Analysis of Syndicated Column Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 words

Analysis of Syndicated Column - Essay Example The purpose of his opinion piece was to ask his readers to analyze the merits of keeping the ObamaCare law as it was versus the reality of what would happen to the individual American's healthcare and economic needs if the law is not repealed by Congress. His main argument being that the ObamaCare law will further open the floodgates of debt and produce no benefits for our nation over a minimum of 10 years. Mr. Krauthammer, being one of the most highly respected columnists in The Washington Post, has never been known for writing his articles willy nilly. He pours countless hours into his research and takes great pains in order to prove the veracity of any claim that he makes by insuring that he gets confirmation or authoritative explanations pertaining to his research material from highly reliable and reputable resources. For his article â€Å"Everything Starts with Repeal†, he presents facts and figures that he gathered from his time spent speaking with CBO Director Douglas E lmendorf, using the man's very own facts and figures in order to disprove the Democrat theory that the passage of ObamaCare would result in a reduced deficit over a period of ten years. An explanation which, when heard for the first time from the Democrat point of view, most certainly points to savings for the nation. However, the savings come at the cost of more government spending and increased taxes. It is at this point that Mr. Krauthammer points out the obvious argument that most ordinary Americans, regardless of their political beliefs as Democrats or Republicans, would make after careful study and evaluation of the facts as presented by Elmendorf. How can our nation have any real savings or surplus if facts and figures are manipulated to never actually show an accurate portrayal of the money spent or saved? In other words, the joke is on us once ObamaCare finds itself fully implemented in 2014. These are arguments that Mr. Krauthammer makes based upon the facts and figures th at he managed to gather from the Congressional Budget Office. These are calculations and formulas that were given credence or denied by explanations from Yuval Levin, the National Affairs editor of The Washington Post. What makes his opinion piece in this highly syndicated column highly informative and accurate is the fact that he constantly argued the merits and demerits of ObamaCare from both a Democratic and Republican standpoint. Therefore, all possible avenues of debate and discussion pertaining to healthcare coverage for the regular Joes are openly and widely discussed within the article itself. He oftentimes refers to his own personal experience and the much highly publicized information pertaining to ObamaCare that is easily accessible via any public information portal. I must point out one small detail, however: the information used within the article is believed to point towards his article being part of a relative truth. This is why the information he has on hand can be b ent and shaped in order to serve the purpose of either political party. This is because, depending upon which side of the political spectrum Mr. Krauthammer's readers have chosen to place their fate in, the truth as they know it and see it can be explained in at least 2 different ways, thus, proving that truth can never be absolute, only relative. In terms of the information within the opinion article, I would have to say that its veracity level is quite high. This is owing to the method by which the information was collated and presented to