What is a Big Lie? It is an obvius, outrageous lie that "19844"-style propagandists (our media) attempt to force upon the public with sheer repetition and disregard for any factual truth. See the revius article. Here is the outrageous Big Lie headline, from Reuters and Yahoo "News", even though it really came right out of "a984":
"Most Americans oppose the health care law, but like lthe law's provisions"
Did yu see why this Big Lie is so OBVIUS, after I gave you some hints in the previus article? I hope so.
First, Reuters and Yahoo "news" called lthe American people STUPID. How else can you take the (false) assertion that "most Americans" opose a law, but like its provisions? That, of course, is absurd, and the BAD people of Yahoo and Reuters are fully aware of that. But this is not about 'facts", or "turth". This is about "1984-style Big Lies and PROPAGANDA. Reuters, of course, made that clear when the body of the article contradicted the headline, and admitted that "most Americans" did NOT likke the "provision" of ObamaCare (a term the maisntream media simply refuses to use) that they know most abut: the INDIVIUAL MANDATE.
But the body of the article "doubles down" on the Big Lie by saying that most Americans "like' "most" of the provisions of ObamaCare. It is hard to LIE any worse than this. This riidiculouss assertin was based on a POLL. THINK here (which media propagandists de not want you to do). Is it eveven lPOSSIBLE to do a POLL on AlL of the provisions of ObamaCare: a 2700 page bill? Of ocure not. Do most Americans (indeed ANYONE) even UNDERSTAND the "provisions" of ObamaCare? Then how can you do a POLL that you SAY shows lthat "most Americans" "like' the "provisions" of ObamaCare? You can't. It is a LIE. Even if you have all of the good faith in the world, and the peole of Reuters, Yahoo and the organization which did this poll have NO good faith at all, you could not devise a pll on the 'provisions" of ObamaCare. The "insurance exchanges" alone are beyond the comprehension of most people, , and the REGULATIONS have not even been fully put into place for a law that will not be implemented (as to most of its "provisions") until 2014. This is a meaningless poll, being merely USED as PROPOAGANDA to push a Big Lie.
"But, Skip, cannot the poll simply ASK whethe the respondents 'agree' with 'most' of the provisions of he law?" Sure, you cuold "ask" that quesiin, but it would be a LIE.--unless "most" Americans were AWARE of ALL of the "provisions" of ObamaCare. In other words, the "poll" wouuld HAVE to LIST the "provisons" it is talking abut, and that is IMPOSSIBLE to "fairly" do.
Therefore, what is this realyl about? Well, what th media has been doing, and this Reuters story about a "poll" is only one example of the RPOGAGANDA approach outfits like CNN have been PUSHING for weeks, is to try to HIGHLIGHT the POPULAR "provisions" of ObamaCare in the most afvorable way possible. The idea is to PUSH the propaganda idea of the Reuters/Y:ahoo story thahat "most" provisions of ObamaCare are POPULAR and "good", and that those "provisions" will be "sacrificed" if Obama Care is completely repealed, or doomed by the fall of the "individual mandate". COST is INGORED. Government DENIAL of "choice" in coerage is IGNORED. All of the "problems" with ObamaCare, includng with some of the "popular" "provisions", are ignored. All that is done is to list the BENEFITS of the bill, as the propagandists of the media want to PUSH them. Thus,
You shoulld know the litany by now. Coverage of pre-existing conditions, and not allowing insurance companies to cancel coverage? Media check mar. Free contraceptin (without mentin of the cost, and why CNCER CARE is not "free")? Media check marrk. "Business" "tax credits"? Media check mark. "Coverage" of 33 million Americans--or whatever number is MADE UP this week)? SOMETIMES a media che mark, because it is hard to ignore the COST and MANDATE here). Coverage of "children" up to age 26 (again without mentin of cost or DENIAL OF CHOICE)? Media checkmark. Questin about whether people want the government TELLING them WHAT COVERAGE they MUST HAVE? Media non-no. You can see why people might say they "like" the "provisions" of the bill, if the "provisions" are presented this way. But ask peole whether they want their CHOICES taken away, as with the individual mandate, and they have avery different answer. Obviusly, you do not need a "comprehensive" law represeting a Ferderal Government TAKEOVER of the entire health system, and PREVENTING peole form having the "choice" to "keep" what they once haD (it being another LIE to sugggest they can, when insurance compnaies and emplyers HAVE to comoply with the GOVERNMENT idea of what health insurance should look like), in order to do something about pre-existing conditions, coverage of children" to age 26, and insurance compnay "cancellations". But there are many CHOICES to be made here> Is ree contraception" the best CHOICE as to coverage, such that it needs to be FOROCED on the whole country? The "best solutoni" remains to have the various states make their own CHOICES as to how to do these things in the most cost effective way. There are MANY ways to go about covering 'prre-existingng conditins", while trying to keep "free loades" from WAITING to be SICK before getting any coverage.
The American people understand what is gong on here. The govevernment is gong to FORCE everyone into the GOVERNMENT"'S idea of wlhat is best for them. It is a massive power grab by the Feeral Government, and people understnad this. Yes, if peole reeally want the Federal Government to deal with "pre-existing conditions", coverage to age 26 for "children", and insurance cancellations, that can be done WIHOUT this MASSIVE government takeover of an enrie industry (the health insurance industry, and ultimately the health care industry itself). People understand that. They even have a chance of "understanding" what these SPECIFIC laws are about. They have NO chance, and they know it, of understanding how a Federal Government TAKEOVER is really gong to work. Experience, of course, shows you that the result of this kind of massive government program is BAD. Ask peole, for example, whether they "agree" with the MASSIVE EXPANSIN of MEDICAID in ObamaCare, at the COST of destrohying state budgets, and see what anser yu get in the "poll'.
No, this whole poll is based on a Big Lie: the idea that it is even possible to ASK fairly about the "provisions" of ObamaCare. You certainly canpt "chery pick" the "rpovisions" you want to ask about, and then assert taht "most Americans" "like" the "provisions" of the law. That is absurd. It is a Big Lie in itself. It deliberately obsures all of the defects of a Federal Government TAKEOVER of so large a part of our lives: depriving us of CHOICES that w can now make ourselves. as to the kind of insurance coverage we want.
Has tghe GOP maade a MISTAKE by concentrating so much on the Supreme Curt and the individual mandate? For sure. Why else would the GOP fail to ATTACK the idea of "free contraception" as a denial of FREEDOM and of CHOICE? This is because the GOP "establishmemetn", as usual, is not realy against the idea of the Federal Government becoming ever more involved in "health care". The GOP estalbishment"---unprincipled fools to a person--merely wants to assert that it can "manage" our LOSS OF FREEDOM better,. The GOP estalbishment totally buyis into this media BIG LIE that the American epeople WANT the Federal Government to "provide" all of these "goodies" (like that "free contraception" BRIBE for young women). But merely because the GOP estalbishment politicians are prety much on board with the Big Lie here does not make it anything other than a Big Lie. It is no accident that the GOP establishment oncdee SUPPORTED the idea of an "individual mandate". Ask my borther about the LETTER he got fomr Senator Corker of Tennessee, who my borhter will vote AGAINST this fall. DEFEAT SENATOR CORFKER.
No, the American peole are WAY ahead of both the media and our politicians. They know when they are being "sold" a bill of goods: "I am from the government, and I amm here to help you". In this case, the correct statement is: "I am from the Federal Government, skupported by media Big Lies, and I am here to FORCE you to have exacvtly the insurance coverage and heealth care that WE think you should have." This goes way beyond whether people "like' any individual "provisoin" of the bill. There are THOUSANDS of "provisins", but it is not a matter of "counting" whch provisins peole may think they "like'. It is a matter of waht the entire bill does to FREEDDOM and COICE in this country, and PEOPLE understnd this. Our politiciaNs do not, because they are alomst totallly Big Government people (even if they claim to be part of the GOP, or even the Tea Party).
P.S. No proofreading or spell checknig (bad eyesight). I will say that if you do not udnerstand why the quoted headline is PURE PROPAGANDA, without even my accuratgte analysis, that you are much more BLIND than I am. It would be incorrect, however, to say that media poeple can be "explained" by the mere fact that they are more "blind' than I am. They are, of coure. But this is not really a matter of "blindness". it is a matter of DISHONESTY, and "1q984"-style PROPAGANDA. That is what the media is really all about, and the afact they are STUPID is merely a FACT that does not really explain what they are about.