E.I.R. GmbH

Massachusetts erteilt Obama eine vernichtende Niederlage

Die herbe Niederlage der Demokraten bei den Senatswahlen im US-Amerikanischen Bundesstaat Massachusets am 19. Januar, hatte mit den Kandidaten selbst (Martha Coakley für die Demokraten und Scott Brown für die Republikaner) fast gar nichts zu tun, sondern mit der Ablehnung Obamas Politik, insbesondere seiner hinterhältigen „Gesundheitsreform“. Obgleich seine Anerkennung schneller dahinschwand als bei jedem Präsidenten vor ihm, weigern Obama und sein Team von Verhaltensökonomen sich, auf die Bevölkerung zu hören.

In fact, White House chief of staff Rahm Emanuel told Politico on January 18, that in spite of the expected defeat, “this is not a moment that causes the president or anybody who works for him to express any doubt. It more reinforces the conviction to fight hard.” In other words, they are prepared to pull all stops to ram through their agenda: slashing medical costs, in particular for the elderly, and bailing out the parasites on Wall Street (cf. Impeach Harry Reid, Defeat Obamas Fascist Healthcare Reform Bill)

But others, in Congress, have seen the handwriting on the wall. Democratic Senator Jim Webb of Virginia, for example, who stated, less than two hours after the polls had closed in Massachusetts: “In many ways the campaign in Massachusetts became a referendum not only on health care reform, but also on the openness and integrity of our government process. It is vital that we restore the respect of the American people in our system of government and in our leaders. To that end, I believe it would only be fair and prudent that we suspend further votes on health care legislation until Senator-elect Brown is seated.”

Democratic Senators Claire McCaskill and Evan Bayh supported Webb's statement publicly, and “about 10” others reportedly backed it implicitly. On the House side, many Representatives followed Webb's lead. Democrat John Murtha told a constituents' meeting that “both versions [of Obamacare], for all intents and purposes, are dead because of Massachusetts.... The public has sent a message.” His colleague Brad Ellsworth agreed that the House could not now accept the Senate health care bill, and announced he would vote against it.

Rep. Chris Van Hollen said, “Health care was also part of the debate, and the people of Massachusetts were right to be upset about provisions in the Senate bill, like the Nebraska purchase and other special deals.” (In order to win the 60th vote needed to pass the bill without Republican obstruction, that of Senator Ben Nelson of Nebraska, President Obama provided that his state would receive more money for Medicare than the others.) And Rep. Anthony Weiner of New York warned, “We've abandoned our principles on health care, such as expanding Medicare. We've driven away the voters on this.... Congressional leaders are whistling past the graveyard.... Take a step back and say, 'We get the message'. The independent voters don't like it. Take a jobs bill, and add health care by expanding Medicare.”

Even Barney Frank of Massachusetts, one of the main architects of the bank bailout schemes and a staunch defender of the White House health care reform, told The Hill that Obamacare was finished and he would vote against the Senate bill. “I feel strongly that the Democratic majority in Congress must respect the process and make no effort to bypass the electoral results,” he said.

Lyndon LaRouche, however, has warned that “Obama the narcissist” will not give up his bill, and is already attempting to buy up Democratic Congressmen, in spite of the mass strike underway.

Related news item: Senate Health Bill Draws Opposition from Left and- Right

Weitere Meldungen

Top

Schiller-Institut e.V.

Bürgerrechtsbewegung Solidarität

LaRouche Political Action Committe

EIR Online

Impressum