(NaturalNews) Before the Democrat-led Congress voted to approve President Obama's healthcare "reform" law, then-House Speaker Nancy Pelosi of California declared, "...We have to pass the bill so you can find out what's in it."
Never before in recent memory has a sitting House speaker demonstrated such disregard for the public's right to know regarding a massive new entitlement, what it meant to them, what it would eventually cost and, most importantly, its impact on American society.
Now, some two-and-a-half years later, with most public opinion polls still showing that a majority of voters dislike Obamacare, Americans are going to be spoon-fed propaganda regarding the law's "benefits," while of course the law's negative effects (on employment, on business expansion, on the ability of the healthcare system to even handle the coming tsunami of new patients) will be ignored or downplayed.
What's more, you're going to be paying for this propaganda.
It all starts - where else? - in California.'Good story lines here'
According to The New York Times
, the state - which is drowning in debt - has already begun constructing a healthcare insurance exchange mandated by the law. That has included, of course, the hiring of 100 new state workers, a consulting firm and a web portal developer.
"Realizing that much of the battle will be in the public relations realm, the exchange has poured significant resources into a detailed marketing plan - developed not by state health bureaucrats but by the global marketing powerhouse Ogilvy Public Relations Worldwide
, which has an initial $900,000 contract with the exchange," the Times
reported. The firm's plan is to tap Hollywood, where some of Obama's most ardent support comes from, to sell this turkey to the American public.
Ogilvy envisions television shows like "Modern Family," which features a gay theme (EDITOR'S NOTE: I WATCH THIS SHOW AND EVEN THOUGH THERE'S A GAY COUPLE, THE SHOW ITSELF DOESN'T "FEATURE A GAY THEME" I THINK IT WOULD BE BETTER TO SAY PROGRESSIVE THEME), and "Grey's Anatomy," weaving Obamacare
into story lines - all in a positive manner, of course.
There's more. From the Times
:Plans are being discussed to pitch a reality television show about "the trials and tribulations of families living without medical coverage," according to the Ogilvy plan. ... "I'd like to see 10 of the major TV shows, or telenovelas, have people talking about 'that health insurance thing,' " said Peter V. Lee, the exchange's executive director. "There are good story lines here."Propaganda replacing honest, open debate
When officials feel they still have to "sell" Obamacare to the public more than two years after it has become law, what does that tell you about the public's faith in the law, much less it's popularity? This was a major accomplishment for Obama
, yet he rarely mentions it on the campaign trail (EDITOR'S NOTE: HE MENTIONS IT ALL THE TIME) and is never pressed about it by the mainstream media.
Because Obama and his supporters know, pure and simple, that the law isn't popular. And it's not popular because, so far, it is not delivering on any of its promises (lower healthcare prices, lower insurance premiums, etc.).
So it's got to be sold
. You've got to be "convinced" it's a good law.
And why not? After all, you're paying for it
The insurance exchange being set up in California "has so far been financed by three grants, worth $237 million, from the federal government," the Times
reported. "Most of the money
is committed to consultants, including Accenture, which has a $327 million contract to build and support the initial operation of the enrollment portal."Newsbusters.org
points out the hypocrisy:Remember that the liberal media was furious that the federal government would promote the war in Iraq inside Iraq, and furious that the Department of Education would hire PR flacks like Armstrong Williams to talk up Bush education programs on cable news. So where is their outrage at the idea that federal grants would promote ObamaCare advertising inside network TV entertainment programs?Sources:http://www.nytimes.comhttp://newsbusters.orghttp://blog.heritage.org