The American Medical Association has weighed in on the new Obama health care proposals.

The Allergists voted to scratch it, but the Dermatologists advised not to make any rash moves. The Gastroenterologists had sort of a gut feeling about it, but the Neurologists thought the Administration had a lot of nerve.

The Obstetricians felt they were all laboring under a misconception. Ophthalmologists considered the idea shortsighted. Pathologists yelled, "Over my dead body!" while the Pediatricians said, "Oh,Grow up!"

The Psychiatrists thought the whole idea was madness, while the Radiologists could see right through it. Surgeons decided to wash their hands of the whole thing. The Internists thought it was a bitter pill to swallow, and the Plastic Surgeons said, "This puts a whole new face on the matter...."

The Podiatrists thought it was a step forward, but the Urologists were pissed off at the whole idea. The Anesthesiologists thought the whole idea was a gas, and the Cardiologists didn't have the heart to say no.

In the end, the Proctologists won out, leaving the entire decision up to the assholes in Washington .

{Note:  This came in an e-mail so it was someone else's if they want to comment it is theirs, I have no objection giving them the credit, whoever they may be.}

It was on TPM that it was first posted.  It was a shockwave felt throughout the industry and permeated the entire national debate regarding health insurance reform.  The defining moment in which the debate turned to face reality was when the insurance companies admitted their responsibility for the urgent need to reform the service that they had failed to provide for years.  President Obama was heartened by the admission and remains ever optimisitic.  He The President issued a statement, "Hopefully, now the GOP will finally come to the table and we can all work together in the common interest of the nation to have a healthy and vibrant population able to resume productive employment with the classic American vigor that was evident when this was a great nation, not that long ago.  Our economy will surely rebound with this turn of events."

Insurers issued a statement that read, "We sincerely apologize for putting our interests and those of our shareholders before that of our customers.  In our greed, we abandoned prudence and redirected funds from a reserve to cover catastrophic illnesses to our own pockets.  Having become accustomed to a new lifestyle, and not being willing to diminish our personal revenues, we found it neceesary to eliminate the sick from our insurance rolls.  Having abandoned these people, we were able to maintain the charade to the healthy people that remained on our rolls that they actually have coverage for their healthcare needs when, in fact, we had no intention of ever providing them care either.  We just were not going to let them know this until they became sick and needed healthcare.  Now the nation is extremely upset with how they have been treated and we wish to apologize.  We will resume our former responsible and sustainable practices, all made evident through historical accounting and actuarial analysis that enabled insurers to actually make a reasonable profit while actually providing medical coverage. If we make less, then we can provide more.  It really is that simple.  It's only when we ignored this axiom that things became intolerable and the American people become upset.  We're going to change now.  Trust us."

Medicare recipients were reportedly relieved by this announcement.  In their old age, travelling to these town halls and expressing their rage was really quite draining.  It made little sense that they were fighting for private insurance when they were all participants in a government healthcare program, also.   They were no longer customers of private insurance, so, now that the threat of healthcare reform has disipated, they have been able to clearly see it was really never their fight anyway.

The Democrats, eager to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory declared, "We really think that having private insurance behave responsibly is best for this country and we will now redirect our attention to matters more pressing then the well-being of a fourth of this nation's population.  It is crystal clear the invisible hand is preferable to the hand of government."

The GOP was outraged by the dramatic turn around and issued their own statement.  "We want the President to fail and if he is not going to advance health insurance reform then we will.  Because we are adamantly opposed to the government growing in any way, shape or form, we will reassign people from the recently created Dept of Homeland Security and the Transportation Security Administration to the healthcare program.  It is our opinion undressing at the airport has not made any real impact on national security and the TSA is redundant. 

We feel that, because we favor competition and big business, the business of providing healthcare to all is best served by negotiating better prices in the healthcare industry.  With 300 million people in our program, we should get a pretty good rate.  However, in the interest of maintaining our image of fighting everything, the money saved will be put into an account to prepare for invading Iran, North Korea, and Pakistan.  If these nations are not willing to fight us, then we will have Malaysia, Burma, and Somalia as alternate targets.  It is our belief that, in order to raise the rating of the quality of US healthcare, if we invade other nations, then their average-age-at-mortality figures will lower, thus raising our relative mortality age without having to wait for anyone to actually live longer..  The comparative results will be evident almost immediately.  We are proud of the astute manner in which we can coordinate better healthcare statistics with perpetual wars against whoever we think we should invade at any given time and on any pretext.  We promise these wars will be fought really cheap, just like the last ones.  But if they do cost a lot, we are going to blame Obama until he leaves office in 2016.  We will declare his presidency a failure because he only served two terms."

The grassroots were relatively silent, as they have been most of the time during this debate, while the astroturf floormats were heard saying, "Hey!  Ya know, we should open carry at NASCAR events.  I'll bet a lot of people will see us with our guns there too, now that these town halls have become unnecessary.  I've got this idea about a bilateral holster, gun on one side, beer on the other!  I gotta express my Second Amendment rights somehow, all the time."

We lose our natural responses by repeated exposure to things.  It's how propaganda works.  Initially, we react loudly.  "That is BS!"  Then, we just kind of remark. 'Yup, same BS."  Until finally we just stop answering at all.  Time and repetition has worn us down.  The policy is in place and we "move on".  Long ago, this happened to us related to healthcare. 

It is not us, here at TPM, to whom I am referring, although I can admit from time to time I have little more then a sigh to give when another account emerges of someone screwed by insurance.  It is the nation.  As usual, Destor got me thinking, and I was mulling about the question whether the media is liberal or not.  {I know, as a whole the MSM is not liberal, but I'm just mulling here.}  I accept that the media needs to make a profit and therefore we are spoon fed things in the form of infotainment.  This healthcare issue has little value as infotainment and even what could have shock value, does not.  We've seen it all already.  Therefore, the infotainment is the weaponry, now being displayed by folks on the Right AND the Left.  Tensions are building!  Oh, this is entertaining.  Who can turn away?

As we watch the gunslingers parade about with their firearms hanging out, we are not seeing the victims of the insurance industry: families who have lost loved ones; families gone bankrupt; or people suffering both within and without the system.  WHY THE HELL NOT?!?

The answer, if one refrains from putting a label on the MSM, is pure business.  It's not news.  It's been happening for decades.  It's become common.  The newsfolk turn away from these stories because they cannot decide which one has the most emotional value when there are so many from which to choose.  People are knocking on their doors daily begging to get some public exposure so that they might obtain relief.  The MSM is loathe to present another heart wrenching story of grief and betrayal.  We all know they could do this every day, all day, and not cover all the stories.  It's that common.  It's just not news anymore.  We would rather not watch it over and over again.  The American people are numb.

Is there a way to rejuvenate the anger about our present predicament living with a healthcare system that serves profits more then patients?  We have not found it yet.  It would seem that exposing people to the horrors of a serious personal health crisis would wake people up, but it has already been seen countless times for decades.  Right now, the only picture of a future with a public healthcare systemin the USA is that provided by the Right, a socialist, impersonal, bureaucratic python strangling the life out of the elderly and now our veterans too, thanks to the creative imagination of Michael Steele.  We already have the picture of our present system, a capitalist, impersonal, bureaucratic monster, sucking the money AND the life out of anyone they can.  It is truly indiscriminate and very progressive!

The stories from countries with public healthcare, why are we not hearing about those?  How boring!  Is that infotainment?    Someone got sick, the doctor treated them, they recovered.  They kept their house, their car, their savings.  Seriously, is that what you want to watch?  Is that infotainment?

This post has been a miserable exercise in hopelessness, and I need to hear something encouraging that would help me see a way to obtain universal healthcare.  I'm really not very optimistic about it.  One can say, don't be defeatist, and I do not wish to be.  But what path can we take to achieve what this country needs?  How do we make people care enough to gain the edge against the misinformation and intimidating tactics of these obscenely wealthy corporations?  The time is now.  Our opportunity is right here and who knows when we will be able to address this issue again.  What can we do that will be successful?

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/news/2009/08/attack_on_obama_riles_becks_advertisers.php?ref=fpc

Here it is!  The link that just might give a moment's thought to the argument for a free market!  Advertisers on Glenn Beck's incendiary show are leaving by the dozens!  It's about time!  I guess businesses finally found a line they would not cross with Glenn Beck, the part about calling Obama a racist.  It's good to see not everyone has completely abandoned decency in the name of freedom of speech.  Frankly, this kind of speech, the boycotting kind, is something we have too long ignored, and we should do more of it.

There are so many examples of times that people should have shunned a business for its behavior, or contributions to bad behavior.  One sentient example in my mind was Citibank.  Here was a massive financial firm taking federal dollars and contributing to an effort to diminish the presence of organized labor.  I cannot recall the exact circumstance, but it was during Obama's Presidency.  I was astonished that this enterprise, with virtually no employees part of organized labor, and pretty much no significant threat to have their employees organized, had felt it their duty to participate in the effort, with federal dollars, no less!  Why was there no cry for the people to move our money? 

It is this negligence that has made the monsters we have today, large corporations openly taking positions that favor a given social agenda.  These companies are no longer taking neutral positions, but actively advocating for actions that demand others behave in a specific way.  Wal-Mart and their refusal to provide the morning-after pill is another example.  

A couple of decades back, actively participating in politics by business was unthinkable.  Now, I am not so naive as to believe business had no influence on politics, but these social issues were ignored by them.  It was because we, the people, would respond promptly and large segments of the market would dry up.  Commentators bemoaned how this punished not just the businesses, but the people who worked for them.  People took this to heart and we, the people, refrained from taking these actions. 

The problem is this.  Strikes and boycotts are really the only weapon we, the people, have outside of an election to make certain our voices are heard.  It works!  Fruit pickers were able to organize only after the market collapsed.  They had their strikes on many occassions with token TV appearances.  The strikes were shown on the news with commentary that either supported or criticized the workers.  It went on for months like this.  Finally, when the buyers began opting for something else to eat, organized labor came to agribusiness.  The same thing happened with orange juice and Anita Bryant decades ago.  People screamed about her homophobic stand, but when people sought other beverages for breakfast, she was gone.  Change happens most often when there is some pain associated with it, unfortunately.  But this "pain" is primarily financial.  In a sense, this pain is merely returning the favor, anyway.

The point is that we need a point.  We need some thing sharp to get the attention of business when it gets out of line.  Cut their profits!  These businesses have been allowed to enter our social arguments where they have no business.  It's an unfair influence for corporations to extend their financial might to an agenda unrelated to selling juice.  It's also rather obnoxious for business to advocate against a large segment of their market, taking the people's money while working against the people's causes.  If we do not take our money elsewhere, why would they NOT get into these issues?  We need to cut their profits.  It's the only way to get their attention.

HURRAH!!!  Color Of Change got our attention and we, the people, raised our voices.  Change will come to FOX News!  In all honesty, I am delighted to see businesses reign in FOX, of all networks, but there are conflicts on every network and I would like to see we, the people, flex our collective might.  As big as they are, and as big as the government is, it is we, the people, who ought to be directing how things are played out.  Maybe, just maybe, we ought to have a Healthcare strike?  What if people decided they were NOT going to take their company's health insurance next month, or for the last quarter?  Before the teabaggers ever get to their whine fesival, we, the people, took off the fourth quarter.  We put our money where our mouths are, we take a founr months on one of those high deductible, cheap, high-risk plans, and send big insurance and our government a clear and emphatic message. 

We DEMAND healthcare reform, and we demand it NOW!!! 

Joe Lieberman, go fuck yourself. 

Blue Dogs, you're sleeping on the porch if you don't learn who's your master real quick.

We don't have to face the armed and dangerous gunslingers at the town halls.  We just have to take our money elsewhere.  At the end of the day, it's the only weapon we have and it's a lot more powerful then their guns will ever be in this debate.    It will take courage.  It will take determination, but no guts, no glory.  This is the opportunity, right now, to make a real difference and Obama and the Democrats who are seeking real change need our support.  Send them a message, loud and clear.  We can dry up the funds from big insurance overnight.  Independent Joe? Blue Dogs?  Big insurance?  Who's your Daddy now?!?