Once again Scott Hamre tries to cover his Socialistic leanings by using what he calls is a "pragmatic" approach to cover the real truth of the danger of Medicare For All.
Pragmatism is essentially described as a logical approach to the solution of a problem. There is nothing logical about the acceptance of ‘Medicare For All.’
He infers that the failure of Obama's Affordable Health Care Act was due to "plain old fashioned politics." Not true at all.
It failed because the American public realized that they would be forced to give up their chosen insurance program and accept one mandated by the Socialist Marxist government.
The right of choice, an integral part of American Independence, would be taken away and that was unacceptable.
He indicated that the act was to "provide as many people as possible with healthcare and do so smartly with cost containment."
He went on to say that he was even willing to accept the fact that the ultimate surrender, more control to the government, as "worthy to consider." Worthy to consider? Unbelievable.
He said that "as an honest writer" the $32 trillion dollar cost of the act over ten years "might rise to some extent."
Oh really, I've seen figures that would dwarf his so-called "honest" assessment, indicating a cost between $50 trillion to $100 trillion over ten years, particularly in view of Sander's open boarder proposal.
When Sanders, the Socialist Marxist candidate, was questioned by one of the media supporting him as to how he would pay for ‘Medicare For All’ he dodged and never answered the question because, in fact, he can't without admitting that taxes would rise exponentially.
Bear in mind that Mr. Hamre with respect to the impeachment proceedings against the President said that the House Democrats "did their job" while the Senate "shirked their duty" and that the Senate was not "impartial."
It is hard to believe that such a statement could honestly be made when one hundred percent of the House voted for impeachment.
No impartiality there.
It is clear that when you consider the shortcomings of Mr. Hamre's defense and his willing acceptance of the left's dogged approach to their radical agenda that the only pragmatic approach to that agenda is to logically reject it as an overt attempt to overthrow our government and our way of life as we know it.
R. S. Bibbo, Banning