Through the Looking Glass

We all have our own particular views and they are certainly not going to be in step with everyone else's. However, there is a point where a viewpoint departs so far from reality that it does no one any good. Case in point is a recent post on the American Thinker blog titled, 'Fluke and Liberals' Bodyguard of Lies'. It touches on the uproar over the contraceptives debate (it is 2012, right?) and the Congressional testimony of Sandra Fluke. As you probably know by now, she's the Georgetown law student that Rush Limbaugh raked over the coals, on-air, for three straight days a few weeks ago. Picking and choosing his words in such a way as to belittle and insult her in every way he could, including referring to her as a 'slut' and a 'prostitute', among others. I had some warning of the kind of piece it was, but wanted to read it anyway. Either I have an insatiable curiosity for the views of others or I'm a glutton for punishment. Probably a little of both. The American Thinker article was indeed pretty eye opening and my amazement, and irritation if I'm to be honest, began with the second sentence, which summed up the author's bias, misinterpretations and a complete misunderstanding of what a Liberal actually is.

"Because liberals are at war with American society and their true beliefs are repugnant to most Americans, liberals constantly conceal the truth of their beliefs with sweet-sounding lies."

I don't know about you, but my first thought was, "Wow!" There is so much wrong with that one sentence that it's difficult to even know where to start. Most surprising to me is that the author obviously, truly believes this. But it's just so . . . out there. When I look for an example of a fringy, right wing, through the looking glass mind set, this would be exhibit 'A'. I give him credit for stepping off with vim and vigor. None whatsoever for accuracy or critical thinking, but boy does he have the unwavering, absolutist swagger down to a 'T'!

I won't play point, counterpoint with the entire post, though believe me I would dearly love to. To be fair to the author, I give him props for imaginative use of rarely utilized metaphors and historical personalities. I mean, really, when was the last time you read something that called out Nietzsche, Caligula or Quetzalcoatl, much less all of them?! Though, to be a bit critical, these and other historical references felt rather forced. More a way to show how well read he was than to actually illustrate or illuminate his point. As such, you will also find references to Communism, Nazis, Roman Emperors, 'true evil' and other pointless and silly hyperbolic statements.

One of the points that the author harps on incessantly, in his aforementioned wild and historically mismatched way, is that it's wrong to require religiously associated, public institutions to offer insurance coverage to their employees that goes against a religious belief of the institution. Specifically that Catholic hospitals and universities shouldn't have to offer contraception coverage for their employees. This is utter, one dimensional nonsense! It only makes any sense at all if these are closed institutions that hire ONLY devout Catholics. Otherwise it is the employees who are having their rights infringed based on a theological tenant that they may not agree with! Does the author think that every employee of these institutions is required to convert to Catholicism as a requirement for employment? If not, then what gives the employer the right to restrict employee insurance options based on their own moral views? By that logic everyone would be beholden to their employer's moral judgements for their medical coverage.

As far as I'm concerned, and I think this fits with the general Liberal viewpoint, I think everyone should be able to practice their faith and live their lives as they see fit. But your right to do that ends when it infringes on my rights. That's what living together in a democracy is all about. We are all different, with different moral foundations and considerations, but we have to live together. The only way that works in a free society is to set the limit of your faith and moral views at the point where my rights begin. I respect Catholics right to practice their faith and live life based on their beliefs, but that doesn't mean they can enforce those beliefs on anyone else, especially non-Catholics.

Contrary to the authors bizarrely distorted theory about Liberals, they aren't trying to force anyone to sell their soul. They just want to limit your ability to force your morals onto someone else in the guise of religious or personal freedom. And that is what this is all about. The author has made the classic mistake of getting so worked up about what he sees as wrong that he's neglected to step back and consider it objectively. He fails to even glance at the other side of the argument. It's so much easier for him to mount his high horse and whine about how horrible Liberals are for saying a religious organization can't force its secular employees to live by its moral code. Boohoo! I'm afraid he has it backwards. But seeing both sides takes so much more energy and is nowhere near as satisfying as a good, full throated pity party!

The author's whole post, while well written and, forgive the pun, liberally seeded with historic markers, is 180 degrees out of line. To claim Liberals are secret totalitarian monsters at a time when the State and Federal government are replete with conservatives attempting to legislate morality is mind blowing. That's why this post was so tough to read. It was like reading an article from an alternate universe, where everything is reversed. And just like Limbaugh, the author seems to have no idea what Ms. Fluke was even testifying about. She spent the majority of her testimony speaking specifically about the use of birth control pills, not for contraception, but as a medical treatment. Even I know that birth control pills are often prescribed for non-sexual reasons! So this is indeed a women's health issue and not, as some brainless prats have claimed, a matter of too much casual sex. As Ms. Fluke stated in her full testimony:

"This is the message that not requiring coverage of contraception sends. A woman’s reproductive healthcare isn’t a necessity, isn’t a priority. These are not feelings that male fellow students experience. And they’re not burdens that male students must shoulder."

Despite using Ms. Fluke's name in just about every paragraph, in the end, the author's post is less about the Fluke/Limbaugh controversy than it is a letter of condemnation, denouncing anyone with the slightest progressive leaning. His accusations of intolerance and "liberal faith" are made up out of his fevered imagination. The piece is muddled even more by his obvious confusion between Liberals and the small group of activist Atheists when he starts blathering about such things as opposition to nativity scenes on public land. Something that only a minority of Liberals give any thought to. Then there is the Sharia law nonsense that only reinforces the author's warped thinking. Yes, there are Liberals who are a little 'out there'. Yes there are Liberals who will fight to stop nativity scenes from going up in front of the county courthouse. But the majority of Liberals are happy to let others live their lives as they wish, unless it infringes on someone else's rights. As I've stated, the author's thinking is way out of whack when compared to reality, but I wouldn't go out on a limb and declare that ALL Conservatives are this, or ALL Conservatives are that. There's a great line from the movie Gettysburg that I've always liked and it seems to fit well here. "Any man who judges by the group is a pea-wit. You take men one at a time." I'm afraid that's exactly what the author of the American Thinker post is doing, judging 'Liberals', as a group, based on his own highly skewed caricature. Reality, you see, is a bit more complex.

Privilege or Right?

If there's one thing that everyone can agree on it's that healthcare is expensive. Unfortunately that's about all we can agree on. As I listened to the 2009 - 2010 health reform 'debate' and the many ripples that it spawned I kept coming back to the same question: Is healthcare a right or a privilege? This seems to be the real heart of the matter, at least for those not associated with an insurance or pharmaceutical company. That's really what we're debating isn't it?

On the liberal/progressive side are those who see this as a basic rights issue. They believe that access to medical care should be something all Americans can count on, no matter their financial status. On the conservative end of the spectrum it seems to be viewed as more of a luxury and that access should be something you must work for and earn. Now conservatives won't put it that way exactly, but that's really the unspoken truth behind all the careful prose. They want to sound like they care, but in the end they always seem to rely on going to the Emergency Room as the fallback position. As if that's some sort of cost cutting measure, which it most certainly is not. That just pushes the cost around, out of sight, till it's paid for by all of us in one shape or form.

I'm sure it's obvious where I stand in this debate. For me it comes down to a simple question of whether a person's lifespan and basic health should rest solely on the size of their paycheck. Is a subcontracting carpenter less worthy of a long, healthy life simply because his job doesn't afford him health insurance and he may or may not be able to afford a policy on his own? Is a network administrator's life more important because his job usually provides health insurance? And even if you remove the employer subsidized insurance from the equation, a net admin makes more than most carpenters, so he would be much more likely to be able to afford insurance on his own. Put it this way, the CEO of Goldman Sachs will never want for medical care, no matter what ailment he may suffer from. However a single mom working multiple part time jobs to make ends meet will have difficulty paying for treatment of a simple broken bone, much less something like cancer. So is the CEO more deserving of life than the single mom because he has a high paying job with top of the line health insurance?

We in America like to think we have the best medical care the world has to offer. And, in part, that may be true, based on how many of the world's great and powerful come here for treatment. But it's important to remember that medical care and health care are two completely different things. Medical care is the actual skill of the medical staff, the technology they wield and their ability to apply both to cure a condition or manage it for the best quality of life. Medical care is not concerned with cost, only results. Health care on the other hand is all about cost. Health care is exclusively focused on how much medical care you are allowed by your insurance and/or your personal finances. So America may indeed have stellar medical care, but that doesn't mean all Americans are in a position to actually benefit from it.

And that's where the rubber meets the road on this issue, isn't it? Stop blathering about 'death panels' and socialism. Strip away the histrionics, the hyperbole and the euphemisms and admit what this is really all about! Is a person's life only as valuable as his paycheck?

Repeal of Intelligence

There are those for and those against the recently passed healthcare reform bill (HCR). That would be true of any legislation of course, but what makes this time so . . . interesting is that the side that lost is in the midst of a PR campaign that is virtually pointless in real terms. Well two prongs of the same campaign. First is the battle cry, which began before the final House vote when it was clear that HCR would pass, to "Repeal and Replace" the bill. Second, which started shortly after the final vote, that the law was unconstitutional and State Attorneys General would sue the Federal Government to overturn it.

As to the first prong of the Republican response to HCR passage, you have got to be kidding me. It doesn't take a constitutional scholar, in fact most eighth graders are up to the task, to realize that it takes two thirds majorities in BOTH houses of Congress to override the inevitable Presidential veto. Keeping in mind that Republicans don't even have close to a simple majority, much less two thirds. Even if you accept the assumption that Republicans may gain seats in the mid term elections, it would take a truly historic turnover to give them veto proof majorities. How historic? They would need a net gain of 26 seats in the 100 member Senate and 112 seats in the House. If the vote was held today, that would still be almost impossible. By the time November rolls around and HCR is starting to take affect kids will no longer be subject to insurance rejection from "pre-existing conditions", Medicare recipients will have gotten drug benefit refund checks and not one person will have been sentenced to die by a "Death Panel". They may gain some seats, but I don't think they're likely to gain the majority in either House much less the landslides needed to "Repeal & Replace".

Then we have the litigation angle. I think we are now up to 13 states who are filing lawsuits or have filed them against the Federal government. Again I'm no law expert, but seems telling that only 13 Republican Attorneys General are going in on this. Even some lawyers who say they don't support the bill are admitting that there really isn't a legal case for scrapping the law. In fact, when the University of Washington tried to put together a debate between legal experts on the legality of HCR, they couldn't find anyone to champion the unconstitutionality of the bill. And in another wild dust-up in Georgia, we have a State legislature and Governor talking about impeaching the GA Attorney General for not joining the madness. Attorney General Thurbert Baker, after investigating the legality of such a suit at the Governor's request, wrote the Governor to say:

"Based upon my understanding of the current Act, I am unaware of any constitutional infirmities and do not think it would be prudent, legally or fiscally, to pursue such litigation. I must therefore respectfully decline your request." He continued, "In short, this litigation is likely to fail and will consume significant amounts of taxpayers' hard-earned money in the process." (The full letter is available here) 

Speaking of tax payer's money, the Attorney General of Virginia, Kenneth Cuccinelli, actually put out a statement in response to cost concerns for his litigation against the HCR bill:

"The court filing fee for the case of Commonwealth v. Kathleen Sebelius in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia was $350.  There has been no additional cost above this amount, as the litigation is being handled entirely by the attorney general’s staff." (Full press release here)

The $350 is simply the charge for filing the paperwork with the court. Really, that's it? So I take it that the entire AG staff has agreed to do all work on this case on their own time and using none of the AG office's resources? Is that what he's claiming? Because if not, then, forgive my directness but, he's lying. Every moment one of the AG staff spends on this useless piece of litigation is time they are being paid by the VA taxpayers and time they are not working on other business. Every piece of paper used or Kilobyte of data sent while online is using AG resources that are paid for by the VA taxpayers. That adds up to way more that $350, even just for the initial filing.

Now are these guys really too stupid to know that all this is pointless? Of course not. They are well aware that they have a snowball's chance in hell of repealing this law as long as Obama sits in the Oval Office. They are also well aware that litigation is almost certainly a waste of time as well. So why are they wasting time and money on it? Actually I just answered my own question, at least in part. Money. There is a nice bit of anger still frothing out there and every riled up citizen is a potential source of campaign cash. The longer they can keep that outrage humming along, the more cash they can raise. Guess this is their idea of 'fiscal conservatism'. Spend thousands and thousands of dollars of our money so the GOP can make theirs. Guess they have to refill the RNC coffers emptied for 'Office Supplies' from Congressional Liquors and 'Entertainment Expenses' at the Voyeur erotic nightclub in CA. Not to mention the Hawaii based convention. Now that's what I call fiscally responsible!

I think what most amazes me about all of this is that the conservative base doesn't seem to care. They are lied to and they are unfazed. They are callously used to  perpetuate misinformation and disrupt any rational discussion of the issues at hand and they keep smiling and waving signs. Conservative corporations and political action committees hijack their demonstrations and they don't mind. The same politicians who voted consistently to enact huge unpaid for tax cuts during the Bush years are now billing themselves as the last bastions of fiscal restraint, yet their supporters don't care. I can fully understand policy concerns and differences. I can understand frustration at the current Administration. What I can't fathom is how so many are willfully blind to the utter lack of respect they receive from the conservative luminaries they support. The rational conservative base should demand more than what they are getting from people like John Boehner and Michelle Bachman who only exist to perpetuate themselves and their friends, whatever the cost to the nation.

Reaping What Was Sown

Well, it's done. The health reform bill is passed and signed. Even the 'sidecar' bill of tweaks to the Senate bill have been passed, following a brief Congressional two-step. So this long healthcare battle is over, right? Yes and no. The problem, you see, is that you can't spend the better part of a year telling people that America faces "Armageddon" from this "government takeover of healthcare" perpetrated by "Commu-Fasci-Socialists" that want to institute "Death Panels" to make grandma "shovel ready" and then walk away when the vote goes against you. Once you get all that fervor stirred up, it's difficult to shrug and move onto another topic.

The citizenry that the Republicans systematically turned rabid is still frothing and unsated. They now believe that it really was the end of our republic when the bill passed. They completely lost the subtext of the whole debate, which was that the GOP was intent on fighting, by any means necessary, every single initiative the Obama Administration proposed. This included misrepresentations and outright lies about the substance of the reform bills. They don't realize that it was mostly political theater or that the bill actually resembles previous Republican proposals for health reform. So why is this a problem? Well it started with spitting and assorted slurs directed at Democratic members of Congress as House members arrived for the final vote on health reform and continued with even GOP members of Congress yelling out comments in the House chamber, as if it was a middle school assembly.  Then came broken glass at Democratic offices around the country, quickly followed by an Alabama blogger who claimed some measure of credit for a brick thrown through the Democratic Committee's office in Rochester, NY. The brick had a note attached to it that quoted Barry Goldwater's famous statement: "Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice." It's one of those statements that seems patriotic until you think on it, which I'm sure these fringe dwellers did not. I firmly believe that extremism of any kind is bad. Extremism is synonymous with zealotry and fanaticism and are the same words we use for Al-Qaida and other groups like them. Not the comparison I think I'd want to make.

But it's escalated from there. Congressional Democrats, in particular, are getting calls threatening violence and outright death threats. I heard a string of truly nasty messages left at the home of Representative Bart Stupak, appearing to focus on abortion. They called him 'baby killer' and the like, which is truly ironic considering that what finally got him on board with the House vote was an agreement by the President to put out an executive order that stated there would be no Federal funding for abortion. To clarify, there never was language in either the final House or Senate bills that would have allowed Federal funding for abortion, so it was always a manufactured issue. Yet here we have people calling Stupak and railing at him, in pretty graphic and violent terms, about an issue that was never a concern anyway. It illustrates quite well that the people behind these sorts of calls were getting all their info on the reform bill from Glenn Beck and GOP talking points. In another incident, a conservative blogger posted what he thought was a Democratic House member's home address online. Bad form in and of itself. But it turned out to be the address for the Congressman's brother and the family found that someone had cut the gas lines outside their house. Now I know that there are a lot of irrational people around and they will always be around. But having said that, there are individuals and groups who need to take some responsibility for the current state of things. And no, I'm not talking about the Democrats who voted for the bill.

But before you think I’ve gone irrationally partisan, I ask you to think back to the GOP rhetoric over the last year objectively. It was consistently laced with phrases like “government takeover” and “Death Panels”.  They continually used emotionally evocative terms like “socialist”, “communist” and "gulag", among many others. These were just the Republican members of Congress, mind you. Once you step outside the Capital building it went downhill even faster. Signs comparing health reform to Auschwitz and Nazi social policies. We saw images of the President of the United States portrayed as the sociopathic Joker from the last Batman movie and as Hitler. By the time the final vote arrived we had protesters with signs threatening armed violence if they didn’t get their way. Add that to the slurs, spitting and threats and you have a nasty situation. Now you can claim that the protesters were responsible for their own overzealous behavior, but that is only partly true. Republican politicians and pundits share responsibility because they not only encouraged this misguided and arguably irrational behavior but actually joined in throughout the year with many of these protests. Put simply, they took the reasonable concern of a minority segment of the American people and whipped them into a Mob, convinced that the nation’s very soul was at stake. The GOP and the various conservative pundits created this Mob to use against the President and the Democratic majority. At every turn the Becks and the Limbaughs of the conservative movement made wild, inflammatory and, more often than not, fabricated statements to keep the fury running as hot as possible. Even Congressional leaders like House Minority Leader Boehner and Senate Minority Leader McConnell continued the misinformation and emotional rhetoric. The problem comes now that the reform bill is passed and signed into law. Now what? At some point, after milking the movement of as many contributions as possible under the ridiculous banner of "Repeal & Replace", the GOP will want to move on to the next issue. But the Mob will still be there. Still looking for blood. They won't understand that it was all a big political game to their conservative representatives. And they won't understand when those same politicians stop talking about the "evil that was done to the Constitution".

It's all well and good to use public outrage to support your policies, but when you surrender all principle and common sense you create not a group of concerned citizens, but a mob of fanatics. A mob who are, in many cases, protesting about issues that don't even exist. Once you get to that level, the most extreme within that group will be the ones running it and guiding it. That's where you get scary people who cut people's gas lines or call their home to leave obscenity laced diatribes describing the horrible ways they wish this person will suffer and die. That's were you get militia-like groups of fringe dwellers who see nothing wrong with bringing weapons to political gatherings and making veiled threats of overthrowing the government. Even now, House Minority Leader Boehner and his fellow Republicans have only managed to make weak statements saying that violence is not good. No condemnations or calls for calm. In fact, he only mentioned that violence and threats are not appropriate after he made allowances for how upset everyone was about the bill's passage. Really? That's the best he could do? That's about as much of a condemnation as when a man flew his plane into the IRS building in TX, killing one and injuring many, and Representative Steve King babbled about how the IRS is a problem and he could understand how the guy might have been frustrated. Yeah, let's feel sympathy for the disturbed individual who thought flying his plane into an office building and killing someone was a good idea. What do you think Boehner and others will say if one of these individuals injures or kills someone out of, what he considers, justifiable anger? I suspect they'll set land speed records distancing themselves from it, even though they helped set the stage for it. When you are in a position of power and trust, there is a measure of responsibility that goes along with it. These people don't seem to realize that. Look, if you go camping and build a fire, but don't put it out properly and a few thousand acres of forest goes up in flames, you are held responsible. Words may seem benign, but they can be just as dangerous as a spark in a pile of leaves.

Senate Health Reform Bill in Tatters

The Senate health reform bill has now reached the point, after weeks of debate and compromise, where even some of the biggest supporters of health reform are now calling for it to be scrapped in favor of trying to create something under the less comprehensive Reconciliation process. A few nights ago Howard Dean, a long time reform proponent, finally threw in the towel on support of the Senate Bill, saying that continued attempts to appease conservatives have striped the bill of most of its benefits leaving mostly gifts to the health insurance industry it was meant to reform. This can be blamed on many. There are the Republicans who never even pretended to care about health reform of any kind, no matter who proposed it or what it involved. Add in the Conservative Democrats who do nothing but give speeches and bask in their moment of notoriety and power who are seemingly determined to protect insurance companies against the slightest check to their power. And don't forget the far right conservatives who have fought this every step of the way with absurd slogans about the Government between you and your doctor, completely ignoring that we've had profit driven insurance companies in this exact role all along. Does anyone really think a company beholden to investors and Wall Street is more compassionate? Do you really think Cigna's CEO is going to lose any sleep over your lack of health coverage as long as he gets his million dollars in bonus money this year?

Last night on Countdown, Keith Olbermann gave an editorial about the current health reform bill being considered in the Senate. It was somber, direct and unfortunately accurate. I highly encourage you to read the text and/or watch the video:  Olbermann: Ruined Senate Bill Unsupportable

Why We Must Fix Healthcare

I just read a first hand account of a recent free clinic, not in some third world country, but in New Orleans, LA. Those who took advantage of this opportunity were not vagrants or welfare leaches. The majority of them were actually employed. Though not in a job that provided full benefits.

I ask you to read this for a perspective on health reform:  Health Reform's Human Stories

A Sign Too Far

Yesterday, in an event sponsored by Representative Michele Bachmann (Republican, MN), hundreds of people came out to protest the current health reform bill. Whether I agree with them or not, it's certainly their right to protest. But, at least in my eyes, they completely invalidated their point when they started making comparisons that were so over the top as to be astonishing.

First we have the, now standard, signs calling Obama a Marxist. Which is amusing since the same groups regularly use signs of Obama as Hitler. It may come as a surprise to some of these individuals, but Hitler was a Fascist and was directly opposed to the Marxist/Communist movement. So, for anyone who's ever watched the History Channel, or just Googled the terms in question, these comparisons come off as what they truly are; a number of ignorant people who grab political terms out of thin air without regard to what any of them actually mean. As long as it evokes an emotional response, that's all they care about. Even if that response is based on misinformation. The saddest thing to me is that it actually works sometimes. Do any of these people ever stop and actually, you know . . . think? Has the intelligence level of the country really dropped this low?

But the one that really got me was this one. A large sign with the title "National Socialist Healthcare. Dachau, Germany 1945" over a picture of the bodies of concentration camp victims, piled like cord wood. Really? Does this make sense to ANYONE?! I'm not sure what angers me most about this. Is it the fact that the inference is exaggeration on a galactic scale? Or is it that they are taking a truly horrific piece of human suffering and death and reducing it to a disagreement on healthcare reform? It is insulting and demeaning to all those who died in these camps. It is a testament to the moral bankruptcy of those who created and cheered this sign. And it highlights a complete lack of understanding of the real world. I am at a loss to understand how anyone could create such a shameful and disrespectful image. Not only does it sicken me that some people actually think this is a legitimate comparison, but it seems to confirm that these people are not intelligent enough to even be allowed in the discussion of real issues. This may be an overreaction, but how can I think otherwise, considering the apparent ignorance involved?

What is the matter with people? It's one thing to want attention for their side of the argument. But when the means they choose are so ridiculously outrageous, how can anyone take them seriously? How can I, or anyone else, engage these people in dialog? There's no common ground, as they have started the argument from a point of lunacy. I can't help but conclude that they don't even care what others think anyway. This sort of protest comes off, not as a demand to have their input considered, but as a demand that you just do what they say. Period. That's not a discussion, that's the kind of overbearing, rule by fiat that they accuse the current administration of. Am I the only one who sees the irony here?

Open Letter to the President

Dear Mr. President,

I realize that you want to find a solution to the Healthcare issue that includes input from all parties. You want to find a consensus. I respect that. I respect your desire to create true, bipartisan legislation. It's a noble idea and speaks well of your character. Particularly the tenacity you've shown in sticking to it. But there are times when we have to accept that bipartisanship will not work. We have spent months now, trying to engage in a dialog. To find middle ground. And it's been worthless. A dialog only works when both sides are willing to sit down and work for a solution. 

Let's be honest, the Republicans never even walked in the room. Instead of approaching the discussion with an open mind, they have come with a political agenda. That agenda is, first and foremost, to stop you from passing anything of substance. Period. Exclamation point. Think about it. They gain absolutely nothing from this Administration succeeding. Even to the smallest degree. Yet they have everything to gain from even the tiniest failure. Second, as the party that has always championed the corporate right to do virtually anything that isn't actually illegal, they don't want to see the, extremely powerful, insurance companies threatened in any way. As soon as you set healthcare reform up as a major Administration agenda item, you painted a target on it. It doesn't matter what the Bill, if one is ever actually produced, says. A large percentage of Republicans will oppose it. Not because of what some obscure provision states, but because 'President Obama' supports it. The massive losses the Republican's sustained in the last election has backed them into a corner. And they are fighting, not for or against a particular bill, but simply for survival. No Republican congressperson will ever be re-elected by touting a vote in support of a 'Democratic' Healthcare plan. This is an ugly truth, but it is a truth nonetheless. And one you must face.

Then we have the Democrats. Your own party. And I'm sure you entered office with every expectation of having their support. This is understandable. You won solidly. This would indicate that you won, not just the Democratic affiliates, but also a significant percentage of moderates and even some of the more liberal Republicans. Basically, you came into office with the full support of both the Left and the Center. So you certainly should have expected predominantly positive support from the majority of these groups. But you don't have it, do you? That's because the Democrats have always been a fractious lot. They stand together when they must, to survive. But when the crisis is over, they fly off in every direction like a flock of pigeons. Only to then cluster nervously in tiny, discordant factions. With Democrats in 'control' of Congress, it's sad that it's the Republicans who are in control of the Healthcare debate. And have been from the start. Your party has, in it's euphoria over their victory last November, sabotaged any benefit that might have been gained from it. They are like an army that solidly defeats an opponent, then gets so drunk in celebration that they allow the opposition to capture them all the next morning. The Democrats won a battle during the last election, but if they don't stop celebrating soon, they'll ensure their loss in the next one.

This is why you find yourself where you are today. You started, during the campaign, with some good ideas for healthcare reform. Ideas that obviously connected with the masses, based on your solid win in the election. But it's all coming apart, slowly, but surely, isn't it? Day by day you are having to drop item after item. Not in a compromise to find a middle ground. Not due to logical discussions of what can really work or make a difference. No. You are losing them, one by one, as the plan is pecked to death by sound bites, lunatics and lies. And I can feel your frustration, even some 500 miles from DC. 

But you, and those Democrats that support you, have to take a significant share of the blame. You must take a deep breath, look in the mirror and see your enemy. With all due respect, Mr. President, you've dropped the ball on this for one simple reason. Overestimation. You overestimated the American public's ability to listen to intellect over emotion. You overestimated their ability to withstand smoke & mirror parlor tricks and to shrug off fun house level scare tactics. You overestimated the ability of your own party to stand together and the willingness of the Republicans to set aside political considerations and deal in good faith.  It is past time that you looked yourself in the eye, Mr. President, and accepted that you made a mistake. 

Once you come to terms with this, it's time to do what you should have done from the beginning. Step up to the microphone and explain your proposal. Not in the context of a speech to a joint session of Congress. That is virtually pointless, sad as it is to admit. As proven by your Republican heckler, the Republicans in Congress are not your allies. They spent the whole speech 'Tweeting' their disagreement to anyone who would listen. And the Democrats are so lost to their individual schemes and alliances as to be useless in building anything approaching a solid front.  What you have to do and what you should have done from the beginning is to take control of the debate! I respect your desire for consensus. But it's not Congress that you need to convince. They aren't listening anymore anyway. You have to convince America! You have to fight the ignorance and lies with Fact. Too long you have allowed your opponents to control the debate, by carefully crafted sound bites and sweet smelling bullshit. Speeches, inspirational  or not, that tout the vague outlines of your plan will never be able to compete with shouted phrases like, 'Death Panel" and "The government between you and your doctor." Yes, they are gross distortions at best, but if they are broadcast with enough volume and vehemence they will drown out all the logic and reason in the world. 

What a Difference Eight Months Makes

It's amazing how things have changed since the last Presidential election. And I'm not talking about health care reform or financial policy. I'm talking about politics, pure and simple. Repeatedly over the last 8 months I have watched as conservatives have made hair-pin changes of heart that would give any driver whiplash. Not in their core political beliefs, but in what is acceptable and what isn't when it comes to the President. 

Last night a news story caught my eye as I skimmed across Yahoo's front page. It was about a planned speech by President Obama, directed at students. According to Obama, in an interview last month with an 11 year old student reporter:

"I'm going to be making a big speech to young people all across the country about the importance of education; about the importance of staying in school; how we want to improve our education system and why it’s so important for the country. So I hope everybody tunes in."

I'm thinking that it sounds like an interesting idea. An authority figure like the President talking directly to kids. Treating them like real people to reinforce the importance of education for them and for the country. I'd say it's a win-win idea. But oddly, the conservatives seem to see it as some liberal, 'activist' attempt to mind control our youth. Below is an excerpt from a statement by Jim Greer, the chairman of the Republican Party of Florida. Though he's far from the only person to ooze from the woodwork with words of lunacy, his press release is truly impressive.

"The address scheduled for September 8, 2009, does not allow for healthy debate on the President's agenda, but rather obligates the youngest children in our public school system to agree with our President's initiatives or be ostracized by their teachers and classmates." 

"President Obama has turned to American's children to spread his liberal lies, indoctrinating American's youngest children before they have a chance to decide for themselves." 

You can find the full press release here and it would be funny if the guy wasn't serious: 

http://www.rpof.org/article.php?id=754 

There are so many things wrong with this single Press Release that I have difficulty deciding where to start. Since when does listening to a speech obligate you to agree with the speaker? Is he claiming that kids are so docile and easily lead that they'll believe anything they are told by an authority figure? If it was that easy, then parents wouldn't have any problem at all with keeping their kids in line. In the 'Real World' kids are pretty skeptical when adults tell them things. They're also a lot smarter than Mr. Greer apparently gives them credit. And what is this babble about spreading liberal lies?! I keep forgetting that if you don't agree with a policy then it's obviously a 'Lie'. Sounds so much more dastardly that way. I saw nothing in the description of the speech that indicated Obama was going to try and sell health care reform or financial bailout proposals. You know why? Because it would make no sense to preach these things to students. They aren't the ones who will decide these issues. Mr. Greer is either an idiot or is desperate to get his name onto the national stage as a 'Conservative Bastion' for future political benefit. Since he's gotten this far in his career, I'm going to give him the benefit of the doubt and assume it's just crass self promotion.

What really gets under my skin about this whole thing? If this had happened 12 mos ago, and it was G.W. Bush doing the speechifyin', these same people would be beside themselves with praise about what a 'historic' occasion this is and how this shows the President reaching out to kids and speaking to them with respect. But the Republican party is incapable of passing up a chance to turn anything Obama says or does into some Democratic plot. As if the Democratic Party was organized and unified enough to manage such a thing!

It's just another example of how quickly what was praise worthy when their man was in power suddenly becomes despicable when the political tide changes. The hypocrisy I've seen on display from conservatives since January is truly awe inspiring. Many, especially conservatives, like to look down on The Daily Show as just fake news. But what they really hate about the program is that it projects their hypocrisy and petty concerns on the wall for all to see. They can't stand to have their own words brought back to haunt them. That's what The Daily Show excels at. Digging up the week, month or year old tape that clearly shows how this person has perjured themselves over and over in the public arena. It's not the fake segments that people love the most. It's the real video clips that clearly display how shallow, arrogant and condescending so many of our elected leaders are. 

Their recent election losses have backed the Republicans into a political corner and they are biting, scratching and yowling at anything they perceive as a threat. And just like a cornered animal, doesn't matter if the threat is real or not, anything that isn't 'them' is treated as an enemy. Unfortunately, many Americans who support the Republican party seem incapable or unwilling to parse through the drek. If it comes from 'their' party, then it must be true. Doesn't matter if it's coherent or logical. All that matters is if it's officially sanctioned by their party. It's sad, but unfortunately true.

Note:
The video of the President's speech to Students
Text of speech to Students

Deafening Ignorance

I'm a big fan of the First Amendment. Free speech is certainly one of our core values. So I am all for other viewpoints. Doesn't matter if I agree or not. If someone has a thoughtful comment to make, I am open to listening to it. Note the operative word there. Thoughtful. That's something I don't hear a lot of lately. Instead I hear a lot of yelling and screeching that contains no substance whatsoever.

This trend has gone ballistic over the last eight months. Take the Town Hall meetings. Might as well just stop bothering, from what I've seen. We have people bringing weapons to them, just to show everyone that they are legally allowed to do so. As if a Town Hall meeting on health reform is going to magically repeal the Second Amendment when they aren't looking. Then, it's not unusual to see those same individuals stand up and scream nonsense at the speakers about "wanting their country back" and "I'm scared of Obama." So in one fell swoop they have not only shown that they are too ignorant to actually discuss the issues, but may also be too unstable to be carrying around firearms.

I know that I'm no expert on health care reform, but I also know that getting all your info from a commercial, sponsored by one side of the debate is stupid. This also goes for relying solely on the opinion of one of the popular 'Pundits'. Most of these loud mouthed, know-it-alls, really know very little. If you're relying on Rush Limbaugh or Glenn Beck for your unbiased information about what healthcare reform does and does not address, then I dearly hope that you don't operate any heavy machinery. Doesn't matter if you agree with his general political outlook. That doesn't make him an expert. The only thing these individuals or those like them, on either side of the isle, are 'experts' at is their own, narrow opinion. And their 'opinion' is generally that more people should be listening to them.

And this goes for both sides of the debate. I hear a whole lot of talking points and catchy statements, but very little intelligent discussion. These are complicated issues that cannot be explained by some ex-Governor's offhand Facebook posts. I know it's easier to let other people think for you, but if you are going to get involved in the discussion, then do us all the courtesy of not pretending you know more than you do. There is nothing wrong with saying, 'Hey, what exactly does that term mean? How exactly are you proposing this be put into effect." And so on. But screaming, 'Obama scares me!' at the top of your lungs? I don't want to hear it. Not because I'm a devout Obama worshiper, but because it's the kind of thing I'd expect to hear from a 4th grader. You are an adult and should be able to control yourself enough to put a coherent thought together without resorting to grade school antics. Have some self respect, please.

And another thing. For the love of all that's good in the world, stop comparing everyone you don't like to Adolph Hitler!!!! It's enough to make my temples throb. First off, it is almost always a stupid and inappropriate comparison. Secondly, it makes you look and sound like an idiot. Same with the posters festooned with the iconic little black mustache. What this actually shows, is that you are too ignorant of history to do more than grab one of the only 'bad' historical figures you've ever heard of. Get the idea that this bothers me? Oh yes! It drives me insane. First you call Obama a Socialist, then you say he's Hitler-like or that the health reform reminds you of Nazi programs in the '30's. I don't think I'm wrong when I say that most of those who are throwing around these statements have little understanding of the terms, beyond what some pundit told them. Does anyone else watch the History Channel or read books? If you don't know the truth, don't scream it at the top of your lungs. It makes you look ignorant and does nothing to advance your agenda. Assuming you actually have one.

Look, if you have a grievance or concern, please step up and make it. But don't squander your opportunity, and everyone else's, by these infantile antics. You will sway nobody with outbursts like that. I'm sure it's very good for your ego to have a few other nut-jobs join in with your chant, but shouldn't this be more important than that?

Though, sadly, maybe that's all these individuals want. To stop any discussion on the subject. They see their narrow little world and damned if they'll let anyone change it, even to help the nation as a whole. It's that fear of change that opponents always play on. If they scare people enough with lies and half truths, then there's no need to do anything so silly as to actually discuss it. And therein lies the big truth of these campaigns. It's easier just to yell 'Fire' in a crowded theater than it is to explain to the patrons the reasons why exiting the theater might be beneficial to them. And American's respond to nothing so eagerly as 'Fear'.