creators.com opinion web
Liberal Opinion Conservative Opinion
Patrick Buchanan
Pat Buchanan
14 Feb 2012
On to Tehran -- or Is It Damascus?

Our War Party has been temporarily diverted from its clamor for war on Iran by the insurrection against the … Read More.

10 Feb 2012
Obama's Trampling on God's Turf Now

Yes, Virginia, there is a religious war going on. It is for the soul of America. And traditional Christianity … Read More.

7 Feb 2012
Who Wants War With Iran?

Appearing alongside CIA Director David Petraeus before the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence last week, … Read More.

Angry White Men

Share Comment

To hear the Obamaites, those raucous crowds pouring into town hall meetings are "mobs" of "thugs" whose rage has been "manufactured" by K Street lobbyists and right-wing Republican operatives.

Press secretary Robert Gibbs compares them to the Young Republicans of the "Brooks Brothers riot" during the Florida recount.

But is it wise for the White House to denigrate and insult scores of thousands with the fire and energy to come to town meetings in August, and who appear to represent millions? Is this depiction fair or accurate?

Most K Street lobbyists could not organize a two-car funeral. They don't storm meetings. They buy friends with $1,000 checks. And if GOP operatives are turning out these crowds, why could they not turn them out for John McCain, unless Sister Sarah showed up?

The Obamaites had best wake up. Opposition to health-care reform is surging, and Barack Obama's campaigning has gone hand-in-hand with collapsing support, just as George W. Bush's barnstorming did for Social Security reform.

There is an anger out there unseen since Ross Perot was leading Bush I and Bill Clinton in the presidential trial heats in 1992.

Who are these folks? Why are they angry?

In his essay "Decline of the American Male" in USA Today, David Zinczenko, editor of Men's Health, give us a clue. "Of the 5.2 million people who've lost their jobs since last summer, four out of five were men. Some experts predict that this year, for the first time, more American women will have jobs than men."

Ed Rubenstein, who has written for Forbes, National Review and the Wall Street Journal, blogs on VDARE.com that if one uses the household survey of job losses for June-July, Hispanics gained 150,000 positions, while non-Hispanics lost 679,000. Guess who got the stimulus jobs.

Going back to the beginning of the Bush presidency, Rubenstein says that "for every 100 Hispanics employed in January 2001, there are now 122.5. ... (But) for every 100 non-Hispanics employed in January 2001, there are now 98.9."

Since 2001, Hispanic employment has increased by 3,627,000 positions, while non-Hispanic positions have fallen by 1,362,000. For black and white America, the Bush decade did not begin well or end well, and it has gotten worse under Obama.

African-Americans remain loyal, but among white folks, where Obama ran stronger than John Kerry or Al Gore, he is hemorrhaging.

According to the latest Quinnipiac poll, which showed him falling to 50 percent approval, whites, by 54 percent to 27 percent, felt Obama behaved "stupidly" in the Sgt.

Crowley-professor Gates dustup.

Fifteen straight months of job losses by non-Hispanics explains the anger, but columnist Lowell Ponte raises an issue that may explain who is protesting health-care reform and why.

Under the civil rights legal doctrine of disparate impact, used in the New Haven firefighters case, if tests for hirings and promotions consistently produce results disadvantageous to minorities, the tests are, de facto, suspect as inherently discriminatory, and the results are tossed out. New Haven canceled the promotions for firefighters when all but one of the firemen who passed the test were white, and not a single African-American made the cut.

The city argued that New Haven was acting true to the letter of the Civil Rights Act, which says that tests that consistently produce a disparate and unfavorable impact on African-Americans must go.

Ponte applies the disparate impact doctrine to the trillion-dollar health-care reform.

Who are the principal beneficiaries? The 47 million uninsured who will be covered. Who are the principal losers? The elderly sick who, in the name of controlling costs, are going to lose benefits, be denied care at the end of their lives and have their lives shortened. For half of all health-care costs are in the last six months of life, and cost control is priority No. 1.

Here is where the disparate impact hits. Among those who benefit most — the uninsured — African-Americans, Hispanics and immigrants are overrepresented. Among the biggest losers — seniors and the elderly sick — well over 80 percent are white. Ponte quotes Fox News' Dick Morris:

"The principal impact of the Obama health-care program will be to reduce sharply the medical services the elderly can use. No longer will their every medical need be met, their every medication prescribed, their every need to improve their quality of life answered."

Under Obamacare, adds Morris, "the elderly will go from being the group with the most access to free medical care to the one with the least access."

America is already divided ideologically and politically on health-care reform. And with seniors having to sacrifice care, while the young are all insured, a generational divide is opening.

Now Nobel prize-winner and New York Times pundit Paul Krugman writes in his "The Town Hall Mobs" column that, as did Richard Nixon's men, "cynical political operators are ... appealing to the racial fears of working-class whites."

Pulitzer prize-winning black columnist Cynthia Tucker says 45 percent to 65 percent of all vocal opponents of Obamacare are motivated by racial hostility to a black president.

We are headed for interesting times.

Patrick Buchanan is the author of the new book "Churchill, Hitler and 'The Unnecessary War." To find out more about Patrick Buchanan, and read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate web page at www.creators.com.

COPYRIGHT 2009 CREATORS.COM


Comments

2 Comments | Post Comment
This letter is about the current state of taxpayer funded health care and the inherent unfairness of the policies that have been created in Washington D.C. My analysis has resulted in some observations and some questions.

Currently American taxpayers are paying for:

1. FREE health care for Afghani and Iraqi citizens that is paid for with U.S. tax dollars. Our funding for those wars includes money for health services. Consequently, even insurgents who go to a medical clinic will get treated for free and be released to return to their nefarious activities. Is it appropriate to deny me health care, yet force me to pay for health care for America's enemies?

2. FREE health care, including FREE prescription coverage for all criminals in custody, including the terrorists in Guantanamo, all paid for with U.S. tax dollars. Why are they more deserving than me or the millions of other taxpaying Americans who have no health insurance?

3. Health care for armed service veterans paid for with U.S. tax dollars. This system has produced radically lower costs and its recipients report that they are happier with their health plan than most any other group. Like you I support the VA. What I don't understand is why you don't support helping the taxpayers who fund it?

4. Taxpayer funded health care for seniors, paid for with U.S. tax dollars. Why should seniors get health care, but not me? Why can't I sign up for Medicare? If I want Part B, I'll pay $100 a month to get it. The minimum age for coverage is 65. This arbitrary age is meaningless. Rep Conyers has proposed a “Medicare for All” plan. If it's good for American seniors, why do you believe it's bad for other Americans?

5. Taxpayer funded health care for all police, fire and other government employees. I understand that they pay taxes, but so do I; and they get health care. Why is that fair? Are their lives worth more than mine? Is this tantamount to rationing potential care for the uninsured, whose tax dollars buy health insurance for this special group? If a public service worker is hurt on the job they have worker's compensation, so health care is just a taxpayer funded perquisite that's not available to other Americans.

6. Taxpayer funded health care for all members of Congress. Are they better than me? Are they better than all the other Americans who pay for their health care, but cannot access it?

7. Taxpayer funded health care for the poorest of our society, but not for the middle class? This is especially unfair, because the middle class pays the bulk of the tax money that pays for the taxpayer funded health care that others receive.

I recently heard former Senator Frist declare that the reason he's against allowing the U.S. government to negotiate lower costs with drug companies is because Americans fund the profits that drug companies use to research and develop more and better drugs. I assume you agree with this argument.

If this is the reason that Americans pay higher drug costs than anyone else in the world, then I have a few questions.

1. Why do some members of Congress want Americans to pay for the benefits of the French, the Canadians, the Brits and all the other socialized health care countries? Aren't Americans just as deserving as they are? If not, why not?

2. I do not believe the drug companies would stop doing research if they weren't funded by price-gouging the American taxpayer. I think they'd say to the French, the Canadians, the Brits, etc, “The days of picking American's pockets are over. You have to raise the amount you pay us.” There'd be some grumbling in Paris, London and Berlin, but they'd all pay an extra couple of Euro's per prescription and the world would go on. And we in the USA would be paying less.

Middle class taxpayers are being told that they have to stay in the back of the bus and pay the bus fare of all the “special” people who get taxpayer funded health care. People like murderers, child molesters, terrorists and our congressional representatives. Please explain why these groups are so special and the taxpayers who pay for it aren't?

I believe that Congress' failing to enact health care legislation that gives ALL taxpayers access to taxpayer funded health care is inherently unfair. It is discriminatory. It is divisive. It is wrong for America and bad for Americans.
Comment: #1
Posted by: OregonGuy
Tue Aug 11, 2009 10:12 AM
I just don't understand Buchanan as a conservative. I think your goal in writing opinions are sensation and publicity. This article is a perfect example. You go to great lengths in describing how all who disagree with obama are denigrated when you say "But is it wise for the White House to denigrate and insult scores of thousands with the fire and energy to come to town meetings in August, and who appear to represent millions?" You also detail how white white men are being disenfranchised by a program like HR3200. HOW DOES THIS RELATE TO RACISM? It's not about race as much as the dems and apparently you want it to be. It's about the socialist policies of Obama and the progressives. I think we all want to provide health care to all Americans. We just don't want the government provide it. Let the free markets do it. It would be much more effective and efficient and it would not be necessary for government to gain even more control of our lives. That's what this about anyway...control....not health or reform.
Comment: #2
Posted by: Gene Douglas
Sun Aug 16, 2009 6:11 AM
Already have an account? Log in.
New Account  
Your Name:
Your E-mail:
Your Password:
Confirm Your Password:

Please allow a few minutes for your comment to be posted.

Enter the numbers to the right:  
Creators.com comments policy
More
Pat Buchanan
Feb. `12
Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa
29 30 31 1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8 9 10 11
12 13 14 15 16 17 18
19 20 21 22 23 24 25
26 27 28 29 1 2 3
About the author About the author
Write the author Write the author
Printer friendly format Printer friendly format
Email to friend Email to friend
View by Month
Author’s Podcast
Judge Napolitano
Judge Andrew P. NapolitanoUpdated 16 Feb 2012
Austin Bay
Austin BayUpdated 15 Feb 2012
Michelle Malkin
Michelle MalkinUpdated 15 Feb 2012

20 Jul 2007 How Empires End

9 Sep 2008 One of Them and One of Us

13 Sep 2011 Setting Grandma's Hair on Fire