very quickly, but if I offer her eight or so to pick from she often doesn't want any of them.  Never mind that back in JFK's day people didn't know about his boat rides with naked women either. 

In this age I think we are also less likely to "look at ourselves" or think about our thinking before making a decision for much the same reason.  It's just so much easier to simply join a crowd.  It's human nature.  So much so that scientists model how groups will exit a burning building or sitcom producers will pay a few people to laugh at their recordings so others will join in.   

*For this post I'm ignoring the two party system that I hate.

[Turtlekid1]

I wonder where all the Canadians will go for their healthcare now that this thing looks like it's going to pass.

[PaperLuigi]

Canada I assume.

[Turtlekid1]

Really?  Apparently we've had a few come over here.

Also, President Obama is totally going to be under the same health plan that's good enough for the rest of us,* just like he sends his kids to the public schools that are good enough for the rest of us.  Please.  Do you really think the people writing this law are going to let it apply to them?  No, this is just for us mortals. [/sarcasm]

*I found this embedded on a site other than YouTube and was for some reason able to watch it - when I clicked the "watch on YouTube" button, sure enough, I got the standard "error has occurred" message I've been getting for a weeks or so.

[PaperLuigi]

I highly doubt information from a website dubbed "Crush Liberalism" is credible regarding this issue.

[Weegee]

Actually, TK is correct: The issue of high-profile Canadians skipping the medical waiting list by opting for private American treatment has been all over our news for quite some time.

[Lizard Dude]

What the heck is Turtlekid saying here? That rich Canadians getting care faster than poor Canadians by using the US system shows the current US system is good? But it's bad if Obama does the same thing if we adopt a more Canadian-like system?

[Turtlekid1]

I'm saying it's bad for leaders to live by a different set of rules than what they would impose on who they lead.  Especially if they're elected officials.

[Weegee]

True, although the double-standard isn't restricted only to government. Any Canadian who possesses absurd amounts of cash, whether they be unscrupulous elected officials, drug lords, overpaid athletes or lottery winners, are entitled to large-scale private American health care. :)

[Lizard Dude]

I know, the question is why Turtlekid brought up the Canadians? He doesn't like political leaders living by different rules but he does like rich people doing it?

[Turtlekid1]

Not necessarily, but the leaders are supposed to be setting an example.  Also, the blame falls on the leaders' heads when their health care system is less than adequate, not the rich peoples' (it may not justify them, but it does make their motives understandable).

[Lizard Dude]

Why did you bring up the Canadians?

[Turtlekid1]

To show that moving toward a health care system resembling Canada's when their own government officials (who initiated Canada's current system in the first place) are coming here for medical treatment is probably not very smart.

[Lizard Dude]

So you do support rich people getting the quickest and best care, while the poor get none. (i.e., capitalism)