Stephen Lendman (stephenlendman.org (Home - Stephen Lendman)

The Times notoriously supports wealth, power and privileged interests at the expense of progressive ones.

Its opposition to Trumpcare is more about hostility toward the president and support for abominable Obamacare than concern about House and Senate healthcare measures gutting Medicaid and leaving millions more uninsured than already.

The Times blasted House and Senate versions of Trumpcare, saying “Senate Republicans voted on Tuesday to begin repealing that law without having any workable plan to replace it.”Fact: GOP hardliners have lots of unacceptable ideas, polar opposite what all Americans need.

The Times: GOP “proposals vary in severity, but all of them would leave millions more people without health insurance and make medical care unaffordable for many low-income and middle-class families. “

Fact: True enough, but here’s what The Times said about abominable Obamacare in March 2010:

Calling the measure “health care reform, at last,” it said “Obama put his presidency on the line for an accomplishment of historic proportions…a triumph for countless Americans who have been victimized or neglected by their dysfunctional health care system,” adding:

It’s “another stone firmly laid in the foundation of the American Dream…reforms (that) could ultimately rival Social Security and Medicare in historic importance” - all of the above deplorable perversion of truth.

Obamacare was and remains a healthcare rationing scheme, benefitting insurers, drug companies and large hospital chains, imposing marketplace solutions, not vitally needed reform assuring universal coverage, free from predatory insurers and drug industry banditry.

Throughout Obama’s tenure, The Times supported austerity harshness, enriching bankers, other corporate favorites and high-net-worth households at the expense of ordinary Americans, responsible for protracted Depression-level conditions

An earlier Times editorial on Medicare and Social Security, lied claiming “(o)f course, neither program is sound for the long run. (Yet there’s) time for lawmakers to reform and strengthen both (for) the long haul.”

“(A) combination of benefits cuts and tax increases is required. (It) could be distributed fairly and phased in over decades.”

When properly administered, both programs are sound. Neither is going bankrupt. Both are government insurance programs, not entitlements, funded by employer and personal payroll deductions.

Times scaremongering claims are fabricated, claiming “(t)here is no way to wrestle down the deficit without reigning in Medicare costs.”

“The only way to make Medicare sustainable is to have it grow at the same rate as the economy that provides the tax base to support it.”

"The solution, most experts (sic) agree, is to have Medicare pay doctors and other health care providers fixed sums to manage a patient’s care and then let the doctors decide which services are truly necessary.”

Congress should pass Social Security “benefit cuts and moderate tax increases (to ensure) solvency (and) fair (burden) sharing.”

The Times saying Social Security is “worse than you think” belies reality. Claiming if remedial action isn’t taken, benefits ahead no longer will be paid is shameful malarkey.

The Times backs policies harming most people at home and abroad. Opposing Trumpcare ignores its consistent support for imperial wars and corporate empowerment over peace, equity and social justice.

-###-

Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago. He can be reached at lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net.

VISIT MY NEW WEB SITE: stephenlendman.org (Home - Stephen Lendman)

My newest book as editor and contributor is titled "Flashpoint in Ukraine: How the US Drive for Hegemony Risks WW III."