Boardman writes: "Obamacare threatens to become a deadly serious tar baby for Republicans: the more they mess with it, the more it's going to entangle them in sticky wickets."
Vice President-elect Mike Pence, left, joins House Speaker Paul Ryan at a news conference on Capitol Hill in Washington on Jan. 4, 2017, following a closed-door meeting with the GOP caucus. Pence and Ryan promised repeal of President Obama's health care law now that the GOP is in charge of the White House and Congress. (photo: J. Scott Applewhite/AP)
The Trumpocalypse Is Near! Repent, and Repeal Obamacare!
09 January 17
No, seriously � repeal Obamacare!
es, that is what the ideological one-noters among Republicans want to do, so let them do it! Of course it�s not that simple, as even two-note Republicans have begun to acknowledge wanly, since flat-out repeal could make enemies for the party, maybe twenty million of the suddenly uninsured. That�s almost ten times the number of votes Hillary won by. Bring it on.
In reality, Obamacare threatens to become a deadly serious tar baby for Republicans: the more they mess with it, the more it�s going to entangle them in sticky wickets (and forced metaphors). The sensible thing for others is to stand back and watch the spectacle. It can�t end well for Republicans, because they have no connection to the supposed purpose of Obamacare: providing health insurance that makes health care more possible for more people. Obamacare isn�t just an ordinary tar baby, it�s a tar baby designed by Rube Goldberg, managing to provide an unnecessarily complex solution to the wrong question that is only tangentially related to the right question (How do we provide health care for everybody?).
For years, Obamacare has been a Democratic tar baby and Democrats, irrationally, will likely feel compelled to defend it because they built it, they prolonged it, and besides it�s part of Obama�s legacy. That argument is all well and good for sentimentalists and lockstep party loyalists looking for more cliffs to march off, but the rest of us might want to figure out something less suicidal, maybe even something more beneficial to all those strangers sometimes known as �the American people.�
If Obama had been more concerned with his legacy in the first year of his presidency than he was in its last year, he might have made a serious commitment to universal health care, instead of wasting the country�s time and energy on something like half a loaf for half the folks. That would have been difficult, visionary, and correct, but it was technically doable with no Republican votes (the same number Obamacare got). Democrats, and Democrats alone, denied the country the chance to have Medicare for all. So when Democrats talk about defending health care and Obamacare as if those were the same thing, they have no credibility. To regain credibility, Democrats will have to rediscover something like principle, and the courage to stand for principle � qualities they�ve mostly done without since Tip O�Neill played roll-me-over-in-the-clover with Ronald Reagan, a corrupt game in which the �ordinary� American got gutted.
The sensible response to Republican attacks on Obamacare is to urge them to go for it � go ahead, repeal Obamacare in its entirety, but only after replacing it with Medicare for all. That is a rational position, that is an honest position, and that is the best medical and economic position. That is even a strategic political position. Let Republicans tangle tactically with the tar baby, while the principled opposition takes a stand for something that works for everyone. Single payer health care isn�t an experiment, it�s a tested system that works in other countries around the world. Even if standing for Medicare for all is a losing position in the short term, it secures the moral and intellectual high ground for the future.
Democrats lost the election for a host of reasons, one of which was that Democratic voters stayed home in greater numbers (and percentages) than Republican voters. Young voters, who turned out for Bernie, stayed home in greater numbers than in 2012. It�s just possible that Democrats stayed home because their party no longer defends, or even much fights for decent Democratic values. If this self-eviscerated party can�t restore itself, then it�s time for a new party to emerge from the ashes of the old.
Health care is pretty much a universal concern, so why not do it right, or go down fighting? When the only alternative to doing the most sensible, effective thing is just a competition between the hypocritically inadequate and the inadequately hypocritical, why is that considered an alternative at all?
William M. Boardman has over 40 years experience in theatre, radio, TV, print journalism, and non-fiction, including 20 years in the Vermont judiciary. He has received honors from Writers Guild of America, Corporation for Public Broadcasting, Vermont Life magazine, and an Emmy Award nomination from the Academy of Television Arts and Sciences.
Reader Supported News is the Publication of Origin for this work. Permission to republish is freely granted with credit and a link back to Reader Supported News.
|
THE NEW STREAMLINED RSN LOGIN PROCESS: Register once, then login and you are ready to comment. All you need is a Username and a Password of your choosing and you are free to comment whenever you like! Welcome to the Reader Supported News community. |
Comments
We are concerned about a recent drift towards vitriol in the RSN Reader comments section. There is a fine line between moderation and censorship. No one likes a harsh or confrontational forum atmosphere. At the same time everyone wants to be able to express themselves freely. We'll start by encouraging good judgment. If that doesn't work we'll have to ramp up the moderation.
General guidelines: Avoid personal attacks on other forum members; Avoid remarks that are ethnically derogatory; Do not advocate violence, or any illegal activity.
Remember that making the world better begins with responsible action.
- The RSN Team
Could Judge Hatch explain or develop and app to advise where woman should and should not be, with appropriate warnings linked to each location.
Why are the thugs (police) always exonerated from their despicable anti-social acts of violence against women, with the "judges" complicit in their crimes against women.
My firm was considering a move into the Phoenix marketplace. Our food and beverage chain has been growing steadily in southwestern states. We have great food and fairly priced drinks but even our chefs know that what really puts asses in the seats is WOMEN and guys who want to meet them. The whole gun deal had us skittish but this sealed the deal
The "judge" refered to bad things happening, as if it was just a weather event and no one bore any responsibility for it. She refered to it as if it's "just one of those things" and no one can do anything about it.
BUT, SHE'S A "JUDGE". SHE'S responsible to do something about it. By her own philosophy, there's no point in punishing anybody under any circumstances, because you can't avoid crime, so why try?
And, as the victim said, the totally unaccountable "cop" would have just done the same thing to someone else, and THAT person could have been given the stern lecture about leaving her home.
This is beyond insane.
What does this say to tourists about the integrity of Arizona policemen and the willingness of Arizona judiciary to treat all criminals equally?
The fact that the perpetrator was a cop makes it even more necessary for their to be punishment - surely he knew what he was doing was illegal. Green light for cops in Arizona, visitors and everyone else beware.
Funny, it sounds EXACTLY like Judge Hatch is blaming the victim. Perhaps she didn't heed her mother's advice. Or, just perhaps, she just doesn't think that being sexually assaulted is that big a deal.
She is part of the problem in our judicial system.
Falling back on "what her mother said" instead of legal precedent is indicative of someone with a lazy attitude towards the law.
What right does Hatch have to lecture the victim? She committed no crime. The judge in essence said "if you go to bars, it's sexual predator free time."
The judge should not only apologize, but resign.
Blame the victim, it is so Republican. The "judge" is in effect saying that when a woman gets accosted, its her fault for being there, and its likely she was wearing a short skirt as well. What drunk male could resist the urge to fondle her genitals, they are so within reach? Obviously, this woman wanted her genitals fondled. Last I checked when any person ventures into the public, they have a right to expect to be safe in their person and possessions. The person entrusted for administering that protection was the person responsible for violating that trust? And the victim share the blame.
WTF?!
Clearly an example of someone being raised to their level of incompetence, Hatch only responds to her level of intellect which in this case is completely non-existent.
Who cares what her mother used to say. Her mother did not sit on the bench.
Apparently this woman was "asking for it" by virtue of going to a bar. I have to believe that the judge is unlikely to convict a rapist whenever one comes up on charges before her.
OK you started it, and I will ask: What was the color of the woman? I would not at all be surprised if she is black. This judge is despicable, and she should not be anywhere near a court room, let alone be on the bench.
She must be impeached. Let's start a petition.
The judge appears unaware that she was dealing with a convicted violent criminal (who I believe has had legal problems in the past).
Blaming the victim is absurd and the judge's actions in violation of any number of bar association ethical canons. She should not only be impeached, she should be disbarred. And perhaps required to spend some time dating Robb Gary Evans.
Note, I'm only sarcastically arguing with you. You're absolutely right.
Any criminal defense attorney worth his/her salt will tell you that when defending a man accused of rape you want to put as many women on the jury as possible. Women jurors tend to be much harder on a female complainant than men and a (see http://www.e-psychologist.org/index.iml?mdl=exam/show_article.mdl&Material_ID=72). There are a number of theories about why this happens; the most popular being that blaming the victim is a way of assuring themselves that the same thing could not happen to them. (The just world myth: bad things only happen to those looking for trouble).
No, I'm not a "rape apologist" nor am I defending the judge. The offending cop originally got the sentence he deserved. But feeling up someone and raping her while both forms of violating her person are not of the same magnitude.
Sexual predation in the form of groping happens to men, too, just as rape does--but it's easy to guess that you've never been groped. Lucky you.
Our culture hero worships the military. History shows anybody who's treated like a hero will feel immune from any reprecussions for his own actions.
The same behavior is rampant in college and professional sports. It doesn't help when women give these guys so much attention. It's a sickness of American society and I'm going to make damn sure my daughters aren't caught up in media generated definitions of "manhood" and "womanhood".
My Veteran Wife and Veteran Mother-in-Law never hesitated either, diving right in to stop stuff while the civilian "men" present just stood and watched.
I hope those you describe are as rare as I sensed in 20 years.
Potting soil-just potting soil.
Gee Rick I wonder how you would feel if a woman in a bar went up to you, unzipped your pants and groped you????
This is an attack on your person, and unbelievable humiliating. Even MORE so if it was witnessed by other guests, but infuriating under all circumstances.
I think only a man could make such a stupid comment as you just did
Ad that solves the problem how? We need an entirely new more equatable idea of relations between the sexes-our planet and human future depends on it.
Since this idiot judge had the nerve to blather: "If you wouldn't have been there that night, none of this would have happened to you," ... then the women of Arizona should stand together and say "You're right, we agree, bars ARE dangerous places, especially when we know our rights are not protected by courts such as those run by Ms. Hatch. In other words, if YOU weren't wearing that robe, we wouldn't be getting f**ked all over again... So from here on, all women will boycott all bars; there won't be a single (or married) female in ANY bar, until Ms. Hatch is removed from the bench..."
See how long it takes the merchants to call for her impeachment...
What a disgusting comment that was in disgusting language - pointlessly disgusting ... why can't you reply without namecalling and express your point calmly ... what are you, "disgusting" or something ?
you really fly off the handle or maybe you purposefully like to provoke people?
I did not mention that I think the cop should have the book thrown at him though.
Yeah ...... the hinterlands... quite unlike those paragons of justice and personal role models for every judge
that are now seated on the Supreme Court of The United States of America in full and thoroughly embarrassing view of the *entire* world.
You are not wrong, but we can all benefit by broadening our views a bit.
implicitly is she saying that society is too big and some places are too dangerous and cannot be policed or controlled by civilized people ?
This confused, incompetent, stupid judge is just such a woman.
Are such women self-hating?
http://www.change.org/petitions/arizona-supreme-court-judge-jacqueline-hatch-should-step-down-for-unjust-sex-abuse-case
http://jobs.aol.com/articles/2012/09/10/arizona-judge-jacqueline-hatch-apologizes-for-chiding-sex-abuse/
By the way it's either: "if you hadn't been there" or "Had you not been there". How did she get through law school? Or grammar school for that matter.
In the early 80s while spending 6 years in the middle east I happened to have a traffic accident in Jeddah SA. Peuguot taxi ran into back of Chevy truck at traffic light. Extensive damage. Religious police decided I was to blame and the costs were extensive.
Reason for my being to blame was because "had I not been in the country" the taxi could not have hit me. Seems maybe Arizona is going the way of Saudi Arabia.
For this judge (what a mis-use of the title) to blame the woman for 'being in the bar' just proves my point ...
America has become a joke of itself ...
else can, either, no women, that is.