Good Times When Obama Improvises

Once again the president demonstrates a complete lack of awareness of the very issues he pushes. The following came from a recent appearance by The Won.

A student raised a question about the government's provision of health services and its impact on private services. Obama answered:

"How can a private company compete against the government? My answer is that if the private insurance companies are providing a good bargain, and if the public option has to be self-sustaining, meaning that taxpayers aren't subsidizing it, but it has to run on charging premiums and providing good services, and a good network of doctors, just like private insurers do, then I think private insurers should be able to compete.

"They do it all the time. If you think about it, UPS and Fed-Ex are doing just fine. It's the Post Office that's always having problems.... there is nothing inevitable about this somehow destroying the private marketplace. As long as it is not set up where the government is being subsidized by the taxpayers so that even if they are providing a good deal, we keep having to pony up more and more money."

You know, that sounds like a great argument AGAINST government intervention in health care. Gee America, your health care can be run just with as much cost efficiency as the Postal Service.

Of course Fed Ex is not exactly running in a purely capitalist mode either, having somehow gotten John Kerry to successfully introduce legislation many years ago to tweak the law and give them an advantage over UPS. Meanwhile the Postal Service, unable to handle its own task efficiently, repeatedly contracts out a lot of work to UPS.

Obama really needs to stick to his script. When he gets too far away from it, too much truth comes out. Then he just sounds like Joe Biden.

The Holocaust, Slavery, and Coal Mining

The war over West Virginia's coal mining history remains alive and well, evidenced by some sharp reaction to Russ Sobell's book Unleashing Capitalism.

Delegate Bill Hamilton (R) Upshur, criticized a chapter in the book that argued for a revised look at the historical memory of coal miners' experience. The chapter contended that the fluidity of the labor market required most operators to treat their workers with decency and that company stores were not predatory operations. This conflicts with the memory of Hamilton's father, a coal miner, who related stories about bad treatment and corrupt practices to his children. Hamilton goes further to claim that Sobell's book is comparable to Holocaust denials and mitigating accounts of American slavery.

Hamilton is correct to raise questions about this chapter in Sobell's book. Social and other pressures placed upon these workers exceeded the economic. One can still see in at least one old coal town the Gatling gun mounts on the porch rail of the boss's house. The practices of the Baldwin and Felts Detective Agency are also well known and recorded. That being said, Sobell's numbers do raise questions and tend to enhance, not detract from, the overall historical debate. History ought never shy away from a serious attempt to examine the past even if it conflicts with accepted beliefs.

That being said, even mentioning these abuses in the same breath as slavery or the Holocaust diminishes the horror of these two events. Yes coal miners were exploited and abused in especially Southern West Virginia. However most "agitators" found themselves blacklisted or physically tossed out. Residents of coal towns were deprived of constitutional rights. That being said, system did not systematically deprive these people and their families of their liberty for the purpose of coercing labor or murdering them. Bringing it to the same level as slavery or the Holocaust is a rhetorical mistake.