October 30, 2013 Politics Who is wearing no clothes? This op-ed appeared in the Lawrence County Advocate on October 30, 2013, in response to one from the previous week in the same newspaper. My references mean more when the other is understood. You can find it here: http://www.gopusa.com/commentary/2013/10/17/patton-who-will-tell-obama-he-has-no-clothes/ Since Barack Obama was elected for his first term, he has been attacked by conservatives for everything under the sun. Being too left (Socialist), too soft (Pacifist), too tyrannical (despot). The man couldn’t make strides with conservatives if he rolled over and played dead, letting right wing zealots win their way, gleefully pumping their fists with satisfaction. Everything under the sun? I am indeed guilty of this exaggeration as well as insinuating, rather crassly, behavior akin to that of simians. However, when newspapers print inflammatory op-eds rife with gross misrepresentation of facts and misuse of metaphors, it is only fair to counter the attacks and point out how inflammatory they can be. Calling President Obama a Socialist or Pacifist makes someone look undereducated in social studies. Calling him a despot reveals either an ignorance of history or penchant for debasing those with other political views or both. Joseph Stalin, Adolf Hitler, and Mao Zedong were despots. Barack Obama was elected President of the United States with both the popular vote and the electoral vote two times. He ran on the mandate of health care for Americans. Instituting a law that follows this mandate does not make him a “potentate ruling over a nation of serfs all the while pretending to be clothed in constitutional authority.” The law was upheld by the Supreme Court; therefore, it is indeed constitutional. Shutting down the government to overturn this law or defund it and then blaming Obama is frankly political theater at its worst. You don’t like the law. I get it. But as a country, we are late in the game. Yes, it may be difficult to accomplish; the path may be bumpy, but is the United States less capable of enacting universal health care than the likes of Australia (1975), Austria (1967), Bahrain (1957), Belgium (1945), Brunei (1958), Canada (1966), Cyprus (1980), Denmark (1973), Finland (1972), France (1974), Germany (1941), Greece (1983), Hong Kong (1993), Iceland (1990), Ireland (1977), Israel (1995), Italy (1978), Japan (1938), Kuwait (1950), Luxembourg (1973), Netherlands (1966), New Zealand (1938), Norway (1912), Portugal (1979), Singapore (1993), Slovenia (1972), South Korea (1988), Spain (1986), Sweden (1955), Switzerland (1994), United Arab Emirates (1971), and United Kingdom (1948)? See http://www.health.ny.gov/regulations/hcra/univ_hlth_care.htm. For those who wish to counter with something like, “But the United States has the best health care system in the world,” according to the World Health Organization, the US is ranked 38th. Behind even Chile and Costa Rica. See http://www.photius.com/rankings/healthranks.html. The US ranks 46th in Most Efficient Health Care. See http://www.bloomberg.com/visual-data/best-and-worst/most-efficient-health-care-countries. Are those against the law just afraid of the bogeyman or hoping for failure so a Democrat will lose office during the next presidential election? Methinks someone is not wearing any clothes.