Spanky's Place

1 - I thought this was about a funny as the Status Quo in which relatives of mine become indebted to the tune of hundreds of thousands of dollars for drugs and services that would be free at the point of use here in the UK.

I realise it's a complex and devisive issue for the US but should healthcare be out of reach for quite so many Americans?

2 - It was really well done, and a bit amusing ... but I've got to agree with Jason's comment. Why should ALL American's be denied the healthcare I receive as part of my disability package? Japan, Canada, England ... there are SO many success stories with the same sort of lan! And their lifespans are longer than ours!

3 - I find the label "Obama-care" to be offensive, so a song and video based on it... doubly so.

I'll explain:

The label "Obama-care" itself is slam-dunk evidence that the opposition to health care reform is not even bothering to base its arguments rationality, but is instead simply appealing to negative emotion. Opposing politicians, health-care industry executives and lobbyists and right-wing pundits just slap on the name "Obama-care" in order to rouse the emotions of "the base", many of whom for various reasons have a visceral reaction to anything associated with President Obama. We need not go into those reasons, but rest assured that I'm using the plural deliberately... so I'm not just saying the one thing you immediately knew I was implying.

The "Obama-care" label confirms that the opposition is in fact primarily interested in gaining political advantage rather than doing something constructive, despite overwhelming evidence that reform is needed and that the majority of the population wants something done now. They are personalizing something that is not personal, and as of now they aren't even personalizing it with the right name. It's not a new issue and President Obama is only the latest in a long series of promoters of the ideas that are being discussed now -- a series that goes back many more years than most people know, and includes Richard Nixon (though it goes back even farther than that)!. Had another Democrat won the nomination and the presidency the same issue would be on the table today. Obama is not even writing the bills, so the target of the personalization is merely the one of political opportunity, rather than the accurate one.

How about "Baucus-care"? Doesn't stir the emotions the way "Obmaa-care" does, does it? Think about that.

Now, you can claim that "Obama-care" really refers to the radical ideas that Obama was really promoting at some point, and the "less radical (but still unacceptable to the right)" proposal that's on the table right now isn't the subject of this song... But that doesn't fly because the Baucus bill is now being regularly referred to as "Obama-care".

The media, of course, goes along with this labeling. Part of it does so because they are aligned with the opposition. They know exactly why opponents have labeled it "Obama-care": and it serves their purposes to popularize the phrase. Other parts of the media love anything that helps generate and play up controversy, so it serves their interests to use the label too. In any case, they have and no particular reason to point out what's really going on.

And oh, yeah... The video isn't particularly funny either. Not to mention rather unhelpful, but like I said: opponents aren't actually interested in solving any problems. They just want to weaken Obama's Presidency.

BTW: I know the other side has been guilty of this sort of labeling, too. "Reagan-omics" comes to mind as the most obvious case. At least in that case he was the political primary promoter of the ideas and policies involved, but it was still a pretty clear case of labeling for the purpose of substituting emotion for rational debate of ideas that did in fact have a very strong base of support.

4 - Wow Richard.
When I posted the video I knew it would push some people's buttons; but I honestly did not expect such a visceral reaction. I thought (and still think) it was funny.

As far as the label "Obama-care" goes; President Obama is (very heavily) pushing the bill. As President he becomes the de-facto leader (and target of opportunity) for anything he pushes/proposes -that's just the way things work. It doesn't matter who writes the bill -the moment the President steps in and begins heavy endorsement / promotion it becomes "his bill".

Does the video appeal to negative emotion? Absolutely.
Does this make it unfunny or intentionally hurtful? Not at all.
To be honest, I really don't like the superimposed flash animation of President Obama; but I lack both the talent and software to edit them out.

Do I oppose the idea of health-payment reform? Certainly not. What I oppose is the complete takeover of our entire health-care system by the government. That is not the government's place or purpose.

Had John McCain (for whom I did not vote) won the election, and had he proposed a similar takeover; I would be just as much in opposition (and would poke fun at it wherever possible) to such a proposal as I am now. Granted, "McCain-care" doesn't have as nice a ring to it -perhaps I (we) would be calling it "Palin-care".

If my candidate { Link } had won the election this wouldn't even be an issue. Sadly he did not.

Barack Obama is the President of our country. While I may disagree with him, I respect him and his office.
I posted this video purely in fun and to point out that I do not want the government to take over our health-care system. It is not meant as an affront or insult to him, nor is it intended to malign his office. The target of the video is "Obama-care", not President Obama.

Hope to see you at the 'Sphere where where we can discuss politics & religion over a few drinks.

5 - Devin, I didn't expect that you would expect my reaction, but I'm saddened none-the-less. To be honest, I didn't expect my reaction either. But I've been hearing this insidious label of "Obama-care" for weeks now from "respectable" media, and it has been bringing my blood slowly to a boil. The video pushed me past the limit of holding my tongue.

Now, if you hear the words "public OPTION", "you can keep your insurance" and "you can keep your doctor" and find that to somehow be equivalent to a government takeover, I can hardly imagine what point there would be to debate. What good is debating whether there are monsters hiding under the bed who turn invisible whenever you look underneath? None at all. But ever the optimist that I am, if I make it to Lotusphere I'll be happy to take you up on a beery debate anyhow.

6 - Looking forward to it my friend.