Politics without the Shouting
August 6, 2009
Print This Post
or Email with:
For someone who calls himself the Passionate Planner, I think you’ll agree that I’ve been very cautious on this blog. I have not discussed politics, because I followed the advice given to salespeople, “Never discuss politics or religion.” As I heard it years ago, you may win the argument but you’ll lose the customer.
Another reason I don’t discuss politics with my clients is because, when meeting with them, we have more important things to go over such as personal challenges, investments, estate planning, saving for college, etc.
But the latest political news is that people are shouting down elected representatives at town hall meetings when the issue of health care reform comes up, as it invariably will. I find that extremely disturbing, because it is terribly corrosive of the democratic process.
So here is my modest attempt to restore civility to political discussion.
Advice to liberals: Read or listen to someone who is a conservative.
Advice to conservatives: Read or listen to someone who is a liberal.
I believe that listening to someone who disagrees with you is hardly ever done. People who tune in to Bill O’Reilly generally do not also listen to Keith Olbermann, and vice versa. To do so would likely raise one’s blood pressure and possibly make one ill. Because we primarily listen only to people we agree with, we essentially live in separate universes, with not only different political opinions, but different political facts.
But my advice is to start out slowly, or in small doses. It’s just like exercise; you don’t want to overdo it at first and risk sidelining yourself to an injury. If you love Glenn Beck, do not watch the Rachel Maddow show. Let’s be realistic.
Herein then are my humble suggestions to change the political dynamic.
If you are a conservative, it is very likely that you read the Wall Street Journal. Buried in the op-ed page is a weekly column by Thomas Frank, who I suppose could be called the “token liberal” for the Wall Street Journal. Read his Wednesday column for a different viewpoint. And even if you don’t get the New York Times, I would definitely seek out the opinion of Thomas Friedman. As my cousin Dahlia said, “Friedman is brilliant, even when he is wrong.”
If you’re a liberal, you probably read the New York Times. I suggest that you read David Brooks, because he is the conservative liberals love. And in my opinion, Peggy Noonan, who writes a column in the Saturday Wall Street Journal is always worth reading.
I’m sure there are many others, but we have to start someplace. I also like the Charlie Rose show, because it is what I call a “no shouting” zone.
Finally I’d like to put in a good word for Joe Scarborough, who has a morning program called Morning Joe on MSNBC. He certainly gets good guests. Joe is a conservative (a libertarian, if truth be told) and though I frequently disagree with him, I find him engaging and likable. You can see a recent interview of him on the Charlie Rose show, because Scarborough is plugging his new book.
According to Scarborough, liberals will listen to him and engage him in debate, simply because he doesn’t call President Obama a “communist” or Justice Sotomayor “a racist.” Sad to say, that makes him unusual among some right wing TV personalities. Truly, I wish there was more civility and less name calling.
My favorite quote of his is about his decision to live on the Upper West Side of Manhattan, a liberal bastion if ever there was one. He says that he loves the Upper West Side, because little old ladies come up and hug him. They have never met a Republican before!
Cute.
Many of the meetings in which (mainly liberal Democrat) politicians were shouted down were carefully staged by the conservative movement. This will significantly damage their already weak cause. At the very least, many conservatives prided themselves on their ability to listen and debate with the opposition.
Bill O’Reilly frequently invites guests on his show with whom he disagrees. Yet, he has been trying to get on the show “All things considered” on left-leaning NPR–and he has been unsuccessful. As he says, maybe the show’s name should be changed to “All things considered except O’Reilly.”
I’m not saying I like O’Reilly or his program, but in orchestrating “shout down” matches at town meetings, the conservatives are damaging their already vacuous (or non-existent agenda).
Roger I loved the masterfully written message ! Beautifully written! Suggestion worth taking.
Roger…This weeks’s topic reminds me of the the toga clad senators of ancient Rome and their pompous efforts in futility. Perhaps our commentators and politicians should speak in Latin. It might spare the rest of us who forgot their Latin all the frustration and nonsense that saturates our lives. Above all, let’s hope the outcome is better.
Matthew,
Yes, I have heard the conspiracy theories of who is behind the angry demonstrations. But I think there may be more going on. In any event, it is extremely disturbing.
Paul Krugman writes today that “angry protesters — some of them, with no apparent sense of irony, shouting “This is America!” — have been drowning out, and in some cases threatening, members of Congress trying to talk about health reform.”
Since when is drowning out an opponent part of the American way? And threatening a member of Congress! Ugh! I agree with you that these tactics will backfire. I sure hope so.
Roger
John,
It’s easy to get frustrated, not to mention cynical. There is also a possibility that changing a complex system will result in unforeseen results that we will not like. On the other hand is the current system viable?
I would prefer a debate on the issues. What is the problem? What are the possible solutions? What is the best solution?
Is there a moral responsibility to provide adequate health care for all of our citizens? What do we mean by health?
Would a single payer system stifle innovation? Is the fee for service model of compensation for doctors the problem? Do we need to change the medical malpractice system? Do people demand more medical services because they have such low copays?
Should people be able to buy health insurance from a company in another state? Should individuals be able to buy bare bones medical coverage and the government provide catastrophic insurance for everyone?
All good questions. I’m still working on the answers.
Roger
Roger, I’ll give you an example of a health system gone wrong. In early July I took my wife to the local hospital’s emergency room…with an emergency! Nine hours later she was discharged…as it turned out with the wrong diagnosis! During those nine hours the emergency room was packed with minority moms and their children…none of whom looked sick, especially not with an emergency.
When we left at midnight, the room was still packed with new faces of minority moms and their children. This was not a pretty picture or experience. And as you know, we live in a small town environment with a low population. This is a grass roots issue that requires people once again learning how to take care of common, non-life threating illnesses.
I’m afraid that our entitlement system has gone amok. We now have generations of Americans who do not want to or know how to contribute but only receive government handouts. What ever happened to that rugged individualism of the 60’s? The attitude that was once considered American.
John,
I think your story actually supports the case for universal care.
When people use the emergency room as their primary source of care, no one wins. It’s expensive (to society), there is no preventive care, and when other people have real emergencies, they wait unnecessarily. And I wonder just how much the hospital is subsidizing the people without insurance who come to the emergency room. So indirectly people with insurance are already paying for the uninsured.
I cannot imagine what it is like not to be able to see a doctor in an office, whenever I have a concern or problem. Our insurance does not even require a “referral” to a specialist. My family has had absolutely great healthcare, so far.
But the stories I have heard on TV involve people who got sick and then their insurance companies found a way to cut them off and not pay for the needed care. So even people who have “good” insurance may not be as covered as they think they are. Watch Bill Moyers for an insider’s take on this.
I guess people who do not have insurance do the best they can. But I am sure that they are not checked for high blood pressure early enough to prevent a serious illness. They never see a dermatologist who could diagnose skin cancer while it is still treatable. And as for colonoscopies at 50, forget it.
I believe that people without insurance do not live as long. Of course that is subject to interpretation, because people who do not have insurance are poor. And poor people die sooner than rich people, so is it the insurance or something else?
I hope your wife finally got the right treatment.
Roger
Thanks Roger for raising the issue of the lack of civility (there’s an understatement!) in modern political discourse. I assume that there has always been name-calling and overheated rhetoric in politics, but a lot of recent activity I’ve found genuinely scary. The hysteria at these “town hall meetings”, and people calling President Obama a Nazi, or otherwise comparing him with Hitler.
I have a rule of thumb. If you call someone you disagree with a Nazi, you can guarantee that I will never take anything you say seriously, ever.
I will take some responsibility here and acknowledge that while George W. Bush was President, I’m sure there were times when I used overheated rhetoric to describe him and his policies. I can see in retrospect how ridiculous it sounds, and wish that I could do it again, I would have tried to be more logical and less “chicken little” in my criticisms of him and his policies.