I sent a friend a link to my recent article on Judge Kessler’s decision equating the making of a decision not to buy ObamaInsurance with activity in commerce. A “liberal,” his response was, “I wish you would not use the term Obamacare and Obasmainsurance [sic]. It’s offensive and derogatory.” At least he did not suggest that the usage was racist; perhaps next time.
That made me wonder why the terms are considered offensive and derogatory. True, I sometimes use them to tweak my “liberal” friends’ noses. However, ObamaCare and its indispensable component, ObamaInsurance, were pretty high on the list of President Obama’s signature accomplishments and I don’t know why those who like him and the wonders he hath wrought should be offended by the usage or consider it derogatory. Why aren’t they pleased and why don’t they consider them complimentary? I could understand their upset had I used instead “OsamaCare” and “OsamaInsurance,” “ChávezCare” and “ChávezInsurance” or “CastroCare” and “CastroInsurance,” but I didn’t. Perhaps being easily offended is the easiest way to attempt to make points without having any. Or, maybe this is a better explanation: “it’s only because the law is now such a heavy albatross politically for the left that the mere act of reminding voters of its provenance feels like a low blow. Pathetic.”
Recently, Jon Stewart of The Daily Show chastised John O’Hara, author of the book “A New American Tea Party,” for using the term ObamaCare.
Stewart: “Isn’t ‘Obamacare,’ by nature of you using the phrase, derogatory? Instead of saying ‘Let’s just talk about the new health care reform.’”
O’Hara: “I don’t think that’s a slam. That’s a moniker that it’s been given because it’s his…”
Stewart: “John, Jooohn, Johhhhn? Why don’t I call it the tea bagging book? I don’t think that’s a slam. Let’s not call it a slam. It’s just something I said.”[audience applause] O’Hara: “One is an obscure sexual fetish, the other is a guy’s name.” (emphasis added)
Oh well. Maybe using “TeaBagger” is a subtle form of acceptance (President Obama may even have used it in a friendly sort of way) while “ObamaCare” somehow connotes something approaching a sexual fetish. I don’t think so and prefer my notion that taking offense at “ObamaCare” is what the easily offended, most of them “liberals,” find to be the easiest way to attempt to make points without having any to make; sort of like “racist” or even the kidnapping by the PC crew of the word liberal which, once upon a time, meant
an open but not empty mind, a tendency to encourage the expression of opposing views, to listen attentively to them, and to desire to become familiar with them regardless of whether they are agreeable. It suggests a rational rather than a dogmatic approach to reality.
No longer.
First, there was HillaryCare. And Massachusetts has RomneyCare. Long tradition. Sort of like all the gates begat by Watergate.
Hey, he broke it, he bought it.
“That made me wonder why the terms are considered offensive and derogatory. True, I sometimes use them to tweak my “liberal” friends’ noses. However, ObamaCare and its indispensable component, ObamaInsurance, were pretty high on the list of President Obama’s signature accomplishments and I don’t know why those who like him and the wonders he hath wrought should be offended by the usage or consider it derogatory.”
If you REALLY want to twist their t!tt!es, call them “ObamaSlaves”, because under ObamaCare, that’s what we all are.
Just so much livestock in a Federal feed-lot.
Is Reagonomics an insult? Or a compliment?
Could these progressives be bigger crybabies?
‘ObamaCare’ is offensive to me too (the concept not the name). How about some alternatives: UndocumentedPresidentCare, DeathPanels-R-Us, TheWonCare, Govt.TakeoverCare, ObamaNotCare, RepealThisCare, UnconstitutionalMandateCare, PelosiCrazyCare, GettaWaiver4thisCare.
Puhlease…can the next president have a sense of humor and thicker skin?
“Obamacare” is specific. What other word is? Certainly not “medicare”.
Obama uses the terms tea-bagger implying all conservatives are perverts and he also calls conservatives racists. That is reason enough for conservatives to feel justified using a deragoratory term obamas health plan which he forced through congress despite public disapproval by putting party political pressure on elected representatives. Maybe liberals are sensitive to this and assume any use of slang is intended to be deragoratory. But to be sure you should really ask your fried to explain why he thinks it is insulting. I think they get insulted by the term obamacare because they know deep down that obama doesn’t care. Or, the only thing he really cares about is obama. “Obamacare” means obama doesn’t care about whites or even blacks, he only cares about obama. If obama cared about the poor he wouldn’t support unions private or government which restrict access to jobs to keep salaries high. If obama cared about poor people he would support lower taxes and less regulation which would allow business to grow. That would create jobs or more rightly scarcity of labor which would improve wages and working conditions for all workers. The best way to improve wages and working conditions for everyone is not to support unions but to let business thrive so they have to compete for workers. But obamadontcare.
Since when has Jon Stewart been reluctant to insult those he disagrees with?
This is another case of “clown nose on, clown nose off”.
“Obamacare” is the least offensive, accurate description. And it’s offensive only to “care,” which shouldn’t be paired with “Obama” ever.
But nothing wrong with “teabaggers,” right? (Let alone overusing the word “racist” to the extent that it’s lost any meaning.)