How to Debate Health Reform with Conservatives, and Not Get Arrested

A recent health care reform debate with a friend got so heated I was nearly arrested for disorderly conduct in my own home!

How can you protect yourself from becoming part of an ugly, national incident?

Do what I did...by printing this wallet-sized (once you fold it) guide to right-wing arguments against reform, and carry it everywhere.

Fortunately, I took notes in my living room, as my opponent pointed and counter-pointed.

When my conservative friend grunted something like "Government--bad," I asked if that meant he no longer trusts government to defend us militarily. Or to watch our borders, which, by the way, have tightened.

Or to deliver his mail. Or to get his mom's Social Security check to her on time, every time.

Or to build roads and bridges, which admittedly need some work. Or to make sure Americans get at least a basic education. Yeah, okay, that could be better, too.

So, I asked him this: "You're saying that, if government cannot address a task with perfection...it shouldn't even try?" By now, that crease in his earlobe, indicating an eventual heart attack, began to deepen.

And then I asked my conservative friend if he'd be willing to give up those things, just to get them out of the hands of the government. He just grumbled.

He insists government can never do anything right, on time, or on budget.

You and I understand his disenchantment. But, unlike him, we'd prefer not to throw out the surgical tools with the medical waste. Certain things, we'd like the government to keep trying to get right.

When my Republican friend inflated his chest and spoke of the need for free enterprise's role in health care, I asked how he'd feel about "something so important" being run by--say--the guys at GM, or AIG. Or Bernie Madoff. I understand Mr. Madoff is still semi-available.

And when my opposition crowed that the only downside of free enterprise is government interference therein, I firmly argued (but not in a disorderly way) that it was the lack of government oversight that led to the recent near-collapse of our financial system.

And then I brought up Bernie Madoff again. Conservatives hate that, and I thought it might get my friend arrested. Ultimately, I was right.

When he growled that the Canadian system sucks, I told him that's not what I heard, that the syrup is great, and that nobody said we were doing it Canada's way, anyway.

My friend smoldered. Those jagged comic-strip lines began to appear around his head.

And when he argued (They do that a LOT) he's tired of shouldering the roughly four percent of Americans who refuse to work, I reminded him the other unemployed six percent may soon include him.

Unlike my friend, I'd like to know that these hard-working Americans are just as willing to cover my ass, as I was to cover theirs...when I was lucky enough to be employed.

When he argued (See what I mean?) that slackers like myself would rather suckle the government teat than get a minimum wage job, I reminded him the same lawmakers who oppose health care reform, also voted against raising the minimum wage.

By now, my opposition was as mad as a Harvard professor, and I could walk away calmly--without being arrested--knowing logic and reason were on my side.

Although my neighbor and I are both moderates, we both became labeled as liberals,

in the age when everything left of right, was leftist. Hearing the ruckus, and concerned for my well-being, my neighbor called 9-1-1.

Then came the piece de resistance, in this health care debate with my conservative friend: I shouted Madoff's name again, as the police car pulled away.

According to newspaper accounts the next day, my friend did not take this well.

Not being close to this President, I understand he's still behind bars.

Comments

[skiffida]

Buzz-

Great to find you here. Jon Stewart had another response to Republicans who insist the government should stay out of health care, and should not come between patient and doctor: Does that include abortion? Terry Shiavo?

[mddem]

Great to read you here, Buzz! I'm a big fan.

As Voltaire said, "Le mieux est l'ennemi du bien."

The best is the enemy of the good.

Conservatives argue that since government isn't best, it should get out of the business of delivering services altogether. Good is never good enough.

Why don't Conservatives propose abolishing Medicare, then, if the public option is so bad? Why don't we abolish the VA, as well? Can't private industry do better? Isn't that their argument?

[booksnmoreforyou]

Arguing with conservatives is no different than arguing with cult members. They are impervious to reason and will only cite dictated dogma to you in return.

[LeftRight]

To be fair, a lot of liberals are simply indoctrinated and can only repeat what they've heard.....

[fabricnthreads]

So does the Pinocchio nose in the photo indicate you know you are lying, and that you really believe the opposite of everything you post?

[TripAffleck]

Good show Mr. B!
Isn't it odd that it's the 'conservatives' that become the most hysterical in political discussions? Recalling the TMOS interview with Coulter, O'Reilly's Christian Bale-esque rant (to name one specifically) and his general 'shout-down' tactics, along with the frequent use of the 'hang-up' button by the Bloviator Himself.
At least here, you can get a word in edge-wise.
Congratulations
Trip

[Kalthia]

I'm disappointed in it, couldn't you include any real Republican arguments and actually have a point against them. The only points I read in your article are (paraphrasing) 'The gov protects, educates (kinda), and pays our citizens well',(okay they protect me), 'We arn't going to do it Canada's way', (let's hope not!) 'that we would have to give up things if the gov doesn't do them' (really out on a limb here, I mean, do we REALLY need the post office anymore?the IRS? there are ways to do these things with NO government agency involved and for less cost), 'lack of gov. oversight is what led to our current financial situation'--(isn't it funny how government INTERFERENCE also led to it?), 'Minimum wage' (raising it hurts small businesses, and min wage is the beginning wage, shouldn't all American's aspire to make much more than minimum wage? It is the starting point, not the end point, so what does it really matter where the starting point is? Isn't one of our basic intrinsic truths that hard work will make your life fruitful? Don't we believe in hard work anymore?)
So, I think the only arguments you put forth were the liberal side. It takes both sides to explain the matter fully.
Still luv ya Buzz.

[eatmorchikn 2000]

where are all the statistics that Canada's system is so terrible? and if its so terrible how come they arent coming down to the USA in droves since our system is so great?

Minimum wage is the starting point but I know of none that offer good health insurance at that wage scale, not everyone can be a CEO u know besides many of the CEO's and fuind managers on Wall Street decided they did not want to work hard either for thier money and many of thier decisions lead to the economic meltdown, of course they walked away with thier golden parashoots while the avg worker was let go with nothing....... not even afforable heathcare for thier familys!

[Kalthia]

I don't need statistics, I was commenting on how one sided Buzz's article is, and I have personal experience, friends in Canada. So I understand the system. I have also been a nurse for 20 years. So, I understand the good and bad of our system. The bad is that we allow insurance companies to do 'group' policies through employment. Stop allowing that, and you put every American on equal footing. Stop allowing the insurance companies to deny coverage on pre-existing conditions and you level the playing field even more. I don't need the government to limit my choices or hold my hand. I need to be in control of my own life and support the companies that I think are socially responsible and doing a good job. Then the gov. could subsidize the lower income families on sliding scale and help them pay for their insurance. But having a govie decide if my doctor and I have made the right decision is most certainly the WRONG decision.

Why does the "Health Care Reform" oh sorry now it is the "insurance reform" bill take all the control away from you? Why are they not looking at ways, like removing employers from the picture, to give us more options, make the companies compete for EVERY Americans business? Because they are all politicians through and through, and the companies have more money than you to support their political aspirations. So you get nothing, they get preference.

[Kalthia]

If you have listened to the debate, you will hear that your employers will be taxed at 15% for benefits if they are not using the exchange, while those using the exchange will be taxed at 8%. This wasn't from news, this is from the mouths of your representatives speaking on the floor of congress. So what will happen? There will be no employer who can afford to pay an extra 7% to keep you in private insurance. So now the gov. controls it all... and some government dweeb is deciding if your life is worth the money.

If you raise minimum wage, there are less minimum wage jobs. Simple, there is only so much money. All you do is make employers expect more from a minimum wage earner and hire less workers. Better to have a low starting point, so people can at least get in, allow them to grow and learn and get some self respect by having a job. If you hand someone everything, how do they feel about themselves? I would feel awful if I lived every day on someone else's dime. I have worked 2 and 3 jobs to support myself and my family and I am damn proud of the fact that I have. I would not take that away from anyone, and doing so has hurt all of us.

[fabricnthreads]

Yes, we need the post office.

Minimum wage is equivalent to $15,080 a year. Not a lot of money, but where, now that the manufacturing base has been exported to any Third World country that would let the corporations in, where do you think people are going to get jobs that pay the more than the minimum wage they should "aspire to?" It has nothing to do with hard work if you can't find a job.

Remember all those tax cuts for the wealthy, you know the people who would invest their tax cuts $$ and create jobs, under Bush and years of Trickle Down?????

What did they do with the money? Inflated the house of cards stock market, built and burst tech and housing bubbles, and went off shore.

I don't know how old you are, but I remember the 50's and 60's when there was a booming economy, a ton of expansion. Those days are gone, those wages relative to the cost of living, are gone. The reason? Manufacturing - autos, textiles, steel, etc - is gone and along with it, the money it put into the economy. Why? 40 years of Republican policy favoring deregulation and union busting.

Sadly, my kids' generation will be the first since WWII that will be less prosperous, less healthy and less empowered than its parents' generation. It is a fact.

[Kalthia]

WHY do we need the post office? So they can send me ads from walmart? so they can send my elderly mother fake checks? There is no reason for the USPS. There are plenty of commercial entities to move packages around the U.S. And the actual mail you get is worthless waste of money... I pay every single bill online and paperless. I do all my banking online. If we want to truly reduce cost and save the environment, get rid of that waste of space time paper and money!

Again, Minimum wage is a starting place, you have to start, learn grown and move on. I don't expect everyone to be a CEO. I am certainly not, I was a nurse for 20 years and moved into a new profession because I could no longer stand to watch people die. Finding a job will be harder if you raise the minimum wage and reduce the number of jobs.....

I think that both republicans and dems share the housing market collapse. Social engineering and requiring companies to lower their standards when lending to get everyone the American Dream of owning, was a HUGE mistake. The commercial sector had it right and the politicians made it WRONG.

[Kalthia]

If you think we are less healthy than the 50's and 60's ... you should look around. Life expectancy according to the WHO has gone from 48 to 65 in that time. http://www.who.int/whr/1998/media_centre/50facts/en/ Childrens deaths are down by almost 1/2.. I mean it is amazing the changes we have made in that time in safety and health.

Manufacturing will never again be the business of the world. We will manufacture smarter, faster and cheaper, and the jobs will never be there again. We have to work in an entirely different environment than in the 50's and 60's. This is a transitional period for the world, until we figure out what things might look like in 20 years, we are walking aimlessly around til we see the light. But more gov control over my life, is not something I ever want.

I don't want any politician making a decision about MY life. They don't know me, they could never understand where I have come from, the experiences I have had, and they have no right to make a life changing decision about MY LIFE.

[Kalthia]

So will your kids feel MORE empowered by the Government controlling insurance?

[upland bill]

Glad to see you back so soon ... will you be able to report without constant interruptions??? :)

[TruthAndConsequences]

One cool part of reading this, Buzz, is being able to hear you read it in my head, in your voice! Well written and captures your cadence! I miss you and the gang!!!

[threeb3232]

I thought that I heard a rucas in Fairfax. Great article. I'm looking forward to reading more.

[SteveJo]

Moderates don’t argue like this, Buzz! The issue is affordability of healthcare/health insurance reforms, not the need for them. Most acknowledge that it’s pay now or pay A LOT MORE later, but rushing very complicated and expensive legislation is foolhardy. We’re a trillion dollars in debt and in recession!

And what’s with the Madoff references. He’s a crook who perpetrated his felonies right under the noses of regulators. His case has nothing to do with the politics of the right. Using him in the context of this article is an illogical polemic.

[willjaysmom]

Awesome article! I definitely look forward to reading more.

[SCmommy]

Very good!

If I print off a copy & mail it across state lines to a conservative relative & he goes ballistic & gets arrested--it won't be a federal crime then, will it? ;)

[Christopher Legge]

Major props on the article, Buzz! When can we expect you to be guest hosting Countdown?

[snowzplace]

I don’t understand how anyone can vote for any of the proposed health care bills under the guise of do “doing what the people want.” If a member of Congress can be so out of touch with his or her constituents to think that statement is true, he or she should just read the research results. If they think this proposed legislation can be “revenue neutral,” they are not smart enough to represent the people. If they believe we are dumb enough to believe we believe what they claim to believe, they best believe otherwise.

[Liam]

Do you have polls to back that up? Because most of the polls I'm reading say that the majority of people WANT this reform, so just asserting that it isn't true isn't really good enough, you're going to have to provide some evidence.

YOU may not like it, and your friends may not, and everyone who is listening to Limbaugh or Hannity and swallowing their statements­-of-questi­onable-ver­acity on the subject don't like the parody of it they've been spoon fed.

But when you look at polls that ask not "Do you like the current bill" but "How do you feel on (issue 1) and (issue 2) and (issue 3)", the answers fairly closely match what the bill is trying to do.

[Kalthia]

I will point you to this poll:
http://www.gallup.com/poll/121814/More-Disapprove-Than-Approve-Obama-Healthcare.aspx of American's disapproving of Obama's healcare plan.

This poll where 2/3rds of the public do not believe congress understands the true issues:
http://www.gallup.com/poll/121916/Two-Three-Doubt-Congress-Grasp-Healthcare-Issues.aspx

[Kalthia]

I do not believe the current administration or congress have enough information to do this job even 1/2 right, and it will only end up hurting everyone in the end. If you think they can run a program, look at Medicare. Have you ever had to take care of a patient on Medicare? I have.

Have you looked at the plan that the Federal Workers have? The one your congressman enjoys? Guess what, it is a way to have competition between insurers and provide everyone choices, but this plan is not being used as a base for the current bill.

An amendment was recently debated on the floor. The amendment said "No federal employee or political appointee may dictate how a physician practices medicine". Do you want Jo Government Worker deciding the course of action your physician takes? Guess what, it was a republican putting the amendment forward and the Dems voted it down. Why? Because they are setting it up to ration care in the future. Take an expensive medication? Hmmm wonder if your worth it? Maybe you are too old, too sick, or just not worthy of the government dollars necessary to give you that drug.

We see several examples of this playing out in the world. UK and in our own states. Why are we not taking good examples, like the Federal Employees health plan, and using those?

[Kalthia]

In the last 24 hours (google search)

http://briefingroom.thehill.com/2009/07/28/poll-americans-skeptical-on-healthcare-reform/
"Less than a quarter of likely voters believe the Democrats' healthcare reform will lower costs, and by a 2-to-1 margin, voters believe the quality of care will suffer, a new Rasmussen poll finds.

23% said healthcare costs will go down if the legislation is passed, while 53% say costs will go up.

Exactly half of respondents said the quality of care will decline if the reforms are enacted, while just 23% say care will improve.

Overall, 47% are in favor of the legislation, with 49% opposed. More important than the small margin, however, is the respective intensity of each side. Just 25% "strongly favor" the plan, while 41% are "strongly opposed."

Clearly, not great news for Democrats…"

[LeftRight]

Two things:

1) As for the revenue neutral, it WOULD be, because people would be paying for the services.

2) As for the rest of your statement, even though the numbers have dropped, a SOLID majority of ALL Americans support this, EVEN IF IT MEANS INCREASED TAXES!!!!!!

[Kalthia]

Your solid majority is slipping. Check the polls...

[davisss]

Great article buzz - congrats on the new gig! :)

[bowseat93]

Buzz!! Love you on the radio (hope to hear you back there soon), but think you have quite a future as a progressive blogger! Looking forward to more!!!