Remember November, 1994? Or: Why ObamaCare Is Doomed To Be A
Eric Renderking Fisk - September 16th, 2009
Nobody seems to remember November, 1994.
Nobody wants to remember the firestorm created by then First Lady
Hillary Clinton who took charge of Health Care Reform. Nobody seems to
remember that anyone who dissented or openly criticized this program or
the unelected and unappointed unofficial cabinet member, they were
vilified and targeted by the Carville - Stephanopoulos - Begala smear
Have questions or concerns about HillaryCare? Then your name would be
dragged through the mud by the "Clinton Spin Machine" on all the Sunday
Morning talking head shows. Critics of HillaryCare were denounced as
being either ignorant and uninformed, or mean spirited or evil. They
claimed that if
you're against HillaryCare, you're obviously some "Republican stooge" or
Insurance Company plant. Or you simply hate poor, sick, and elderly
Nobody also seems to remember that back in the late 1980's and early
1990's there was a little known Congressman named Newt Gingrich who
climbed out of relative obscurity and crafted the Republican Revolution
that won (or stole, depending on who you ask) both The House and The
Senate with the "Contract With America." Who was Newt Gingrich besides
someone who became the voice of Conservative Reason with a calm and
disarming tone? Newt Gingrich seemed to be the soothing voice that
countered the radical hysteria from the left, the wise elder to the
Chicken Little "sky is falling" scare tactics from The Clintons: "We
have to do this now! Before it's too late! Rush rush rush this bill
through! Faster, faster, faster!"
Speaking of Rush, there was
the call from some to silence Rush Limbaugh because of his
fear-mongering tactics on his daily radio show, while others discounted
him and his listeners as conservative knuckle draggers and blowhards.
But then nobody thought that Mr. Limbaugh and his listeners could do much harm to
The Clinton Agenda.
Nobody seems to remember the pendulum swing of political paradigm
shifts, or the rhetoric that causes them. Nobody seems to remember that
what I just described was a perfect storm created by The Clintons and
their supporters and was used by Conservatives that resulted in a
disaster for Democrats during the 1994 Mid-Term Elections. Afterwards,
it was the Republicans that dictated the direction the country was going
to go in. To remain relevant, Mr. Clinton took the advice of Dick Morris
and went with the polls - following the "Contract With America"
Why are the events of 1994 relevant today? Could it be happening
As addressed by members on our forum, The Electric Speakeasy, The
Obama Administration and his supporters are making the same mistakes The
Clintons and their supporters made back during the first two years of
his first term: Ignoring the dissent or vilifying those who have
questions or concerns creates more enemies then new converts or
Worse than forgetting the lessons of The Clinton Era - this current
administration has forgotten the lessons of the previous one.
What was the world's reaction when George "Dubya" Bush said in regards
to The War On Terror: "You're either with us... or
against us." What was the reaction from the left? Embarrassment, rage, or frustration?
President Obama taking the same "you're either with us or against us"
approach to the current debate on health care and his supporters giving
him a pass on such an approach seems both ironic and tragic. To take an
"Us against Them" approach in the War On Terror is wrong, but taking the
same approach to Health Care Reform is correct?
It seems to me after watching the debate this summer, this is
the sprit of the exchange...
"I have concerns about the rumors about 'death panel,'
can you explain to me what's really going on here?"
"You're a really bad person for reading those nasty
e-mails and for even thinking that maybe 'death panels' could be a
You stop and think about that for a while. The "Question Authority"
generation that I grew up with and elected this President now wants to
silence anyone who has a question about a plan with such serious
implications, that will effect our lives on such a huge scale. Questions
or concerns are brushed off, and the questioner or commentator is
demonized or marginalized.
Is it a correct observation to make when I say that the only opinions
that's "relevant" in this debate are the ones that are enthusiastically
for this Heath Care plan? I have serious doubts about any
government-controlled health care plan, regardless of who is in the
White House or who has the majority in Congress. Does that make me a
troll? A vicious monster who need to have his website stripped from me?
The only opinion tolerated is the one that is supportive of the
President? Think about it for a minute in the context of The Bush
Administration. Imagine the outrage.
This mentality is causing President Obama to hemorrhage support
because he's slitting his own political throat.
The bitter fruit of this labor has already began to show in the form
of President Obama's plummeting poll numbers [Zogby
Interactive: Loss of Democrats' Support Helps Bring Obama Job
Approval Down to 42% -
PEW RESEARCH CENTER FOR THE PEOPLE & THE PRESS: "Obama's Approval
Ratings Slide: By the Numbers," September 4, 2009]
Trying to silence the new heir-apparent to Rush Limbaugh's throne -
Glen Beck - has done little more then rally his supporters and bring his
name to the front pages of many news sites. Has calling Mr. Beck's
listeners "dangerous idiots" done anything to hurt his ratings, or has
it had the opposite effect and rallied his supporters?
Has the calls to censure Joe "You Lie" Wilson (R. South Carolina) for
his outburst during President Obama's State Of The Union Speech done
anything to make the controversy go away? Or has this empowered him to
become the "Newt Gingrich" in 2010?
Then there's the report that people's trust in the media has
Research Center: "Press Accuracy Rating Hits Two Decade Low - Public
Evaluations of the News Media: 1985-2009."] because of what readers
and viewers now see the main-stream media as an extension of the DNC
Propaganda machine. If you can't see how and venom
from hosts like Chris Mathews and Keith Oberman isn't as potentially dangerous to
the political process as someone like Limbaugh or Beck, you're
delusional with your own deep bias.
Simultaneously media outlets like CNN and MSNBC have under reported
the ACORN scandal. As of this writing (September 15th, 11:55PM) there is
no story on CNN about the passing of HR3288 with the amendment that cuts
all HUD funding to ACORN. Nor about the Senate Committee on Banking,
Housing and Urban Affairs calls for an investigation into that
An organization that had close ties to the current
President Of The United States. And that's not news?
Finally - there's the under-reported 2 Million people who showed up for the
Tea Party March in Washington DC. I think one media outlet brushed them
off as "Tea Baggers." [Carol Shea-Porter being the most recent elected
official to use that derogatory term, which will be used by Republican
candidates for the next 14 months.]
All of this is creating is the same set of circumstances that
occurred before The November 2004 Mid-Term elections where outraged
voters will join a new conservative movement similar to Newt Gingrich's
"Contract With America" revolution in the mid-1990's and vote to strip
President Obama of his majority in the House and Senate.
If Barack Obama wants to win this debate on Health Care Reform, he
and his cabinet and his team at "Change For America" need to do more to
get the word out about what this health care reform really is, and what
it really isn't. They need to get into hammering out specifics, since
the opponents are doing a better job of reciting chapter and verse of
this health care plan, H.R. 3200.
Dismissing opponents questions and concerns as "fear mongering" isn't
doing anything besides rallying the Conservative base. Why doesn't
he see this, how can someone who is supposed to be so smart with such a
sharp clear vision for "change" be so blind to the harm he's doing to
his own cause?
These characters have to go back and listen to the speech Mr. Obama
gave the night he won the election, his Inauguration speech ["Will You Join Me In Taking This Medicine Called Hope?"]
and reiterate the points he made during the last State of the Union
Speech about wanting to come together and fix what's wrong with the bill
as it stands today...
Rather then vilifying the people with questions or concerns, he has
to get back to his promises about ending the partisan rhetoric. I want
to like and respect this man, Barack Obama. I want to like him as a
person and respect him as a leader. I want the guy who campaigned on
platform of changing the dialog in Washington and the way business is
done; change it's tone. I want the man the people of New Hampshire met when
the 2008 Campaign began.
If not, that's the first thing his opponents will use against him;
his biggest campaign promise.
The question now remains, is it too late? Has the damage already been
done? Can Barack Obama win back moderates and independents?
I'll give Bill Clinton who spoke with Esquire Magazine for this
month's issue, the last word.
September 8, 2009, 9:44 AM
"What I'm more worried about is our people getting careless,
forgetting the experience of '94, and that it is imperative that they
produce a health-care bill for the president and make it the best one
they can; if it's not perfect, we'll go back and fix it. But the people
hire you to deliver."
"This electorate has suffered. They've suffered economically, they've
suffered an enormous amount of sort of psychic insecurity from 9/11 to
the economic breakdown, they've seen all this change going on around
them, and they see in Obama a cool and intelligent guy who can multitask
in a world where they know you've got to multitask. What they don't know
is whether our guys are going to stand and deliver. And sooner or later
you've got to stand and deliver. All we have to worry about is getting
things done and doing them as well as we can. Don't even worry about the
Republicans. Let them figure out what they're going to stand for. 'Cause
as long as they're sitting around waiting for us to mess up, they don't
have a chance."