Change, Not a Restoration: The Death of Conservatism and Rebirth of Reform

The tide is about to turn in the debate over health care reform. The lies and the screaming that captured the discussion in August have a lot of Republicans thinking they've got the Democrats right where they want 'em.

They are wrong. And they are wrong because their castle is built upon a pile of sand... a pile of crazy, crazy sand.

Sam Tanenhaus talked about it earlier today on Morning Joe. Discussing his new book, The Death of Conservatism, Tanenhaus warned that today's Republican Party is more about radicalism than conservatism. He recalled how in the 1950s, William F. Buckley, Jr., began pushing the lunatics and extremists out of the conservative movement in order to legitimize and strengthen their argument. This preparation allowed them to pounce when the time was ripe in the late 1960s.

This is why supporters of health care reform are about to experience a second wind. Because while the mobs, the conspiracy theorists and the lie-pushers look like they're winning the debate for the Republicans, they are actually setting them up for a big fall.

For the discussion will inevitably move past what the protesters think the dreaded 'Obamacare' will do (Kill grandma!!!), to ask A) why they feel this way and B) what's their alternative?

The crazy-crazies can only answer the first question. A lot of ink has been spilled debunking the lies; not as much attention has been focused on explaining why some so easily believe them. Confronted with explaining how any sane person could believe 'President Obama's bureaucrat army will kill grandma,' they'll spin into whatever tizzy best suits them, be it Kenya, Communism, black nationalism, Nazism -- who knows what. Their explanations are way, way out of the American mainstream, and frankly, creepy.

So that leaves the response of the reality-based Republican community (a rapidly shrinking field). These people have enjoyed the hysterics of the last month, happy to see Obama and the Democrats sweat. At the same time, they seem somewhat embarrassed by the most heinous lies and would love to fast-forward fourteen months to when they can reap the benefits and regain power. For the time being, they will explain their opposition to health care reform as based on bigger deficit projections or excessive harm to the insurance industry.

Though no matter what they say, it will miss the mark. David Brooks points to Obama losing support among independents, supposedly frightened of debt tied to his health care reform. What Brooks does not acknowledge is that they're not so much opposed to reform as they are confused as to what it will do. It's hard not to be confused with so many lies being so carelessly tossed around... But once the din dies down, and the conversation moves on to the why and the what behind the opposition, Republicans are in for a rude awakening.

Because people want change -- not a restoration.

And here the Republican Party is utterly unprepared. Their alternatives are lousy because their party has spent no significant time honing and improving their failed ideas from when they were recently in power. Nor, as Tanenhaus suggested, have they pushed the lunatics and extremists away from the debate; if anything, they've pushed them to the front.

In so many ways, you have the case of an opposition party that is not yet ready to be an opposition party. The smash-it-up approach may have worked for August, but it has done nothing to improve the Republicans' capability to offer cohesive, plausible alternatives.

At least ones that are not a return to the policies of George W. Bush and Dick Cheney.

Follow John R. Bohrer on Twitter: www.twitter.com/JRBwrites

Comments

[Wake-up]

Dude... honestly... the lies are coming from Obama (this is why folks are so upset):

- Tax Code punishment for not bing insured (Consttutional?) after denying it
- You can keep you current Dr. and provider
- We're not trying to take over HC
- Abortion is not in the plan - when it is
- There are not death panels... when there actually is a process for ending life for older folks
- Medicare will not be touched... and the bill kills it

On and on it goes, the man does nothing but lie and he's getting busted!! Can't wait for the snoozer TV event...

[WonderingImriel]

Someone isn't drinking the coffee they want others to drink. Or...just can't read. Thanks for playing though, Sleepyhead.

[Wake-up]

I listed examples.... where am I wrong?

The left should be upset with him on several fronts as well, not the least of which is that he promised to pull out of Iraq right after he's sworn in - I thought this particularly funny!

[MekhongKurt]

Hm.

"- There are not death panels... when there actually is a process for ending life for older folks
- Medicare will not be touched... and the bill kills it."

No, actually, there *isn't* "a process for ending life of older folks." There is a provision for the government to pay for one consultation about end-of-life issues every 5 years -- IF a person WISHES such a consultation. We talk to lawyers, heirs, and others preparing for the end of life, so why not talk to our doctors (including private ones, under other provisions, BTW).

No, actually, "the bill kills it" is also simply misreading the facts. It reduces some Medicare benefits, including Medicare Advantage. It kills nothing in Medicare. We can debate cuts, but cuts don't amount to a death sentence.

Don't swallow propaganda -- from either/any side. Read the originals yourself.

[Wake-up]

First... the bill (what will be final as the original is all but dead) provided for End of Life Counseling not from the primary Dr. but a Bureaucrat which obviously is of concern.

Another aim of the administration is/was to deal with the coming insolvency of Medicare and given the slight-of-hand and confusing presentation, older folks are obviously upset and will lead to rationing... Rationing kills...

Dr. Tom Price (R-Ga.):

Going down the path of more government will only compound the problem. While the stated goal remains noble, as a physician, I can attest that nothing has had a greater negative effect on the delivery of health care than the federal government’s intrusion into medicine through Medicare. Because of Washington’s one-size-fits-all approach, its flawed coverage rules and broken financing mechanisms, seniors are increasingly having care rationed while federal health spending spirals out of control.

[RobespierreSam]

I'm one those doubtful independents mentioned in the article. I am not confused by what health reform will do to "health-care", but confused by the absence of good reasoning on behalf of the administration.

In my perspective this is a cost shifting issue, nationally we're investing an enormous amount of money with little return. The easiest thing to do is to setup a new provider and shift the costs from independent purchaser premiums, employer contributions and employee premiums, and aggregate that national "spend" under the Medicare system and move along.
I do not understand why the administration can not muster the intellectual talent to posit the issue in simple economic language. Will taxes go up? Yes. Will your employer contributions and out of pocket premiums turn into tax dollars? Yes, we will be shifting the costs and improving the service and ultimately be better off. In any scenario we are paying, but at least when we buy through Medicare we can better manage the return on that spend.

There is a cost to not taking action and sticking with the system we have today, more bankruptcies means less consumer demand for all businesses, including health insurance and medical care providers. Sick people suffering from treatable stuff walking around at your children's playground is not in the national interest at all.

[Ponzipundit]

I hope that Mr. Bohrer is right that the radical right wing has set Republicans up for a fall once the reasonableness of universal healthcare is made apparent. I fear, however, that the left often makes the mistake of thinking that Americans are moved by facts, statistics, and rational arguments. We has oftentimes engage in public debates thinking that once "the truth" comes out, people will be persuaded by the better argument.

More often than not, though, Americans are moved by emotional appeals to anecdotes and symbolism--not upon rational discussions about which policy will be best for them. Right now the right is winning that battle: "killing grandma," "death panels," "government takeover" are all effective emotional appeals. I don't think that the left will win this argument simply by proving that the radical right wing is lying. We need to tell our own emotional stories about experiences with the existing for-profit business model of healthcare. It is simply astonishing that we are losing on these grounds because insurance industry bureacrats are such easy villains in a narrative--there are countless real existing victims of their inhumane decisions (Note that I use the personal language of "decisions" rather than the institutional language of "policies.").

Once Americans are won over emotionally, they will be able to hear the facts. Until then, they are simply unable to listen to any rational argument about what is best for their family, and the country.

[BartRoberts]

Watching the crazies screaming "You're gonna kill my gramma!" reminds me why I left the GOP.

[ThePeacemakers]

If it's not Medicare For All or Single Payer, no matter what you call "health care reform" or how "the public option" is defined...it will all be about subsidizing private insurance companies with tax payer dollars.

The only thing the O Admin, some Democrats (not the ones for single payer) and all Republicans in Congress are REALLY disagreeing on is how much to REGULATE these subsidies. The Republicans want NO regulation at all.

Republicans in Congress are fine with mandates that allow tax payer dollars to go to private companies. What they can't do is say this to their constituents, but that's main thing they see wrong with health care reform - Regulated government subsidies. So, until they get this, they use the fears of their constituents to attempt to hold up "reform" selling them on craziness....

The Dems (particularly the O admin) should be getting these questions:
1) If everyone, including a healthy 23 year old, is mandated to have health insurance coverage from a private insurer and they need help paying for it due to income level or unemployment, and tax payer dollars insure this gets covered NO MATTER THE COST - will there be caps on EXECUTIVE PAY and bonuses for private insurers?
2) If there are stiffer regulations for private insurers, what are the gaurantees these will still be in place 10 - 15 years from now?
3) If drug costs can't be negotiated, what type of price controls are there for drugs?

[DIdaho]

I think this is a great little factoid I haven't seen reported. We inherited an email address from a company we bought six years ago, whose (former) owners subscribed to Focus on the Family (James Dobson's right-wing religious group). Got this email today:

"Focus on the Family income is down nearly $6 Million from what we planned for this year... I hope you'll prayerfully consider a generous contribution right now."

The best poll is the one you pull out of your back pocket.

[OlongapoEd]

The Republican Party no longer serves any legitimate purpose. If the Republican Party completely disappeared tomorrow, the US would still have a 2-party system...the Democrats and the other Democrats. :-/

[mom of three]

Perfectly written -- and you are perfectly RIGHT!

I am an Independent, and from the conversations I've had with every other Democrat and Independent lately, you've verbalized it perfectly -- they aren't against reform by any means.

On the other hand, the Republicans I speak to only re-iterate their concern that the President was not born in the United States. Eh?

[DIdaho]

When we look back, I think this whole health care fight will be an example of political judo taught in Poly-Sci and history classes for decades. By allowing Congress to actually legislate, by the time whatever bill finally emerges it will already have the votes. By offering to compromise, even surrender key components to Republicans, probably knowing in advance it would never happen, Obama has defused the argument that Republicans were excluded.

In the meantime, Republicans spiral down into a furious shouting match that proves to anybody but whom they consider the "most faithful" that they're ignorant, hateful, empty-slogan spewing fanatics who care nothing for anything but their own political advantage - and will lie with impunity in order to placate a vanishingly small minority of their "base."

The poll numbers on health care now are completely misleading. The ditto-heads keep pointing to polls that fewer people trust Obama on health care - but that's because huge numbers of lefties are not seeing single-payer or a government takeover of health care that they'd prefer - not because the town-hall nuts are convincing anybody.

I predict the result will be that Republicans will take themselves completely out of the process, and that will be obvious to everybody - allowing the Democrats to pass whatever it is they can agree to themselves without any recrimination of "bipartisanship."

[stick458]

Predict away - at your own peril.

[oldngrumpy]

"I predict the result will be that Republicans will take themselves completely out of the process, and that will be obvious to everybody - allowing the Democrats to pass whatever it is they can agree to themselves without any recrimination of "bipartisanship."

There will be sufficient Republicans jump on board the reform train as soon as it becomes evident that Democrats intend to draw a line in the sand on the public option. Until then there is simply no incentive for them to do so. It will probably have to be Obama that does this. The last thing the Republicans want is to own the status quo when it blows up in the next couple of years. That would guarantee a Democratic Executive for at least another term and could reverse any house and Senate gains made in 2010 (some are inevitable).

[codycap]

I can't help but remember the last two times we had battles between the ignorant and deranged vs the concerned citizens of America. The elections of 2000 and 2004 That's what scares me.

[MThomasNC]

Mr. Bohrer, you are spot on w your analysis. Pres. Obama will sign HCR legislation this year. He got this. The 'town hall' meetings are straws breaking the repubs backs. It wil be great to see the repubs running away from these clips that will be shown during election season. I see JonStewart writers chopping at the bits waiting to replay these wonderful clips and sound bites next year. This is great. The town hall meetings - hollywood could not have come up with better scripts.
This strain of radical republicans no longer have the moderates to stand behind even when they were pushing their destructive agenda. Now their moderates are gone all is exposed for the world to see the hatred, the lies, the puffery, the immorality, the theivery of the conservative republican party.

[noaxe397]

One thing overlooked in all the talk about the right wing crazies and how they are perceived as the main body of the GOP and how they are pushed to the front, etc, fails to take into account the real reason and danger behind the right wing strategy.

The GOP, both mainstream and crazies, are so over-the-top in their rhetoric and actions (beginnig with the 2008 campaign and Palin) that there can only be one ultimate reason for it and this reason was FINALLY stated by a reporter from Seattle being interviewed yesterday on Olberman's show. He said to KO it is all part of a way to get the president removed from office in a way decent people and real Americans would be horrified by.

Republicans will not (not "cannot") accept a black man as president.

[Humanistic]

I think it's dangerous to write off the Republicans. Never underestimate the power of money. The Republican lie-propagation and mud-slinging machinery is effective because its highly skilled professionals boil down the complex issues into negative buzzwords like socialism, they obscure the benefits of change by instilling fear into people who otherwise would think rationally, and they try to discredit policies by casting aspersions on the President's and Democratic Congresspersons' character. Dirty fighting and obstructionism are all that's left for them, because their stale ideas, like less regulated free markets and more tax cuts, have proven disastrous. Their phony patriotism and religious zealotry doesn't wash any more with most of the public which doesn't want more of the same; however, they still can inspire a vocal minority to garner the support of conservative and so-called moderate Democratic legislators. Remember this is not a true Democracy, and the influence of money through lobbying and election politics is at least as powerful as public opinion and the vote.

[jmpurser]

The only argument I have with you is the inference that the GOP is "the" party of money. Obama is a DLC Democrat like Clinton and certainly they can also be considered a party of, by, and for the moneyed interests.

[TeddySalad]

There are more RICH Democrat Congress People than Republican. So now what do you say?

[oldngrumpy]

Comparing a few "rich" Democratic contributors to the massive amount of money flowing from the insurance industry (they promised to spend $1.5 million pr day to defeat reform) is brainless. Come back when you are relevant to anything.

[jmpurser]

This argument again.

The "conservatives" have been crazy as jaybirds for over 30 years. There hasn't been a sound basis for their belief system in all that time. There hasn't been a single national issue where their stated goal was achieved by their preferred method. They have been monstrous failures with a perfect record seriously screwing over most Americans and they've used nothing but the lowest, ugliest, and most divisive arguments to sell their agenda.

And in those 30 years they've been SMASHING successes at reforming the national conversation to suit their needs. They have a perfect record of breaking government programs, corrupting the constitution, motivating people to vote against their own interests, and they've even moved the entire Democratic party to the Center RIGHT party.

All without ever making any sense or doing one honorable thing.

So don't come telling me that they're going to lose this time because their insane and not too bright to boot.

In terms of the "health care reform debate" they have OWNED it since before it started this time around. Obama, himself a product of the Democratic party's rightward charge, went out of his way to kill real health care reform before the debate began. Now, instead of actual health care reform, we're arguing about whether or not there should be ANY health INSURANCE regulation.

Yes, the GOP is insane, stupid, and nasty. Unfortunately they are currently a fairly good reflection of this nation and I don't see that changing any time soon.

[stick458]

Sounds like you've got the stupid and nasty part cornered.

[kmsbt]

"Conservatives" have been helped immensely by the rise of right wing media and the softening of mainstream media from news sources into entertainment profit centers. I think the author underestimates the effect these factors have had on the American people, as codycap and Humanistic alluded to. I've too many good friends of diverse backgrounds whom I consider on the whole intelligent, observant and open-minded who faithfully regurgitate the Fox line when discussing politics.

[Pablo175]

Brooks is right. There is no confusion. People don't want what the Dems are selling: a significant increase in governments involvement in healthcare which adds to the deficit.