Posted by
LorenDaniels on Thursday, December 17, 2009 10:01:20 PM
It is pointless at this juncture in the ongoing saga of the health-care reform debacle for us, the civilians, the non-congresspeople to debate with other civilians the finer points of the health-care bill. Studying and arguing the various nuances of the Hatch-Nelson, Sanders, Coburn, etc. amendments with believers in Obamacare will not matter and inevitably just lead to frustration. The fact is that we don't know what kind of bill will come before the Senate. We may have a government-run "option". We may have an extension of medicare. We may have a cut in medicare. We may have a trigger. Indeed we technically don't even have a bill yet as Senator Reid is giving it sanctuary in his
conference room. I've spent much time arguing with my friends/acquaintances that this bill should be thrown into the bottomless pit for countless reasons including: it pays for abortions, it will inevitably end in government/DMV style control, it cuts medicare, it will absolutely lead to budgetary cost-cutting, etc. The list goes on. But the hard-core supporters of the non-existant bill either counter that such-and-such provision does not exist, or that it is mis-interpreted, or it's just another insurance option.
I've discovered that debating parts of the bill that officially don't exist is useless, instead I've found success in arguing against government-run healthcare in broad terms and general principles. I've also found by trial and error that debating the principle in detail will always lead to a stumped liberal and their argument will always revert back to cliches usually regarding criticisms of the insurance company. Liberals's ignorance about profits, policies, and the inner-workings of insurance companies and insurance in general is astounding to the point of laughable. One can't tell them differently however, so we must bring the argument down to their level. Oversimplify it.
"Do you want Sarah Palin to be in charge of your healthcare?" That's the question we should start asking. I've asked this and the answer is always a resounding "NO!" - very often preceded by an expletive. Once they answer, of course the next question is, "Why are you then supporting a policy that would give her (or someone like her) control of your healthcare?" The way our Republic and two-party system works is that sometimes the Democrats are in power; sometimes the Republicans are in power. Right now liberals are content to let Obama control their lives, but sometime in the future Sarah Palin, Jeb Bush, or Tim Pawlenty will hold the reins of power. Liberals are not the only occupiers of government. It's an easy debate, and I personally have had great success using this method.
After the point is made, it is a good opportunity to make a broad argument for conservatism. We conservatives don't want Sarah Palin controlling our healthcare either. We don't want any politicians in control of any private part of our lives. Politicians are not experts. Just because someone knows how to make a good speech or organize a community doesn't make them an expert or even knowledgable in healthcare, in business, in religion, in finance, or in environmental issues.
This is the reason why many
surveys show that Republicans are happier than Democrats. Liberals are eager to cede control of many of their decisions over to the government; which, of course, means that roughly 50% of the time their mortal political enemies control many of their decisions. For years (as far back as I can remember starting with Reagan) liberals and Democrats have caricatured "dumb" Republicans to be the brunt of their jokes. Who can forget the names and adjectives that Bush, Quayle, Reagan, and now Palin have been called. Yet these same liberals are ceding control of their lives to Republicans. We conservatives don't want anybody in Washington controlling any of our decisions, thus when a Democrat is in power it usually doesn't affect us to the extent that it affects a liberal. It falls to reason that Republicans are happier.
Start the conversation by asking "Do you want Sarah Palin to control your healthcare?"