H/rain
56°
H/rain
Hi 68° | Lo 57°

My Turn: On Obamacare, exactly who is doing the bullying?

I would like to respond to recent columns by Deborah Lielasus and Katy Burns and other letters and posts about the Monitor website commenting forum, health care and bullying.

Lielasus’s glowing review of her health care experience on the boondoggle Obamacare website, healthcare.gov, stirred lots of emotion among readers, not only at the Monitor but throughout the internet (“Surprise! I signed up for insurance, and it worked,” Sunday Monitor Forum, Nov. 3). Millions have lost their insurance policies, have found that they will now pay much more in premiums for much less coverage and have a 300 to 500 percent increase in deductibles. Lielasus was ecstatic that her insurance will be cheaper, her pre-existing condition covered and her premiums less due to a subsidy. That subsidy will be paid by people who have taken responsibility for their health care for decades and now find that they will pay more to subsidize and give breaks to other people. Moreover, these folks will be forced to change doctors, and perhaps their entire treatment plan will be unrecognizable, perhaps less effective, uncomfortable and worrisome.

As quickly as the Lielasus column faded, along comes Monitor columnist Katy Burns, all wound up about cyber bullying (“Wrath of the cyber bullies,” Sunday Monitor Forum, Nov. 10). Notwithstanding the fact that Burns regularly bullies anyone who is not of the progressive persuasion, she railed on against people with an opinion opposite to the Lielasus column as part of “anonymous cowards hell-bent on imposing a bully culture online.” Of course, Burns has her own “bully pulpit” from which she preaches her lofty and self-congratulatory enlightenment on high, almost every week. I guess “Do as I say, not as I do” applies in the world according to Burns.

Promises of keeping your doctor, your health insurance plan and $2,500 savings per family turned out to outright lies. And progressives wonder why people worry about death panels! President Obama’s mea culpa, an emotionless and empty apology to millions of Americans, was too little, too late. Obamacare was a two-story monstrosity built on an idea and a lie. Americans should not trade their freedom of choice for promises from a government that can’t seem to get much, if anything, right – a government composed of politicians who believe that they know what is better for you than you do!

One has to question how a plan that does not meet the minimum standards of Obamacare should or could be deemed inferior when the Obamacare alternative has a higher premium, higher deductible, delivering less care. Progressives want the government to “stay out of our bedrooms.” What about staying out of something much more personal and private: our health and our medical records! In 2015 many people with plans offered by employers will join the 5 percent of citizens who lost their preferred plans over the past six weeks. Experts believe that more than 125 million Americans will lose their plans when the employer mandate goes into effect.

Finally, Democratic Rep. Rick Watrous of Concord called for commenters on the Monitor website to be required to use their real names, explaining that it would make the forum much more civilized (“Make online commenters own their statements,” Monitor letter, Nov. 13). He referred to those posting and expressing opinions as “trolls.” Many of his constituents may be some of those commenters. I hope that his constituency will consider his own form of “bullying” when they go to the polls the next time.

We should not stifle any discussion on something as important as our health care through political correctness, censorship or calling those who do not agree “bullies” or “trolls.” Burns and Watrous are calling for silence and blind acceptance simply because their ideology is in lockstep with Obamacare. Their tactic is to shame people into silence. Sorry, Ms. Burns and Rep. Watrous – that is “bullying”!

(Bill Bunker lives in Barnstead.)

Medicare is socialized healthcare, SOCIAL security is socialized retirement benefits. I don't think most people on this site know what Socialism is, or Communism for that matter.

I applaud Mr. Bunker’s courage for publicly stating how he feels and taking the responsibility to attach his real name to his statements, even though I disagree with some of his remarks. As I said in my original letter: “One way that websites such as the Monitor’s could help curb cyber-bullying is to insist that people who post comments online use their real names. Just like in the letter pages, real names should be attached to comments.” The Union Leader has this identify-yourself online policy. I ended my letter by saying that adopting “this policy would reduce online bullying and out of line remarks. Many of us have had our full of internet trolls. Let’s encourage real discussions between real people.” What I was talking about, and what I believe Katy Burns was talking about, was anonymous online posters who hide behind their anonymity while attacking others and engaging in insulting rants. By all means, speak up, but please let us know who is speaking. --Rick Watrous

Bullies like Katy Burns and Rick Watrous bow to the biggest bully of them all Barack Obama. There is nothing worse than someone willing to lie over and over again for pure political gain at the expense of Millions of people who are losing their insurance or who are paying dramatically more on their insurance. I wonder who sycophants like Burns and Watrous are going to explain how Obama are changing the rules on ObamaKare so to hide the truth on ObamaKare before the 2014 elections. Bill you are hero to standing up to these Bullies. Thank-you Bill!!!

I did notice gdn1 that you did not comment on what Bill said. Instead you stated you were tired of listening to the diatribes of folks who disagree with you. The ACA Website is the least of what is wrong with it. Although, I would guess that because the site is only 40-60% created, that there will be more problems associated with it like, identity theft, and folks getting govt subsidies that do not qualify for them. More fraud and abuse of yet another govt program. The pure faith acceptance of an administration that seems to not know what they are doing, claim they do not know anything, and basically shows their incompetence on a regular basis, is something that the left would not tolerate from a Rep Administration. Yet many are willing to accept this standard in regards to their health care, IRS, and spying, etc. I guess the folks who elected this President are not willing to judge his performance. They do not want to hear that he messed up, lied or is leaving the bill to future generations to pay off.

All the more reason for a single payer system, Bill. Back when President Johnson signed Medicare in to law, the conservative caucus across the USA warned us all about how the retired would be doomed, Armageddon would fall upon us all, pretty much the same lame arguments being made today by the same people about the ACA. There were no computers back then, and things got off to a rocky start, with problems in every direction one looked in when it started up. The wrinkles were ironed out. I am not sure why people like you think that everything is going to be perfect when the ACA begins, leaving us all with a warm and fuzzy feeling. Nobody has ever claimed this is how things would go. Medicare is socialized medicine for the retired, a single payer system. Tell you what Bill, you and all the other people who's sophistry and diatribe I am tired of reading and listening to: go up and down your street, survey the town of Barnstead. Let's see how many registered Republicans who are on Medicare are willing to give up their health care and go back to a "personal responsibility" system.

After careful reading of all your posts it is easy to determine your political philosophy. Your comments are almost word for word straight from this party's platform. I offer you this web site for you to peruse to see exactly where you fit in. http://cpusa.org/cpusa-constitution/

I too find it a sad irony that some of the most ardent opponents of single-payer are on Medicare--including some on this site. "Do as I say, not as I do", indeed!

Not me. When I am eligible for Medicare I would have been paying in for 50 years (16-66) I think i have earned it several times over again. The key word is earned it.

My point is why is it OK for your health care to be managed by a government program when you're over 65, but not until you're 65?

Excellent point

Gen X you can tell you are young. When you get old enough for Medicare there will be no Medicare because the government had already spent it. It is suppose to go go solvent in 2027 right about about the time I become eligible. Do you think paying in for 50 years and getting nothing for it is a good deal?

Reply to Van: You are completely missing my point. Medicare is a government administered program funded by taxpayers to provide for their health care. I ask again, why is it OK for this program to exist but only for those over 65? Why not just adjust tax rates to include everyone in Medicare regardless of age? Take the burden of providing health care off employers backs. Just cut the insurance companies out. They don't provide any health care. They are the middlemen. Their cut is almost 30% of premiums for administrative costs and profit. Medicare has no profit and 3% administrative costs. Every other industrialized country has figured this out and implemented a Medicare-for-all system--aka single payer.

Post a Comment

You must be registered to comment on stories. Click here to register.