To say I am not a fan of Obama is an understatement. When he veers off from his rhetoric of false hope, he simply gives Republican talking points.
At the last debate he attacked Clinton’s moratorium on ballooning interest payments as putting the economy at risk with high inflation. Obama might as well have called Clinton a flaming red socialist, not that there is anything wrong with that. I guess there is some consistency in his comments, in the Senate, he voted against limiting credit card interest to 30%.
During the same debate he articulated a health care position in which the free market would magically lower prices and as a result we’d have universal health care. Obama, in accepting the republican talking points, sees mandates as an evil akin to controlling interest rates.
Krugman has another brilliant piece on a recent study of how Obama’s plan covers less people, yet costs more than the Clinton plan. What the study found was a plan without mandates would only cover 23 million, whereas, a plan with mandates would cover 45 million. Ironically the Obama plan will cost almost twice as much per insured person as the Clinton plan.
Krugman hit the nail on the head when he states we may have universal health care with Clinton, but we will never have it with Obama. Why? Well, with his rhetoric against mandates he has already done half the Republicans job for them.