I'm not sure why it is people can look at two sources of relative similarity and totally accept one while totally rejecting the other.
My friend Mitch is constantly sending me e-mails with things like "Isn't this scary?" in the subject line. When I open his e-mail to see what he's referencing, it's almost always some right-wing news source claiming that President Obama's health care plan will euthanize Grandma, sterilize the kid down the street and outlaw Christmas unless we agree that Santa Claus should be black.
Now Mitch, as you know, is a pretty intelligent guy. When leftist sources claimed that Dick Cheney ate boiled babies for dinner, watched snuff films for entertainment and led Dubya around on a leash when no one was looking, Mitch dismissed that as ridiculous.
Even when I showed him the evidence.
It's like the folks who listen to talk radio, left and right. Some take the words of Rush Limbaugh as gospel, while others wouldn't believe him if he said the sun was rising in the East.
Mitch's latest panty-twister was an editorial in the Washington Times citing some early writings by one of Obama's health-care advisors as proof that euthanasia and forced sterilization were goals of the left in the current battle over health-care reform.
Now I suppose it's always possible that some Democrats would love to see forced sterilzation of Republicans, and there are certainly plenty of conservatives wishing liberals weren't allowed to reproduce.
But if you look at motivations, it's easy to see that the Times -- owned by the Reverend Moon -- is opposed to health-care reform. And while it would be nice if both sides limited themselves to the truth in arguing their case, it just doesn't happen anymore.
Truth is nice, but to 21st century politicians, winning is much nicer.
Posts
6 comments:
Your friend Mitch may be off his nut, but in this, I wonder if the evidence may be there for reconsidering President Obama's approach, if not his goal.
Mike, my sister works for a congressman (a true progressive) and even he has put the brakes on in the last few weeks as his staff discussed the finer points of the proposed health care reform.
It's clear we need to do something, but to my mind, it is equally clear we can't adopt a plan that will hurt middle and lower-income bracket people, much less the elderly.
Face facts, the orientals revere their aged citizens and we ought to be doing a better job that slamming grandma and grandpa in the some home and forgetting about them.
Maybe there has to be some old-fashioned non-partisan cooperation here. The trouble is, I suspect, that the deep-pockets purveyors of insurance, drugs, and healthcare don't want reform and they're "scaring" the daylights out of our Congress.
Maybe you should ease up on your paranoid friend: sometimes "they" are actually out to get you.
In this case, I am beginning to think they are.
Jeff, in Pomona
Your "friend" Mitch is getting worked up over nothing.
The new healthcare reforms will only force poor families to eat one of their young.
The rest of us are safe.
Evelyn
"Mitch" is an idiot.
We need to start rationing healthcare.
If a baby is not going to make it, maybe we should let it die.
If some grandma or grandpa is consuming a disproportionate amount of healthcare dollars, pull the plug,.
Your friend is probably over sixty and worried that he's going to die.
Maybe he should just accept the fact that he will.
Jim
i love jim's empathy...
i also love the debating.
it is how we find out where we stand.
i hate the term 'idiot'.
so much of what i used to think is now revised.
it happens when life teaches you a thing or two.
i just hope i can 'pay as i go' for my health care.
it is all a huge gamble, hoping for no catastrophe.
i am expendable, for sure.
nan....
I showed my history professor this blog and the responses and he said that Mitch is at best a confused child and at worst a buggering idiot.
I'm not sure yet what all this means.
What's interesting is that there seems to be no safe place to be on this issue. Everyone is in one camp or the other.
Aaron
"Truth is nice, but to 21st century politicians, winning is much nicer. "
No. You're mistaken.
Whining is more important.
Jeff, from Pomona
Post a Comment