Blather, Baloney and Conventional Wisdom
Published October 7, 2013
by Joe McLean, political consultant and adviser, published in Politics North Carolina, October 7, 2013.
“Iteration, like friction, is likely to generate heat instead of progress.” – George Eliot
As the ridiculous government shutdown staggers into its second week, this morning’s cable news chatter was once again consumed with polls, political name-calling and a healthy dose of tongue-clucking over which side acts more like spoiled children. As usual, buried in all the blather was another throw-away aside about how the Affordable Care Act remains deeply unpopular with the American public.
This really matters, because now that the federal deficit is shrinking so quickly, the one and only justification offered for shutting down the government and potentially crashing the entire world financial system is the Tea Party’s obsessive opposition to Obamacare. If they’re wrong about public support for the ACA their whole argument is pointless.
Surprise! Contrary to conventional wisdom, most Americans support health care reform – and not just a little bit. In no fewer than 11 separate CNN polls since March of 2011, a clear majority, (averaging 53%) either support the ACA or think it does not go far enough. Only 38% on average, oppose the law. These results are remarkably consistent over three years of intense polling.
Why didn’t you know that? Because the honchos who run cable news don’t think you’re smart enough to understand nuance. When these results are reported, the roughly 12% who think we should go further toward national single payer healthcare get lumped in with conservative opponents. Most pollsters I’ve asked with say this makes no sense unless you’re Fox News or have a political ax to grind. But this simplistic baloney is reported ad-nauseam in the cable-TV echo chamber until it becomes accepted fact.
Today, over two-thirds of all Americans are against shutting down the government even “for a few days” to stop Obamacare – 68% to 27%. Taken together with the direct polling on health care, this ought to frighten the pants off any politician. It plainly terrifies the few rational Republicans left in the House, as well as Speaker Boehner and any Senate Republican not named Cruz.
President Obama knows this. That is why he is so comfortable holding a hard line. When the Tea Party back-benchers bloviate about the “will of the American people” the President knows it’s bovine scatology. He also knows time is on his side.
But the Tea Partiers in the house don’t believe any of this. Maybe gerrymandered districts insulate them. Or maybe they only listen to Fox News or Rush Limbaugh, (or themselves). But maybe it’s because, like the rest of us, they actually believe the mindless hot air on cable news.
While the cables continue to chase ratings by broadcasting suit-and-tie food fights and a generous helping of train wrecks and two-headed cows, they are numbing our minds and deadening informed discussion. Here’s what the cable news can do for our country: More light and less heat.
“Balance” is a common refrain nowadays. So long as both sides get a fair hearing the thinking goes, the actual facts can take care of themselves. You can see where this leads. One side says the moon is made of green cheese, but some scientist says its rock and dust. “We report, you decide.”
There was a time when journalists were also the arbiters of truth. I remember vividly watching Walter Cronkite report from Vietnam that the U.S. was losing the war. He prompted an earthquake in our political culture and society at large by speaking the simple truth.
So next time some self-styled “political strategist” fills cable TV air-time with a rote rant about how Obamacare will destroy the country, why not have serious economists who have actually studied it discuss the economic models which give us reliable predictions? Turns out most economists and CEO’s believe there will be little if any impact, and that health costs might actually come down. Report that.
When a “Tea Party favorite” fumes about the “makers vs. the takers,” point out that Obamacare will make all those “takers” who can afford insurance, but refuse to buy it, ante up and pay their fair share? Or that insurance rates are actually going down for most people. Report that too.
And, just for the record, how about reminding your viewers that Barack Obama ran on health care reform in 2008 and won. The Affordable Care Act was passed by Congress, signed by the President and upheld by the Supreme Court. Then, despite an intensive negative campaign, mostly against Obamacare, the American people re-elected Barack Obama and returned a Democratic majority to the U.S. Senate. Case closed.
Cable news creates conventional wisdom. They have a duty to get it right.
October 8, 2013 at 10:41 am
Norm Kelly says:
'now that the federal deficit is shrinking so quickly'. The federal deficit has dipped slightly. What's it been? One whole year? Is this some level of history that we can plan to have happen on an ongoing basis? Even though the annual deficit is less than it's been since Obama took office, the national debt continues to skyrocket. Which is of at least as much concern, if not more, than the annual deficit.
And let's remember that part of the reason the annual deficit has gone down this year is because the taxes & fees associated with socialized medicine started before the payouts associated with socialized medicine. This was predicted by the CBO when Obamacare was proposed. Since the fines/taxes/fees started in year 1 but the big payouts don't come until after the King is supposed to leave office, the annual deficits would come down. But, the CBO also showed that as soon as socialized medicine is fully implemented the annual deficit would skyrocket again causing the federal debt to also skyrocket. A one-time slow down in the growth of the debt does not mean anything good.
Actually, time does not appear to be on Obama's side. The longer the King insists on shutting down the government, refusing to negotiate at all with any Republican, the more the populace realizes that this is not supposed to be the way Washington runs. The longer the King holds out, and makes outrageous statements about the Republicans, the more even his supporters realize he's the one being intransigent. The more lies the King tells about what the law will do, how it will help people, how the Republicans have a Constitutional duty to support HIS position, the more the people realize he's full of crap and the tables turn against HIM.
'There was a time when journalists were also the arbiters of truth'. I was slightly too young to remember these days. But those days are long gone. What we are left with is 'news' outlets like NBC, who wouldn't know the truth if it literally smacked them in the face. CNN, which wouldn't report a story unfavorable to either Democrats or muslims if someone paid them to do it. Nobody watches CNN to get news. Most of the people who watch CNN do it because they already believe the crap they are hearing, so it reinforces their own opinion. It doesn't matter if the CNN reporter is simply reading off the Democrat party talking points memo, CNN will simply read it without question, without hesitation. Unbiased news is no longer available. And when some reporter or news organization decides that they will not carry the party line, this administration is openly hostile toward them and cuts them off from access to the administration. (yes, this is widely reported. if you don't believe me, you are already dead. or you are a liberal. redundant!)
Once again I find it necessary to correct a common misconception from liberals/socialists within the media. SCOTUS did NOT uphold socialized medicine. You have the resources to figure this out & properly report it. Why are you so lazy that you can't do this one simple step before publishing your garbage. SCOTUS said that Obamacare, what you incorrectly call ACA, was unconstitutional. SCOTUS changed the definition of the law and then said that the redefinition was legal. What other law has SCOTUS ever changed in order to approve it? Please do your homework and show us specific examples of when SCOTUS allowed a law to stand that the majority said was unconstitutional.
If there's a group of people who can afford to buy some commodity, but they choose not to, why is this the business of the federal government. Why should it be allowed to have a government agency force me to buy something I don't want to buy in a FREE society? What types of government do force people to participate in commerce? Fascists. Socialists. Communists. Certainly not representative republics. I'm under the impression that the constitution says that the federal government is specifically to be limited, restricted in it's powers. I thought the constitution said that all powers not specifically given to the feds were automatically the jurisdiction of the several states. So what gives the central planners the authority to force me to participate in commerce? What will be the next commodity that the central planners will deem necessary for me to participate in buying? When the leftists finally get gas powered vehicles removed from the streets, will I be forced to give my car to the central planners and purchase an approved non-gas vehicle. Whether I can afford the car payment or not, will the central planners be allowed to force me into this? If you believe this is a stretch, please take off your rose colored glasses and step into the real world. If the central planners are given permission to force me to participate in one area of commerce, they obviously have the ability to force me to participate in any area of commerce. Bono wears rose colored glasses and refuses to live in the real world. Why do you insist on joining him? Please get back to the point where I am allowed to participate in commerce at my own level without you deciding what's good for me & what's not good for me. I'll drink as much pepsi/cola as I want, and won't stop you from eating as many bean sprouts as you want. Deal? Of course not. You are a liberal and therefore know what's best for me. Like all liberals, it's either your way or no way. Total government control of my daily life from the rising from bed to the returning to bed in the evening. And if you get your way, you'll also control the bed I lie upon, as well as any activity that might be allowed to happen once I get there. Stretch? Don't doubt it. Liberalism starts with small steps, ends with control of individual lives. Socialized medicine can be proven to be bad for the people, for the economy, for the budget, for every aspect of it's implementation. So who is it that is ignoring the facts? The only reason socialized medicine is acceptable to liberals is because of the power & control it gives to the government over individual lives. It certainly isn't to improve health care delivery. It certainly isn't to make the system more affordable. Neither of these will be the result of Obamacare. The only reason left is control. (cute. used 'left' and 'control' in the same sentence.)
