It was true then, It is true today.

[sheshe2]

Why Obama Still Matters
Andrew Sullivan NOV 21 2011

The one thing I noticed in my continental run-around this past week is just how mad liberals are at Obama. I remain as baffled by this anger as I am by Republican contempt for the guy.New York magazine has two superb essays that sum up my own feelings on both sides pretty perfectly – by Jon Chait and David Frum. Chait notes how systemic and eternal liberal disenchantment is, and how congenitally useless Democrats are in rallying round a leader, even one who has achieved so much in such a short time. Many Dems even now think Clinton was more successful in fighting the GOP in his first term than Obama has been. (Memo to the left: universal healthcare was achieved under Obama). But much of this is the usual Democratic limpness and whininess. If George Bush had taken out Osama bin Laden, wiped out al Qaeda's leadership and gathered a treasure trove of real intelligence by a daring raid, he'd be on Mount Rushmore by now. If he'd done the equivalent on the right of universal healthcare, he'd be the second coming of Reagan. But Obama and liberals? If I hear one more gripe about single payer from someone in their fifties with a ponytail, I'll scream.

But the right is more unhinged and more dangerously full of denial. Since I was never structurally or financially or socially linked to the Washington right, I was immune to the withdrawal of jobs, money and access doled out to any dissenter in the Bush years. But every now and again, I get some kind of amazed look – "You're not going to back Obama again, are you?" – from someone in the conservative cocoon, and when I respond, "So far, you bet!", there is often a long pause and a genuine sadness on their faces. "What the hell happened to him?" you can hear them asking themselves.

Some of this is as head-scratching for me as it is for David:

Some of the smartest and most sophisticated people I know—canny investors, erudite authors—sincerely and passionately believe that President Barack Obama has gone far beyond conventional American liberalism and is willfully and relentlessly driving the United States down the road to socialism. No counterevidence will dissuade them from this belief: not record-high corporate profits, not almost 500,000 job losses in the public sector, not the lowest tax rates since the Truman administration. It is not easy to fit this belief alongside the equally strongly held belief that the president is a pitiful, bumbling amateur, dazed and overwhelmed by a job too big for him—and yet that is done too.

Did you get the impression from the GOP debates that Obama had lowered taxes? That he had not nationalized but saved the banks? That he had dispatched Osama and Qaddafi? That he had 60 percent support for a sane and succcessful foreign policy? That he was an exemplar of all those social values conservatives say they support: a model husband and father, a black man who has eschewed identity politics almost entirely, a president whose speeches are among the most intellectually Christian of any in modern times? This strange, bizarre hostility to him I put down to displaced anger at Bush, to cultural panic among the old, but also to a wider propaganda support system that is truly a sight to behold:

SNIP:

It was never my party, but it was one to which I could once accord regular agreement and respect. No more. I remain unrepentant in my support for this president, a man who has accomplished more in the face of a more hostile environment in his first three years than any president since Johnson. I wish more reasonable Dems and a few moderate Republicans will soon have the courage to say so.

The rest here:
http://dish.andrewsullivan.com/2011/11/21/why-obama-still-matters/

[freshwest]

1. He's not the only one not swayed by the hatred. We're still fortunate to have PBO.

[sheshe2]

7. We are so very fortunate to have this President.

With all the negativity, I wanted to post a rebuttal if you will.

I, we all grow tired of the whining. I said it here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/11028191

Thanks, freshwest.

[freshwest]

9. Somehow I'd rec'd that but not really read it through in this context. Thanks, sheshe.

[sheshe2]

12. You, freshwest are most welcome! n/t

[freedom fighter jh]

2. "Universal healthcare was achieved under Obama"?

I guess I missed something. So did friends of mine who can't afford health insurance.

[Honeycombe8]

6. That statement wasn't quite correct. But it's close to making ins. coverage universally available.

Closer than anything the country has ever had.

[DRoseDARs]

10. Except for, oh I don't know, Medicare or the coverage afforded members of Congress or Armed Services

I know what you're trying to say, I'm just making it a little more accurate. I think we should both agree Sullivan is lying here. "Universal healthcare" has ALWAYS been available if one goes by the tone deaf definition Sullivan is trying to use... available to anyone that can afford it. "Universal healthcare" actually means no one is denied needed care. Period. Elective treatment, as determined by a doctor and not a bean-counter, costs out-of-pocket and is out of the scope of universal healthcare.

[Honeycombe8]

13. No, ins. coverage hasn't always been universally available to most of the people.

If I had been fired at one time, I would not have had a way to get ins. coverage....not poor enough for Medicaid, old enough for Medicare, rich enough to buy it.

He's talking about the subsidies for the working poor and lower middle class, Medicaid for the poor (which has been expanded to include the working poor), Medicare for the seniors, health care for children. The wealthy and most middle class working people get ins. through their employers. Plus the laws that prohibit ins. cos. dropping those who file claims, and prohibit ins. cos. from excluding pre-existing conditions, and prohibit the charging of rates so high that it is equal to not providing coverage at all.

Some still fall through the cracks, which Obama acknowledged on the passing of the ACA. But it's close.

[eridani]

16. "Coverage" is not care

Any of the people who are part of the 50% of medical bankruptcies in MA years after Romneycare could explain that to you.

[Honeycombe8]

46. This is not a post about a national care system. This is a post about health care coverage.

So when talking about health care coverage, yes, the ACA was historical in providing almost universal ACCESS to health care (thru ins. coverage for some, providing direct care for others).

[treestar]

49. It pays for it

That meme is just really dumb, sorry. The idea is getting it paid for. Single payer would not be care either, just a means of paying for it. The left needs to stop making itself look stupid by using this canard.

[eridani]

52. No, insurance doesn't pay for health care--not if they turn down your claim

In single payer (and single buyer countries as well), claims refusal is illegal. No other country has deductibles either, though some have copayes.

[treestar]

53. If they turn down a claim due to

It not being covered, then it needs to be covered. Obamacare helps with that. It's not so that insurance has no value - it does pay out on claims for what it covers.

Single payer would still only pay. It might be a different and better system but is still not care but just a payment method.

The idea of insurance companies turning down most claims doesn't go along with people 's experience. It pays for a lot of things for a lot of people.

[eridani]

54. Insurance companies turn down claims for things that are supposed to be covered all the time

Single payer is a payment system designed to maximize benefits. Private insurance exists for the purpose of minimizing them. They are always looking for excuses not to pay.

In MA, 50% of all bankruptcies are STILL due to health care costs. There is no such thing as health care bankruptcy in civilized countries. Before Romneycare, 59% of bankruptcies were health care bankruptcies, so we can expect similar improvement from ACA. However, the 50% number is still NOT acceptable.

[Honeycombe8]

56. Our country doesn't have a single payer system, so that's irrelevant.

This discussion is about what the ACA accomplished in our insurance-driven system.

Is it perfect? Absolutely not. No legislative bill is perfect. But it is helping millions of people who didn't have access to health care before.

If you don't care about your co-citizens getting health care, I wonder why you're so concerned about a health care system at all. If all that matters to you is if you have health care, and you have it, then you should be happy.

As for bankruptcies, in the U.S. a debtor cannot get care provider bills done away with in bankrtupcy. That law was passed not too long ago. Joe Biden voted for it or actually introduced the bill, as I recall. A very disturbing chapter in Biden's history (altho I otherwise love the guy). Very unfair and harmful to millions of people, who will be saddled with debt the rest of their lives due to one illness....until the ACA passed. The ACA requires NO LIFETIME CAP on coverage. It also does not allow rejection based on a pre-existing condition. It also doesn't allow dropping an insured because he files a claim. It also provides subsidies for policies, if you meet the criteria. It also expands Medicaid into the working poor class.

When you have a policy, now...you know how much out of pocket you will have for an entire year, up front. There should not be many surprises, like before. And the policy won't drop you...so you'll have that same policy the next year.

If you live in a state with exchanges, you will have a FEDERAL policy in your choices, is what I've read. But you will have an array of policies to choose from. I'm not in a state that will have exchanges, but I get my ins. through my employer, like most middle class people.

I hope I can hang in there until I qualify for Medicare at age 65.

[treestar]

57. Private insurance does not exist for the purpose of minimizing claims

I sympathize, I have a high deductible. Now 50 and had to pay for a lot of tests out of pocket, because I'm not at the deductible. All those tests you just have to have for being female and/or of a certain age, so we're not even talking about symptoms. But if I were really sick I'd have a way to pay for 80% of the amount over the deductible.

Single payer might cut back on things too, or not cover certain things. It's just a way to pay for it.

[eridani]

59. It's a way of paying whose purpose is to provide health care for ALL

Private insurers are essentially mass murderers. If some foreign country killed 44,000 Americans a year, it would be a radioactive parking lot. ACA will improve things, but people will still die because they can't pay for care.

[treestar]

60. Murderers. Now you're getting out of hand.

Single payer won't pay for everything everyone wants either. We're just talking about how to pay for it. It is never going to be free.

[eridani]

61. Private insurance is the cause of people dying because they can't pay for health care

Health care can be free at the point of service without being free, jsut like the fire department. Single payer will not include every single bells and whistles item, but it will include all standard procedures that save lives, for everybody.

[Honeycombe8]

55. For the umpteenth time, this isn't a thread about a system our country doesn't have. It's about

access to health care...in our country, that access is obtained by a combination of direct care in some instances, and insurance coverage in other instances.

The govt also doesn't give each of us a million dollars in a basket to provide for our future health care, a new car on our 30th birthday, or all sorts of wishes we might have.

But this is a thread about what is. Not what we dream about (not that dreaming should be stopped, or activism to work towards a national health care system should be dropped). But the ACA accomplished in the US what had never been done before: almost universal access to health care.

If you aren't one of the ones it has helped, you might not think it's important. But there have been members of my family who were denied health care coverage, which would not be the case now because of the ACA. So I personally feel the good that the ACA is accomplishing.

[DRoseDARs]

19. Evidentally you didn't read my post close enough. "...available to anyone that can afford it."

Pretty much the point of adopting UHC: No one can be denied needed care. That isn't what the ACA does. We both agree that Sullivan is full of crap and that ACA is most certainly not UHC. The ACA is a step in the right direction, but let's not call it what it isn't.

[Honeycombe8]

47. No one can be denied emergency care...this is true. It's the law.

As far as ordinary care, the ACA, for the first time in American's history, provides almost universal access to health care through direct health care or subsidies to ins. coverage.

Of course, it has long been the case that anyone requiring life saving care gets it...the law requires hospitals to provide that, and the govt reimburses the hospital. This need will go down, now that most people will have access to health care, preventing some emergency situations, and paying for other emergency situations, so the taxpayer doesn't have to pay.

[xtraxritical]

41. I'm in the same boat as you Honeycombe. I've got a few years to go until I can qualify for Medicare

I have no coverage and can afford none. At my age they won't take me anyhow. America is an effing joke.

[Honeycombe8]

48. I feel for you. I have coverage now thru employer, but I was unemployed a short time

last year. I paid for the COBRA, but it was hard...it was VERY expensive.

What was helpful was accessing www.healthcare.gov, and using that service to identify policies in my state that I could more easily afford. I could sort them by deductible amount or premium or whatever. There were policies at various premium levels. So I would've gotten a policy that way...a much cheaper policy, just protecting me from a catastrophic illness, probably.

I work mainly for insurance. I work for $, too, don't get me wrong.

The ACA isn't perfect, and passing a national health care system, jumping directly from an insurance provider system, wasn't going to happen. But it has provided access to health care for millions, who didn't have access before, so I acknowledge that. My mother (now deceased) was one of those once denied ins. coverage because of a pre-existing condition. That would no longer be the case.

[xtraxritical]

50. Happy Easter HC. I've seen that web site, thanks you.

[DRoseDARs]

8. Andrew Sullivan is a conservagay. While he isn't as completely nutzoid as his contemporaries...

...he's not above being disingenuous when it suits him.

[sheshe2]

14. I will be happy to provide you with some links...

ProSense has an amazing amount of info on these subjects...

May I caution you that you are posting in The Barack Obama Group.

You can always start a thread in GD.

[freedom fighter jh]

20. This is (now) a thread on the Greatest Page.

Are there things that are not allowed to be said on a thread that originated in the Barack Obama Group?

What would be at those links? Evidence that Obama did in fact bring us universal healthcare?

[sheshe2]

22. It does not matter that this OP

is in GD:

Mission Statement Barack Obama Group:
This is a group, not a forum. Groups often serve as safe havens for members who share similar interests and viewpoints. Individuals who post messages contrary to a particular group's stated purpose can be excluded from posting in that group. For detailed information about this group and its purpose,

roup Hosts are assigned either by the DU Administrators, or by other Hosts of that group. Group Hosts have the following abilities: 1) They can lock threads which they believe violate the group's stated purpose; 2) they can pin threads to the top of the group; 3) they may completely block out members whom they believe are not adhering to the group's purpose; 4) they may add other members as group Hosts; and 5) they may remove any Host that became a Host after they did (and who is listed below their name on the list below).

Your bio shows that you have been here since 2006....I think you should know about the groups and their mission statements!

[freedom fighter jh]

24. Oh, I see, I could get barred from posting within the group.

That's OK.

I don't pay much attention to group rules, because until this moment I have not knowingly posted in a group. Sorry I missed that.

[d_b]

18. right

that's where i stopped reading

[Cha]

3. President Obama still remains Strong in the face

of Hostility from both ends of the Spectrum.

In Miami, President Obama Talks About his Plan to Put People to Work Rebuilding America

President Obama was in Florida today, where he got a chance to see the Port Miami tunnel project on Dodge Island. The project, which is the result of three years of work by over 500 employees and more than 6,000 sub-contractors and vendors, will create connect the port to the interstate highway system more quickly and safely and will take over 1.5 million trucks out of the downtown area per year.

It is projects like this one, the President said in remarks following his tour, that will help reignite the true engine of our economic growth -- a rising, thriving middle class. "Projects like this create a lot of other good jobs, too," President Obama explained. "You ask any CEO where we they rather locate their business and hire new workers. Are you going to set up shop in a country that's got raggedy roads, runways that are pot-holed, and backed-up supply chains? Or are you going to seek out high-speed rail, Internet, high-tech schools, new state-of-the-art power grids, new bridges, new tunnels, new ports that help you ship products made in America to the rest of the world as fast as possible? That's what people are looking for. That's what CEOs are looking for."

http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2013/03/29/miami-president-obama-talks-about-his-plan-put-people-work-rebuilding-america

thank you for aritcle from Andrew Sullivan, she.. and as you say.. was true then and it's true now.

BOG

[sheshe2]

26. From your post, Cha

"Hostility from both ends of the Spectrum."

Oh yeah, so very well said!

Sorry I didn't get back to you sooner, a little busy...

Thanks for the news from Miami!

[Cha]

38. No worries, she.. I see you

have your hands full.

Not sure what he meant by that? "Universal Healthcare".. If he was talking about just the medicaid part or what? But, the fact remains that the President matters as much now as then. Andrew was right about this..

I remain unrepentant in my support for this president, a man who has accomplished more in the face of a more hostile environment in his first three years than any president since Johnson. I wish more reasonable Dems and a few moderate Republicans will soon have the courage to say so.

[Jamaal510]

30. If a person just hangs around DU all the time,

"President Obama still remains Strong in the face of Hostility from both ends of the Spectrum."

it would be hard to believe that his approval rating is even in the mid 50s. His critics are about as vocal on the Left as they are on the Right. Even when he does something beneficial or takes a populist position (such as his Jobs Act he tried to pass, ending the war, or endorsing gay marriage), they just look past that and look for something to jump on him for in order to brand him as some DINO sellout.

[Cha]

40. Exactly Jamaal..

It's the curse of the whiners.. it must be fed.

[Honeycombe8]

4. APPLAUSE APPLAUSE APPLAUSE.

No wonder he's a writer by profession. He says things so well.

I have gotten disappointed, angry, frustrated. But in the end, after I regroup, I start thinking about the whole picture and remember all that he's done, under the most trying circumstances. Passing the ACA was nothing short of miraculous, despite its shortcomings. Setting aside millions of acres to be preserved. The Lilly Ledbetter Act. And on and on. I support him.

[sheshe2]

15. Thank you Honeycombe8!

I support him too.

Yes the list goes on and on!

sheshe

[kairos12]

5. Universal health care achieved

That is a laughable, preposterous statement. Tell that to all the people in my Red State who:

don't have the money for pre-existing condition pools

no private insurance will touch

Red State Teabag governor cut funds for people in her condition

won't live long enough to qualify for SSDI or Medicare

over 26 and off their parents health care

He is as full of shit on this issue as when he supported Shrub's war in Iraq.

[sheshe2]

11. I think that you should be talking to your Governor...and the rest of the GOP

Governor's have the option of opting out of care that is provided under ACA. This at a huge cost to the states. Please place blame where it it due. This is not the fault of the President.

And a word of caution here. You are posting on The Barack Obama Group.

[kairos12]

37. OK thanks for the information

[sheshe2]

43. kairos, there is this too.

There is so much more to the article than health care. Yes that is a huge issue, one that I feel he has done his best to address with so many against him. He is not a King, he is a elected president.

The thrust of my OP was praise for what he HAS been able to accomplise, with the ubstruction of the GOP and yes, I am sorry to say from many democrats.

Then there was this:
From my Link.

It’s one thing to point out (accurately) that President Obama’s stimulus plan was mostly a compilation of antique Democratic wish lists, and quite another to argue that the correct response to the worst collapse since the thirties is to wait for the economy to get better on its own. It’s one thing to worry (wisely) about the long-term trend in government spending, and another to demand big, immediate cuts when 25 million are out of full-time work and the government can borrow for ten years at 2 percent. It’s a duty to scrutinize the actions and decisions of the incumbent administration, but an abuse to use the filibuster as a routine tool of legislation or to prevent dozens of presidential appointments from even coming to a vote. It’s fine to be unconcerned that the rich are getting richer, but blind to deny that ­middle-class wages have stagnated or worse over the past dozen years. In the aftershock of 2008, large numbers of Americans feel exploited and abused. Rather than workable solutions, my party is offering low taxes for the currently rich and high spending for the currently old, to be followed by who-knows-what and who-the-hell-cares. This isn’t conservatism; it’s a going-out-of-business sale for the baby-boom generation.

[freshwest]

17. And your problems are Obama's fault, how?

Have you used your energy to convince your neighbors to vote the Tea Party out of power to get what you need?

Coming here using abusive language and sneering isn't going to solve your problem:

...In short, if you’re still disappointed in Barack Obama, it’s only because you never understood whose job it was to produce change in the first place. But don’t take out your own failings in this regard on the rest of us...

~Tim Wise

[Cha]

21. Thanks for the chart, freshwest!

I thought I remebered Rick Scott wanting to accept Obamacare but I guess not.

But, Jan Brewer did.

[freshwest]

23. I've no idea which ones have or haven't. But traditional Medicaid, as in my OP here, covers more.

Obama is not a dictator who can make every state obey him. Not sure why people expect him to be. Maybe they miss good ol' Shrub's 'ballsy' style. There is good news, though:

[freedom fighter jh]

25. Is that the result of last fall's election?

It would be shrinking even more if gerrymandering weren't keeping it bloated.

[freshwest]

33. It was, or about the same. The fight is within the states, where it always was.

If Battleground Texas keeps on pushing forward, it will be blue in a few years. Many of the states aren't really red to begin with. They are purple and the traditional winner take all system disenfranchises many. All of these things are managed on the local level, not by PBO. I've learned recently districts can be changed and partisan gerrymandering challenged non-stop. It requires not ceding any election no matter how trivial they may seem to the GOP who is always working on the ground game. Many people only watch the elections every four years, but it's really what happens in the years between that determine the outcome. It's not an episode of American Idol and then it's done, it's ongoing.

[sheshe2]

29. ~~~

!

[sheshe2]

27. +1 and Thank you!

[kairos12]

34. What a wonderful colorful map

The term Sullivan uses is universal health care. For the good Obama achieved it was not universal health care as Sullivan claims. Millions will not be covered. That is not universal health care so Sullivan should not use that term.

[Demeter]

28. WHAT UNIVERSAL HEALTHCARE?

there's no such thing, and anyone who tells you there is is selling something.

[sheshe2]

32. Please read post #22

[salib]

31. OK, this is pathetic.

Talk about
- cherry picking
- misdirection
- demonizing
- straw men

Etc.

We, as thing individuals, let alone liberals, can do better than this silliness.

[sheshe2]

35. Please read post #22

[riverbendviewgal]

36. sullivan writes a good article that I agree with.

As your neighbor up north, I and my fellow Canadians wish we had an Obama. America's problem and Obama's is the tea bagging republicans. I have been lurking on DU for years and lately I find my self disgusted with many DUrs with their hatred of Obama.

As a president he can only do so much. All those filibusters are absurd. Your media is corrupt when it does not present the facts and makes stupid stories big news.

My history teacher said empires last about 200 to 250 years. Empires die from within due to apathy, ignorance and corruption. America is on it's way down.

I admired America for electing Obama but now I see his own side turning on him. So now It is time for me to get very involved in making sure my country goes to the NDP or Liberals. Harper is a danger. Canadians made a grave mistake in the last election.

My concern now is water, health care , especially mental health care and having more green energy, better education. I want a progressive Canada and the only to get it is to work at it.

[sheshe2]

39. Welcome to the BOG, riverbend.

I thank you for you post.

You want for Canada what we, well most of us want for the US. We have the hater's. However we have strength too. We can do this, we all can.

sheshe

[Cha]

42. Hi riverbendviewgal.. you have our US media's number!

It's treasonous in my view. During the bush error I lived in upstate New York and would get CBC with Peter Mansbridge.

Pres Obama's "side" isn't really turning against him.. these people have always been against him. There are still a lot of people who appreciate this President for what he's accomplished in the face of such venomous hostility.

You should check out http://theobamadiary.com/ for an excellent photo -journalism site of the President and his Administration.. Plus, the supporters on there are chock full of reality based information.

Good Luck with Canada getting more Green Energy and your other concerns of water, health care(mental health care especially), and education!

Aloha, riverbendviewgal~

[sheshe2]

44. Cha

BOG

The Obama Diary

[Cha]

45. Look at you with your

Canadian Flag, sheshe!

Big Maple Leaf.. I love Canada.. got me a grey hoodie there in Niagara Falls one time with a big red Maple Leaf on it.

Yeah, I thought riverbendviewgal might want a look at our The Obama Diary for a good dose of reality.

BOG

[riverbendviewgal]

62. I have looked at The Obama Diary quite a few times

It is excellent...

I just get discouraged watching US news...sometimes I think Obama is in quicksand. I believe it is his colour that many Americans hate. including my brother, who lives in NJ. All his family and friends in his circle hate Obama and the democrats. They pride themselves on being ignorant of the world. football is their universe..

[MotherPetrie]

51. Andrew Sullivan is a conservative. He never misses a chance to refer dismissively to "lefies" as if

it's still 1972.

His wholesale approval for Obama needs to be evaluated in that context. It is NOT untinged by Sullivan's own biases.

[bvar22]

58. Memo to the OP:

Mandatory Health Insurance from For Profit Vendors
is [font size=3]NOT[/font] "Universal Health CARE".

[ucrdem]

63. That's a fair point, but on the other hand,

ACA as I understand it is a vast improvement over what it's replacing, or I suppose we could say regulating, which is/was a largely predatory free-market free-for-all that's dandy for those lucky enough to have good insurance and/or a lot of dough but hell for everybody else. So in the main I'd say Sully's point is accurate.

[ucrdem]

64. Gee I didn't know Sully felt this way.

I wonder if he still does. Can't think why he wouldn't except that he was awfully harsh on BO after that first debate. But I guess his job as a pundit is to be fickle now and then. In any case thanks for this great find sheshe!