Skip navigation


George Will sees President Obama as a jumble of contradictions––a president who no longer believes what he says.

He deplores “scare tactics” but says that unless he gets his way, people will die. He praises temperate discourse but says many of his opponents are liars. He says Medicare is an exemplary program that validates government’s prowess at running health systems. But he also says Medicare is unsustainable and going broke, and that he will pay for much of his reforms by eliminating the hundreds of billions of dollars of waste and fraud in this paragon of a program, and in Medicaid. He says Congress will cut Medicare (it will not) by $500 billion—without affecting benefits.

However, could it be that saying people will die without accessible health care is not a scare tactic, it is a fact? That health care reform’s opponents have been lying and lying big. That Medicare is a program that seniors and doctors both believe which is only sustainable with adequate funding and better oversight.  Could it be that Obama is speaking the truth and truth, as usual is a complex animal which sometimes lacks the simplicity of a big, fat lie? Sure, it could. The question is, is whether the American people are ready for a President who speaks to them about complicated subjects. The truth rarely fits on rally placards.



  1. It was said of the old Soviet Union that “they were able to put a man into orbit but they couldn’t get onions into Moscow”. That’s my trouble with your supposed truth. Everyone knows that people “die without accessible healthcare”. Everyone knows that the same coercive power of government that put a man into orbit can be directed towards keeping a man from dying. The questions is “can they get onions (the best healthcare possible for as many people as possible) into Moscow”. History shows that “central planning” is completely inefficient at allocating scarce resources. This applies to healthcare in the same way it applies to onions. So we see the 1,000 lives that were saved by “central planner” but we can’t see the thousands of lives that were lost because of the inefficiency and/or misallocation of finite resources (I actually prefer the term death panel). You don’t have complex truths at all. You have very simplistic truths. They are truths that have little or no real economic understanding. I equate these truths with “modern city planning”. They were great diagrams but they were “hell” to live in.

    I don’t find that you have any solid moral grounds for your arguments. Sinking the boat and then rescuing a few passengers isn’t exactly morality. Of course, you do more than that, you actually steal the boat (I am sorry, benevolence is you giving your own money, theft is giving other peoples money), sink the boat and then rescue a few. It makes for good TV and bad morality.

    Here is a funny little joke that shows the absurdity of Obamas economics (Obama is the women):
    A woman goes to a butcher shop where she sees that ground beef is selling for $1.29 a pound. She says to the butcher, “Why is it $1.29 a pound? The butcher shop down the street has it for 79¢ a pound.” The butcher asks, “So why don’t you buy it there”?” The woman responds, “They’re out of it.” The butcher responds, “Well, when I’m out of it—I’ll have it for 79¢ a pound too!”

  2. Wow! Moscow is sinking boats and Obama is rescuing people at $1.29 a pound. Health care reform sounds so stupid, now. However, I think these analogies could stand a few swastikas. Then they would be REALLY scary!

  3. Your simplistic truths go well with your simplistic comments.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: