This government shutdown would have been over in hours if the media would have presented it factually and impartially.
What are the facts?
- ObamaCare constitutes a disaster in every respect: It will reduce the quality of healthcare; It will reduce the availability of healthcare; It will increase the expense of healthcare; It will increase the cost of government and the national debt; It will reduce the benefits of Medicare; It will force people to lose their programs and the medical providers they have chosen (e.g. some hospitals will not be accessible under some programs); It will drastically increase government intervention in our lives, It will invade our privacy; It will expose our personal information to many people and increase the possibility of data theft; etc.
- It fails to meet virtually every promise President Obama made regarding it, showing him to be either dishonest or incompetent.
- The concession that Republicans are demanding entails forestalling the implementation of the Individual Mandate for a year. They have sent bills to the Democrat-controlled Senate to fund every other aspect of government.
- President Obama is doing everything within his power to make the government shutdown as onerous to American citizens as possible. For example, a headline from the Washington Examiner reads: “Military keeps Camp David open, cuts NFL, baseball coverage to troops overseas.” Instances abound of such initiatives designed by the President to inflict misery through the shutdown. If he cared about the American people more than his political career he would do just the opposite.
If the media made the public aware of these realities, a groundswell of support for the Republican position and in opposition to Pres. Obama and the Senate would quickly emerge.
In addition, an accurate analysis of the third point above, which represents the focal point of this showdown, would add fuel to the fire of public indignation toward the President and the Senate. Such an analysis would include the following:
- Republicans are not forestalling the implementation of ObamaCare but to the Individual Mandate, the requirement that individuals buy into it. I would anticipate negative public response to the Individual Mandate if they were sensitized to the reality that this is a mandate, coercion, the government telling them what they must do, the government insistence that they buy something. Who likes mandates? Agreed that in some instances we need to be told what to do, but the less mandates from the government, the better. This is certainly one that should be left to the individual.
- If ObamaCare were so good, why the need for a Mandate? Why do people have to be coerced into buying into it? This very need for coercion should serve as a major red flag to the American public that ObamaCare is a bad deal.
- The President already unconstitutionally delayed the implementation of this program for businesses. How can he was a straight face oppose the initiative of Congress, which does have constitutional legislative authority, to postpone the requirement that individuals participate?
- Individuals attempting to sign up for ObamaCare have experienced widespread difficulties because of software failure. This signifies that the government is not ready for this program despite the fact that they have had three years to prepare. This lack of readiness reveals that the Republican idea of delaying the Individual Mandate is a good idea. It further puts a dark cloud over the government’s capacity to handle healthcare. If it can’t handle the very first step, signing up, which should not be tremendously complicated, how can it possibly handle the far more challenging medical issues? And if government healthcare experiences as many glitches with brain surgery as it does with enrolling people, something far simpler I would say, shouldn’t we be afraid?
My point in the discussion above is that the ire of the American people has not risen against the President in the Senate because the media have not informed them and analyzed the issues fairly and accurately. Had they, the President and the Senate would have been forced to capitulate early on.
The broader point is that practically every liberal issue is dependent on media cover for survival. Let me just list a few.
- If the public really understood and was made aware of what was involved in abortions, this practice would be quickly shut down. It survives because the media won’t inform the public about the horrors of these atrocities.
- If the public was made aware of the nature of the homosexual lifestyle and the objectives of the homosexual agenda, gay initiatives would not enjoy the success they currently do.
- The scandal of government waste provides another area where the media protect liberals and also RINOs who often are complicit with them in squandering our money.
- The media also conceals nonsense related to much of environmentalism and its negative impact on individuals and on our nation as a whole.
This media practice of covering for liberal causes becomes more apparent at a time like this when we have front row seats to observe biased media coverage related to the government shutdown. Media power is revealed in the resulting public opinion that is far more favorable to the President and the Senate than warranted by the facts. ObamaCare only passed and can only survive by hiding behind the apron strings of Mamma Media.