« Horst Faas early VN pictures | Main | Edmund Burke in 1775 »

12 July 2012

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Tyler

Blacks have always been drive mainly by tribal loyalties. Why the Republican party attempts to appeal to the 'gimmee dat' smells like more 'Beltway' wisdom.

That being said, I don't have any hope for Romney to adhere to conservative principals. I imagine we're going to get more tax breaks for the rich dressed up as some sort of conservatism while they try to shove through a neoliberal agenda that's good for big business but fucks everyone else.

r whitman

I can remember the same things being said about Medicare when it was passed in the 1960's. A massive transfer of wealth and welfare to the poor. The same was probably said about the passage of Social Security in the 1930's but I cannot verify that personally like I can Medicare.

Fast forward to today. White middle class old farts are the biggest users of both programs. In the future white, middle class young farts will be the biggest beneficiaries of the ACA. Just think of the possibilities of divorcing health care insurance from employment and purchasing it more like automobile or homeowners insurance.

Jake

DITTO Tyler....Big DITTOS!

fanto

Colonel, I disagree with your asssessment that most Whites are in the "AGAINST ACA" camp - there are many more Whites who are under- or uninsured than Blacks, so on balance the poor Whites will vote for Obamacare, I think.

jerseycityjoan

I am sure that a significant portion of whites share the concerns and resentments that you describe. I suspect that many who are the most upset about Obamacare (though by no means all) are on Medicare and are better off than many of the people of all races who are uninsured or underinsured.

They don't have to worry about going to the doctor. It's nice for them but what about the many millions of uninsured and underinsured who still have this worry?

It seems to me that immigration and healthcare are two issues in which many facts are known but mostly ignored by the public, our elite and our policymakers alike.

Healthcare costs are already eating us alive and we do next to nothing about it.

Many who are opposed to Obamacare will in 10 or 20 years (if not now) that their own family members won't be insured and will end up with heavily subsidized care or on Medicaid.

Most of the well off people in the US are white but most white people are not well off. This is a trend that I suspect will rapidly accelerate, with greater numbers of whites becoming poor and desperate in ways that none of us ever dreamed of.

Whites are the new poor. How lovely.

jerseycityjoan

I saw the segment on TV where Romney announced to the NAACP with all the fervor and enthusiasm as a preacher leader a revival meeting that if elected president "I will eliminate expensive non-essential programs like Obamacare." Considering the audience, it was one of the stranger things I've seen recently.

After reading this, I half-wonder if what I thought was Romney being Romney in his delivery was an intentional spur to get the boos.

The boos won't surprise anybody. I am not sure they will hurt the NAACP too much, though I am sure they will be endlessly linked to and replayed by certain political websites.

What I take very seriously and makes me sick at heart is the counterproductive alignment of the black elite and black political and cultural groups with immigrant groups.

To see black leaders stand up with the various new ethnic lobbies, take a knife and cut out a slice of their share of America's housing, jobs, education and wealth -- which was already grossly inadequate -- and serve it up voluntarily to tens of millions of newcomers is to witness an ungodly sight that is tragic and unfair beyond words.

The various black leaders who think that having more nonwhites in this country is going to help them need to do more than "grow up", they need to wake up from their delusions before it's too late.

Here's a link to a transcript of his speech:

http://blog.chron.com/texassparkle/2012/07/transcript-mitt-romneys-speech-to-the-naacp-convention/

Matthew

Col: I'm not sure how the NAACP loses. The organization has been adrift for decades. They are as current and relevant as Julian Bond, who still haunts their conventions.

Where you and I probably disagree is over the remedy. What should the NAACP do? (Besides update their organization's name.)

How do they reach out to working class whites?

turcopolier

Matthew

There is no "remedy." They are an outmoded, unnecessary and self-pitying group. The immigrant stream into this country has marginalized blacks. BHO himself is illustrative of the future. Maraniss is right. Obama created himself. pl

turcopolier

fanto

"There is apearance and then there is reality." Lewis Black has it right. "Getting a mob to break out of the double-wides, dressed in 18th Century clothes and demanding that the rich not be taxed can only be called Leadership." Many of our fellow citizens are going to vote on the basis of things that have nothing to do with a rational view of their economic self-interest. pl

Will Reks

Most of the folks who attend functions like this for the NAACP are rather well-off and likely have health insurance. They're not upset that Romney is against giving out "free stuff". They did however take personally that Romney used the word "Obamacare" to that audience. They picked up on the disrespect to the President.

toto

I wasn't there either, but the Brits' beloved NHS was initially seen as the coming of the Beast by some quarters - especially by doctor associations.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/7405526.stm

Anonymous

Manipulation? The candidate didn't change his discourse in order to manipulate the crowd. The boos one hears is the boos one gets. Manipulation is convincing the electorate that a marijuana obssessed mulato who wouldn't be allowed to reach a middle level management position in the private sector were he white was fit to be an american president because he was black, wise and a uniter.

Anyway, I had this strange dream where americans finally had decided to exchange Pollard for an El-Al 747 full of Israeli girls. Everyone seemed well contented with the deal, but when the plane arrived and the door was opened from the inside came the shouting voice of Mrs. Wolowitz "someone come here now help remove our facial hair before we come down the stairs!" Then, out of the cockpit window comes Bibi's head and he shouts "Bazinga!" Horrid stuff both, my dreams and american reality.

jerseycityjoan

We see a lot of resentment about subsidies.

But look --

1. Where are the jobs? - there just aren't enough. Many long term unemployed only qualify for Food Stamps.

2. Why are we allowing illegal immigrants to keep their jobs?

3. Why are we still handing out more than a million work visas a year, many of them going to extended family members (parents, brothers, sisters) of prior immigrants or to people brought in to work at jobs that an American can do (but would probably want more money to do)?

4. How can an adult live on minimum wage? Even $10 is too low in many places. Housing costs have skyrocketed, many families with children are split into two households.

If we deliberately choose to pursue policies that keep wages down while prices rise, then many people will need government help.

Would it be better if people were paid enough in wages to pay taxes -- YES.

Is there support for doing what is necessary to change the present set-up? -- NO.

Instead what we're seeing is cutting of the social safety network and less tolerance for the increasingly desperate lives of our people who are average and below average in education, job experience and wages.

The "smart people" who think that if only we could convince everybody in America to go college, engage in continuous self education and strive for excellence and enlightenment that we'd be a nation of extraordinary people (e.g. Tom Friedman at the New York Times) are dead wrong. The US will never be a nation of extraordinary people because no nation can be. The number of average and below average folks will always outnumber the number of above average folks.

turcopolier

Anonymous

"The candidate didn't change his discourse in order to manipulate the crowd." Surely you understand this... He did not change his discourse because he wanted the "boos."

Someone said the NAACP would not be damaged. i agree but that means nothing. pl

optimax

The boos made Romney look for once like he wasn't pandering to the audience, something he is good at. He did it to attract the White vote. He knows he doesn't have a chance with the Blacks and lost nothing but looked strong and steadfast in his convictions to fight for Truth, Justice and the American Way.(the cape waiving behind him)

Jerseycityjoan, I agree with most of what you say but thinlk Hispanics take the jobs the Blacks won't do. The problem is they also take the jobs that used to pay middle-class wages and work for poverty wages.

SteveB

The ACA penalties hardly affects the middle class, unless they don't have insurance through their employers. And if they don't have it I imagine most of them want it but can't be insured due to either pre-existing conditions or the overall cost. Plus the rebates help them if they are not insured through their employer. So the ACA helps them.

As for cutting 500 billion from medicare...I don't think it's a correct summarization of what the ACA does (it limits the growth), and moreover Ryan's budget plan assumes the exact same savings, so what difference does voting for Romney make if that's what people care about?

As for the pools being heavily against the ACA in the middle class...how do you know this is accurate? I can't find any polling that breaks down by economic class...moreover the most recent polling shows an even split in support/opposition and even more support for just moving on and implementing the law (http://www.kff.org/kaiserpolls/upload/8329-F.PDF).

I agree with the last three paragraphs, though (but not the last sentence--the same thing can be said of CPAC, or any homogeneous political organization).


turcopolier

Steve B

Noted as your opinion. So, who pays for the expansion of Medicaid? Don't feed me the baloney about the feds for the first thee years. And who ultimately pays for that? pl

Tyler

Don't be disingenous Whitman. Look at per capita usage of welfare and food stamps and then tell me what the numbers say.

r whitman

I am talking about Social Security and Medicare, not food stamps(originally started by conservatives to aid supermarket owners in the 50's. Poor people got surplus ag commodities free and food store owners objected) and welfare (current program designed by Newt Gingrich in the late 90's). The numbers of people on Medicare and Soc Security far exceed food stamp and welfare recipients.

TWV

The parallels between health insurance and auto/homeowner insurance are invalid.
Do you expect your auto insurance to pay for oil changes?
Homeowners insurance to pay the landscaper?

Health insurance is expected to pay for the
medical equivalents of oil changes and landscaping.
That's why it's NOT health insurance; it's nanny state tit sucking.

Returning health "insurance" to "insurance" might very well simplify and reduce the costs.
Not likely, though.

People have come to expect - demand - health CARE (misnamed insurance) paid for by somebody else.

As for using Medicare; I don't have a choice.
If I refuse to enroll in Medicare, I lose Social Security - which is still money I paid in.

The government leviathan rolls on

Tyler

And your point is? People pay into both all thier life - its not needy families or food stamp 'gimmedats' that you get grata. You bringing up "hurr white people use the most benefits!" is disingeneous anti-white agitprop.

Welfare wasn't really 'reformed' in the 90s, and it has all been downhill since LBJ's 'Great Society' that opened it up to single mothers and just about single handidly destroyed the black family. The government, with its bottomless pockets, stood in for the father as provider in black families and welp here we are.

No one has a problem with Grandma and Grandpa Smith getting some help in thier sunset years. These social programs work best in a homogeneous society that everyone pays into. The issue comes when D'shawndra and Pedro sit around collecting benefits and pumping out future Democratic voters who will vote themselves more gimmedat benefits.

Tyler

Out of curiosity, are veteran's benefits 'government assistance' as well to you?

HankP

You are absolutely correct, resentments have nothing to do with the actual situation or economic self-interest. I'm not sure that the resentment is strong enough outside of the Republican party to make a difference, though.

Did Romney want the boos? Hard to say, but his campaign hasn't shown that kind of thinking (or much competence) so far.

HankP

Not just the numbers of people, but the numbers of dollars. Welfare programs are about 450 billion, while ss and medicare together are about 1.2 trillion.

HankP

Hi joan, good to see you again.

Yes, it seems that there's a big push to design an economy that's great for the top 20% and screw everyone else. I don't understand the desire to do this, it's obviously a disastrous policy on many levels. I think getting corporate money out of politics would help, but that appears to be a long way off at best.

The comments to this entry are closed.

My Photo

July 2020

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
      1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8 9 10 11
12 13 14 15 16 17 18
19 20 21 22 23 24 25
26 27 28 29 30 31  
Blog powered by Typepad