–How President Obama surrendered the principles of the Democratic Party, and lost the health care battle.

Mitchell’s laws: The more budgets are cut and taxes inceased, the weaker an economy becomes. To survive long term, a monetarily non-sovereign government must have a positive balance of payments. Austerity = poverty and leads to civil disorder. Those, who do not understand the differences between Monetary Sovereignty and monetary non-sovereignty, do not understand economics.
==========================================================================================================================================

I urge you to read this excellent, short article,

How Liberals Killed Universal Health Care, by Paul Andersonin, at Policymic.

Here are some excerpts:

The most striking thing about the Obamacare oral arguments was the absence of a moral argument in favor of universal healthcare. Liberals’ quest to cover everyone spans almost three generations. They weren’t pursuing universal coverage to grow government, increase efficiency, punish insurance companies, or “bend the cost curve.” Their case was much stronger than that.

As T. R. Reid put it in his book The Healing of America we have an “ethical obligation — as a matter of justice, of fairness, of solidarity — to assure everybody has access to medical care when it’s needed.”

Instead of making that argument, Obama and liberal activists focused on overly wonky gibberish and ideological sideshows. In doing so, they deprived the final bill of the moral justification that might have blunted the arguments of its opponents.

As has happened so often in President Obama’s administration, he has allowed the Tea Party to set the terms of debate. Thus, anything that expands government or increases the deficit is automatically bad, without any discussion of why this philosophy may be wrong.

When the healthcare debate began early in the summer of 2009, what’s the first thing you remember? For me, it was the unfortunate phrase “bending the cost curve.” After inheriting a deficit of $1.3 trillion, Obama apparently decided that he could only win the heathcare debate if he framed it as an exercise in long-term deficit reduction.

Unfortunately, by focusing his initial public messaging on the flawed mechanics of healthcare markets instead of their inherent cruelty, Obama stripped away the moral urgency of his message and let his opponents demonize him without even being forced to admit his good intentions. Here we had a President proposing the largest program for the poor in a generation and spending all of his political capital on it, but very few on the Left or the Right ever said “at least his heart is in the right place.” That’s a failure in messaging.

Everywhere, people march for the poor. The #Occupy groups, all over the country, demand reduction in the gap between the rich and poor. Yet these same people have been sucked into angrily rejecting Obamacare because . . . well, they’re not sure why, but by gosh, they know they’re angry, because the government is “forcing” them to do something . . . something bad.

Millions upon millions of people, who otherwise could not afford adequate health care, would now receive it, and they’re angry about that. And people who otherwise are moral, caring and charitable — they’re angry, too. And what is President Obama talking about? The immorality of a great nation not providing adequate medical care for its less fortunate? No, he talks about cost reduction, as though he were a Tea Party stalwart.

Not only is it the wrong argument, but it’s a phony-baloney argument. You can’t massively increase coverage while decreasing costs. Nor do you need to, in a Monetarily Sovereign nation, where the federal government easily can support Medicare for everyone.

President Obama, through ignorance or some sad quirk in personality, has forsaken the basic principles of the Democratic party – the warm party of the people, the party of unions, Social Security, Medicare and Civil Rights – while the Republicans have been the cold party of money.

Where are the “bleeding hearts” when we need them? Where are the caring Americans, who take justifiable pride in the words, “Give me your tired, your poor, Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, The wretched refuse of your teeming shore. Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me, I lift my lamp beside the golden door!” No other people could say that. Only Americans.

But now, what has happened to us? Where are the truly religious? Why have they been outshouted by the fake religion of the cruelly pious? Where is our human leadership? Where is Obama?

Again, I urge you to read the article in its entirety.

Rodger Malcolm Mitchell
http://www.rodgermitchell.com

==========================================================================================================================================
No nation can tax itself into prosperity, nor grow without money growth. Monetary Sovereignty: Cutting federal deficits to grow the economy is like applying leeches to cure anemia. Two key equations in economics:
Federal Deficits – Net Imports = Net Private Savings
Gross Domestic Product = Federal Spending + Private Investment and Consumption + Net exports

#MONETARY SOVEREIGNTY