Health care debate gets buried by hyperbole

This blog was inspired by seeing this billboard posted on facebook:



One of the comments underneath the facebook posting of that billboard reads "I have my gun ready."   This is ridiculous!  Methinks the rhetoric and hyperbole have gone too far.  I don't remember the reaction being this strong in 2003 when Bush involved us in an (IMHO) unnecessary war that killed thousands of Americans. Other examples just from this morning's read of the newspaper:

• several states threatening lawsuit over the 'unfunded mandates' of the health care law (nevermind that the charges to states budgets don't kick in until 2017 and then only a small percentage)
• protesters hurling racial and anti-gay epithets at Congressmen on Sunday (the irony being that John Lewis was one of the targets ... kind of takes you back to the '60s, doesn't it?)
• Sarah Palin saying "Don't retreat, instead RELOAD"
• all the comparisons of Obama to Hitler and Stalin

It's perfectly fine for people to protest our government and it is our right to vote against incumbents that we don't like.  But when people resort to violent rhetoric (and actions) a line has been crossed.   I am actually starting to feel nervous that we are headed for a violent split in this country.  Technologies such as twitter and facebook have helped to amp up the volume.  Our divisions seem to be deepening, and hardening and we are forgetting the many things that unite us.  Politicians on both sides contribute to this by demonizing their colleagues in the other party and by drawing comparisons to socialism, totalitarianism, even fascism!  Go and read up on those ideologies and you will see that nothing that we are doing today remotely approaches those forms of government.  Yes, the Obama administration believes that government has a role to play in the protection of the people; reasonable people can disagree with that and prefer to let the free market sort things out.   That's what elections are for.  My point is that we should engage in a reasonable debate over the role we want government to play.   Let's do that and drop the hyperbole.

As to the health care law, I have a couple of points I want to make, with regard to some of the reactions I have heard:

• People are criticizing Congress for going against the wishes of their constituents.  They forget that Bush was praised for not being a slave to the polls.  They also forget that in 2006, Bush ignored a wide majority of the American public and the recommendations of his own blue ribbon, bipartisan panel, and he escalated the war in Iraq by going forward with the surge.  Guess what - that worked out pretty well!  Sometimes a politician has to do what he or she thinks is right even if public opinion is opposed.
• The issue of the constitutionality of the individual mandate is very interesting.   Supporters cite the commerce clause as justification.  I read one blog that said that, while the current interpretation of the commerce clause probably exceeds the original intent of the framers, several Supreme Court decisions in the mid 20th Century expanded the modern definition of the clause to cover a wide range of legislation.  Other examples of individual mandates include Social Security and Medicare taxes, and income taxes in general.  So there is precedent, and the likelihood of the issue even getting to the Supreme Court is remote.  Most scholars that I have read believe that, despite the current conservative leaning makeup of the Court, if it did reach that far they would uphold the law as written.  As recently as 2005, Justice Scalia wrote "noneconomic local activity" can come under federal regulation if it is "a necessary part of a more general regulation of interstate commerce." 
• The other constitutionality argument being made by several states is that the government is imposing an unfunded mandate on the states by expanding Medicaid.  Here, the "supremacy clause"(Article 6) states that "the laws of the United States ... shall be the supreme Law of the Land".
• The health care law is not a "socialist" law.  A single payer system would be an example of a socialist policy.  Even with the "public option" this type of legislation was never part of Obama's recommendations.  The law Obama signed on Tuesday keeps private insurers in place, and is, in fact, a very moderate change in policy.  Yes it will cost more, and there are legitimate concerns about what it will do to the deficit.  However, it is not socialist.

OK, I've had my rant.  Feel free to comment / rebut as you see fit!

Random musings from sick bay

I'm not really much of a blogger, given that this is my first (attempt) at a blog since mid November.  I've always thought of myself as having some writing talent, but my life is (thankfully) pretty boring and there's just not that much inspiration.

So what prompted this blog?  Only the most boring weekend I've had in years (which is not in and of itself a bad thing, mind you!).  I was supposed to go to Brunswick with Kathy on Friday to see the grandkids but my 10 day old cold turned into a sinus infection on Thursday night.  With the way I was coughing, Kathy (rightfully) declared that I had no business hanging around a 1 year old (or a 6 and 4 year old for that matter!).  So she went on to Brunswick and I went to the doctor and got some antibiotics.

I'm always saying I wish I had more time to read.  So here I am with 3 days stretched out in front of me with no obligations, and what do I do ... I rent 3 movies!  My excuse was that I didn't have the mental energy to focus on a book (I did catch up on Time Magazines!).  So I rented 3 pretty mindless comedies, all of which were entertaining enough to keep my mind off how badly I felt.  What were the movies, you ask?  Well, I'm almost embarrassed to say, but here goes ... "The Simpsons" (I have never watched the TV show and I am always missing character references); "Nick and Norah's Infinite Playlist" (the music was pretty good and Michael Cera and Kat Dennings were good together) and Woody Allen's "Whatever Works".  That was the best one, but I have always enjoyed his movies (even while not approving of his life choices!).  I don't usually like Larry David, but he was softened by Evan Rachel Wood, one of my favorite actresses, who was barely recognizable in this movie.

I did do some chores, caught up on laundry, read my Disciple, and kept the kitchen cleaned up!  One strange thing I did was re-read the entire US Constitution and Declaration of Independence!  Why would I do that?  Someone at church made a comment the other day about this being a "Christian nation".  Depending on what you mean by that, that can be true or not true.  But it prompted me to do a little research about Jefferson and Madison, and while doing so, I decided to go straight to the source.  It reminded me that too often we all form our opinions based on other people's opinions without making any effort to focus on the source, whether that be a book or an essay or a speech or whatever.    With the internet we often have the opportunity to see for ourselves but instead we let talking heads tell us what to think.

OK, that's my philosophical comment for this blog.  Over and out!

Sex, Religion and Politics

Sex, religion and politics. These have always been the 3 things that you don't discuss in polite company. I am pretty good about staying away from talking about sex; however I am not as successful at staying away from the other 2. I have never been afraid to share my Christian faith, as I feel it is my obligation to talk about the impact that Jesus Christ has had on my life. Regarding politics, I have always enjoyed a good give and take with someone who approaches things differently than I do.

That kind of person is not hard for me to find! I consider myself to be slightly left of center on the political spectrum (of course, we ALL think we're moderates!). Between my friends at church and my co-workers at EMC, most of the folks I see every day are conservatives. I would consider many of them to be very right of center, but then again they probably see me as a "tax-hiking, government-expanding, latte-drinking, sushi-eating, volvo-driving, New York Times-reading, body-piercing, Hollywood-loving left-wing" fanatic! In fact, I do not drink lattes or eat sushi and I do not have any body piercings!

Since I have so many friends who are conservative, I can attest to the fact that there are good folks on both ends of the spectrum. Being a Democrat does not mean that you are Godless and being Republican does not mean you are heartless! Through personal experience I know that Republicans can be compassionate and service oriented and Democrats can be spiritual and place a strong importance on personal responsibility.

The problem is that these political discussions can sometimes get personal. I try to remain "above the fray" but I can start to feel defensive when I feel that I am being personally criticized for my beliefs. This has happened to me more often in the past year than ever before. My conservative friends were energized by the election last year, particularly after Palin was named McCain's Veep choice (which was also the precise moment I made my decision to support Obama). They remain fired up by the greatly expanded government intervention in society (I think we can all agree that government is more intrusive than ever, the disagreement comes when we discuss whether this intervention is necessary to turn around the economy and whether it will be temporary or permanent). This has led to an increase in the number and intensity of discussions.

It doesn't help that there is no longer one version of the truth. We can no longer even agree on the same set of facts! There are so many media and internet outlets available that you can choose to listen only to people with the same beliefs as you. I think it's important that we try to get both sides of issues that we care about. I get most of my news from NPR, Time Magazine, AJC and CNN, which conservative friends think are all liberal mouthpieces. I would agree that many of the reporters for those outlets probably tend to be left leaning, but I also believe that they all make sincere efforts to represent both sides and they all employ and feature very conservative columnists / talking heads. I intentionally seek out and read conservative columnists like George Will, Charles Krauthammer and David Brooks, specifically to get a different perspective. I happen to be a big fan of Brooks; we often disagree, but I appreciate his thoughtful approach to most issues and he does not see Democrats as evil people conspiring to take over the world!

So the dilemma for me is whether to continue to participate in political discussions. I have felt somewhat 'ganged up on' for the past year since I am so badly outnumbered in my daily interactions. I think that is wearing me out, in addition to having had several discussions recently that turned personal. At various times I have sworn off discussing politics, at work, at church, in email or on facebook! That usually lasts a week or two until some big issue (like health care reform) rolls around or someone else initiates the discussion (I truly believe that I am one of the very few 'liberals' that many of my friends know and they often look at me like I have 2 heads!)

I think I am probably incapable of shutting down that part of my life. But I think it's time to take a break. I am going to do my best to avoid talking politics for some (undefined) period of time. Of course I will remain interested (I am a political junkie) and will continue to read, but I promise that from now on I will only send politically tinged emails to like minded friends.

What have your experiences been? Have you noticed an increase in the emotional content of political discussions?