Who Lit The Fire Under the Right-Wing 'Populists' Against Health-Care Reform?

Wow, this is really terrifying. Conservatives have organizations where they engage in -- brace yourself -- politics! Heaven forfend!

LV

My guess is that if you ran the photos of their rallies through some face recognition software, you'd identify the same "grass-roots" people who stormed the courthouse in Florida to prevent vote recounts in 2000. Wonder what kind of salaries can be afforded for professional demonstrators?

Except that they can't make their case, so they disrupt.

contradiction: We're told the health care system is untenable

It can't be a "mob" and "organized" at the same time. So what is it?

I guess only liberals are allowed to have organized protest as long as it opposes conservatives in office.

By the way, where are the anti-war protest? Where is the daily body count on the news?

What's dishonest about this commentary is that adopts the DNC tactic of attempting to dismiss anyone who protests the Democrats' health care reform as essentially a tool of some scary "far-right" interest. Yes, I'm sure there are a handful of protestors who got their marching orders directly from Koch industries or some manufactured citizens "grassroots" effort. These same tactics exist on the "far-left". However, there are also "regular" people who are genuinely concerned about the direction health care reform appears to be taking. I know it's a lot easier to believe that anyone with a different worldview than yours must be a tool of a nefarious evil-doer somewhere, but the world is a lot more complicated.

One can also judge the seriousness of an argument by the number of times guilt by association is used as a tactic (note the entire paragraph devoted to telling people how bad Ralph Reed is, but then the lack of a single bit of evidence that he's involved in this health care debate except that a former associate of his is running AFP. So what exactly does Ralph Reed have to do with any of this? Maybe something, but there's no evidence of it provided.) and the number of times scary phrases like "far-right" and "right-wing" are used. Perhaps if you used "far-far-far right" then people will be even more scared. Boo!

Oh, it can be both, believe me. All you need to do is tell a group of people where a discussion is taking place and, almost on cue, they know how to disrupt things. That's their only goal, to overwhelm the system so that no discussion in held.

Except that this is pretty much the same thing that happened when Bill Clinton tried to get some health care reform. In that case editors of the Weekly Standard sent faxes to other organizations, which began the groundswell of opposition -- because, frankly, they didn't want Clinton to get any credit for change. Look at the big picture; this is always they way the right does things.

If the president had his way there would be nothing to disrupt. The whole deal would have been passed without a chance for public debate of any kind. The democrats would be very happy now if their opponents couldn't say anything - the president himself said as much.

The democrats have jumped the shark on this one. They fail to understand very the real fear and anger of those protesting their plans. So what do they do in response, they vilify the protesters. This kind of "stupidly" behavior by those in power just leads to more fear and anger.

Awesome post! You called it right on the money. I would add that this entire Sojourners' website is filled with examples of "bearing false witness against thy neighbor." They are leftists hiding behind religion in the most condescending way. Their contempt for Christians is blatant. They are carrying water for the Obama Administration.

The whole deal would have been passed without a chance for public debate of any kind. The democrats would be very happy now if their opponents couldn't say anything - the president himself said as much.

Well, when you consider that the opposition has consistently refused even to negotiate on anything -- and has been completely honest about that it had no interest in dong so -- you can somewhat understand. Keep in mind that Obama is probably going to use this episode in the future as to the intransigence of the Republican Party and the conservative movement that runs it. Bill Clinton set a trap for the GOP in 1995 during the budget battle; Obama may be doing the same.

They fail to understand the very real fear and anger of those protesting their plans. So what do they do in response, they vilify the protesters.

On the contrary -- that's all they have, fear and anger. Thing is, they have no alternate plan; if they did their leaders would have sat down with Obama and worked something out.

The Right is now the counter culture.

For 50 years the left has protested, disrupted, and done whatever it could to "speak truth to power". The left was the "voice of the people" defying the corrupt powers of the "The Man" and we have much to be grateful to them for doing it.

Now the left is "The Man." They control the universities, main stream news, and now the government. However, If they continue to try to win their ideological arguments through power then they will be met by same kind of forces that brought them to power.

The only choice the Right will have is to protest, disrupt, and do whatever it can to speak truth to power.

What truth are they speaking?

1. The administration has no feasible plan for paying for it. It could very well bankrupt the country. According to the CBO it will significantly raise the growing debt and deficit and still not cover every one.

2. They wanted to pass legislation before August barely giving Congress time to debate it themselves let alone let the public give comment. This is opposite of the promise for more openness and transparency and smacks of a power grabbing.

3. The plan is based on a European socialist model that has serious flaws.

4. The oppositions reflect the opinions expressed by all the polls. Calling the opposition nazi's, racists, and unpatriotic, is the kind of thing you would expect from the Nixon administration not Obama. What happened to Hope and Change? People who are dismissed will disrupt.

5. Calling the protests "astroturfing" and "organized" is just plain hypocritical.

6. The very people who pass the bill have chosen not to live under it

It's funny - those are fine concerns to have, but those aren't the ones I'm hearing from people who oppose this plan and the protesters.

Go to one of the protest and ask them yourself instead of getting your news from MSNBC.

I admit there are some folks there with misinformation and bad behavior but if you survey them will find they are reasonable people with legitimate fears.

Name the falsehood you have heard and I can tell you where or why they are saying them.

1. is wrong.

2. is wrong.

3. The plan is not based on a European socialist model (I only wish it were because their flaws pale in comparison to ours).

4. I would like to see any comment by the President or on any government website where the opposition was called "Nazis, racists or unpatriotic". Can you provide a direct link to a transcript, interview or website by Obama or someone in his cabinet or public relationships office speaking on his behalf?

5. Maybe so, but I haven't seen a quote from any member of the administration saying this.

6. is wrong. The Congress and President are covered by a government plan.

7. Physicians are already quitting because of regulation and paperwork from the private bureaucracy: HMOs and insurance.

8. The current system is already a bureaucratic nightmare. The bureaucracy is private, but still a nightmare. Public systems in other countries are much much much more efficient.

Sorry, daylight, but your #3 reveals how little you've cared to inform yourself of the details. There is NO SINGLE-PAYER OPTION on the table. More's the pity, say I.

Not sure if your answers fully address the question.

1. Yes, the CBO reports a $239 billion deficit over a 10-yr plan as calculated from the original funding proposal. This does not necessarily mean there is "no feasible plan for paying for it", although it highlights a need that must be addressed (and has to an extent in the most recent modification).

2. I can agree with the need for additional time for debate and further proposals. Nonetheless, Obama's explanation for setting an initial timetable in order to precipitate action seems reasonable. We all work in places that set deadlines and even "stretch goals".

3. Which European socialist model in particular? There's considerable debate about the true inefficiencies of UK and Canadian healthcare (see recent reporting from NPR), and Germany has quite an outstanding model.

4. It may be a stretch to assume that the answers given in polls (without specifics to the answer options and questions) are in "full agreement" with the shouting down of the meetings. I agree, however, that reciprocal name-calling is absurd.

5. I get this point. Both sides manufacture their own "grassroots" protests using PR firms which, if not reported, is a bit disingenuous.

6. The plan under the bill isn't really the same as that which is proposed. Also, the purpose is not to supplant a person's choice for other insurance, but to provide an affordable option to others who may not have access. It is likely that this will shift many over to the public plan due to the potential economic incentive, but this is a residual, albeit highly probable, effect.

7. The paperwork that most Canadian and German doctors deal with is far less than what US doctors currently deal with. Filing for payment won't really be different. Some physicians main concerns are really about the discounting of the service (e.g., MediCare type payments) than anything else.

8. Merely an assertion. Not seen in Germany. Legal issues in the US (e.g., malpractice insurance/suits) have already increased bureaucracy, along with multiple referrals already required by private insurers.

"Thy Word is truth", "I am.... the Truth"
The distance between these 8 items and the words of Jesus is significant.
If the right is going to speak "truth to power", they are going to need to get aquainted with the Author and His words/Word.

"I would like to see any comment by the President or on any government website where the opposition was called "Nazis, racists or unpatriotic"

Pelosi accused protesters of bringing Swastikas, and Krugman wrote a strange op-ed about how racism was motivating opposition to Obama's healthcare plan in which he failed to defend his thesis.

S.F. Chronicle has the first story, and the Krugman piece appeared in NYT, obviously. Pelosi used the Swastika reference to support her claim that the response was an "astroturf" campaign, which is odd.

What she is talking about, and what, I suppose, makes her statements nominally uncrazy, is that some protesters brought signs that said "no fascism" with a Swastika crossed out. That's a very different thing.

"The current system is already a bureaucratic nightmare. "

An argument I would love to hear from the president, Pelosi, Sojo, or any Democrat willing to defend this reform plan on the merits.

The problem is that you are introducing government as a solution to bureaucracy. That's a tough sell.

What plan would you propose? Or are you happy with the way things are?

I am happy with my insurance. but the question is how do we help those who don't have insurance? I do believe reform is needed.

But, I believe in marketplace solutions (liberty) with some government oversight (accountability). There are some things only the Feds can help us achieve.

1. Tort Reform - we must stop the casino malpractice suits. According to Pacific Research Institute, defensive medicine wastes more than $200 billion a year. But, if the Republicans are controlled by the Insurance industry, Democrats are control by lawyers. So this too will be difficult.

2. Real Health Insurance Reform. There is no logical reason why employers are responsible for health insurance. It makes people stay in jobs they hate...etc.

Tax the employer provided health care benefits and return the money to the employee with a government check to buy his own medical insurance just as he buys any other type of insurance (freedom to have coverage base on need). The health care benefit exemption is the largest tax break in the entire U.S. budget costing the government a quarter-trillion dollars annually.

3. Eliminate the prohibition on buying personal health insurance across state lines. This competition breaks up monopolies and helps drive down cost.

Thanks for asking.

These are the sorts of free-market proposals we need to hear. Unfortunately, they are being drowned out by the big-government Hannity/Limbaugh/Beck neo-cons who aren't proposing anything. All they are doing is shouting and screaming.