Jon Stewart pissing me off

Dear Folks, Some of you may have watched Monday Jon Stewart and his cruel treatment of Kathleen Sebelius the Secretary of Health. Here is my response. John G

October 8,20l3

Dear Jon,

              I ordinarily enjoy your program a lot, you and Steve. You both have acute minds as you lead us cleverly through many political issues.  Our health care plan is one of these. It is, as you know the end of a line that has helped strengthen the health and security of people, beginning with social security, The plan had to jump many hurdles, the worst being Republicans in the Senate who used the filibuster to almost render the congress and the country defunct. We all ---as in Canada and Europe—would have wanted the single payer plan, simply by adding people to Medicare.  It is a compromise but a meaningful one, as you know. 17 million children with pre-existing conditions are now covered. Roughly six million more students are covered by their parent’s insurance until age 26. Now any woman needing health care such as birth control, testing, etc are covered, no longer can insurance co’s put a year’s limit on costs or can drop old people. Insurance companies must spend 80 percent of their income on insure needs. Over all health will be promoted,  a national health bank will reduce unnecessary interventions, companies under 50 employees will receive some government health, those over 50 must provide adequate insurance, at least 25 millions will get inexpensive insurance on exchanges, Medicaid is expanded to childless adults, as well as to poor folk who will receive Medicaid when needed in states that allow such (states can reject this provision, as set down by the supreme court,  not by the law. In Texas, for example, l.5 poor people can’t have Medicaid). Premiums from the government will go to families with up to 90,000 income and individuals up to 45,000, On another level, no citizen will ever need to go into bankruptcy or  lose a home because of impossible health costs. Over all employees will be healthier, and so our industries will be competitive on the world market.

Two problems with Obama

Dear Folks, Much as I value Obama as a complete person and worth-while president, he bothers me on two counts: (l) he talks about ending wars, but added considerably to the Afgan one. Now he considers bombing Syria. Few agree with him, Two major writers in Sunday's New York Times, Nicholas Kristof and Thomas Friedman, both of whom I Admire very much somewhat disagree:  Kristof holds we should bomb in order to make a strong statement about Assad's violence (over l00,000 killed) but acknowledges he is in the minority. Friedman's title says it all, "Same War, Different  Country."   He points out that all of these Arab countries, such as Libya, Iraq, Afghanistan, and Syria are all in the same predicament: locked into sectarian conflicts since the 7th century and will have to work out their own divisions in order to become a pluralist democratic society. We need to help them in this process and not just bomb.

    My other ongoing problem with Obama and his administration is their unrelenting damage they do to immigrants who are not criminals but workers meeting legitimate needs in so many areas of American life. The Time's editorial discusses this issue.Republican congressional rigidity hasn't helped this situation. Still the Obama team is responsible for sending 2 million back to their countries!!!  Thank God, however, for Obama's version of the dream act.However, overall his team has done severed damage to families and our industrial needs.  Let's communicate with the white house in these regards. My view is: don't bomb, support the right rebels, work diplomatically with Syria, and stop the bloody manhandling of immigrants.John G