There has been much discussion over the last week on the topic of Kay Hagan's position regarding health care reform.
First, we saw Mark Binker pen a prominently-placed piece in the News and Record asserting that Kay Hagan's handling of the issue is a reflection of her overall political moderation. Hagan had been expressing some degree of opposition to the costs associated with health care reform, and also to the "public insurance option".
Of course, in the perspective of the media, moderation is good, even if it is a cover for liberalism. And in the eyes of the local media, Kay Hagan is also very good. Placing a label of "moderate" on a liberal politician like Hagan might make them appear more acceptable in the eyes of the masses.
It turns out that she has a record at the state level. She was a legislative leader during a time when state spending rose dramatically; and we are now seeing massive budget shortfalls because of this record of profligacy.
In any case, there has been a passionate reaction from the political left to Kay Hagan's display of so-called moderation on health care reform.
We saw a flurry of commentary that suggested liberals were quite unhappy with Hagan's "moderate" stance. The media reported she had a significant equity interest in certain health care companies. The liberal blogs began profiling her in a manner to pressure her to conform; Move-on.org got involved; and an ad or two was produced to apply even more political pressure.
And Hagan responded. She told us that her goal was not to defeat health care reform; but rather her goal was to produce a better bill that could pass.
One of the interesting things about this whole discussion is the liberal/moderate continuum. It was always to their political advantage for the liberal Democrats to paint Hagan as a moderate-- and for Hagan to pose as one--- because it would help her get elected in a state like North Carolina. However, the moment she begins to talk about governing like a moderate, the liberal forces move to squash her like a bug.
It seems moderation will only take you so far in the Democratic Party.
But there is yet another interesting dimension. Some of us observing from the sidelines have felt that Kay Hagan will vote in favor of whatever Democratic health care reform package reaches the floor of the Senate--- regardless of the noises she is making now, and regardless of whatever might be in the final bill.
Some of us feel that we are observing a delightful political shuffle in which the local media is complicit. Create the appearance of moderation, then vote as a liberal. Vote as a socialist.
I hope that is not the outcome, but if it is, I hope everyone will recognize it, and acknowledge it vociferously. Indeed, I hope everyone will shout it from the rooftops if it happens.
We simply cannot permit a huge deception to be inflicted upon North Carolinians without letting the people know what is truly happening.
It's just the old Smoke and Mirrors routine exemplified.
Certain Dems/Lefties/"Progressives" are experts at that.
Certain other Dems/Lefties/"Progessives" can't and never will figure that out.
Posted by: Bubba | June 30, 2009 at 04:12 PM
Well, we can always count on your keen eye to detect liberals posing as moderates. Let's also remember that as a doctor you're part of the problem those nasty liberals are trying to fix.
Posted by: jo | July 01, 2009 at 08:39 AM
Jo, I appreciate your observations. I would remain mindful, however, that the political positions I have expressed on this blog would likely result in a net reduction in income for many physicians; and would likely cause lesser cash flows through the system.
The status quo-- high levels of government-sponsored health care, and prevalent first-dollar third party coverage-- keeps earnings in the industry higher, and causes higher cash flows running through the system.
Posted by: Joe Guarino | July 01, 2009 at 08:56 AM
When we learn that an All-American institution like Wal-Mart has teamed up with SEIU and George Soros to push socialized medicine, we are truly doomed as a country. Sam Walton would be so proud at the loss of the ethics and integrity of his former company. Truly sad.
Posted by: Stormy | July 01, 2009 at 07:15 PM
History tells us that it was the merging of the central government and large corporate interests that drove Nazi Germany. Are we headed in the same direction with regular citizens being made subject to those interests? We saw outlandish rewards being handed out in the cap and tax bill like never before in this country. will we see the same with socialized medicine controlled by the central government?
And, but the way, didn't our friend Roch proclaim very strongly that Obama promised that he would not, I repeat not, raise taxes on families making less than $250,000? It's what he is about to do to tax health benefits to pay for his plan, not to mention how costs (taxes?) would rise dramatically under the cap and tax? And, guess who one of the big winners will be under that plan? Duke Energy.
Posted by: Stormy | July 01, 2009 at 07:23 PM
Stormy, that tax pledge has already been broken, as we all had predicted here last year. And he will have to break it more, in all likelihood, if he wants to pay for his health care reform package.
It is very unfortunate that, if it is structured in a certain way, much of corporate America will sign on with socialized medicine. It will get a huge monkey off their back. That again refutes the notion that what corporations want-- or what the Chamber of Commerce wants-- is necessarily conservative.
Posted by: Joe Guarino | July 02, 2009 at 09:20 AM
Joe,
History tells us there were some American corporations that were in bed with Nazi Germany, before and even during WW II. The desire for corporate power and profits was so great that they crossed national borders. One of the biggest offenders was GE, who is very tight with the Obama
Administration and doing their will for a profit.
Posted by: Stormy | July 02, 2009 at 11:59 AM
Stormy "All-American institution like Wal-Mart" - I hope that was a joke. To say Wal-Mart is an All-Chinese institution would be far more accurate. I challenge you to go to Wal-Mart and find 10 items made in America.
Posted by: Todd Schmidt | July 02, 2009 at 12:29 PM
Todd,
I don't disagree with your comment, except that Sam Walton's Wal-Mart was always cited as the All-American company, serving the middle class of America. Their search for profit, by selling in volume and keeping prices low, did lead them to primarily selling Chinese-made products. In the end, this ethics capitulation by making their bed with Obama, SEIU, and George Soros will be their undoing. They obviously believe that they can dance near the flame, and not be consumed. But, they would be as wrong as that insect who gets zapped on a summer evening.
Posted by: Stormy | July 02, 2009 at 12:58 PM
Here is another example of how business has capitulated to the Obama Administration in pursuing a profit opportunity, and an amazing loss of journalistic integrity, all combined. So, is the print media in the tank or not? How slimy can you get? There really are not any adjectives that adequately describe what has happened to the integrity of some of this country under the Obama Thugocracy.
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0709/24441.html
Posted by: Stormy | July 02, 2009 at 02:48 PM
I hope she votes like a liberal and supports a bill included a strong public option. The government is the only entity in a position to keep the insurance company monopolies from ripping off the American people by competing with them. I assume you think competition is a good thing, but maybe you just like the corporate monopoly special interests.
Posted by: politicscorner | July 02, 2009 at 07:00 PM
Er, no-- I think it would be great if we could reverse the dynamics that created the cost problem we now have-- first-dollar, third party coverage; governmental sponsored programs like Medicare and Medicaid; and tax preferences for employer-sponsored coverage.
Posted by: Joe Guarino | July 02, 2009 at 09:49 PM
Government will not "keep private companies honest" by competing with them. Government kills competition. How exactly are private insurance companies "ripping us off", and how would a public plan stop it? Eventually, the public plan would be the only game in town. Then, you get what you get.
Think about a public plan like it social security. You have no option to invest your money privately, and the government has squandered it so terribly that it probably will not be there when people will need it the most. No private company would have ever offered such a pension plan as it was never actuarially-sound. It has never been any sounder than a Bernie Madoff Pyramid scheme.
Posted by: Stormy | July 02, 2009 at 11:20 PM
"I hope she votes like a liberal and supports a bill included a strong public option. The government is the only entity in a position to keep the insurance company monopolies from ripping off the American people by competing with them. I assume you think competition is a good thing, but maybe you just like the corporate monopoly special interests."
Critical thinking skills are obviously not a necessary requirement to belong to the Obamacare Cheerleading Squad, are they?
Posted by: Bubba | July 03, 2009 at 08:49 AM