The New Town Hall Reality: Why Did Congressman Baron Hill (D-IN) Blow Up?

Tall, tanned, white-haired, U.S. Congressional Representative Baron Hill (D-IN) at his August 31, 2009 town hall meeting at Indiana University Southeast (IUS), New Albany, said to the crowd, "I would rather go to the dentist than be here."

"At least he's telling the truth on that score," muttered a man in the back.

Thanks to the clear cool evening, when the crowd overflowed the hall in New Albany, it could spread outside onto the back patio where people watched Hill through a green glass wall, near a loudspeaker and extra microphone. No AK-47s and strapped-down handguns, as had been seen outside some town meetings farther west, were in the Indiana meeting. People were polite and even relaxed enough to chuckle whenever someone spoke with dry Indiana wit. Yet Hill silenced would-be hecklers by saying "Let me answer that before you interrupt, please!" "Respect her! She has a right to express her opinion!" and "I would prefer that we not turn this into the Jerry Springer Show!" as citizens stepped up to the mikes or as the crowd responded to the questioners and then to Hill's answers by murmuring, laughing, quietly hissing or applauding.

Their anger and anguish simmered and spit. So apparently did his.

Four days later, at a meeting in Indiana University Bloomington (IUB), farther north in Indiana, Hill grabbed headlines by erupting at a young student journalist -- there to talk about the recent death of her mother and her own commitment to health care reform. Congress was soon buzzing with it. Congressman John Yarmuth (D-KY) from across the river in Louisville, Kentucky recounted, "Baron Hill may have lost his job that night. He had a town hall in Bloomington and apparently banned recorders. When a 17-year-old girl asked why, he kind of went ballistic on her and said 'I set the rules and no one tells me how to run my office!'"

It also hit cable and YouTube.

There are clues in the first, New Albany, town hall meeting about what went wrong later in Bloomington. It is a snapshot of a deeply aroused nation, watching its representatives like hawks now, of a vibrant democracy returning and of representatives who are perhaps not used to constituents demanding transparency, records and accountability.

Democrat Hill is a conservative from a conservative area. (By no means all Democrats are progressives.) Elected to Congress before, an old hand, the returning Hill had swiftly hooked up with the Blue Dog Coalition, 52 Democrats who are a factor delaying for example passage of the American Affordable Health Care Act of 2009 (H.R. 3200), thus becoming a crucial swing vote on epochal legislation. Hill -- whose website accurately shows the national debt spinning as fast as an electric meter whirls, though the site's numbers are arguably misleading -- has called for cutbacks or more government savings or income to balance the spending. His constituents do not agree about what stance he should take next.

Indeed many said they were not sure where he stood. Constituents at the New Albany town hall whispered that on Hill's government website under Issues, he stated that health care was a right, but said little about how to provide it, let alone cost-effectively. When searched for "health care bill," the site accessed Thomas, a U.S. government database that coughed up only old health care bills. When "single payer" or "public option" was entered in the search box, it brought up no reference more recent than 2004. Even when the accurate number of the main 2009 reform bill, H.R. 3200, was entered, Hill's site--or Thomas-- wrongly identified it as a proposal "to expand the travel and transportation allowances available to members of the Armed Forces granted leave...."

They wanted firm statements on contentious issues. Indiana, a long rectangular state stretching from the Ohio River to the Great Lakes, is surrounded by Michigan, Illinois, Kentucky and Ohio. The people of Indiana, called "Hoosiers," voted for Obama by a razor-thin margin. Reflecting that partisan split and a practical Midwestern attitude, the demonstrators who lined the front walk of the New Albany town meeting waved competing signs that read, "No 'Socialized Medicine' AKA Obamacare" " Yes to the Public Option," "True Health Reform Starts with Tort Reform," "Yes to Single Payer" and "How About a Czar of Common Sense?"

Hill could not represent an Indiana consensus view, because there was none; whatever he chose to do, it would cost him votes. Some wanted no change, some wanted better-regulated private health insurance with rule-making left to the States, or federal tax rebates for employers providing health care, or federally-regulated private insurance with a public option or full public "single payer." Citizens called out to Hill, "Will you vote the way that we would on health care reform?" threatening not to re-elect Hill if he did not do so. The usual unfounded rumors were floating but it was clear moreover that many people were doing their homework. Quite a few referenced H.R. 3200, the 1000-page bill main health care bill, by section and clause, and they wanted firm explanations from him.

Cost was one of the people's two main concerns. The U.S. government had four main ways of funding massive reform: raising taxes, bringing greater efficiency in programs and shifting money from unneeded ones, borrowing from (by selling U.S. Treasury bonds to) nations like China, or "watching the Federal Reserve -- which is not a government agency -- print money." Other nations had not demanded repayment of the staggering U.S. debt yet but creditors could pull the rug out from under the U.S., which as recently as the 1970s had owed no one. Marvin Comstock, a retired Jeffersonville police officer, growled, "The U.S. is broke. If I write a check out of my checkbook that I can't cover, they're gonna' arrest me for fraud. How does the government keep spending money?"

Standing on the demonstration line with his wife and small children, a man identifying himself only as "Travis" said, "Here are my three boys, who as future citizens already have unfunded liabilities of $1.3 million! I'm 39 years old, heading a family business. We pay for our employees' insurance. It's a huge expenditure but we feel it's the moral thing to do. I do not oppose public health care but how are they going to pay for it when they've already run up a $1.5 trillion deficit? If I did business that way, I could not keep my doors open! The only way to pay for that has got to be to tax me more or to borrow more in my children's names."

Nancy Tierney who had recently moved to New Albany, looked at costs and came to a different conclusion. "The providers [doctors, nurses, pharmacists, hospitals] should get all our health care money, not those pencil pushers at the top of the private insurance companies who are profiting from our being sick. We need to transfer our health care dollars to them with as little overhead as possible."

The greater concern for many was staying alive.

Folks spoke of medical bills of hundreds of thousands of dollars, of bankruptcy, decades of suffering with chronic illness, or family deaths because private insurers had canceled policies or rejected legitimate claims. Most people without insurance had jobs -- had they been completely busted, they would have been eligible for Medicaid. Those old enough to remember vastly lower costs though were often appalled that anyone needed help in paying health care bills at all. His face red and contorted, a weather-beaten man who refused to give his name roared, "Decades back, on just $4.25 an hour I managed to pay a hospital and doctors for medical care for a collapsed lung, took me years but I did it, so why can't everybody else? I hate socialism! Why do I have to pay other people's bills for them? I say, 'Get a damned job!'"

Dusty O'Brien, with advanced cancer, retorted, "They say, 'Get out and work for it.' I've been working since I was fourteen years old! I plan on living to retirement regardless of what the doctor tell me but when I reach it, I won't be 65 yet; and even with this cancer, won't have Medicare."

"Where were all of you people who are worried about cost: when we got into this war that we didn't need to be in?" a voice interjected. Another called out, "We're spending three thousand dollars a second for a mistake in Iraq!" Another: "What about the trillions being given to bad banks? Shouldn't money go instead to the people? We're workers, taxpayers in the richest country on earth! Why should we die from lack of medical care?"

Many wondered if Representative Hill understood the other costs of NOT reforming the U.S. health care system fast. "I am holding in my hand a school system check written to my mother, a check for seventeen cents -- that was her net income after the insurance costs were subtracted! Private insurance companies are breaking the school system...and U.S. business...and families," said Mark Megenity of English, IN, a tanned man in a bright green shirt, as he explained that he had spent 30 years as a teacher, was past president of the county teacher's association, a past negotiator for the school system with private insurance companies, and in retirement was a small business owner.

"The health insurance subtraction from teacher and pension paychecks grows greater each year, so their net pay is dwindling." Megenity elaborated privately: "New small businesses, which are the main U.S. job creator, can't compete for workers with established companies offering health insurance, and often go under before they can create new jobs. U.S. business in general cannot compete fairly against other developed nations, which furnish national health care so business can get on its feet."

As it stood, private insurance ate over 20% in administrative fees, as compared to 3% for government programs like Medicare. Increasing numbers of U.S. voters therefore wanted to corral "the greedy middle men," to let each citizen choose to enter either a private insurance plan like Aetna or a pubic insurance program similar to that which Congress was already giving itself. That was the "public option" in the main reform bill, H.R. 3200. Some people screamed "socialism," but public roads are socialism, something everyone can access and taxpayers fund....

Butch Ragland, a Jeffersonville retiree, said "Emotions trump reason, are terrible advisers for behavior. Some fear the word 'socialism' without considering what it means. An emergency 911 [telephone] line is socialism and it saved my life. Don't get lost in labels. Think this through."

A "Single Payer bill" (H.R. 676) had gathered some momentum in Congress before the August recess. A federal health-care purchasing pool, Single Payer was socialized health insurance, not socialized medicine, replacing private insurers while leaving individuals the freedom of choosing their doctors and hospital providers. According to Physicians for a National Health Program (PNHP) http://www.pnhp.org/facts/what_is_single_payer.php, "there are literally tens of thousands of different" private organizations--HMOs, billing agencies, various insurance corporations. "By having so many different payers of health care fees, there is an enormous amount of administrative waste generated in the system." In a single-payer system, the government collects insurance fees and then health care providers like doctors and hospitals bill it for their services. Single payer "reduces administrative waste greatly, and saves money, which can be used to provide care and insurance to those who currently don't have it."

First giving a brief speech, Hill had then answered a barrage of questions that did not stop when the meeting ended. Crowding around him, the people wanted him on record, in detail.

Answering them in bits and pieces both in the meeting and after it, Hill described health coverage as each citizen's right and stated that federal reform must be immediate because both inefficient health care and the soaring insurance costs were a major factor breaking the already teetering U.S. economy. "We've been debating this for 60 years, leaving it to the individual states and the private sector and they did not get it done. The federal government must act....The current system is broken. Heath care cost is just swallowing everything up." While Representative Hill did not take a position on the "single payer" bill, H.R. 676, he did say that he would "like to support the public option" on H.R. 3200, to give each citizen a choice between private and public heath insurance, with both plans dependent on private providers, leaving people free to choose. Unlike Democratic progressives who were holding firm for a public option, conservative Hill however would "not insist on it."

Effective health care reform he said should bring the insurance and out-of-pocket cost to individual families tumbling, making health care available, affordable and predictable, but there was a trade-off. Doing it partly by raising taxes Hill said was "probably unavoidable."

"At least," the muttering man in the crowd said, "he's telling the truth on that score."

Perhaps Hill's blow-up has wrecked his chances, perhaps not, but it raises interesting questions. How will representatives accustomed to a less alive electorate weather the storm? If Blue Dog Democrat Hill has little time left as congressman, will that corner him or free him to act? Do term limits work?

>>>>This article is part of Huffington Post's Eyes and Ears reporting on town hall meetings across the country.<<<<

Comments

[ohiodem250]

Good post. I've met Congressman Hill. He seems like a good, decent, straightforward man. I saw him tell a room of conservative donors that he understood alot of their concerns and that he, too, did not want to see any health reform stifle business. But he immediately followed that up with a statement about how health reform would happen and that he would vote for it. He also defended the President and said he was doing a good job with the situation he inherited and that he wishes people would give him some room to work. I respect the man.

[TishiJo]

I think Hill was right on by not allowing cameras. The cameras have been focused ONLY on the angry citizens reiterating the words of Fox commentators and talk radio hosts inciting fear and hatred in honest, decent Americans especially targetting seniors. This has presented a distorted picture when those who favor health care reform are larger in numbers and never shown in the videos.

[PlaceboStudman]

I have a question that absolutely no one is able, or at least willing to answer. Just what, exactly, does having insurance have to do with the absolutely horrendously poor quality of medicine we receive when we have insurance? How does Aetna and Blue Cross influence BigPharma's ingredients list that allows them to produce things like heart medication that causes kidney and liver damage (which causes further heart damage) or antidepressants that cause suicidal tendencies, or chemo and radiation that obliterates the immune system and makes one vulnerable to the common flu virus?

No one has been able to explain to me how the insurance companies influence BigPharma. Someone please explain? Because, frankly, if there is no connection, as I believe, then I have to wonder why we are bother trying to give more people the same poor quality medicine as stated above when so many people are already dying from the poor quality of medicine we receive

[propitiousmoment]

You are using "medicine" in the sense of medication or drugs. Another sense of the word is the work of the people who do research into the human body's functions and disorders, and who attempt to apply the knowledge gained from that research to individuals, i.e., "practice medicine." In the sense of drugs, doctors and other health care providers are mainly marketing conduits for getting the product to the end user, while getting the insurance company to pay for it, thus ensuring the drug companys' profits. Drugs that harm rather than cure are rushed through the approval process so that the marketing cycle can continue/increase the revenue stream for the drug companies. Health reform as I understand it and in the form it currently has (although this may change as it goes through the legislative process) is in part designed to get to work on the problem of harmful drugs by requiring effectiveness studies, so that the drugs that do more harm than good can be weeded out, and by requiring better information to the patient so that they can make an informed decision. In other words, to tie the payment to performance rather than the profits of the drug companies. There really is a connection, I may not have articulated it very well but perhaps someone can correct me.

[PlaceboStudman]

yes I am using medicine in the sense of medication and drugs, because when you're terminally or critically ill, you don't really give a damn about how the medicine that will cure you got to you, you only care that it WILL cure you, and that it won't make you worse (as in the case of chemo/radiation that zaps your immune system). The individual who is criticially or terminally ill really could care less if the guy in the next room can get his jock itch cream or not. The problem is that we're currently only focusing on the guy in the next room, not the critically­/terminall­y ill patient

[propitiousmoment]

And oh yeah, obviously "medicine" in the other sense of the word will improve because doctors will not have to fight for every dollar that get paid when they provide care, and will have more time to spend actually "practicing medicine." But you already knew that.

[PlaceboStudman]

A doctor is only as good as the medicine and technology he/she can dispense. If the only thing a doctor can dispense to cure cancer makes the patient succeptable to the common flu virus, do you blame the doctor, or do you blame the company that provided the treatment that led to death via the flu?

[potterhead360]

this story is pretty inaccurate. i was there with the student he confronted. she was not there to talk about supporting health care reform (very much to the contrary, we are not in favor of the bill).she wasn't talking about anything to do with her mother either. she was there to help me with my school project. when we were told, after having gotten permission, that we were not allowed to film, she asked him why and he responded "this is my town hall and i set the rules."

[Gail McGowan Mellor - Huffpost Blogger]

My article was about the New Albany town hall meeting before the Bloomington meeting, and the strain apparent in Congressman Hill even then. On that, I have firsthand information, since I was a reporter, an eyewitness, observing and doing interviews. On the Bloomington meeting, as I noted, my information was secondhand, coming from Youtube, members of Congress and cable. When the young woman was on cable, both the recent death of her mother and her own position on healthcare were mentioned as among her reasons for being there.

I'm fascinated that you were not only there with her, but that your school project was actually her main reason for attending. As a Bloomington eyewitness, would you elaborate, potterhead? What was your school project? Do you know who got the video that hit Youtube? What else did you notice about the interplay between Congressman Hill and the citizens? Thanks for reporting on this.

[potterhead360]

sorry. i did not see the reply button for your comment, so my reply is a reply to my own

[potterhead360]

for my visual communications project we do a still photography project and a video project. i thought the town hall might be a good story for either, so i brought both of my cameras. i had filmed and photographed both the people outside and wanted some footage of inside as well. we were granted permission to film and photograph the event, but about 10 minutes later were publicly escorted to the back of the room and told that they called the school of journalism and "our story didn't check out." which is suspicious, as the office of the school closes at 5 PM. this prompted my friend to ask the congressman why we could not film. i've no idea who took the video of her question or how it got onto youtube. the congressman never really answered a question that was in opposition to him. he either gave a few-word answer or ignored the question and moved on, hoping to find a more favorable opinion. people would occasionally shout "ask a question, that's why we're here" when people would go into long stories and he would tell them to stop shouting because they should be learning from the people's stories. he seemed to have no patience for those against him in the crowd

[potterhead360]

my friend's main reason for coming, however, was her OPPOSITION to the health care bill and massive government spending. her helping me film was an afterthought, since i had not gotten our syllabus and assignment list until that day, and needed help operating two cameras at once

[Gail McGowan Mellor - Huffpost Blogger]

This is fascinating reporting potterhead360 and I think history because one way or another, this year's going to go down in the books. Thank you for correcting me and filling us all in.

Gail

[johnsopinion]

This is a powerful article because it brings life to individuals
and their story's--of bumping heads with giant-sized Insurance
Companies and Congressmen. Yes, do-nothing, fence-sitting,
congressmen.

These are real people, just like your neighbors, your family, your
cousins (and they're asking all of the right questions). They are
not abstract labels that allow them to be relegated to that file
cabinet over there!

Kudos!

[Samalabear]

This is a terrific article. And still, hands down, single payer comes across as the best solution, with an opt out for anybody who wants to buy from Aetna or Cigna or United Health Care, or whatever. The support for it is already there. All we need is a leader to get up there and really explain as this article does -- explain Medicare for All -- Medicare, a familiar program. How can anything so familiar be thought of as so radical. It's all in the way you present it. If only President Obama hadn't taken it off the table. Well, the fight isn't over and I don't see a reason to give it up. I want this for myself and all the other people out there who are hurting from no insurance, or under-insurance, or the backbreaking cost of insurance. The Mad As Hell Doctors Cross-Country Tour is just starting.

[Gail McGowan Mellor - Huffpost Blogger]

Do you have a contact in the Mad As Hell Doctors' Cross-Country Tour to whom I should speak? Thank you for the link if you do. Sounds interesting....

[Samalabear]

http://www.madashelldoctors.com/

You'll see the tab along the top for their Letter to Obama. It looks like they're kicking off the tour on September 8th.

[AnnfromCA]

This is the best article yet on this issue. Congratulations.

You absolutely captured the real issue. How do they survive this?

[Gail McGowan Mellor - Huffpost Blogger]

Thank you, Ann from California! I'm about to expand on the issue that you pinpoint in an article THAT I'm writing on the Louisville town hall, because the representative from there is a former journalist and made an unusually candid representation about the inner workings of this reform process.

[feetfirst]

I attended the meeting, held not at Indiana University but at Bloomington North High School. There were more public option supporters than detractors, but the opposition was venomous. Several who shared their stories (someone born with a pre-existing condition and denied health care; a woman whose mother had to divorce in order to get Medicaid for her MS; an amputee who was told by Anthem that a prosthetic leg was not medically necessary) endured cat calls such as "what a sob story." When those who have not suffered cannot help those who are suffering, our nation is in trouble. Empathy is a hallmark of any great nation.

Two points should be emphasized: When you pay into a system for most of your life, it should be there for you when you need it. Social Security is a great example. In the current scenario, if you change jobs, or if you lose your job, the money you or your employer paid into health insurance is lost to you. Who keeps that money? The insurance industry. Does that make any sense?

Second, the government currently funds many public entities, from interstate highways, to public schools, to libraries, to museums and parks, to concerts, as well as to national defense. If we believe that this use of government funds is for the public good, or if we avail ourselves of these government goods, then we can't really say that the government has no business supervising healthcare.

[pfrogger]

Third point.
Currently, the government has MASSIVE subsidies for Medicare and Medicaid care and for PHARMA through part D. that's essentially a government handout. because it doesn't benefit taxpayers. Canada is able to bargain for cheaper drugs. are Canadians smarter than us? if we can't get meds for the same prices as Canadians do, then maybe they are?
and regardless STOP subsidizing insurance/PHARMA companies. it doesn't help. it's just another handout to them of billions of dollars.

[cordyc]

Good article. Let's not let the small venomous opposition take our health care. Standing tall to these people with dignity and courage will gain the respect of many in the next election. I'd hate to be a Republican who stands in the way of reform.

I live in a purple county and have been to 2 Townhall. One by a Dem and one by a Rep. Lot's of support for even Single Payer and the vast majority for reform.

We need to make it clear that those of us who work just want to buy insurance for a fair price. We are tired of paying for fat cat salaries and thousand for private insurance companies to lobby against our best interests.

[Gail McGowan Mellor - Huffpost Blogger]

Thank you for your correction (that it took place in Bloomington high school not IUB.) VERY interesting point about the insurance outlays being lost, "feetfirst." Unfortunately Social Security pay-ins were also lost. It was never a protected fund, kept sacrosanct for SS pay-outs and was therefore thrown into the general fund and spent by one Administration after another.

[blackherbs]

The insurance industry does not want people to stop and think about how much money paid in by the insured is stolen through denied claims because of preexisting condition, money paid in and not used due to good health, deductible paid before insurance pays, ,job loss thus losing insurance and the money we paid in, paying in for six months before you are deemed covered, etc.

[Mabo]

Sounds like someone forgot that HE works for US...not the pther way around. An all too familiar thing in today's politics...shame on him and the rest of them.

[Snowball]

Actually, Hill is my Congressman. This is not a Conservative area that he represents, quite the opposite. Hill is awash in money from the health insurance industry, this is what explains his positions, not the political leanings of his constituents.

[DasBoot]

Southern Indiana is as conservative as it gets in the mid west. Hill's district just happens to include Monroe Country with Indiana University, that's how he manages to pull off tight wins. But he does have to walk a constant tightrope between these two poles.

[mitch93]

Hill is my congressman also. The district is rated R+5 by cook PVI ranks. The main reason for Hills victories is Mike Sodrel, NO ONE likes him. If you call Indiana's 9th liberal than you must not know what the heck you are talking about.

[heartsick]

Hill should go to work and take all of his staff with him. I wouldn't vote for a representative who has five year old information on his Website. While I agree that much of the railing about health care reform is the result of Republican race-baiting, I am glad that some of the statements made in IN made a lot more sense than those made where the gun-toters and "sleeping giants" appeared. Maybe we're headed for real and sane discussions that are issue driven and not filled with hatred and racism?

[tompoe]

Have to disagree. Nothing made sense. There are 36 nations that provide universal health care, superior health care, at a fraction of the cost we pay, here. Had Obama and Hill made sure the CBO costed out and reported the numbers for Single Payer in the U.S., it would have been a no-brainer even the staunchest conservative could grasp. In France, individuals pay maybe $300 a month for all the health care they and their families can eat. The question is, why would Obama not permit that to happen?

[Gail McGowan Mellor - Huffpost Blogger]

I've written to Congressman John Yarmuth [D-KY] , a co-sponsor of H.R. 676, to ask about a CBO cost comparison and will get back to you as soon as I have the answer to your question

[Sauron21]

Rep. Hill is a good man. I might not think he is liberal enough, but I respect his desire for fiscal restraint. At least he is serious about it unlike Republicans.

If he votes for the public option I will gladly donate time and money to him.

[tompoe]

Good men don't lie. Hill won't tell you the truth. There are 36 nations that provide universal health care, superior health care, for their citizens at a fraction of the cost we pay here for a right to health care we are not getting access to. You have to ask yourself why Hill and Obama refuse to have the Congressional Budget Office provide the exact numbers for Single Payer? It's because the number would come in at somewhere around $700 a year less in your tax return. Can't live with that?

As for Hill's crap about fiscal restraint, what has he done for you to restrain Paulson's demand for entitlement for Bush's $1 trillion dollar going away present for his cronies? The list is huge. Eight years of Hill sitting on his hands, while they spent literally trillions of dollars on an invasion/occupation of a sovereign nation, based on lies to you. Did Hill tell you the truth? If he doesn't want to be guilty by association, he simply needs to explain why he's different than the rest of our current crop of lie-driven elected officials.

[pfrogger]

aside from everything else, one thing that I can't agree more with:
WHY WON"T THEY EVEN SEND SINGLE PAYER TO THE CBO FOR SCORING?
removing an option immediately doesn't sound like the move an impartial and intelligent mind.
on top of that, single payer works so effectively for modern countries. why wouldn't they even score it?

cowards and hypocrites.
I'll live with a public option for now. and NO mandates. mandates were tried in Mass. and it failed. in addition, health "reform" with NO public option, but including mandates, has been tried in Mass. and failed horribly. why would a reasonable person expect insurance companies to control costs when they have not done so for 30+ years? but now somehow they will? are you kidding me? that's some strange magical thinking. it's just delusional.
half the middle class could be crushed by premiums set to DOUBLE in 10 years, and the insurance companies WILL CONTINUE TO VICTIMIZE AMERICANS. they've done it till now, why won't they continue. the government is supposed to protect us, the American people, from them. aren't they?

[Sandy Kaczmarski - Huffpost Blogger]

I'm afraid I agree with you mcthfg. There is no accountability because shouting "you're a liar" doesn't mean you want the truth. Shouting anything contrary does not constitute a healthy, informative dialogue. That's not what these people want. It is only to disrupt, and disrupt they do. I recently had a close elderly relative talk about the "nigger in the White House," and proceeded to tell me it was in the Bible that the black people will prey on the whites. It's not enough that some of these older folks will die soon, because their ideas have been rekindled with the racism and stupidity and blind ranting that is taking over.

[Freesia2]

And it chills me to the bone Sandy. I'm going to be making a trip soon into family territory where I'm sure to hear something of that kind, and God help me, I don't know how I'm going to respond. Silence seems wrong. Saying anything won't change minds. They're old, insulted, sincere. And wrong. Wrong, wrong, wrong.

I blame the Republicans for this. Leadership is about embracing the now and moving the country forward. Not dragging us back to Jim Crow. They purposely have driven this discussion into ignorance and hate and applauded people for feeling that way. I blame them for this and I will never give them another vote as long as I live.

We're better than this. America is better. My only hope is that rather than a "rekindling" as you say it's actually like a last desperate flare up before the fire of hate and racism and really bad politics starts to flame out and go to ash. I try to hope for that. They make it hard.

[Gail McGowan Mellor - Huffpost Blogger]

Hi Sandy and Freesia2! I'm almost 70 so I don't really buy the idea that the problem is age, though it can be coincident with it. Finding self-worth in being a part of a dominant group--instead of say in being a good carpenter or a decent person--is a kind of hardening of the intellectual arteries. Doesn't happen to everyone. Young people in a world without jobs, without obvious avenues forward, may fall back on finding people to feel better than. That isn't universal either. Perhaps it all depends on whether people have been taught to see themselves as individuals or as a color. Those whose primary self-identification is "white" (though honesty, most of us whites are pinkish-be­ige...thos­e of us who turn white or especially blue are rushed to the hospital) are going to feel swamped by the proliferation of folks who can (because part-African or Native American) be effortlessly tan without suntan lotion. Doesn't seem fair.

[mcthfg]

Do you really think this democracy is "vibrant?" I think it is filled with a lot of dumb people who can't be bothered to care about anything but themselves. There is very little conversation, and a lot of yelling. It is filled with FOX clones, who spit back sensless talking points like watermelon seeds. It is filled with people who don't know medicare is government funded. It is filled with people who hate our black president because he is black.

This country is dying, and racism and stupidty are killing it.

[awake108]

I agree. Our leader on both side have sold us out for power and money. Also a lot of American are just plain ignorant. They can't even figure out when they are getting skrewed.

[Snowball]

Just because a few "Democrats" in the blue dog coalition are corporate tools, doesn't mean the entire party is. Cynicism of this type only helps the elite and corporate interests undermine democracy.

[chacatre]

Then, by all means, please leave.