I didn’t attend yesterday’s health care town hall meeting with Rep. Vic Snyder and Rep. Mike Ross at Arkansas Children’s Hospital. Lots of other people did, apparently, because it’s been all over Fox News, among other outlets. Over lunch today I had a discussion about these disruptions with someone I respect deeply and it has assisted me in formulating these thoughts.
But first, an aside: In several previous posts I used the term “teabagger” to describe what has commonly become known as TEA activists or TEA party members. This, of course, pissed them off. I’m not alone in using this term, and that’s also not my justification for it. An aspect of it is rooted in my own sense of humor. Simply, I find it funny. The remainder is rooted in convenience and expediency. If I use the term terbagger you know to which I am referring. Thus, I don’t have to re-define it for the reader ad nauseum.
The point here, however, is to illustrate that their frustration – whether you call them a teabagger or invite them to a public forum – is real and visceral. It also has little if nothing to do with health care.
These people, almost exclusively older, middle class whites, publicly express their displeasure by screaming and shouting at elected officials. Let’s call them shouters. From what I can gather their frustration centers on government mistrust. The shouters don’t appreciate that the government is speedily moving forward with health care reform. Speed equates to ram-rodding, and no one likes to be ram-rodded, even if it means giving more people access to something they could not afford otherwise. Essentially, it’s disrupting life in the slow lane.
But such a position ignores the complexity of the task at hand. This, naturally, begs the question as to whether any of these shouters understand what it is they’re shouting about. My guess is no, they don’t.
So why so much anger? These efforts are deeply rooted in racial fears and the anxiety that the Obama presidency has brought to the lives of uneducated, middle class whites. Take, for example, the “birthers” movement – a grandiose effort by middle class whites to illustrate that President Barack Obama is not, in fact, a natural born citizen of the United States. There’s nothing to be gained by their efforts (much like these recent disruptions), but that doesn’t stop them from happening.
Paul Krugman, the Nobel Prize-winning economist and columnist for The New York Times, notes this in an article today on this subject. He also notes that fewer Americans can be swayed by appeals to fears about race and culture. Yet, there remains a noisy group that will always be upset about it, and therefore motivated by it. If these shouting matches are illustrative of anything it is that the “angry white voter” is alive in America. Unfortunate as it may be, it also comes as little surprise.
Alaska governor Sarah Palin’s candidacy for vice president galvanized this voter demographic and gave them a platform to express what was, essentially, a fear of electing a black man for president. Unfortunately for them, the decible levels of their enthusiasm didn’t equate to votes; the McCain-Palin ticket was whipped on election day. This encouraged their fears, which only made it more convenient for them to respond harshly to any efforts by the Obama administration to solve the myriad problems created, in part, by the previous administration.
In the short term I don’t know whether the shouters will successfully kill health care reform. Nor can I predict the impact a failed health care reform effort will have on the Obama presidency. Regardless, if it’s not health care it will be something else. Who knows, maybe “cash for clunkers” will dominate the headlines in 2010. My point is that this is bigger than health care policy, automotive bailouts or card check legislation. It’s probably time the shouters admitted it.
Pathetic, predictable, reactionary thinking. Before the election many thought that critics of an Obama presidency would most likely be called racist in an attempt to shame them into silence. Thanks for playing true to form Blake. The only racist statements I have heard about were hurled by an SEIU activist at an African-American opponent of the Obama plan. You and your ilk (Krugman, et al) are the only ones who want to inject race into this debate.
Older Americans are against the Obama plan because many of them see the real problems in the current Medicare system (new enrollee’s unable to find an accepting MD) and are naturally wary of expanding this to everyone else, especially as they learn of plans to cut off treatments for their own conditions as a way to pay for this government plan. Others are wary of a plan that could disrupt their own health coverage because, surprise, poll after poll shows that most Americans are very satisfied with their health insurance and their medical care in our system.
Obama’s drop in popularity in the last few months has not been latent racism but has occurred as independents and moderates find out that he is not the moderate those in the news media assured them he was, but, is in fact a leftist that wants to remake the United States into West Sweden.
By the way, how Obama like of you to admit you didn’t attend the event in question before accusing those who oppose the Democrat plan of acting like stupid racists.
I was gonna say this guy was a little wacky, but wait! He’s a doctor! He must be right!
I put the MD in there because one of Mr. Rutherford’s assertions is that critics of the Obama plan don’t really know anything about healthcare or the plan they just don’t like the race of the president. I know about healthcare, medicare, and this plan and I am against it. I do not mean to suggest that mine is the only oinion that matters, just that I am edumucated on the subjects at hand. Flame away if you want.
I am also not so afraid that I feel I must hide behind an anonymous posting name. I figure if Mr. Rutherford is willing to put his name on what he writes, then the least I can do is own up to my thoughts.
Teabaggers and others stampeded into warrantless fear and irrational hatred by self-serving political and corporate interests bent on killing or delaying much-needed healthcare reform in this country can’t do it on intelligent, respectful two-way conversations and debate in these town hall meetings because they don’t have the facts on their side. Their only chance is to yell, shout and shut down rational debate that would lead to civil discourse on this important subject. All they have going for them is rude, dangerous mob rule—a tactic which runs counter to the civilized, democratic process.
Racists? Maybe. I don’t know.
Un-American. Possibly. But I doubt it.
Un-democratic. Absolutely.
Give us some facts, then. Mortality rates are worse for almost all cancers when you compare the US against Canada and Great Britain. Worse in the government run systems, that is. Whose against reform? Everyone wants reform. The question is what kind of reform. Your post added nothing to the conversation except more of the namecalling you claimed to be against.
My comments were posted as a response to Blake’s article and the disruptive mobs at town halls who are keeping people from sharing opinions, ideas and facts on the healthcare issue. I stand by my post. I respect all those on all sides of this important issue who genuinely want as much factual information as possible so as to be able to make an informed decision. We can’t get there with mob rule.
I don’t think I’ve ever read a more ignorant assessment.
Tincanman, you are really respecting them by calling them irrational, un-democratic, un-American, possible racists. I also find it hilarious that your side wants calm, rational debate now since the original plan was to ram it through congress before anybody had a chance to read the damn thing. Give me a break.
R Bryan Benafield Jr MD: Ok, here’s your break. I’ve always wanted calm, rational debate. Never said otherwise. It seems odd that a person with MD after their name would have such a problem with reading comprehension but I’ll try again. The comment on ‘racist’ comes from Blake’s article. I merely commented on it and said I don’t know if they are racist. Do you know? At any rate, the comments such as un-American and un-democratic were directed at those involved in instigating mob rule at town hall meetings, not honest folk from all sides interested in hearing their elected representatives. You seem confused by what I said which was that I respect all those on all sides who genuinely want or need more information on this issue. That’s a true statement. It was then, it is now. That cordiality, however, does not extend to those who use mob rule, shouting and other tactics to shut down or turn otherwise peaceful fact-gathering sessions into chaos. It matters not to me which ‘side’ uncivil people claim to represent. Those types do not seem to want or tolerate rational discussion. Do I believe they are un-democratic? You betcha’. On the politicians’ attempt to ram it through before they read it comment, I’m in full agreement with you on that one. It seems to me to be every bit as dangerous and idiotic to meaningful healthcare reform as mob rule is to effective democracy.
I don’t think I am confused at all. You, and by “you” I mean the Democrats, don’t mind mob rule, community organizers or astroturfing in the least bit as long as it is coordinated by David Axelrod, ACORN, or SEIU. When its the other side that starts doing it is when y’all get all bent out of shape about it. We have a long history in this country of fiery civil discourse that would make this current activity look like a bridge club. You claim to be against that activity by all yet you only mentioned those opposed to Obama’s health reform. I think I “read” you very well. Thanks for continuing the civil discourse with the personal attacks though.
I’m done on this topic. I do enjoy your blog, Mr. Rutherford. The charge of racial insensitivity and the fake outrage against citizens exercising their rights of free expression to their elected representatives just happened to set me off.
When it comes to the medical care we get vs. what we pay for it, we’re 38th in the world. Anyone who believes their insurance company has their best interest at heart is living in fantasy land. The more care they ration / deny, the more money they make – down to individual bonuses to the administrators saying no. 30% of my insurance premium goes to pay for people to ration my care, to stockholder earnings and fat multi-million dollar CEO salaries.
But that’s only a financial argument. From my own Christian perspective, lack of public health care is like abortion.
In both cases we kill children because it’s cheaper and more convenient.
So when government health care was killed during the Clinton presidency, was that racist too? Or is it just racist when we don’t agree with Obama?
[...] Notes Freeman: “Bring your signs and bring your manners.” Quick, Blake Rutherford, explain why this makes her a racist! [...]
[...] In an earlier post that got a lot of folks fired up I suggested that there were racial motivations at work amidst the shouter movement, or these bands of people that show up at health care forums and yell wildly and incoherently about how health care reform is ruining America. [...]
[...] Notes Freeman: “Bring your signs and bring your manners.” Quick, Blake Rutherford, explain why this makes her a racist! [...]