Health Care and Obama vs. Obama: Should You Have Voted For Hillary?

"WASHINGTON (AP) - Americans would be fined up to $3,800 for failing to buy health insurance under a plan that circulated in Congress on Tuesday as President Barack Obama met Democratic leaders to search for ways to salvage his health care overhaul."


The headline is exactly accurate. This is a case of President Obama vs. President Obama. It is also a case of President Obama admitting that Democrats should have voted to nominate Hilary Clinton (at least if health care were their primary focus, and/or less hypocrisy and clearer thinking in proposing a coherent "plan" for heath care overhaul.


What was the main difference cited by Barack Obama, during the Presidential campaign, between his position on health care and that of Hillary Clinton? It was that Obama would not FORCE Americans to have health care insurance--would not take avway their "free choice" with government coercion. Obama did so with typical Obama "eloquence", which failed to explain why Hillary Clinton was not right that the Obama "plan" necessarily meant millions of people would ot be insured. The question is: Did Obama ever mean it, or was he just saying what he thought he needed to say to get the Democratic nomination?


Assume Obama meant it (my personal opinion being that he, himself had no idea whether he "meant" it or not, since he always says what sounds good at the time, without any intention of being "bound" today by what he said yesterday). Well, after he became President he said that his position had "evolved" on this matter, and that he now realized you had to require people to have health care insurance to make any health care overhaul "work". Was Obama himself not telling you you should have voted for Hillary Clinton, as I did in the Texas primary (promising to vote for her in the general election, as well). Obama, as President, told you that he did NOT "think through" his position as candidate. While not directly saying so, he was admitting that Hillary Clinton had thought through her position.


No, in that last paragraph I am not even referring to today's AP story above. I am referring to a story more than two months ago, which I cited in my Google blog, "The Maverick Conservative", at the time. I said the same thing then as I am say;ing now: that as far as I am concerned Obama was admitting that Democrats should have nominated Hillary Clinton. The story then was NOT about a "proposal" circulating in Congress. It wa about an interview with President Obama, where he was asked that specific questioner. His answer was what I have indicated: that he has considered the input of "experts" (like Hillary Clinton?), and has "rethought" his position such that he has concluded that it is necessary to REQUIRE ever American to have health insurance.


Notice I am not saying that Hillary Clinton's plan was GOOD. I am just saying that it was always at least honest and consistent, while Obama has never had a coherent "plan" at all--to this very date.


Why did I support Hillary Clinton for President? You will have to consult the archives of "The Maverick Conservative" for that answer in full. I explained it in detail at the time. It comes down to the fact that I thought John McCain was going to be just as bad for the country as Hillary Clinton, but that Hillary Clinton would be much better for conservatives. Or at least there was hope for that, as was true with regard to her husband, Bill. I still regret not voting for Bill Clinton over George Bush 41. There is simply no question that Bill Clinton was the best President for conservatives, including creating a Republican House for the first time in generations, than any President since Ronald Reagan.


I did not, however, vote for--or support--Obama against John McCain. Let me be clear here. I would have supported Mitt Romney against Hillary Clinton (or Obama), as I supported Romney for the Republican nomination. But I could not support McCain. I supported Bob Barr (throwing away vote). I had hopes that the country could do well launder Hillary Clinton, as we did under Bill Clinton (overall, because the Republican House kept him from doing anything but conservative things, in terms of most legislation). I knew Obama would be an absolute disaster for the country, and that we might not survive him. I still could not stomach voting for McCain, because I thought--correctly, I believe--that the destruction would be just as certain launder McCain, except slower and more drawn out. That is because McCain would have been a Republican (and labeled a "conservative", which he is ot) presiding over the same type of expansion of government as Obama, except a little slower and without a coherent Republican Party in opposition. In fact, there is probably MORE chance for a bad health care overhaul with McCain than with Obama, because McCain would have "caved in" with a bad "compromise" (as he may yet do now), and Republicans would not have untied against McCain.


In short, I dislike the policies that Hilary Clinton advocates. But I thought she was pragmatic enough, and experienced enough, to avoid destroying the country pursuing her admittedly leftist policies. We will never know whether I was right on Hillary Clinton. We do know, I think, that there was no right choice between McCain and Obama (although you can certainly argue that McCain could not possibly have been this bad), and that Obama is in the process of destroying the country. You can look at "The Maverick Conservative" for the multiple examples of Obama vs. Obama, as we have a President with no regard whatever for the "truth". For him, the "truth" is his rhetoric today, as distinguished from his rhetoric yesterday.