I'd like to take this opportunity to piggyback off of OB's post from earlier this week ("The Party of No, The Party of Lies") which showed that an astonishingly high number of Americans do not believe in basic facts like natural selection, or even heliocentrism , and drew parallels to the outright falsehoods that people in town hall meetings across the country have chosen to believe. I'd like to add that I, too, am astounded at how easily people can be convinced of something that is obviously wrong. Mere months after overwhelming majorities expressed support for health care reform, and even a public option, the public has completely soured after being bombarded with some of the most absurd criticisms of Congress's as-of-yet unfinished health care plan. Not only do a majority of American's now oppose Obama's health care plan, but majorities and near-majorities believe in what I can only describe as utter fabrications concerning said plan. Fabrications that a little bit of research, or even common sense could easily debunk.
Majorities in the poll believe the plans would give health insurance coverage to illegal immigrants; would lead to a government takeover of the health system; and would use taxpayer dollars to pay for women to have abortions — all claims that nonpartisan fact-checkers say are untrue about the legislation that has emerged so far from Congress.
Forty-five percent think the reform proposals would allow the government to make decisions about when to stop providing medical care for the elderly.
You've got to be kidding me. Why would the Democrats be so politically inept that they would add funding for abortions and free health insurance to illegal immigrants? How could anyone believe that's what they were doing? And why would that many people accept at face value the idea that there are "death panels" that would stop covering the elderly? Of course, it doesn't help that the chair of the RNC won't even refute the claim. The elderly already get coverage now. It's called Medicare. I only hear talk about getting rid of Medicare from Republicans.
Also important to note is that NBC found that when confronted with the facts about the upcoming health care legislation (namely that there exist no provisions to insure illegal aliens, fund abortions, or kill grandma) respondents warmed to the President's plan. Sam Seder, filling in for Cenk on TYT, puts this into perspective:
--------------------------------------
Update: actually, a new Rasmussen poll paints a slightly rosier picture on the Public Option. So does yesterday's Rasmussen poll trump Tuesday's NBC poll? It's times like these that make me really hate polls.
------------------------------------- More updates: It's come to my attention from one of my commenters that while none of the proposed legislation mandates the funding of abortions, the House and Senate bills allow for the creation of a public plan that could fund abortions. For more info check out Factcheck.org's "Abortion: Which Side Is Fabricating?"
Figured I should say something about health care reform, but then I decided I'd rather let other people do it for me. That being said, let's turn to Michael Maiello of Forbes magazine, and the legendary Roger Ebert!
Maiello paints a rather bleak picture of health care reform in his most recent column ("Obamacare is No Big Deal"). Still, it's a welcome breath of fresh air amidst all the hysteria.
Roger Ebert throws in his two cents on the health care debate on his blog ("'Death Panels'. A Most Excellent Term"). He's criticizing Sarah Palin's invocation of "death panels" into what should be a serious national discussion, while simultaneously praising the actual phrase "death panels" as a prime example of literary flourish.
They're both entertaining and insightful columns. I'll provide some of my favorite quotes here but the entire articles are worthwhile reads.
ObamaCare isn't worth all the shouting. It's not an ambitious proposal. It doesn't change health care as we know it. Not even the industries that will be most effected are that worked up about it. The health insurers won.
-Maiello
Oh, and there will be no death panels--most people will continue to have their care rationed by bureaucrats working in insurance companies instead. Why that's more comforting to people remains a mystery. If somebody denies me access to a medical service, I really don't care if they work for Aetna or the government.
-Maiello
"Death panels" is an example of a meme. A meme is a word, phrase, saying, idea or belief that passes from one mind to another. The Domino Effect. Alligators in the sewers. Blondes have more fun. Tax and Spend. The New Frontier. When the going gets tough, the tough get going. Swiftboating. Where's the beef? The King of Beers. A meme succeeds because it survives and reproduces. It works. It has utility. It can define an issue in the desired way. It is almost impossible to refute, because it seems so clearly to open and close the subject simultaneously. Even a single adjective is fatal to it. It admits of no qualifiers: "When the going gets tough, the tough, if they want to live to fight another day, reevaluate the situation." How's that for a lousy meme?
-Roger Ebert
My take on health care reform? Disappointment. I really have given up hope on the public option, which means whatever health care reform we do get, it won't be universal coverage by any stretch of the imagination. Combine that with the fact that we're still in Iraq, Guantanamo is still open, we're still wire-tapping Americans, and none of the last administration's proponents of torture will face criminal charges, and I'm starting to wonder at what point can the party controlling the White House, the House, and 60 votes in the Senate decide to start acting like the majority party.
Lefty's Last Cry is hosted on blogger, and by default we have google ads. Often the ads are irrelevant to our content, and sometimes they stand in direct opposition to our politics. When that happens it sucks, but we're small and that's just how it has to be.
Talking Points Memo is huge. They have tons of traffic, they've won awards, and they have their own targeted ads all over the place. They have a contract with Advertise Liberally. So, after seeing this ad, I'm thinking maybe it's time for Talking Points to stop using google ads. It's an ad from Newsmax, a conservative news source that has ads featuring poorly photo-shopped images of the President making a "smug" face with a tagline promising a poll with a loaded question.
For more context, click on the image below. It's a screen shot of an article I was reading, criticizing a Republican's statement on health care, followed by the ad from newsmax. (the image has not been altered in any way, though it was pretty hard to copy the whole thing with three screen shots, and paste them together in microsoft paint).
So, why does this bother me so much? I'm annoyed by the pervasiveness of these Newsmax ads on the internet (they're literally all over the place). There's a ton of these conservative polls out there, and it's frustrating to see the public discourse be swayed to the right with polls with leading questions that let republicans set the agenda. They have every right to do this, of course, but as a prominent liberal blog, I just don't see why TPM needs to give Newsmax a soap box to stand on and get their message heard. In the very least it's frustrating to all of their readers who probably all want to get away from those ads.
And if you want to know why I don't trust Newsmax, check out Media Matters' articles about Newsmax, or just look at their wikipedia page and check under the subtitle of "Controversial and/or incorrect articles".
