Tuesday, September 1, 2009
Barry / Politics Wamp and Circumstance: Death Panel Edition
Posted by Bruce Barry on Tue, Sep 1, 2009 at 1:15 PM
"Because people who like ideas and dislike authority tend to identify with the Democratic left, while people who feel threatened by new ideas and more comfortable in a disciplined and ordered world tend to identify with the Republican right. Democrats and progressives let a thousand flowers bloom. Republicans and the right issue directives. This has been the yin and yang of American politics and culture. But it means that the Democratic left's new ideas often fall victim to its own notorious lack of organization and to the right's highly-organized fear mongering."Reich isn't conjuring those characteristics attributed to conservatives out of thin air; there is solid empirical evidence in political psychology connecting conservatism with a lack of openness to experience, intolerance of ambiguity, a lack of integrative complexity, and high needs for structure and closure.
The political voices on health care we are hearing these days in Middle Tennessee certainly appear to reinforce these distinctions. The latest example: gubernatorial hopeful Zach Wamp's inane comment yesterday that optional end-of-life planning could lead to death panels "in some circumstances." Wamp says "I just don't understand" why such consultations should qualify for Medicare reimbursement. Um, because lots of poor elderly folks won't get it otherwise?
Perhaps Wamp can use some of the generous federal health insurance he currently enjoys as a Congressman to get himself an integrative complexity transplant.
Comments (26)
Showing 1-26 of 26
"What does the health care reform debate say about party politics in America today?"
It says that no one cares about the facts. We just want to scream at each other.
http://tomoveanation.blogspot.com
like
dislike
"Because people who like ideas and dislike authority tend to identify with the Democratic left, while people who feel threatened by new ideas and more comfortable in a disciplined and ordered world tend to identify with the Republican right."
LOL
What a crock.
Democrats dislike authority?
They have a funny way of showing it since they are constantly trying to expand the authority of government over all of us in virtually every aspect of existence. That is what their "ideas" are all about. From cap and trade to healthcare to financial regulation to virtually everything else the current Democratic administration is doing, it is all about a vast expansion of authority by the government. Democrats don't dislike authority - they just dislike any authority that wasn't initiated by themselves.
Furthermore, Democrats don't have any more ideas than anyone else. They just have ideas that conform to a more collectivist ideology than others do. And that doesn't count as either more or better ideas.
"Democrats dislike authority?
They have a funny way of showing it since they are constantly trying to expand the authority of government over all of us in virtually every aspect of existence."
I actually agree. Democrats and Republicans are constantly trying to expand the authority of government over all of us. Democrats love authority as much as Republicans. Ironically, it's the people that vote for Democrats (liberals) that don't like authority, although we have no where else to turn. That's one reason that left-wing radio doesn't work very well. Conservatives have a pathological need to be told what to think and to be comforted in the face of all the change in the world and that explains the success of the Limbaugh's and Hannity's of the world. Liberals aren't going to show up at town hall meetings and ask a bunch of stupid questions just because someone from Air-America tells them too.
Take your medication, Gilbert. The black helicopters will go away when you do.
How many times did you vote for George "Warrantless Wiretaps" Bush?
"Anarchists, now there's a bunch of folks that don't like authority."
Not to mention the fact that they're right wing fear mongers
"Ironically, it's the people that vote for Democrats (liberals) that don't like authority, although we have no where else to turn."
Get real.
It is the liberal base of the Democratic party that loves authority most of all.
Who do you think it is that are rabid believers in a government run single payer mandatory participation healthcare system and are pissed at Obama that he isn't explicitiy pushing that? That would be the hardcore liberals. That would be a vast expansion of government authority. They are also the true believers in the "global warming" scare and all in favor of government mandating what kind of energy we produce, what kind of cars we drive, what kind of lightbulbs we use, etc. etc. on and on.
There is a group of people who truly do not like authority but it isn't the liberals.
It is the libertarians.
" That's one reason that left-wing radio doesn't work very well. Conservatives have a pathological need to be told what to think and to be comforted in the face of all the change in the world and that explains the success of the Limbaugh's and Hannity's of the world"
And that is nothing more than self-serving spin trying to rationalize the failure of liberals to succeed in that market.
Furthermore it is liberals who want government to be a national parent who protects and comforts all it's "children" from the changes in the world. It isn't conservatives out demonstrating against economic globalization and agitating for government to protect their jobs from foreign competition or advocating for new entitlement programs all over the place.
"How many times did you vote for George "Warrantless Wiretaps" Bush?"
Exactly now it's Obama finishing the job. Yes we still have the wiretaps. And just think if Bush and Obama really wanted to save the economy, they could have paid all of the bad mortgages and credit cards for a fraction of what the gave to their bankster buddies. Just think of what say, 200 billion into SBA loans could have done. AND so now we cant afford squat and the depression is getting worse and worse.
I think its time for everyone to wake up and think for yourelves. Screw Rush, Hannity and Air America
Real conservatives are against the expansion of government, except when it comes to homos. We're hoping to bring back the sodomy laws to bring the government into the most intimate relationships. Sure, we'll argue that the government can't do anything right while we collect a government salary and then insist that the government is really good at figuring out what a family should look like.
Hope you've got 2.5 kids and you're living on a street named after a tree!
"There is a group of people who truly do not like authority but it isn't the liberals.
It is the libertarians."
Nice try Gilbert. Let's see, Libertarians are against foreign intervention, especially money pits like Iraq. They also are opposed to massive military spending and a large standing army. They have a live and let live philosophy and are for legalization of most drugs, allowing gay marriage, and keeping abortion legal. That makes them quite liberal on foreign and social issues. They are also quite conservative on economic issues but the right-ward tilt of the Republicans into culture war and endless foreign entanglements has caused many self-described libertarians into the Democratic tent.
In short, libertarians have more in common with progressives than they do conservatives.
How "libertarians" have confused their possessions with their selves baffles me to this day. They do a lot more whining about perceived threats to their property than actual threats to their personal liberty. I'm very much a civil libertarian, but big "L" Libertarians are more interested in defending greed than defending people, which makes really just a variant of Republicans, which is really backed up by the how many of them oppose abortion and promote theocratic ideas.
Good point OG DG. There is a difference between a small "l" libertarian, and a Libertarian. It's amusing to see how many people call themselves libertarian and back the war in Iraq. A good example is a talk-show host named Neal Boortz out of Atlanta. He calls himself a "libertarian" but supports everything out of the right-wing playbook. He's a Republican, not a libertarian.
"Libertarians are more interested in defending greed than defending people"
Oh boy, it's kool aid time, Actually defending peoples civil rights is not greed at all. Greed is when you have a two party government that gives trillions of your hard earned tax money to the exact same group of bankers that destroyed our economy.
"They are also quite conservative on economic issues but the right-ward tilt of the Republicans into culture war and endless foreign entanglements has caused many self-described libertarians into the Democratic tent.
In short, libertarians have more in common with progressives than they do conservatives."
No they don't. They greatest real world impact on the lifes of the majority of people ARE the economic issues - not the cultural lightening rod issues like gay marriage or abortion.
Most people are not going to want to have abortions or enter into gay marriages. In constrast, everyone is impacted by wealth redistribution schemes like "progressive" taxation entitlement programs, government interference in freedom of contract, etc.
About 40% of the population currently pay NO federal income taxes. They are getting a free ride on those who do. Those who are paying the freight for all those deadbeats could have a higher personal standard of living (better cars, better houses, etc) for their entire lives if they weren't being forced to subsidize the existence of others.
The right to keep and control one's own property is not one iota less of an inherent individal right than freedom of speech or reglion or anything else.
"Libertarians are more interested in defending greed than defending people"
More of the usual DG nonsense.
Greed is thinking you have a "right" to someone else's property and attempting to get your hands on it in the first place.
Oh and by the way Chris, don't think I didn't notice your backing off trying to defend your absurd claim that liberals don't like authority.
"Oh and by the way Chris, don't think I didn't notice your backing off trying to defend your absurd claim that liberals don't like authority."
I wasn't trying to back off anything. I will say that classifying people on what degree that they don't like authority within the tired "liberal/conservative" paradigm is futile. Both those groups have individuals who don't like authority, it is just usually against different things. Conservatives don't mind warrantless wiretapping or military intervention and liberals hate these things. Liberals don't mind higher tax rates (for the most part) and conservatives hate it. Liberals distrust large corporate entities and conservatives distrust large government entities. Honestly, I don't see much difference in the two and this may come as a surprise to you Gilbert, but I don't trust any of em. I know it doesn't fit into your stereotype, but I don't trust government to fix things anymore than I trust big business.
"In constrast, everyone is impacted by wealth redistribution schemes like "progressive" taxation entitlement programs, government interference in freedom of contract, etc."
Just a question, Gilbert, who in Washington is really standing up for you there? Every time I have a debate with my Republican mother, who frets about the "socialist Democrats," I just point out that there really isn't that big a difference in the two parties. One is for really big government, and the other is the Democrats.
"Liberals distrust large corporate entities and conservatives distrust large government entities. Honestly, I don't see much difference in the two and this may come as a surprise to you Gilbert, but I don't trust any of em."
Yeah if you just look at the events,- with an open mind and think a bit,- that have taken place over the last 20 years you will see they are one in the same
"I will say that classifying people on what degree that they don't like authority within the tired "liberal/conservative" paradigm is futile."
Uh Huh.
Let's see now, who was it that said this:
"Ironically, it's the people that vote for Democrats (liberals) that don't like authority, although we have no where else to turn."
That would be you.
"I just point out that there really isn't that big a difference in the two parties. One is for really big government, and the other is the Democrats."
That is also nonsense.
The Democrats have expanded the role, power and scope of government to a far greater degree than the Republicans have.
FDR wasn't a Republican. His so-called New Deal ushered in the age of vastly expanded government. That's why they called it "New Deal" in the first place - it was drastically different from the old deal.
LBJ wasn't a Republican either. His programs like Medicare have increased government spending enormously - far in excess of the original (bogus) projections of their costs.
And now we have Obama who is trying on multiple fronts to engineer another vast exansion of government in as short a time as possible and racking up a bigger addition to the national debt than all previous presidents combined.
"The Democrats have expanded the role, power and scope of government to a far greater degree than the Republicans have."
You have got to be kidding Gilbert. The whole point of the Bush II administration was to expand the role of the executive branch and the federal government as a whole. Love state's rights in theory but when the state of California wants to make their own laws regarding auto emissions, sue them. When the state of Oregon wants to have their own laws regarding assisted suicide, sue them. On and on and on. Reagan, that other "big government conservative," the one who talked a big talk but never walked the walk, left office with a greatly expanded federal government. His fans like Phil Valentine blame the Democratic controlled congress but forget that he had a veto pen. In fact, Clinton, that "hillbilly Socialist" was more conservative relative to the growth of government than any Republican since Hoover. And if Obama is a Socialist, so was Eisenhower, Nixon, Ford, Reagan and both Bushes.
The fact is, Republicans have never really been for slowing the growth of government and have arguably worked harder than the Democrats to bury Jeffersonian democracy, i.e. decentralized government. Only, unlike the Dems, every two years they campaign on a "small government" platform and get away with it every time. Actions speak louder than words Gilbert.
"And now we have Obama who is trying on multiple fronts to engineer another vast exansion of government in as short a time as possible and racking up a bigger addition to the national debt than all previous presidents combined."
And by the way, that is a popular talking point on the right but is completely incorrect. Most of the current expenditures were hold-overs from the Bush administration.
"You have got to be kidding Gilbert. The whole point of the Bush II administration was to expand the role of the executive branch and the federal government as a whole."
You're full of it Chris.
There is NO other president who did more to expand government than FDR.
"And by the way, that is a popular talking point on the right but is completely incorrect. Most of the current expenditures were hold-overs from the Bush administration."
Wrong again.
The $787 B so-called "stimulus" was not a "hold over" from the Bush administration. The expansion of the SCHIP entitlement program was not a "holdover" - in fact the Dems deliberatly held it up until Bush got out of office because they knew he would veto it. And the same thing goes for a lot of the other things in their pork barrell budget.
Furthermre, it's not just about "current expenditures" - it's about the costs of all the things Obama is trying to get passed. His healthcare "reform" alone will add $1 trillion in spending over the next 10 years (and a hell of a lot more beyond that). And in reality it will probably be much more than even those CBO estimates given their lousy track record at estimating the future costs of entitlement programs. Medicare turned out to cost about 9 times as much in 1990 as the CBO had projected it to in 1965.
