Tuesday, June 16, 2009

A Few Days Have Passed, Safe To Bring Up Ex-President Clinton Again

June 16 Editorial

Six days ago The Editorial Staff wrote a piece "Blame game: Just leave former president out of it" discussing how George W. Bush is no longer President, so therefore we should not hold him accountable for anything or complain about him anymore. I didn't even bother critiquing the piece.

Sure, I could have easily gone into the 2001-2008 archives and pulled out hundreds of editorials where they knock Clinton (I am NOT a fan of the man by the way) but one can only do so much and preserve their sanity.

I did consider briefly mentioning the bit I included in my "Empathy in the Bush Years" where I pointed out how they were ranting and raving about the Lewinsky scandal Ten Years later, but figured I would pass.

So today, The Editorial Staff figures their victims (readers) have such short memories that they can rant and rave about Clinton, and not recall how they were saying it isn't good to do so with past Presidents. Had one member of The Editorial staff ever paid attention in just one of the enumerable bible classes they attend, their is no way they would try and pull this garbage off.

Sadly, it is quite obvious that none have so Today we are blessed with a disgusting piece entitled "Mediscare II: Obama health plan evokes ’96 campaign". There are too many things to point out in this piece, and I will do my best to keep this short.

First, they state "..In some of the most shameless fear-mongering ever seen in Washington, Clinton drubbed the GOP for its plan to save $270 billion over seven years by holding Medicare growth to 6 percent instead of the projected 10 percent."

It is fairly safe to say the editors recall "Harry and Louise", the disgraceful ad campagn that ran during the Clinton years when he was trying to pass reforms. Note that Harry and Louise are back again to fight Obama's reforms, along with a cast of other characters, including the firm that ran The Swift Boat Campaign against John Kerry.

Now, putting aside the disgraceful partisanship of this newspaper, lets look at how things are in the real world. The Editors are screaming unfair that Obama is discussing cutting back on Medicare expenses. Their gripe is that when Gingrich proposed them, Clinton went bonkers and won the next election based on his gripes about what the Republicans wanted to do, backed by Gingrich. Ignore all other factors, this surely had to be the reason!

What the incompetent staff is incapable of understanding, is that it surely is a conditional thing he is proposing. Note the recent article on the Foxnews website, "Obama Praises 'Historic' $2 Trillion Health Care Savings Plan" that Health Care Industry hot-shots have promised him and the people a massive savings over the next ten years. Putting whether we believe they'll pull it off (I can't imagine shareholders will like them doing this very much), those of us who are interested in the real world can deduct that Obama "...who said Saturday that he wants to cut Medicare and Medicaid spending by $200 billion over the next 10 years..." will probably do so conditionally. And those conditions will be based on what is probably a delusion that the Health Care companies are not filthy, disgusting liars and will deliver on the $2trillion in cost-cuts.

Man I can not stand The Oklahoman editorial page/staff. What the hell is wrong with these people?

1 comment:

  1. Personally, I think it all goes back to Millard Fillmore.