Michelle Obama on ObamaCare: This is very much a women’s issue

posted at 8:54 pm on September 18, 2009 by Allahpundit

“The status quo is unacceptable,” she says, ignoring the fact that a near-majority thinks the status quo is very much acceptable indeed when the alternative is ObamaCare. Ah well. This is, as predicted, the “soccer-mom sell,” aimed squarely at women who might otherwise balk at the plan’s pricetag and/or their suspicions that their families will do worse with universal health care than without it. And yes, before you ask, of course there was a heartwarming anecdote about children to cement the emotional appeal. Less heartwarming is her prior involvement in “patient dumping” when she advised a hospital in Chicago. America’s forgotten but the boss hasn’t:

While a top executive at the hospital, Mrs. Obama helped engineer the plan to offload low-income patients with non-urgent health needs. Under the Orwellian banner of an “Urban Health Initiative,” Mrs. Obama sold the scheme to outsource low-income care to other facilities as a way to “dramatically improve health care for thousands of South Side residents.” The program guaranteed “free” shuttle rides to and from the outside clinics.

In truth, it was old-fashioned cost-cutting and favor-trading repackaged as minority aid. Clearing out the poor freed up room for insured (i.e., more lucrative) patients. If a Republican had proposed the very same program and recruited black civic leaders to front it, Michelle Obama and her grievance-mongering friends would be screaming “RAAAAAAAAACISM!” at the top of their lungs…

Following the Adams incident, the American College of Emergency Physicians (ACEP) blasted Mrs. Obama and Mr. Axelrod’s grand plan. The group released a statement expressing “grave concerns that the University of Chicago’s policy toward emergency patients is dangerously close to ‘patient dumping,’ a practice made illegal by the Emergency Medical Labor and Treatment Act (EMTALA)” – signed by President Reagan, by the way – “and reflected an effort to ‘cherry pick’ wealthy patients over poor.”

For whatever reason, the posts about Mrs. O tend to bring out our jerkiest commenters so if you haven’t read Ed’s post today about comment protocol, now would be a good time. We’ll be watching the thread, as will our many valued regulars. Ignore Ed’s advice at your peril.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 5 6 7

psst, we’re using Alinsky on the Alinskyites – whispers – and it’s working.

marklmail on September 20, 2009 at 1:34 PM

marklmail on September 20, 2009 at 1:34 PM

Wouldn’t that make you a newfound ‘Alinskyite’?

EarthToZoey on September 20, 2009 at 2:50 PM

Wouldn’t that make you a newfound ‘Alinskyite’?
EarthToZoey on September 20, 2009 at 2:50 PM

Not any more than washing my hands to remove bacteria makes me Louis Pasteur. Watching and learning is what smart folks do. Why reinvent the wheel?

indypat on September 20, 2009 at 3:33 PM

indypat on September 20, 2009 at 3:33 PM

That’s not analogous. I didn’t say that employing the principles of Alinsky makes someone Saul Alinsky. Rather, it makes them a person who follows the Alinsky strategy. Or, as mark put it: an Alinskyite.

If we’re going to criticize someone who uses cheap methods of attack, using those same methods makes the critic guilty of the same accusation.

EarthToZoey on September 20, 2009 at 3:55 PM

If we’re going to criticize someone who uses cheap methods of attack, using those same methods makes the critic guilty of the same accusation

Another Alinsky rule. Impressive, earth2.

indypat on September 20, 2009 at 4:25 PM

As a strategy, criticism of the opponent’s appearance is used to lessen their credibility when argument can’t do the job. I remember when certain persons took issue with Wm. F. Buckley’s wrinkled shirt in a misguided attempt to portray him as a fool. Of course, they were the same ones being pummeled by his wit.

That is not the case here. Ms. Obama’s words and actions serve quite nicely to obliterate her own credibility. Completely.

Like it or not, shallow or not, we all are judged on our appearance.

I searched for a full length picture of Ms. Obama’s outfit to gain a little insight to the woman.

White ruffled girlish blouse with a revealing plunging neckline, but demurely covered with a shawl collar sweater – cinched tight with a huge industrial cruel looking belt over a wild black and white carefree flouncy skirt. And plain understated pumps.

Wow, that outfit could be the official uniform for the terminally passive-aggressive.

But, all in all, I think what most posters here are trying to say – what apparently no one, not her daughters, nor a girlfriend, not even one of her many assistants, feels comfortable enough to say – “Girl, what is that thing around your waist?”

itsacookbook on September 20, 2009 at 4:41 PM

indypat on September 20, 2009 at 4:25 PM

I don’t know nor care about Alinsky’s so-called “rules”. I care about reason and logic. If you want to take my claim and dispute it, fine; I’ll listen. But dismissing me blindly doesn’t make an argument — it makes a cop-out.

EarthToZoey on September 20, 2009 at 4:46 PM

Allahpundit: I must congratulate you on your article. I know Michelle Obama’s history so your comments did not surprise me.

However, considering most of the responses relate to Michelle Obama’s attire, the respondents must feel your

comment need no further elaboration.

Ridiculing Obama for her attire will only attract sympathy, and detracts from the her cynical comments.

davod on September 20, 2009 at 4:54 PM

itsacookbook on September 20, 2009 at 4:41 PM

The first paragraph of your post was spot on. My concern is that talking about fashion and looks in a political forum weakens the impact of the biting critique of ‘ObamaCare’ and her hawking of the plan — which is what the topic of this thread is about.

(I agree that she has positively wretched fashion sense. Being someone who works around fashion, what she wears boggles my mind and I do talk about it when appropriate. But my bigger concern is with those who are deriding her physical looks (i.e. height, weight, facial structure, etc). This is completely classless and unmerited no matter where it’s posted. That is just basic good manners. Of course, we’re all free to be classless. Just don’t be surprised if it backfires, and keep in mind your own deeds when the tables are turned.)

EarthToZoey on September 20, 2009 at 4:59 PM

Of course, there I go talking about fashion! *slaps her wrist*

;)

EarthToZoey on September 20, 2009 at 5:00 PM

How in the world is health care a womens issue. Men do not get sick or have health problems? Only women buy health insurance? What a load of stuff. This WOMEN was sitting on the hospital board making 10 times the average income and divised a schene to deny care to poor people in her own COMMUNITY.

TomLawler on September 20, 2009 at 5:47 PM

OH yes Michelle, Abortion is a woman’s issue, but have the taxpayer front the bill is another story.

workingforpigs on September 20, 2009 at 6:26 PM

Making fun of a person’s appearance lessens the impact of the argument on the issues. Some things are better left said in private as opposed to a public blog viewed by thousands attempting to consider the debate on the merits.

EarthToZoey on September 20, 2009 at 1:12 PM

I agree, but Mrs. O’s “arguments” are so empty-headed that there’s not much left to discuss. And anyway, if she’s a fashion maven as we’ve been told, her attire at any rate is fair game.

ddrintn on September 20, 2009 at 7:12 PM

Making fun of a person’s appearance lessens the impact of the argument on the issues. Some things are better left said in private as opposed to a public blog viewed by thousands attempting to consider the debate on the merits.

EarthToZoey on September 20, 2009 at 1:12 PM

Her clothing choices are indeed relevant to the discussion because this woman, who has many, many taxpayer supported assistants and consultants, comes in front of the American people looking ridiculous and we are supposed to take her seriously? On top of her clownish wardrobe, her disingenuous speech is simply not believable.

Spunky06 on September 20, 2009 at 7:22 PM

EarthToZoey on September 20, 2009 at 1:12 PM

Interesting but the Left’s treatment of Palin certaily didn’t follow that logic. Or have you forgotten the comment after comment from the Left regarding how Palin did her hair, what clothes she wore, pictures shot between her legs, blah, blah, blah. The Left had no issue with attacking her person and they still repeat those coments.

katiejane on September 20, 2009 at 7:25 PM

katiejane on September 20, 2009 at 7:25 PM

Not to mention how Mrs Bush was attacked as a “Stepford Wife”? There’s a First Lady who was a true LADY! Or how about Cindy McCain? Mrs. O is fair game…
I can NEVER call Mrs O a “lady”–which saddens me…

lovingmyUSA on September 20, 2009 at 8:02 PM

katiejane on September 20, 2009 at 7:25 PM

I haven’t forgotten the Left’s treatment of Palin. In fact, I remember it well. Even when I espoused more liberal views (yup — I’m a recovering liberal) I consistently defended Sarah Palin from these types of attacks to the vehement chagrin of “fellow progressives”.

In fact, the constant dirty politicking on the Left was one of the things that jarred me out of the liberal echo-chamber I grew up in (though was always skeptical about) and sent me to the library to learn from more intellectual conservative thinkers (Sowell, Buckley, D’Souza, Goldwater, Hayek, Burke, et al). Of course, reading political philosophy is one thing and paying attention to modern political events is another. So, I searched for current events coverage, found Hot Air, and was pleased. The only reason I’m giving you this background is because when I run into threads, like this one, that devolve into a mirrored reflection of what I experienced on the Left, it’s a major disappointment. When people on the Right employ these same tactics, they have zero leg to stand on when admonishing the Left for doing the same.

I know the commenters here are capable of much more. Perhaps people are just blowing off steam? That’s what the Left commenters kept telling me when they hurled insults against the Bushes, Palin, etc. Either way, the petty negativity is a turn-off to people who are interested in the conservative movement and possibly adding their vote and money to the cause. I don’t mean to carry on about this topic, but I really hope to see more people stay intellectually honest and smart about their arguments. We can keep the criticism biting and scathing without being trivially spiteful.

(Sorry for the long post. I’ll let the subject rest from my end.)

EarthToZoey on September 20, 2009 at 10:53 PM

I can NEVER call Mrs O a “lady”

But she is First Lady, unlike Cindy McCain.

Grow Fins on September 20, 2009 at 11:09 PM

Not feeding the troll…

lovingmyUSA on September 20, 2009 at 11:19 PM

Michelle is immoral, without a redeeming attribute. She belongs in jail with her fascist husband.

proconstitution on September 20, 2009 at 11:30 PM

MO seems to be saying that Moms bear the brunt of burden when it comes to making sure that kids take their medicine, get to their doctor’s appointments on time.

How the heck does she think that ObamaCare is going to lighten any of those burdens? Is it going to pay for nurses to come to your house and force your kids to take their medicine. Is it going to send a chauffer to your house to take the kids to their appointments?

If not, what the /self deleted/, is talking about.

MarkTheGreat on September 21, 2009 at 9:42 AM

No, this is an issue where the presidents wife should sit back and keep quiet. Just like Hillary should have done.

tx2654 on September 21, 2009 at 11:03 AM

Does Obama’s “Bitter Half” ever not look angry in a picture?

Nice suicide bomber belt too.

wildcat84 on September 21, 2009 at 12:31 PM

I have a vagina female reproductive parts: hear me roar.

Badger40 on September 21, 2009 at 1:51 PM

No, this is an issue where the presidents wife should sit back and keep quiet. Just like Hillary should have done.

tx2654 on September 21, 2009 at 11:03 AM

I agree.
Nobody voted for her.

Badger40 on September 21, 2009 at 1:53 PM

she needs to shop and shut up, maybe a new belt.

workingforpigs on September 21, 2009 at 2:16 PM

Comment pages: 1 5 6 7