The Atlantic Wire has posted a roundup of the reactions to the boycott of Whole Foods by lefty bloggers over the WSJ opinion piece written by Whole Foods CEO, John Mackey. Mackey angered the bloggers by suggesting a free-market solution to avoid ObamaCare (you know, that heathcare program that aims to save money by rationing medical care to the elderly):
1. “Remove the legal obstacles that slow the creation of high-deductible health insurance plans and health savings accounts.”
2. “Equalize the tax laws so that employer-provided health insurance and individually owned health insurance have the same tax benefits.”
3. Allow competition across state lines.
4. “Repeal government mandates regarding what insurance companies must cover.”
5. “Enact tort reform.”
6. “Make costs transparent.”
7. “Enact medicare reform.”
8. Revise tax law to make it easier to donate to those without insurance.
Well, the left just about had a cow over these suggestions and saw it as an attack on Obama and even though Whole Foods helps the poor and hungry around the world, they decided speaking out against the president was so egregious that it outweighs the good the company does. Evidently, lefties believe they are the majority of the customers for Whole Foods and as such Whole Foods should walk in lockstep with their opinion. (They may be the majority of customers but I know a lot of conservative Christians who shop at Whole Foods. I like their very yummy salad bar and make the trek there to buy pico de gallo – always fresh and tasty – and cranberry juice.)
This reminds me of the time conservative Christians boycotted McDonald’s because they were outraged that McDonald’s supported the National Gay and Lesbian Chamber of Commerce. It’s funny how the left and the right use the same tactics to pressure those who don’t conform to their view of morality.
So, who is boycotting a store that spends part of it’s profits empowering the poor?
posted August 18, 2009 at 1:28 pm
I bear no malice toward Whole Foods and see no point in boycotting them.
But Mr. Mackey’s proposals don’t offer much detail.
“Repeal government mandates regarding what insurance companies must cover.” So they can cover less? That’s hardly seems helpful in covering people the insurance com[anies already won’t serve.
“Enact tort reform.” Sounds good in principle, But what constitutes true reform that is just and fair to all? I suspect pharmaceutical companies and patients would have differing ideas on that.
These are bare bones proposals that offer little specificity.
I’m not dazzled.
BTW he doesn’t mention lobbying reform. Apparently the lawyers and pharmaceuticals can continue their bidding war using stupendous amounts of money they earn from lawsuits and from inflated medicine prices.
“Enact medicare reform.” Michele, you might want to look at what that means. It’s another way of saying “ration care.” Look out, here comes the death panels in their black helicopters lookging to unplug granny!
posted August 18, 2009 at 1:50 pm
Hmm…something odd happened to my post above, but I think you get the gist.
posted August 18, 2009 at 3:32 pm
this reminds me of the right-wing when they got bent out of shape and boycotted the dixie chix for voicing their opinion of president bush, a.k.a. the worst president ever.
these boycotts are quite pointless, but hey, if the right-wing and fundie conservative xians feel empowered by using them as a tool, i see no problem with the left doing the same.
btw, i see that you’re sticking to your lies (“that heathcare program that aims to save money by rationing medical care to the elderly”) without providing any evidence whatsoever. reformed blabbers serve as a loyal echo chamber of right wing lie machine.
posted August 18, 2009 at 3:52 pm
I’ve never shopped Whole Foods because I prefer Wegmans, also well-known for philanthropy.
http://www.allbusiness.com/retail-trade/food-stores/4261384-1.html
But, as the Wegmans are from Western New York, they’re probably lefties.
posted August 18, 2009 at 4:44 pm
The strange thing is how utterly naive Michele is about rationed care. She seems to be utterly unaware that private insurance companies do it too.
posted August 18, 2009 at 7:03 pm
I was just thinking about the uproar over the Dixie Chixs when reading about Republicans in Israel speaking out against Pres. Obama, such as Rep. Canter, Mike Huckabee, and others.
posted August 20, 2009 at 12:16 pm
Michele isn’t naive about the insurance company. She just knows it’s much easier to fight a company that you can sue than the federal government which you cannot. Michele views the other side as naive to think it’s better to be denied service by the government than the insurance company.
And btw, what kind of argument is that? They do it too? You’re not helping your case.
posted August 20, 2009 at 12:18 pm
(“that heathcare program that aims to save money by rationing medical care to the elderly”) without providing any evidence whatsoever. reformed blabbers serve as a loyal echo chamber of right wing lie machine
Please! Obama himself provided the evidence when he said that he planned to pay for his program on the savings from Medicare.
posted August 20, 2009 at 12:24 pm
“Enact tort reform.” Sounds good in principle, But what constitutes true reform that is just and fair to all?
In states where they have enacted tort reform, the prices for malpractice insurance are much lower. I think Texas is one of the states that has enacted tort reform.
And you can laugh all you want about rationing care but it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to understand that if you plan to cut spending, you’ll have to cut what you pay for the care of sick people. I have a grandma and 4 parents on Medicare (mine and my husband’s). All of them have major medical conditions.