Wednesday, April 2, 2014

Mr. Obama, maybe folks are mad because you’re a liar

Dear Mr. Walsh,

Congratulations on gaining a large audience for your blog!

Not to muddy the festivities by harping on your contribution to the destruction of public discourse, but I thought I'd pass along some observations, in case you planning on writing anymore blog posts or anything:

There are a couple ways I could go with this. I could point out your enormous hypocrisy, and describe all the ways in which you, yourself, distort information (even the articles you link to), incorrectly use statistics, rely on dubious sources of information (your posts are an exercise in how many links to the NY Post and Daily Mail you can fit in one essay), present speculation as fact, and generally mislead your audience, emotionally provoking them in unproductive ways.... all for the sake of your personal profit and popularity.

But that's kind of what I point out every time I post on this blog, so I'll focus on something else this time. 

From the (well-funded, well-organized) agenda upon which you have staked your career, as a blogger, you have absorbed and implemented the strategy of stoking personal hatred in conjunction with utter neglect of systems, structure, and history. To the extent that anything broader than a particular person or type of people (Secular Progressives or whatever it is) factors into your analysis, it assumes the form of a fantastic narrative of Us Good People vs. The Tyrants which still, really, ignores history, social structure, and social processes.

Let me explain. Your post is saturated with emotion, to the point of being unbearable. Every word is uttered with hate. Your post focuses entirely on Obama, the person, and how he lies and how terrible he is. This is not helpful. Do you really think Obama is different than any other politician? Surely, politicians are known for being straight and honest with facts! 

I can understand being disillusioned with politics in general, but why does Obama frost your muffin SO MUCH?

When I hear the criticisms of the ACA from the various brands of conservatism to which you are most closely aligned (I hear reasonable criticisms from other, more reasonable conservatives) it mostly revolves around "socialism" and increasing dependence on government. This is complete insanity, totally divorced from reality.

If one really investigates socially, historically, it emerges that almost the exact opposite scenario is true. The primary foundations for the ACA were conservative ideas propagated by conservatives, and yes, contrary to their claims, a couple decades ago totally intended to be applied on a national level. The ACA maintains, if not increases, privatization of our health care system and works to the benefit of insurance companies. Insurance companies, in combination with a variety of other interest groups, were instrumental in creation and design of the ACA. In the grand scheme of things, Obama is merely a figurehead. It is not his law. He claimed it as his, because every president needs a "signature achievement" - and maybe, possibly, he really does believe in it. 

Do not for a second believe that Obama could do ANYTHING that a powerful block of interest groups was seriously opposed to. Do not believe he could STOP anything that a powerful block of interest groups was set on doing. Do not even believe he has ultimate control over his own messaging. There is a whole power structure, including that of the party and its strategists, to which Obama is subservient.

So, you don't like things that Obama does? Fine. Totally fine. But going on silly, childish rants about what a poopy-pants liar he is will not help anything. You are not just "calling a spade a spade." You are wasting your emotional energy and missing out on what is really going on. You are misshaping complex social issues into an Us vs Them  cage match and creating divisions where they need not exist.

Isolating and analyzing power structures, constellations of interests, and historical processes is much more valuable. It allows for more productive conversation. But it's also, like, totally boring to the nitwit audience you're targeting, and hey, a man's gotta earn his cheese, right?



Matt Walsh writes:

Dear Mr. Obama,
Congratulations on getting 7.1 million people enrolled in Obamacare before the March 31st deadline!
Not to muddy the festivities by harping on technicalities, but I thought I’d pass along just a few corrections, in case you plan on giving anymore speeches or anything:
Alright, by ‘March 31st’ you mean ‘sometime in April,’ and by ‘deadline’ you mean‘suggestion which is subject to change.’
And, obviously, by ‘enrolled’ you mean ‘people who have filled some information out on a website.’
And by ’7.1 million’ you mean ‘probably like 858 thousand or something.’ 
In your speech on Tuesday, when you said that Obamacare is ‘the law’ and ‘it’s here to stay,’ you really meant that Obamacare is ‘a fluid and constantly adjusted set of unconstitutional decrees, which can be imposed or withdrawn by the Executive Branch at any point, for any reason, up to 21 times and counting.’ And by ‘here to stay,’you actually meant to say that ‘most of it is neither here nor staying, because you don’t want America to feel the full brunt of it until after the midterm elections.’
You claimed that ‘more than 3 million young adults have gained insurance’ by staying on their parents’ plan. Even if that were true, it seems to take for granted that there’s anything remotely positive about the government forcing insurance companies to treat 25-year-old men and women like children. But, more importantly, it isn’t.
Indeed, when you said ‘more than 3 million,’ you really meant ‘extrapolations based on faulty estimates conjured up by Health and Human Services almost two years ago have brought us to the dubious conclusion that we can claim 3 million, because nobody will understand how we arrived at that figure, and most everyone will be too lazy to even attempt to check our numbers.’
You appeared to venture into the vicinity of truth when you stated that Obamacare is‘doing what it’s supposed to do,‘ but then you forgot to stipulate what, precisely, that happens to be.
It has not, nor was it meant to, make insurance cheaper and more accessible – but it has stripped away choice and freedom, and made more people dependent on the government.
It has forced single men and elderly couples and nuns to pay for maternity care and birth control. Likewise, it has compelled everyone to purchase coverage for psychiatric illness and drug addiction treatment, even if we aren’t necessarily psychiatrically ill or addicted to drugs (though, with your help, the pharmaceutical industry will soon get us all under one or both of those umbrellas).
And, while you spiked the football in the Rose Garden, you still failed to indicate how many people have purchased and paid for a plan, as opposed to just checking some boxes. And you forgot to tell us how many of the Obamacare ’enrollees’ were only inclined to enroll in Obamacare because your law forced them off of their original plans.
You celebrated a ‘law’ that will supposedly ’insure the uninsurable,’ even though most of the people now insured by Obamacare aren’t actually yet insured, but they were insured before Obamacare made them uninsured under their original insurance.
Of course, this is all after you famously told us we can ‘keep our plans’ if we ‘like them,’while omitting that by ‘keep’ you meant ‘watch as it is demolished in front of our eyes,’and when you said ‘like’ you didn’t include the disclaimer that we’d all be legally obligated to adjust our affections in the direction of the type of plan you think we should like.
Whew. My head is spinning.
You’re a slippery one, Mr. Obama.
I feel like I’m beginning to learn your language, although I haven’t deciphered the entire code. I do know that, essentially, when you say a certain thing, what you really mean is anything but the thing you just said.
Honestly, I’m starting to think that you’re doing this on purpose.
I’m starting to think that you’re… lying.
You’re a liar.
Yes, that explains it. You’re either enormously inaccurate and oblivious in ways that just so happen to suit your political goals, or you’re a scheming, conniving liar.
I’m going with the latter. You lie. That’s all you do. You’re a liar.
I know, in this day and age of ‘civil discourse,’ we aren’t allowed use words like ‘liar’ anymore. It’s such a harsh and startling term. It upsets people. It makes them sad. It makes them feel all icky inside. But, Lord forgive me, I’d rather call a spade a spade and a liar a liar — as opposed to your strategy, which is to call a spade a tortoise, or an apple, or a three toed sloth, or anything but a spade.
I would label you pathological — as deception seems to drip like putrid sewage from every single word and phrase that escapes your lips — but I know your lies are calculated, not compulsive. You can’t be a pathological liar for the same reason that an effective diamond thief can’t be a kleptomaniac. Your lie, like his heist, requires careful planning and plotting. You’re very aware of the truth, which is what makes you so adept at avoiding it.
Still, I’d like to, for your sake, take you seriously on one count.
In your speech, you said this:
“I’ve got to admit, I don’t get it.  Why are folks working so hard for people not to have health insurance?  Why are they so mad about the idea of folks having health insurance?” 
Why are folks mad at you? Well, as you’ve pointed out in the past, it’s probably because you’re black.
Yeah, that’s gotta be part of it. I’m sure cancer patients would be excited about having their plans abolished and their out-of-pocket expenses skyrocket, if only it had come at the hands of a white dude.
But, beneath the racism, maybe there’s something deeper going on.
Maybe, Mr. Obama, we’re all just tired of the lies.
Maybe we’re mad because you used the IRS against your political opponents, and lied about it. And you spied on everyone’s phone records (after specifically condemning that sort of practice), and lied about it. And you sent your Justice Department after journalists and whistleblowers, and lied about it. And you funneled weapons to drug cartels and terrorists, and lied about it. And you assassinated American citizens and drone bombed hundreds of innocent civilians, and lied about it. And you filled your administration with lobbyists, and lied about it. And you armed a terrorist insurrection in Libya, then orchestrated a cover-up once the terrorists murdered our ambassador, and lied about it. And, in general — whether it’s wiretapping, or Guantanamo, or deficit spending, or Obamacare, or whatever else – we’ve seen you do everything you said you wouldn’t, and little of what you said you would.
We’ve heard you lie. Over. And over. And over. And over again.
Maybe that’s why folks are so mad.
Maybe you’re a liar, and we know it.
And so do you.
I hope this helps clear up your confusion.
Matt Walsh 

No comments:

Post a Comment