wws's picture

    Deadlock Redux

    By wws on Sat, 02/27/2010 - 6:10pm |

    NOTE: I did not repost this. Apparently it was reposted automatically when the weekend spam was deleted. So dpo continue the discussion if you are interested in doing so --- particularly if the discussion moves on from the particular example I gave to a more general discussion -- or ignore this second posting, as you prefer. But I did not double dip, as the last thing I want to do is to hog precious space between spams.

    In Doomer's blog -- http://tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com/talk/blogs/d/a/dan_grant/2010/02/whats-up-with-tpm-ers.php: --  Chthonic said: 

    "The Republicans' sole remaining role is to inflict pain on America.... Ironic, no? .....a major political party inflicts pain on the system....which system is, really, all of us...."

    Chthonic's comment summarizes the complete disorientation I feel -- in terms of encountering alternate realities -- now that I am back in Charleston, which is a Republican bastion. Where I am experiencing a nauseating vertigo despite the fact that I did anticipate this disconnect; therefore, I've been at pains not to engage -- lest I inflame, and then explode, or implode.   

    But heres' the problem: however prepared I thought I was, what I was not prepared for was the violently veering Right that occurred, while I was away, in some of my closest friends.  Friends who had been raised as Republicans (it's Charleston, after all) but who, throughout their free-thinking adult lives, steadfastly endorsed a broader canvas of perspective because they valued panorama in the overall picture. 

    Among these women is a friend for whom I have had profound respect, for years. An adult who, as a girl, was determined to be light-hearted (only in a good way)  -- but who, nonetheless, surprised us all. Because it was she, who:

    1) committed the past thirty years to hard slog -- in unglamorous posts in third world countries -- as the traditional "wither thou goest, I will follow" wife of a consultant engineer  (who was somehow loosely affiliated with the diplomatic corps and who was therefore entitled to government benefits). 

    2) raised three reasonably adjusted and educated children despite their frequent moves and disruptions in schooling. 

    3) made it a point to learn three additional languages, along the way, on the side. And who -- 

    4) even though promptly divorced by said husband and left in genuinely precarious circumstances immediately after their return -  made the decision to eschew drama, to look life in the eye, no matter what, and laugh.

    Who would not have faith in this woman?

    So I was confident that we might talk candidly to one another -- no matter how circumspect we might need to be in the company of others. And at first, that seemed to be true. When we talked, just the two us, our conversation seemed to automatically veer to the political hot potato topics that would have been approached by our mutual friends with oven mitts, if not also with silver crosses and cloves of garlic. 

    Hoorah! We found immediate common ground when we talked about global women's issues. We effortlessly agreed about the horrors of war, about Gitmo and Abu Ghraib. We proceeded cautiously, but achieved détente about the MSM, agreeing that Fox is faux, but also, that no network (as compared to an individual anchor person, of whatever persuasion) seems to be sorting wheat from chaff. 

    Therefore, having safely negotiated what I considered might well have been a great divide of foreign policy minefields, I assumed we might have a more relaxing, civilized exchange about domestic issues - specifically, about HCR. Particularly when I asked, sincerely, for her take -- based on her direct experience in third world countries -- on what a truly ideal HCR solution would contain.

    BIG mistake, apparently. And apparently, for her, a great divide precisely because the topic was a domestic, rather than a global issue. Because within a heartbeat she began a rant, (albeit one in which she never lost her composure and never raised her voice) about "the evils of intrusive government in private lives" and "entitlement of the indolent." 

    I'll spare you a blow by blow narrative, because her cut-to-the-chase, ironic bottom line, was this:

    1) " I'm not going to aid and abet BIG GOVERNMENT so that its lackeys, its mindless bureaucrats, can make my personal life or death decisions... if I wanted SOCIALISM, I'd move to Sweden, or the Netherlands, or to France, or to the UK, or to Canada.....this is AMERICA we're talking about - you know, 'the land of the free'? I'll be damned if I will willingly give over my country to that kind of totalitarian control...." 

    (Response: Huh? But there was more....) 

    2) "People in America, as compared to the world at large,  are so deluded, in such denial, about the connection between SOCIALIZED healthcare and expectations of entitlement.....  This pie-in-the-sky push by Democrats for single payer, or for a public option, represents nothing more than the insufferable arrogance of people who feel free to push for 'these entitlements' because now everyone thinks that he or she is a welfare person --  expecting something for nothing." 

    Whoaaa. What happened to my globally-aware friend? Not to mention the friend who cares so passionately about the plight of women raising children alone. Not to mention the woman WHO DOES NOT CURRENTLY HAVE ANY HEALTH INSURANCE, because she cannot afford it? Who has recently suffered two weeks of unbearable pain -- because she cannot afford the expense of cat scans, MRIs and other medical attention that she would have to pay for, out of pocket? The friend whose husband ruthlessly ran up her legal fees, via continuances and other costly delaying tactics, so that she would give in, drop any claim that she should have a health insurance policy as part of the divorce, when her husband has GOVERNMENT-sponsored coverage, as part of his retirement package, through which she was "entitled" to get coverage? 

    My brain, at this point, was screaming: "Red alert; disconnect, disconnect" but she was in a zone. 

    So that she did not hear me when I asked, gently: "N - have you considered that you might be willing to deprive yourself of the very program you so desperately need, just to ensure that those you regard as deadbeats are no longer, in your terms, enabled? "

    She retorted, immediately: "I cannot turn a blind eye to those who cheat." 

    To which I replied, seriously: "N - rather than argue the point of who it is who actually gets welfare, what if, let's say, 15% of people who get welfare cheat on it?..... How does that affect you negatively?  And, by extension, what if the people who are the idlers you imagine them to be -- and that is debatable -- get free health care?  How would that negatively affect you? In other words, isn't it worth the price of ostensible cheating if you -- and other people who really have no other option -- get the healthcare you or they need, rather than doing without? In other words, N, why would you hurt yourself to hurt others who have nothing to do with you?"

    Her reply?

    "I will die before I will collaborate in facilitating a government take-over of private lives, or before I enable those who would milk the system."

    We had this conversation in my car. After I had taken her to the ER, where she got a shot to relieve pain -- because for two weeks she had not been able to sit, stand, sleep or otherwise function normally thanks to the acute pain in her lower back radiating to her legs -- which she tried to ignore, because she did not have health insurance.

     

     

     

     

    Comments

    I'm thinking that her circumstances have left her dazed and she is trying to hold on to anything that suggests a reality. It's too illogical a response to be other. Also, you say that she was agitated. She may need more medical attention than for her back.


    by Doomer252 (not verified) on Sat, 02/27/2010 - 8:03pm

    Wow. Interesting insight into the mindset. We need more of these kinds of posts, Wendy.

    Where do you think that kind of hate comes from? That you're willing to suffer and die ... just so someone you don't know gets deprived of health care?


    by Obey (not verified) on Sat, 02/27/2010 - 8:06pm

    Good points, Doomer, and I was definitely thoughtless to give into the temptation to raise this issue when she was phsyically exhausted. I do feel guilty about that.
    But, PS, she called me the next day, to say it all again. This seems to me to ring true with what Chothonic said, although I paraphrase -- there is a crazy willingness among Republicans to see an "us versus them" instead of seeing that we all are vulnerable to the fallout of not having regulation and/or other options.


    by wwstaebler (not verified) on Sat, 02/27/2010 - 8:08pm

    I don't think it's the issue of healthcare, per se, Obey. It's worse than that -- it's some sort of visceral antipathy triggered by the association of "government program" with "entitlement" in a completely negative sense of the word, which denies that entitlement means, literally, entitled to, rather than taking advantage of.


    by wwstaebler (not verified) on Sat, 02/27/2010 - 8:11pm

    Wendy, that must have been a really painful conversation for you. Several of my relatives have the same philosophy (although they are comfortably covered with their own insurance, and so they don't have the odd situation that "N" does).

    But her answer is really the crux of the Teabaggers and other far-right mantra: "Don't take money out of my pocket and give it to a bunch of lazy slackers!"

    I wish these people would spend a day going to WalMart, Taco Bel, as well as many of the large department stores and ask the hardworking people who are employed there what they do about medical care. The idea that people who can't afford (and do not get employer subsidized health insurance) are all lazy good-for-nothings is the basis for their hatred and rage.

    Empathy is hard to find in those groups; and I'm not that surprised that a diplomatic corps (former) wife lacks it as well. If ever there was an entitled group, it is they. They have the difficulty of uprooting frequently, but they get quite a bit of help; including servants in their new government-provided abodes.

    Still, I know you must have been stung by this; I know I was when my office manager called me in to look at her computer. Her husband had just sent her a message that went something like this:

    If you want to know how cold it is, this will explain it --
    It is so cold outside that I saw a Democrat with his hands in his own pockets!

    Yep! That is how they see it, and they ridicule people like the Kennedy's because they care about the poor but are wealthy themselves.


    by CVille Dem (not verified) on Sat, 02/27/2010 - 8:29pm

    It has always been the uncanny ability of the Right to distract the populace from its true interest. That is something about America, sadly. Bye.


    by Doomer252 (not verified) on Sat, 02/27/2010 - 8:34pm

    Nice post WW. I've been having an ongoing debate with a friend of mine over various topics, including health care, for some time now. A self described libertarian. Extremely minimal government and laissez faire markets are basically this person's "issues". Anyway, they do have health care (which they get through a public school, somewhat ironically).

    But the argument is the same - arguing against a "sense of entitlement" that's "disgusting." (Their words.) Where entitlement is a dirty word. It's actually a rather open antipathy for equality. I can't understand that, and I don't know how to address it, let alone begin to change their minds.


    by Hilarym99 (not verified) on Sat, 02/27/2010 - 8:40pm

    C'Ville -- it was a painful conversation (x2, because she repeated it the next day) but only in the sense that: a) my good friend was unnecessarily torturing herself with ...well, nonsense as in NON sense; and b) anytime I hear what sounds to me like utter craziness, I immediately wonder if I misheard, and if, therefore, it is I who is crazy, not whomever.
    I do see, now that you point it out, that diplomatic corps people do live for years in a world of cosseted, if temporary perks, and they do so, at every post, in the face of incredible impoverishment and need.
    So maybe that experience is part of her unconscious reaction. Maybe -- after thirty years of superior, organized us, looking at ostensibly flawed because beggared and chaotic them -- she actually learned to look at the world that way, in general, whether domestically or abroad.
    Which would be unbearably sad, because this was a woman who, as a recent college grad, spent two years in the Peace Corps -- much to the consternation of her family, but to the delight of those friends who had thought her, affectionately, as an airhead, and who had themselves gone "off" to other places, for balance.


    by wwstaebler (not verified) on Sat, 02/27/2010 - 8:57pm

    While I would have done the same as you in taking your friend (or any friend) to the ER in those circumstances, that same friend would shortly thereafter, and in no uncertain terms, be a former friend.

    No explanation, no comment offered, no calls made, no calls returned. The one thing I will no longer tolerate is intolerance.

    It's simply a realization that the other side has determined to use our tolerance and openness against us in a grotesquely perverse jujitsu of fascist societal destruction. To continue to extend tolerance to those of such a mindset is suicidal at this point.


    by The Old Grouch (not verified) on Sat, 02/27/2010 - 9:02pm

    Hillary: how might we address it, to make a real difference, even if only one person (one voter) at a time? This person is arguing against her own need, at her own expense, which is different than other people I've talked to, who have the same views, but who also have great insurance plans. So that they are merely smug, and disinterested, rather than self-sacrificing.
    What is a good response?


    by wwstaebler (not verified) on Sat, 02/27/2010 - 9:02pm

    Well Doomer has a point.

    But throughout my life I was confronted with racists. Most of them were closet racists. They picked up on my political views and just side stepped the subject.

    Same with war mongers and fiscal conservatives.

    If anything pushed me to the left it was they.

    Friends over look things I guess. I mean none of us are faultless. Someone just pointed out some of my shortcomings.

    TPMGARY says:

    "Health Care or I don't care."

    That about says it all.


    by dickday (not verified) on Sat, 02/27/2010 - 9:22pm

    My first thought, would be to cut her a little slack for her participation in the conversation as she'd been unable to sit/stand/sleep for the preceding two days. After that I'm continually amazed at the ability of those who are unable to "turn a blind eye to those who cheat", and yet are completely comfortable in turning a blind eye to the suffering of those who've fallen by the wayside in our healthcare system. I suspect your friend didn't have to pull her bootstraps up quite as far as some of those whom she would label "cheaters". My only approach with someone with that level of empathy would be to try to educate her in drips and drabs. In the healthcare/insurance debate, I would start with trying to communicate the way that healthcare doesn't function as a normal "free" market would due to the information asymmetries between providers and consumers, and then progress to the concept of spreading risk through pooling it, (which would obviously include some kind of public funding of the less well endowed members of our society). Perhaps she could be persuaded by appealing to her sense of noblesse oblige, even if there were a certain percentage of "cheaters", and that if there are cheaters, the issue they provoke in her can be solved through other venues, (such as the qualification and verification process for access to public funding of one's healthcare), than as you say, "cutting off one's nose to spite your face".

    On another note, it's interesting to travel outside one's own circle of friends and to see what that looks like when you arrive at a conservative bastion, such as Charleston. I recently took a trip to the Big Bend area of west Texas where I met a very friendly, talkative, and conservative couple from the Midland-Odessa area. I was struck by some of their experiences and beliefs, which included:

    1. Anthropogenic global climate change is a hoax created by the tree-hugging left.
    2. The husband has seen a UFO.
    3. They have both heard the scream of a Sasquatch on multiple occasions while camping and hunting in East Texas.
    4. They believe that a new oil field was just found in West Texas that will supply the petroleum needs of the US for at least 20 years at our current level of consumption, and that information about the oilfield was being suppressed in order to advance the global climate change hoax.
    5. They were both ardent Republicans.

    So should all else fail, all I can advise you with regard to your friend is what my approach was with this couple: buy them a round and groove to the backbeat of the band.


    by miguelitoh2o (not verified) on Sat, 02/27/2010 - 9:24pm

    God, I don't know. I had thought when I was having this conversation with my friend that perhaps one day he might find himself in a situation without health insurance, or without adequate health insurance, and change his mind. But your story does not give me much hope for that.

    As it happens I've been reading on the development of social, moral and political consciousness in children and adolescents. On an unrelated note, the most interesting thing about the recent research is that it shows that extremely young children are moral, empathetic people. Much less "egocentric" than previous theorists thought. (Of course, I always wondered about that, working with three-year-olds convinced me some time ago that they often had a better sense of right and wrong than some adults.)

    But anyway, the only way I can make sense of it is that they believe something hugely important will be lost if they allow this to happen. Some sense of freedom, privilege, something. I don't quite know.


    by Hilarym99 (not verified) on Sat, 02/27/2010 - 9:33pm

    OG: I have actually been cutting my ties to certain former friends, those who were not close friends, because the right wing static is simply unbearable. But this is someone I've cared about for most of my life -- one of those few friends who can complete a sentence, or whose sentences I can complete, without conscious thought, because we have shared so much, over time, that was meaningful. How do you cut off someone who was a Brownie Scout with you? Someone with whom you read Tropic of Cancer (however surrepticiously, on a summer night, on the second floor piazza) to figure out what having sex actually entailed? Someone who later asked you to be the godmother of her daughter, etc.? And who currently is in so much pain, whether physical or emotional, that one's own circumstance, also shaky, seems like a walk in the park by comparison?
    It can't be done. She is at sea, in every respect. Which doesn't change the fact that her anger is misdirected, malevolent and therefore potentially harmful.
    So. Without cutting her off, what would you say that would be tender, but clear?


    by wwstaebler (not verified) on Sat, 02/27/2010 - 9:33pm

    I wonder who that would have been, DD? You are wry.


    by wwstaebler (not verified) on Sat, 02/27/2010 - 9:35pm

    Mh2o: Well, thank god I did not have to hear about climate change as a hoax, UFOs, Sasquatch, or a surfeit of oil. Toooo much distortion, on too many subjects. I would have been spiraling in space, like a punctured balloon, chanting the instructions of the hokey pokey to myself.
    It is illuminating that, as an adult, I found such psychic ease and effortless companionship in the Maritimes, whereas I am experiencing such discomfort with lifelong friends, on territory that I know down to the very ground.
    I think you're onto something when you advise appealing to her sense of noblesse oblige.... except for the irony that no one, right now, needs more of that than she does, herself.
    O/T: I looked at an update of your photos today and wish you more happy trails and turquoise water.


    by wwstaebler (not verified) on Sat, 02/27/2010 - 9:51pm

    As you know, a good 75% of my family is of the conservative, Republican mindset, so I find it best, in situations like this, to simply not discuss politics with them if I want to enjoy their company.

    When we do end up talking about health care, I find that their basic argument is: If you want something, you must earn it.

    My mother's hero is her own dad, who carved out a lucrative career from nothing. Mom certainly feels for me, in the situation I'm currently in, and she worries about me being unemployed with no health care, but she has complete and utter faith in the system that she grew up with. Meaning that all I have to do is continue to plug away at getting a job, and all will be well for me.

    If I ask her to consider others (such as her very dear friend in PA) who are unemployed and without healthcare, she's able to sympathize with their lot as well...and when I ask her to think of all the nameless, faceless folks just like me, and just like her friend, she realizes that something needs to be done.

    But then she hears something from a doctor with an agenda, or she reads something at Real Clear Politics, and she veers back towards her original inclinations. Why? I do not know.

    I just know there are a lot of conservatives who do truly care, they just fear what they hear. And I don't know how to get around that. I wish I did.


    by LisB (not verified) on Sat, 02/27/2010 - 9:53pm

    Oh yeah. I got the global warming hoax stuff too. Climategate. And how it's part of a grand plan for commie world government.

    And strangely, also the 9/11 conspiracy theories.


    by Hilarym99 (not verified) on Sat, 02/27/2010 - 9:54pm

    'Kindly and tenderly go fuck yourself'?
    (Just teasing, Wendy Staebler; you walked right into it with that sweet query...)

    I don't actually know if you would convince her with words; I have begun noticing even on these boards how many people start with a belief, then only hear what sentences support that idea. 'Let nothing new in to upset my apple-cart; it's well-ingrained in me, and this is what defines me.'
    Though I am left wondering: N is willing to go through pain so she doesn't have to accept those 'entitlements' of the ne'er-do-wells; fine; but what if it were her CHILDREN who needed the care?


    by wendy davis (not verified) on Sat, 02/27/2010 - 9:58pm

    What would you say? Given your history together and how much it means/meant to you, I would suggest you say nothing. How important is it, in the scheme of things, that the two of you agree on this issue? I have a couple of friends and one family member with whom I could have that same argument, but I don't. I care too much about them, and even though I might consider their views idiotic and ignorant, they will never know how much I feel it.

    I don't agree with them, nor they with me, but I don't dwell on our disagreements, and thankfully, neither do they.

    Sometimes we just have to admit we can't sway everyone in our direction, no matter how passionate we are about our own worldview.

    I can feel you sadness in what you wrote. Maybe you just need to let go your zeal for this one moment with this one friend.


    by Ramona (not verified) on Sat, 02/27/2010 - 10:00pm

    Well, although it is probably best not to bring this up ever again, but if it DOES come up, and you want to give it a go, I think I would approach it from the "curiosity" factor. I would ask:

    "Who are the people that you think will have their insurance paid for by the government?" (Keeping in mind that Medicaid already covers the non-working poor)

    "I just saw that 60% of people in the US who are insured, are already insured through government programs. It works for Congress and government workers; what changes if it includes more people?"

    "I just feel for the people who work in low-income jobs whose employers don't offer any kind of group coverage. What are they supposed to do?"

    "Small businesses cannot get group rates; and if any employees have high blood pressure, back problems, or are of child-bearing age their premiums are impossible. That discourages new small businesses and any kind of independent entrepreneurship. What do you think is the answer?"

    In fact, I would like to ask these questions to Eric Cantor, John Boner, and every Blue Dog Democrat, plus a whole host of others.


    by CVille Dem (not verified) on Sat, 02/27/2010 - 10:10pm

    Wendy, after all you have said, I think the only thing to do if it comes up again, is to say that it is probably better that you not discuss this again, because you feel so strongly about it and that it would interfere with your relationship. Leave the door open to discuss it when she is feeling better, but for now it needs to be a closed topic.


    by CVille Dem (not verified) on Sat, 02/27/2010 - 10:20pm

    C'Ville: I think discretion is the better part of preserving friendship, if not valor, but I will memorize your talking points, as they are good ones -- just in case I lapse.
    WendyDavis: you make me smile -- if she were not in pain, this is one friend in my life to whom I could say "Fuck you" and she would, in most circumstances, laugh with delight.
    Ramona, and LisB: you, as well as C'Ville, are probably right that I could and possibly should just shut up now; I can see the proverbial handwriting on the wall, and it says:"Y'all are never, ever gonna have a meeting of the minds on this one."
    But it's sad, nonetheless. For her, and for the two of us, if we must now monitor our give and take.



    by wwstaebler (not verified) on Sat, 02/27/2010 - 10:22pm

    I posted a response and linked to this blog.


    by chthonic (not verified) on Sat, 02/27/2010 - 10:37pm

    It is sad, Wendy, because you probably will never feel the same about her after this. You may never get back what you once had, but it's clear from your eloquent post that you're not ready to say goodbye to your friendship with her.

    You may have to say goodbye to that particular subject, but just remember that we're here whenever you want to vent And she'll never have to know. . .


    by Ramona (not verified) on Sat, 02/27/2010 - 10:39pm

    Perhaps it's some kind of anger transference going on. It sounds to me like WW's friend has internalized her anger over her poor treatment by her ex, and it has to come out somehow.

    That it is at the wrong target is not necessarily that hard to understand, or that it is a target that many around her also vent their frustration on.

    Conditioning, I suppose.


    by Bwakfat (not verified) on Sat, 02/27/2010 - 10:43pm

    No one should dismiss the impact the first black president could have on the psyche of individuals no matter how sensitive they once perceived.

    But you know your friend and apparently that thought has never crossed your mind.

    Your friend doesn't sound much different then the haters from the tea baggers movement but you don't mention who might be influencing her.

    But there is something else going on.
    There is a growing movement underway based on the philosophy of the sociopath ayn rand.

    The words your friend uses are the same as glen beck who calls for the "eradication" of progressives.

    In congress we see movement towards the elimination of social security and Medicare. The "shadow budget", brought forward by congressperson Ryan(r) who happens to be a follower of rand.

    Justice Thomas and Greenspan we know are Rand disciples.
    Rush Limbaughs daily rants are full of the Rand concept that "One puts oneself above all and crushes everything in one's way to get the best for oneself".
    ( the sale of Rands books have exploded the last few years)

    So its easy to see how ordinary people become parasites in such a philosophy.
    Where "BIG GOVERNMENT and its lackeys" are taking care of all the "cheaters".

    The country is in a bad way and
    we know how a society can react under such stress.
    Suddenly we are witnessing behavior we never dreamed imaginable and at a loss to explain it.

    Yet the roots of it were all around us.

    The irony of what Rands philosophy really was lost to the ordinary folks being influenced by it,sort of like your friend.


    by JadeZ (not verified) on Sat, 02/27/2010 - 10:43pm

    Wendy, When I say to give it a rest, I also acknowledge that a huge part of your friendship is diminished with that. To me, having a close friend who sees the world so differently removes a plank of that mutual respect. We all have pals that we see occasionally, and never even have substantive conversations. But a good friend who absolutely hates what you believe to be important? That is big.

    True friends (like spouses) have to have the same core beliefs, even if they disagree on how they should be carried out. Some may admire the James Carville/Mary Matalin union. I wonder what is wrong with both of them. How can they stand to even have a meal together?

    There is no rush. You may revisit this when she is better (or not). Wait. Take your time. A friend lost is a friend lost forever.


    by CVille Dem (not verified) on Sat, 02/27/2010 - 10:51pm

    Heh, I remember the day my ex solemnly told me that I was not to talk politics around his family anymore.

    ...and I thought I was doing so well....

    =D

    So, I didn't. Odd thing is, a couple years later, I get an email from one of his brothers. It was about Wal-Mart, and why he wasn't going to shop there anymore, along with saying he didn't understand why he didn't listen to me when I had brought up the very same arguments he was using.

    As far as I could determine, it was due to the fact that someone he admired, a supervisor, bringing it up.

    It's kind of good and bad. Good that he came around on that issue, bad that he, as well as the rest of his family apparently had so little respect for my opinions.

    (shrug)

    As my grandmother used to say, What are you gonna do?


    by Bwakfat (not verified) on Sat, 02/27/2010 - 10:55pm

    Wendy - The conversation with your friend epitomizes the philosophical divide between conservatives intent on guarding themselves against being cheated, and liberals more concerned that they not inadevertently cheat others through excessive caution in distributing society's benefits to those who claim to be in need.

    However, the extraordinary anger you describe in her seems exaggerated even for an average conservative. I have the sense that being cheated has a personal meaning for her that goes beyond matters of political philosophy.


    by Fred Moolten (not verified) on Sat, 02/27/2010 - 10:57pm

    wendy,

    I have no advice. This is one of the painful schisms that have to be endured or disposed of in human relations. Your choice. Not an easy one. Neither of you will budge. At least not now. Perhaps some day, your friend will see the light. I hope she does not have to bear the pain of losing someone close to her in order to understand what is apparent to those of us who have.


    by Ripper McCord (not verified) on Sat, 02/27/2010 - 11:00pm

    Sound advice.

    It sounds like they have plenty of other things to talk about.

    =D


    by Bwakfat (not verified) on Sat, 02/27/2010 - 11:31pm

    JadeZ --
    I do agree that there is a tea party aspect to this. And that the big government is bad/every man for himself/let people sink or swim thing is Randish.

    I do thank you for then moving the discussion beyond this personal relationship. Because part of what concerns me is that if N. could say things like this, with conviction, that means lots of people one would never imagine having such inclinations may have them too. Ramona alluded to this, as did LisB.

    So what is going on? Why is there this growing wish, that pervades, to withhold help from others? And why are people willing to hurt themselves solely for the purpose of withholding that helping hand?
    Oleeb suggested, somewhere today, that it has always been so. He may well be right. But if so I not only grew up in a caccoon, but spun one myself to block out awareness of this mean-spiritedness, if it was all around me,


    by wwstaebler (not verified) on Sat, 02/27/2010 - 11:31pm

    Oh, geez, Wendy... Where to begin. :-(

    I'm cooling my heels in W. Columbia for the weekend, waiting for the company to finish prepping my truck. Truly a shame you, Missy, and self couldn't manage to get together...

    As for your friend?

    *sigh*

    Think I'll pour myself a drink and pound my head upon the wall in your name.


    by coralsea (not verified) on Sat, 02/27/2010 - 11:43pm

    The one thing I will no longer tolerate is intolerance.

    Precisely, Alan.

    My credo as well.


    by coralsea (not verified) on Sat, 02/27/2010 - 11:47pm

    Excellent point, Bwak. Maybe she'll think about my questions. Maybe she won't. Or maybe, as your brother-in-law could finally hear it from someone else, if not from you, the same dynamic will pertain.

    The bigger question for which I hope we can find an answer is this: is there anything anyone can say, to anyone, that will shake loose this groundswell of tightfistedness (is that a word?) that hurts everyone, in the end.


    by wwstaebler (not verified) on Sun, 02/28/2010 - 1:03am

    I think she will, Ma'am. Sometimes, with my daughter, I have noticed the same kind of thing, I'll say somthing, and she'll get mad and disagree, and more often then not, if it's one of those common sense things teenagers so often think are "stupid", she'll end up agreeing. Give it a little time, and talk about the things that matter that you do agree on.

    It sounds like she needs good friends right now.


    by Bwakfat (not verified) on Sun, 02/28/2010 - 1:09am

    Excellent question, to which I can predict her answer: she would fight like a tiger for her adult child to get whatever.


    by wwstaebler (not verified) on Sun, 02/28/2010 - 1:09am

    Regarding the differences between the "psychic ease and effortless companionship in the Maritimes" and our relationships and degree of conciencia with our childhood friends and our current interpretation of the world, take a deep breath. Don't get me wrong. I love my childhood friends, and many of them are quite simpatico. We are however like bird dogs on a scent traveling through life. We meet people, develop ideas, even get married, and move off in a direction. As long as that scent is fresh, and feels right to us, we continue on. When it becomes cold, we lose interest, and if we've still got our wits about us we change direction. That can entail leaving old friends behind as we explore the new possibilities, and stay on the scent of whatever it is that keeps us all going. So... don't chastise yourself for moving on from your childhood chums, but celebrate all the new voyagers you've met along your way who cherish at least some of the same things you do.


    by miguelitoh2o (not verified) on Sun, 02/28/2010 - 1:14am

    Hey, CoralSea -- no head pounding on my account.

    (Btw, Are y'all married now?)


    by wwstaebler (not verified) on Sun, 02/28/2010 - 1:15am

    Damn! I missed the memo on the link between climategate and 9/11!


    by miguelitoh2o (not verified) on Sun, 02/28/2010 - 1:15am

    This is an important post, Wendy. Lots of insight in the comments, too.

    I've been working on a volunteer project with a colleague from Kentucky for the past five months. I invited her to join the project because we have such contrasting thinking and communication styles.

    Politics didn't come up until the week of the State of the Union Address. One day out of the blue, she said something to the effect that Obama isn't listening to anyone and is going to force unwanted policies and programs down everybody's throats. That's what she gleaned from his address. There was despair and real fear in her voice. I didn't respond.

    Later, I reflected on her remarks. How could we have watched the same speech and come away with such different conclusions? I've decided there are as many different conclusions as there are people who watched the speech -- all of which are informed by personal experiences, upbringing, locale, fears, and so on. It seems to go back to those pesky schema that were rooted in us very early on.

    In the deep south, some of those schema are rife with racism. My colleague and I work in the most ethnically diverse environment imaginable, and her efforts are nothing short of heroic. Her political views don't seem to match her professional efforts at all. Maybe that's a classic case of cognitive dissonance.

    We finished the project and are now developing a strategy to ratchet up our effectiveness with the next one. If hot button issues come up, I simply won't respond. It isn't worth it. Whether she's aware of it or not, her participation in the project may have helped propel some disadvantaged individuals toward a brighter future. I doubt her core beliefs will ever change, but if her actions help others in spite of them, so be it.

    Once your friend's pain subsides, it might be helpful to invite her to join you in some kind of effort that gets her out of herself, i.e. Meals on Wheels (that's all I can think of right now). When she comes to know real people in need it may soften her view somewhat.


    by Cindy Etal (not verified) on Sun, 02/28/2010 - 1:19am

    Fred --
    That is a clear, concise depiction of the difference between conservatives and liberals. I'd love to quote you, but I guess I won't, at least not anytime soon.
    And you are quite right that the degree of anger is partially displaced. (I'm reasonably familiar with that syndrome myself, as I have demonstrated here, more often than is acceptable, and certainly more often than is remotely amusing.)
    Thank you, Fred, for weighing in.


    by wwstaebler (not verified) on Sun, 02/28/2010 - 1:23am

    Thought-provoking observation, Mh2o. I've left Charleston before and then come back, to retest. Maybe I should just visit.;-)


    by wwstaebler (not verified) on Sun, 02/28/2010 - 1:31am

    Perhaps you could come at from the standpoint that the truly indigent get care from medicaid...These new programs mostly benefit the working poor, and people who HAVE insurance but are getting killed by co-pays and out of pocket expenses. 80% of the bankruptcies in this country are for medical expenses. Of that 80%, 70% are people who have both jobs AND insurance.

    You might also point out, that it is a jobs issue, as well. Until we are competitive with countries who have universal health care and therefore don't have to provide health insurance to their employees, we continue to be at a disadvantage in the global job market.

    THOSE are the arguments that are beginning to get traction with my conservative son.


    by stillidealistic (not verified) on Sun, 02/28/2010 - 1:36am

    I see a consensus building here..... what a great exercise in making political process this is turning out to be. Making decisions, by polling.
    Thank you, Ripper, for contributing, which I very much appreciate.


    by wwstaebler (not verified) on Sun, 02/28/2010 - 1:37am

    Thank you for describing your similar scenario, Cindy, and telling me what you did within it, and what you did not do.
    I particularly appreciate what you said here:
    "How could we have watched the same speech and come away with such different conclusions? I've decided there are as many different conclusions as there are people who watched the speech -- all of which are informed by personal experiences, upbringing, locale, fears, and so on...."
    And I love this:
    " It seems to go back to those pesky schema that were rooted in us very early on."
    As for shared activity, I have invited her to the Center for Women to various seminars, many of which have been timely in their appropriateness to her situation. But so far, not. Maybe soon.


    by wwstaebler (not verified) on Sun, 02/28/2010 - 1:44am

    Thanks, Still. I'm sorry, since I initiated the discussion, that I did not remember the point about HCR being, in a sense, a jobs program. That would have definitely resonated, without alarming.


    by wwstaebler (not verified) on Sun, 02/28/2010 - 2:13am

    N's life has been turned upside down, and it seems she's grasping familiar/convenient things for security. I hope she takes you up on your invitation. When the hurting lessens, she may even decide to reinvent herself. Your friendship could be very helpful then. Good luck!


    by Cindy Etal (not verified) on Sun, 02/28/2010 - 2:20am

    LisB -- Just as you say about your mom, I do know that if my friend knew a real person in desperate need, she would try to find a way to help him or her. Although, in her case, that would be from a noblesse oblige perspective -- apparently it is OK, in her opinion, for someone to give and someone to accept charity, but it is not OK for someone to accept relief from the government, which should not offer it.
    You figure. What is really upsetting is that she does not perceive that, in rejecting HCR, she is rejecting something that might be of pivotal help to her.


    by wwstaebler (not verified) on Sun, 02/28/2010 - 2:24am

    Not yet, Wendy, but much closer now that we're finally on the same coast. Thanks for asking.

    No two people who share a history and a deep love for each other will ever agree on everything. In some cases, the things upon which they will never see eye-to-eye are heartbreaking for both ... as they seem so fundamental to the very essence of the person. And perhaps they are. Thankfully, in the truest sense of the word, we are all so much more than the sum of our ideals.


    by barefooted (not verified) on Sun, 02/28/2010 - 2:24am

    Here's the question:

    Do you think your friend will cut off your friendship because of your left of center views?

    :o)

    I wonder why the asymmetry?

    I never discuss politics. I discuss facts. Most of the time it's easy to show someone how they are being inconsistent. And on more than one occasion this caused a person to finally give up on FNC.


    by clearthinker (not verified) on Sun, 02/28/2010 - 2:37am

    The old UFO thing.

    How many here bent over backwards to rationalize Dennis Kucinich's siting?

    I'm like you, however. UFO sitings are a definite warning sign.


    by clearthinker (not verified) on Sun, 02/28/2010 - 2:39am

    You were arguing common sense against an emotional bias which never, ever works. Emotional bias always, always blocks rational thinking.

    C


    by cmaukonen (not verified) on Sun, 02/28/2010 - 3:04am

    I'm going to take the contrarian side here, Wendy, and say that to people who have insurance they like, or at least tolerate, HCR is scary stuff. It risks what they already have to provide for those who don't. It asks of people who are paying taxes -- and paying for insurance -- to subsidize those who don't. Unless you are someone to whom that is part of your political makeup, that's a unpleasant thought. If you think you already pay enough, paying more is an unpleasant thought.

    And when we start talking about it in terms of "rights" and "social responsibility," they hear "You want me to take responsibility for those who will not do so for themselves."

    There is a tendency to think of those who oppose HCR as selfish or unfeeling. And while that may be the case for some, most are just scared that the benefits they have will be lessened to pay for those who do not have any. And if you have insurance now, there are scary parts of this. There's a good chance it will empower employer to reduce reduce benefits and increase deductibles. I'm not saying it will, I'm just saying it could.

    I took a job I don't really like mostly so my family could have insurance. People do things like that. People make choices like that. Sacrifices are what we do -- they are part of the societal contract. So if your friend believe people will game the system -- and some will, because some always will -- and that those same people will benefit from this while she suffers, her indignation isn't unjustified. If her health concerns are a major part of her life's anxieties -- and it sounds like it is -- then the level of her anger makes sense. She may be incorrect, but dismissing her concerns seems less kind than we ought to aspire to.


    by msa3 (not verified) on Sun, 02/28/2010 - 3:41am

    Sorry, I misread the original post to see she didn't have coverage on her own. But I still think the big picture is still valid. She thinks it's a personal responsibility thing, even her own. She doesn't want that responsibility co-opted by the government, even if it benefits her.

    I don't think she's right, per se, but I don't think she's crazy to take the position.


    by msa3 (not verified) on Sun, 02/28/2010 - 3:45am

    She's probably afraid about how sick she is. She might be worried she has something scary-serious that she has no control over. So she wants control.

    Here's my sage advice (or far-fetched suggestions, if you prefer): If you focus on helping her get some control in her life in some area, she might calm down. Shelve the health care debate for now because she's not capable of discussing it rationally. She's too jacked up. It's not about what she says it's about in her rantings, but you don't really have enough information to know what it's about instead (lots of good guesses in this thread, but they are still guesses). And you are feeling bombarded by this, which you don't need right now.

    What you do need, however, are friends, so getting to the bottom of this disagreement can wait.


    by readytoblowagasket (not verified) on Sun, 02/28/2010 - 5:38am

    They have both heard the scream of a Sasquatch on multiple occasions

    ROFLMAO!


    by readytoblowagasket (not verified) on Sun, 02/28/2010 - 5:45am

    Honest-to-god gasket. I almost wrote a blog about that night. Was gonna call it "Letter to TPM from West Texas" just to let people here know that people out there in the hinterlands don't necessarily see things even close to the way we might expect.


    by miguelitoh2o (not verified) on Sun, 02/28/2010 - 5:52am

    I am shooting this post off quickly but I think you've hit upon a good discussion and I am doing some research in order to give a good reply to others in similar situations.

    Is your friend an only Child?
    Maybe your friend was not taught the principles of Generosity?
    Your friend may not be prone to give?
    Displaying an attitude of "It's mine"

    Does your friend have any Christian background?
    If she does, maybe a good parable or illustration might work.

    (Acts 20:34-35) . . .. 35 I have exhibited to YOU in all things that by thus laboring YOU must assist those who are weak, and must bear in mind the words of the Lord Jesus, when he himself said,

    ‘There is more happiness in giving than there is in receiving.’”

    The use of an illustration or scripture, and your friend might draw her own conclusion without you hammering her.

    (Philippians 2:3-4) 3 doing nothing out of contentiousness or out of egotism, but with lowliness of mind considering that the others are superior to YOU, 4 keeping an eye, not in personal interest upon just YOUR own matters, but also in personal interest upon those of the others.

    Maybe your friend is Self-centered, (concerned solely with one’s own desires, needs, or interests)
    People who are self centered do not have successful marriages, or satisfying friendships.

    Maybe she's too proud?

    A lover of self; cares little how they harm other people. People like your friend can easily cheat others, through some demented rationalization.

    SELFISH. Prima donna?

    Maybe together we can find a good illustration that might bring her back to her senses?

    If Not; you need to protect yourself from this type of influence

    (2 Timothy 3:2-5) 2 For men (women)will be lovers of themselves,

    lovers of money, self-assuming, haughty, ..... unthankful, disloyal, 3 having no natural affection, not open to any agreement, ...... fierce, without love of goodness, ..... headstrong, puffed up [with pride], ..... and from these turn away. . .

    FROM THESE TURN AWAY:
    If your friend continues to display these qualities; safeguard your own heart, stay away.


    by Resistance (not verified) on Sun, 02/28/2010 - 7:55am

    I think many peoiple in this country have come to confuse government regulation of aspects of the public marketplace with a government takeover. It is difficult to minimize the failures of our system and the havoc those failures have wrought.

    In spite of an obvious need for reform, neither government or the marketplace seems able to objectively address the issues that have jeopardized the country and the global economy. It's more than a little puzzling that we would continue to embrace a system that has produced such epic failures. How much proof we need to recognize change is necessary is the fundamental question that needs to be posed to those resisting this necessity. I think we are at the limit of our ability to sustain such failures. The cumulative burden of such failures places insurmountable restrictions on what is possible. We can do much better. And in practical terms we have to.


    by thepeoplechoose (not verified) on Sun, 02/28/2010 - 9:40am

    Excellent post Wendy, it would be difficult to add to the sage advice expressed in these thoughtful comments. So, I will leave you this,

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aHa096VQ8FE

    Seal - A change is gonna come 2008

    Original by Sam Cook

    I was born by the river
    In a little tent
    And just like the river
    I've been running ever since.

    It's been a long, long time coming
    But I know a change gonna come
    Oh, yes it is

    It's been too hard living
    But I'm afraid to die
    I don't know what's up there beyond the sky.

    It's been a long, long time coming
    But I know a change gonna come
    Oh yes it will.

    Then I go to my brother
    And I say: Brother oh help me please, yeh.
    But he winds up knocking me
    Back down on my knees.

    There's been times
    that I thought I wouldn't last for long
    But now I think I'm able to carry on
    It's been a long, long, long time coming
    But I know a change is gonna come
    Yes it will, oh I know

    A change is gonna come, but I know

    A change is gonna come
    Hey
    A change is gonna come, right now, oooooh

    A change is gonna come, I say it now
    hey-ey-ey-ey-ey, oh no
    Oh, believe me
    I say a change is gonna come


    by Jon Wisby (not verified) on Sun, 02/28/2010 - 10:33am

    That is a very good point.


    by Hilarym99 (not verified) on Sun, 02/28/2010 - 10:37am

    If you don't blog about it, you could turn that nugget into a short story. Or a song. With a music video.

    You raise an interesting point, m, about diversity of experience, and where that experience gets expressed and where it is absent. Thanks for giving me something very rich to think about for a project I am working on.


    by readytoblowagasket (not verified) on Sun, 02/28/2010 - 11:57am

    You answer that she would 'fight like a tiger.' But would she, for instance, try to help her adult child to secure some government 'entitlement' health care? We can hope so, and IF so, why is it so difficult for her to make the leap that her other Brothers and Sisters in need are also deserving?
    My brain is wrinkling up here trying to explain my thoughts; try to bear with me as I backtrack.

    On the occasional Bad Days, it is almost a tradition to ask my husband, "Now what is the purpose of Life supposed to be again?" He varies the answer depending on his moods and musings, and we end up laughing ruefully.
    He learned from his Christian upbringing that Doing God's Will was the thing; in our hippie years we bent that to mean being the best people we could be; knowing that checking in with our Inner Guides would usually provide direction. (Jiminy Cricket Plus Plan). God/Goddess within, Thought Adjustors, Higher Power, Inner Bodhisattva, whatevah.
    It would be safe to say (I hope) the knowledge that we need to have heart and care for each other would be at the base of this concept. Jesus told us so, and so did most of the Prophets of other religions, and most of the dogma says so, too.
    How, then, can so many of us sleep at night while holding onto credos and actions that deny others' health and food and shelter and dignity? Or marriage, for that matter, in the case of gay bias?
    Could your friend let down her defenses and the Catechism of 'self-reliance' long enough to get this for her own glorification?
    (And I ask this knowing that you may have taught her this silently by dropping your difficulties long enough to get her to the ER.)
    It jangles and crashes inside me that so many allegedly Christian Americans can deny this very basic premise: We are all in this together, and the best thing we can do to give our lives purpose is to care for one another. For me, that also includes realizing that without greed, there is plenty of everything to go around: greed and selfishness gurantee that someone else is robbed of the basics of life.

    Ah, hell; I am getting tangled up again. I hope you can get my drift, though.


    by wendy davis (not verified) on Sun, 02/28/2010 - 12:18pm

    Good questions, CVille, and nicely phrased. We really need to get at the idea that having some sort of security about being able to go to the doctor when you get sick is better for the country than not having it.

    And asking for suggestions about how lack of health insurance hurts entrepreneurship is very good.


    by erica (not verified) on Sun, 02/28/2010 - 2:17pm

    ya know... some people say that they know that fox is faux but they don't recognize the bs and lies coming from people who get it from Fox. So the trusted friend watches Fox and repeats the bs to them... and it gets into their system in round about ways.

    The power of belonging to a 'group' often persuades people to adopt and champion ideas that their own logic, left to its own devices, would not.


    by synchronicity (not verified) on Sun, 02/28/2010 - 3:17pm

    Two words: Cognitive Dissonance


    by Maxine Udall (g... (not verified) on Sun, 02/28/2010 - 3:22pm

    As I was struggling to finish this comment, our daughter IMed me; she hasn't many friends for a lot of complicated reasons, and she communicates with me either online or by phone multiple times a day. She was cranked up because in response she made about so many 'Christians' try to out-do each other in their verbiage attempting to show how 'Godly' they are. Both her husband and his mom told her their solution: You need to go to church more!
    Wow; how ironic. I called and we kicked it around, and I tried to remind her that 'religious' and 'godly' even Jesusonian are too often really different.


    by wendy davis (not verified) on Sun, 02/28/2010 - 4:16pm

    If it weren't for the illness aspect of things, I'd say sometimes you just have to walk away from people you love when they draw that line in the sand. I imagine we've all been there in some way or another. Nothing you can do when it boils down to your belief system.

    But the fact that she is experiencing symptoms for which she has absolutely no diagnosis is of great concern. Do you have any mutual friends who can help with that aspect of things. Someone preferably with initials MD after their name? It can't be easy. I had a situation in HS where my best friend joined the Black Panther movement. Because of her militant stance, I lost my best friend. I actually grieved as if she died. But here we are over 30 years later and we skype every week! Good luck.


    by girl from the bronx (not verified) on Sun, 02/28/2010 - 4:34pm

    If you ask most doctors if they have had more problems with reimbursement from private insurers or the government, most will say the private insurers are a bigger headache. These same doctors are repulsed by government intrusion into medical insurance.

    People trust their ability to choose a private insurance program over government intrusion into insurance even as they see their personal co-payments increase, premiums increase, ans covered services decrease.

    Logic does not apply in many situations.


    by rmrd0000 (not verified) on Sun, 02/28/2010 - 4:36pm

    You wrote “We can do much better. And in practical terms we have to”

    Therein lies the problem

    No; we cannot do much better, or we would have.

    You’re correct though; we have to;
    But we won’t.


    by Resistance (not verified) on Sun, 02/28/2010 - 4:44pm

    Both sides


    by Resistance (not verified) on Sun, 02/28/2010 - 4:46pm

    Wishful thinking?


    by Resistance (not verified) on Sun, 02/28/2010 - 4:48pm

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ycbgHM1mI0k


    by Jon Wisby (not verified) on Sun, 02/28/2010 - 4:52pm

    If it weren't for the illness aspect of things, I'd say sometimes you just have to walk away from people you love when they draw that line in the sand. I imagine we've all been there in some way or another. Nothing you can do when it boils down to your belief system.

    But the fact that she is experiencing symptoms for which she has absolutely no diagnosis is of great concern. Do you have any mutual friends who can help with that aspect of things. Someone preferably with initials MD after their name? It can't be easy. I had a situation in HS where my best friend joined the Black Panther movement. Because of her militant stance, I lost my best friend. I actually grieved as if she died. But here we are over 30 years later and we skype every week! Good luck.


    by girl from the bronx (not verified) on Sun, 02/28/2010 - 5:23pm

    Sorry about the twofer.


    by girl from the bronx (not verified) on Sun, 02/28/2010 - 5:30pm

    I can't answer that one for you, Wendy - only tell you what my response would be.

    I don't have - or seek - the level of connectedness with someone not related to me that would permit me to put up with such deep-seated, misdirected, blindly hateful feelings toward others.

    Bluntly, "N" is going to cause you a lot more grief and heartache because of the differences in your worldviews, and you are allowing it because of experiences and understandings long since past and not likely to be again shared or repeated.

    So you're pretty well on your own here.


    by The Old Grouch (not verified) on Sun, 02/28/2010 - 5:42pm

    "... entitlement of the indolent..." sounds like code for racism to me, ww. How is N on racial issues?


    by tlees2 (not verified) on Sun, 02/28/2010 - 6:11pm

    hahahahahaha

    Listen, strange things live in the woods up here Miguel.

    And aluminum foil is real cheap and I know when I get that hat on....nobody is going to know what I've been thinking.


    by dickday (not verified) on Sun, 02/28/2010 - 6:41pm

    Tlees:
    I have seen no evidence, ever, that N. has racist tendencies. On the contrary, both her work in the Peace Corp and her life going from diplomatic pillar to post was spent, more often than not, in one part of Africa or another. If she has prejudicial tendencies of any kind they are class related, so that in the context of an antipathy to welfare recipients and a desire to withhold assistance, she would be alluding with negative assumptions about "white trash."


    by wwstaebler (not verified) on Sun, 02/28/2010 - 7:00pm

    It was a really great comment, girl! I was away from my computer during those hours, so I'm glad it posted a second time. Otherwise I might have missed it altogether.


    by readytoblowagasket (not verified) on Sun, 02/28/2010 - 7:06pm

    CT:
    She will not cut me off; rather, she will revert to the female southern protocol for avoiding conflict -- if the conversation edges into dangerous territory, she will make a quick quip, one that will be wryly self-deprecating, and promptly change the subject.
    This time-tested strategy works in terms of its primary goal, but discourages close connection, which is its secondary goal.
    However, it is a boundary she is entitled to, and I will respect it.
    Not least because -- hey -- it's an entitlement that she recognizes as having value.


    by wwstaebler (not verified) on Sun, 02/28/2010 - 7:20pm

    Ha. C. Of course I know that -- what ever was I thinking? Thanks.


    by wwstaebler (not verified) on Sun, 02/28/2010 - 7:22pm

    msa3:
    I think you have summarized her position -- which is fundamentally about individual responsibility and self-reliance in a way I hadn't understood before. There is integrity in her position, in that she is applying the same standard to her own behavior that she applies to others. I only wish that she could take that same consistency of principle and make it one of generosity rather than a hairshirt puritanism.
    Thank you for observations.


    by wwstaebler (not verified) on Sun, 02/28/2010 - 7:28pm

    So classism rather than racism. Still classism is one of many "isms" that are prejudices. So that would explain her anger. I'm not sure how to make her see that - a good sociology course, the writings of Kevin Phillips, the work of Paul Krugman, might be a good starting point. She should be angry at the economic elite - not the victims of that elite.


    by tlees2 (not verified) on Sun, 02/28/2010 - 7:34pm

    Gasket: how I wish (and I mean this, sincerely) that I had your ability to quickly comprehend, analyze and distill that which is essential. I appreciate it.


    by wwstaebler (not verified) on Sun, 02/28/2010 - 8:06pm

    Thanks for posting this WW. When your friend honed in on government intrusion, did she ever mention the proposed mandate that individuals purchase health insurance?

    Just asking, because on that count I can empathize. It eats at me when I think of government coercing citizens to become customers of private health insurance companies. And the same counter applies -- that I should be willing to drop that concern so that more folks can be covered. It would be easier for me to swallow if the mandate were coupled with a robust public option.

    Maybe your friend doesn't want any reform that's broader than the tiny steps endorsed by Republicans. If so, she's in the same boat with a lot of citizens (30%?) who're going to be upset with whatever Democrats do alone at this point.

    I can see many of those folks getting over their anger if they start to see tangible benefits soon after passage of HCR. If there's a significant lag time, however, I can also see frustration over the individual mandate festering to unseat the majority and undo whatever incremental gains leaders believe they've accomplished.

    A simply way to expedite benefits would be to significantly lower the age limit for Medicare. That was part of the Senate compromise prior to Lieberman's showboating. If the Senate uses reconciliation to pass HCR, I hope they will at least go back to that compromise.


    by Watt Childress (not verified) on Sun, 02/28/2010 - 8:06pm

    Sorry Johnnie: misplaced reply. Thank you for the lovely, lovely song which resonates and soothes.


    by wwstaebler (not verified) on Sun, 02/28/2010 - 8:08pm

    Gasket: please see reply that I misplaced below, after johnnienohands song.


    by wwstaebler (not verified) on Sun, 02/28/2010 - 8:10pm

    Resistance: I appreciate the thoroughness with which you thought through the possibilities, but your speculations about my friend are way off: she is anything but a selfish person, or an egotistical person, or someone who didn't do her part in the hard work of marriage. I would think, in fact, that from a traditionalist's point of view, she could nominated as the poster child for "the good wife." Conversely, from a feminist point view she is a person whose only error is that she sees her value in life solely in terms of serving the wishes and wants of her family.
    Therefore, as the most traditional of wives -- one, btw, who also made it a point, as part of the profile, to stay slim, trim and stylish (even in safari gear) -- she not only stoically but cheerfully supported her husband in all his endeavors -- enduring all the moves, the months apart, the effectively solo raising of the children. This was so consistent and marked a characteristic that she was mentioned, annually, in her husband's performance reviews, cited as an invaluable asset to him and to the post community in question.
    (It is anathema, then, to all who have witnessed her complete commitment to her husband, who benefitted so greatly from her contributions, that he dumped her after thirty years for someone else -- not for the cliche of a younger, alluring woman, but instead, for a career woman of his nearly own age. Ah, the irony.)
    The point is that her sense of service has been so strong that this blind spot about "entitlements" comes as a real surprise. Anyway, thank you for your thoughtful response


    by wwstaebler (not verified) on Sun, 02/28/2010 - 8:44pm

    What is curious about the right wing fear of "government take-over" is that, as far as most us can see, the government itself has already been taken over by corporations, a fact which should feel quite comfortable to people who believe so fervently in non-regulated commerce. Churchill said something like: It is a puzzle inside an enigma" or words to that effect. Exactly.


    by wwstaebler (not verified) on Sun, 02/28/2010 - 10:11pm

    Synch: That is very true. Repeated message, taken in not only consciously but unconsciously over time, bend one's thinking.


    by wwstaebler (not verified) on Sun, 02/28/2010 - 11:11pm

    I love reduction to essentials: thank you, Maxine.


    by wwstaebler (not verified) on Sun, 02/28/2010 - 11:14pm

    Thank you for comment, GftB -- you are some I respect, a lot. You, like Gasket, read, comprehend, analyze and distill. As you put yourself into the scenario at hand, and think about the essence of that circumstance and link to your analogous experiences.


    by wwstaebler (not verified) on Sun, 02/28/2010 - 11:20pm

    Watt: I could not agree more with your opinion that lowering the age of Medicare accessibility is the shortest distance between two polarized points and one which, if taken, would have immediate tangible and positive results.
    The lag time is problematic; three years before any result is realized, no matter what "reform" is passed? Outrageous. Part of the prioritizing done by both legislative and executive branch in which re-election, not the business of the people, is the priority.
    This is a pivotal consideration for people my age: those caught between real viablility in the business world, yet four to five years shy of qualification for Medicare.
    Many of us will die, in favor of the next election cycle.


    by wwstaebler (not verified) on Sun, 02/28/2010 - 11:26pm

    I left you a comment waaaay above, ww, concerning the 'fight like a tiger...'


    by wendy davis (not verified) on Sun, 02/28/2010 - 11:36pm

    Wendy: this comment of yours struck me as so layered, and yet so essential, that I had to spend time, after an unusually busy day, to think about all that you said.
    What struck me like lightening was your rhetorical question of real meaning (which I paraphrase, because the comment itself is way upthread): "doesn't everyone know -- or when will people know -- that there is enough love to go around..."
    Ding ding ding, ding. That's it! Is the world divided, fundamentally, between those who experience the various disappointments, heartaches and real tragedies of life but still believe in goodness, in doing the next right thing, in the sense of the generous, inclusive thing, and those who have all the same experiences and, in consequence, choose to shut down, to hoard, to resent???
    It may be that cut and dried as a fundamental choice.
    Except, as long as one is breathing, why would one choose that which suffocates, not only others, but also oneself????


    by wwstaebler (not verified) on Mon, 03/01/2010 - 1:03am

    Bless your heart, wendy staebler.


    by wendy davis (not verified) on Mon, 03/01/2010 - 1:30am

    WW, I lived in Charleston for nearly twenty years and can well image your plight. Here is a link to a great piece in the Times about what happens if there is no health care reform.
    http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/28/weekinreview/28abelson.html?ref=todayspaper
    The other approach you may take is how are medical costs going to be brought under control? If people can't see the personal maybe they can think about what it is doing to businesses big and small in this country. As costs rise businesses will no longer offer health insurance as a full or partial benefit. As more people have to pay full costs for their own insurance they will drop it causing insurance costs to rise - as so forth. It is not getting better from here on out and capping court cases is NOT going to reduce costs. I don't think your friend has fully realized the extent of medical costs these days and I pray that her condition is not life threatening. If she was a good friend I would not discuss it again with her. I was in Charleston for the presidential campaign and election. I did end a friendship over some very racial emails and would do it again, but every friendship is different.


    by bluesplashy (not verified) on Mon, 03/01/2010 - 3:14am

    This post really stuck with me, ww. It is such a perfect example of the disconnect induced by an irrational focus on some slacker ne'er-do-well getting something for nothing and the guvmint that forces us all to support it. Better to leave 30 million uninsured to prevent the undeserving small fraction from getting freebies. Talk about a brake on economic growth!

    Having lived in the south and in some parts of the west where these sorts of sentiments seem to be more dominant, I have alternately hypothesized that it has something to do with 1) the "war of Northern aggression" (i.e., the federal guvmint fought, burned, and pillaged, stole "property", altered a preferred albeit unjust societal structure, and then sent in carpetbaggers who prolonged the pain); 2) an "old time religion" that focuses more on sin and retribution than on love and justice; or 3) the federal guvmint's role in ending Jim Crow laws and codifying civil rights (along with its role in prosecuting racists who had been acquitted by local juries under federal law during the civil rights movement).

    Oversimplified, but when I lived there I was struck by how "alive" the US civil war is for many southerners. And if you accept their initial premise that it was about states' rights, then animosity to the federal guvmint follows like the night the day. The fact that the federal guvmint liberated and then eventually enforced rights for an extremely disenfranchised and discriminated group simply (within the mindset I'm describing) reinforces the perception that it only helps the "undeserving." The religion thing provides scaffolding by providing a world view in which Jesus should have thrown the first stone and "as you do to the least of these" is turned on its head and interpreted as divine instruction to implement a tough love program for the sick, the hungry, the thirsty and the naked, since, of course, that is how they would want to treat Jesus.

    I've found that friendship requires me to accept and somehow love my friends' limitations, knowing that theirs is the larger challenge, to do the same for me. I wonder if she can love the part of you that is so different from her?

    And I wonder how she feels about welfare programs for bankers who cheat? :-)


    by Maxine Udall (g... (not verified) on Mon, 03/01/2010 - 12:01pm

    If only I could apply my powers of discernment to my own life, LOL!

    Thanks, ww. I sincerely appreciate your comment.


    by readytoblowagasket (not verified) on Mon, 03/01/2010 - 12:43pm

    It sounds to me that your friend has been successfully 'programmed' Wendy. As far as I am concerned the right has been waging psy-ops on the American people. But they are conflicted on many fronts. Government control of health is bad, it is socialism. Government control over a woman and her 'right to chose' is good, Christian morality. If you notice most of the rabidly anti-big government types are only against government being involved in business issues or the economy. When it comes to personal choice issues they seem perfectly happy to have the strong arm of a big government there to enforce the rules. There is a perfectly good explanation for this disconnect. On economic issues business interests have poured tens of billions of dollars into an ad campaign, one that amounts to psy-ops, to protect their turf. They have successfully demonized any attempt at regulation of business as a socialist plot to destroy America and enslave the American people.


    by Libertine (not verified) on Mon, 03/01/2010 - 2:28pm

    Some of you seem to be missing the point.

    The proposals being offered by the president and Congress are a far cry from a single payer system. More specifically, they are a far cry from a national health care plan. Instead, what we have is a concoction of political compromises (within the Democratic caucus) and partial fixes to a few of the overwhelming problems plaguing the system.

    Most people in favor of the president's proposals readily admit that it's far from being perfect, but it's better than nothing.

    Really?

    Are you going to benefit one iota from it?

    I've raised the following question on two other threads but nobody has come forward with a clear opinion.

    If the Senate uses reconciliation to amend their own bill, and if the House subsequently passes that modified Senate bill, and Obama signs it into law...

    Does that take us a step CLOSER to one day having a single payer system (or, if not that, a REAL national health care plan), or does it take us a step further AWAY from one day having a single payer system?

    For my two cents, if this patchwork plan gets shoved through, no Congress (or president) is going to have any desire to take up the health care issue again for a very long time. If the plan fails, I think the Democrats have moved the meter to the point where people now expect reform, better reform, and would demand that this issue be taken up again next year.

    Other people disagree with me on that. But even the Republicans cannot seriously look to the status quo any longer. The Democrats are risking putting the Republicans back in power over what amounts to a shitty proposal.

    Is it worth it?

    Obama still has 3 years left in his term. In my opinion, if they wait another year, there will be some bi-partisanship and both sides can save face.


    by Gettysburg (not verified) on Mon, 03/01/2010 - 2:47pm

    Well in the context of Wendy's story I get no indication that her friend is against HCR because it is not really reform at all...I have been against HCR for that exact reason myself. It seems she would be against any reform...period...because regulating business is anti-American and limits our freedom (as we remain wage slaves to rich oligarchs).


    by Libertine (not verified) on Mon, 03/01/2010 - 3:02pm

    Note: Hey -- I did not repost this. I don't know why it surfaced again.
    So, Everyone, please feel free to ignore, or, if you want to continue the discussion, could we, at this point, move it beyond the personal example I gave to the big picture? Thank you, one and all.


    by wwstaebler (not verified) on Mon, 03/01/2010 - 10:09pm

    So true. Thanks, M.


    by wwstaebler (not verified) on Mon, 03/01/2010 - 10:13pm

    What an excellent analysis, Maxine. You are right that a conflict between "big govt." and state's rights was a fundamental motivator for the south in the "war of northern aggression," which is still an open wound for many, as crazy as that may be. You are also right that resurgent fundamentalism seems to promote punishment of perceived sin rather than forgiveness and inclusion. And Civil Rights legislation did cause a backlash for two decades that gradually lessened during the 80's and 90's through the election of Obama but which, since then, is fueling up again.
    All that said, I am still baffled that someone so intrinsically kind, so well-traveled and so seasoned could mimic any of these views, and for the first time.


    by wwstaebler (not verified) on Mon, 03/01/2010 - 10:30pm

    Good link, Blue Splashy and, if it were believed, persuasive. But when was the last time you convinced one of your Charleston friends that the NYT is a reliable, objective source? ;-)


    by wwstaebler (not verified) on Mon, 03/01/2010 - 10:36pm

    Yeah, you are right. I worked part time in one of those corner stores and on Sunday I would get abused by some regular customers for reading the NY Times. I just laughed. But there was one man that would always tell there was no cheaper education available on a daily basis.


    by bluesplashy (not verified) on Tue, 03/02/2010 - 4:21pm

    Latest Comments