To those who don't like my position in support of passing the Senate Health Care Bill

[CreekDog]

1) Calling me Republican, DLC and saying that politicians that I trust more than others (like Boxer, Sanders, etc.) are bought and paid for.

2) Lecturing me about how all I'm going to do is help the insurance industry.

You know they are not very convincing and it makes me wonder why you bother to post them.

I mean on this side, countless posters have tried to post language from the bill that addresses concerns. We've tried to explain what alternatives are available to us now and what aren't.

Now sometimes, we get arguments back saying, "but what about X weakness in the bill, won't that make things worse?". To me, that's a useful discussion to have.

But half the posts in opposition (and sometimes more) are just:

1) you/Senator X/you all are just sellouts. (even folks like Sanders, Boxer, etc.)
2) you just want to help the insurance industry

Not only is it not convincing, making me wonder what on earth you think you are accomplishing by making it. It also makes me convinced that you don't know me or what I care about and that further undermines the very arguments you are making.

Perhaps I shouldn't tip you off that your strategy is counterproductive to your own goals, but, well, I just want to show you how ineffective those talking points are.

And while ineffective is forgivable for a greater purpose, there is a bankruptcy of such screeds against those who are trying to argue on the basis of the bill and its circumstances. This leads me to think at times that some opponents who stoop to such vapid arguments are not really serious about working on health care or improving it because they won't argue seriously about it here.

[Teaser]

1. CreekDog, intellectually honest users know you ain't a shill.

and don't sweat the rest.

[phleshdef]

2. Amen. All the crap most of that crowd is spewing is full of bad cliches and unproven conspiracy BS.

A few people actually feel what they are saying and actually have some knowledge of what is actually taking place here. Most of them though, that isn't the case. Most of them don't understand the current bill, don't even understand what they even mean by "public option", they have no clue what a "corporatist" actually is and they don't want to bother to take the time to actually think it out and come to an informed conclusion. They just want to trash the bill, trash our people in office and throw buzzwords around to make themselves feel "more liberal than thou". Its a lot of petulant nonsense and I'm frankly tired of it.

[lapfog_1]

3. And, calling those of us who oppose passage "tea baggers" etc

doesn't help either, nor do the "nah nah na nah nah" posts with things like

"you lost you crybabies" and "call the whaaa-ambulance".

And, last, listing a group of Democratic or Progressive Politicians who are voting in favor, as if this is an actual argument, is not productive. Argue the points, present sections of the bill that support your claims. Argue the merits.

Thanks.

[Teaser]

5. fine points, except for your last

which is more

"POST HOW I WANT. THANKS".

[lapfog_1]

9. Everybody in the world can be wrong.

If this was 1400 and all the world's brightest people came to me and said "The world is flat". The list of impressive individuals with credentials would be long and lustrous.

And they would still be wrong.

Reason and logic, using the facts, not opinions of even those we hold in high esteem, is the way to convince me.

Yes, because of the list of progressives, especially those outside of federal elected office (who now have a motive to put the best face on this that they can, knowing that this is all that they can get right now), is reason for one to listen carefully and closely to their arguments. But the list alone is not sufficient.

And if such a list is sufficient for you, then that saddens me. For we, as progressives, should never take anyones word for something, we should always question, adopt an opposing view, else we end up in lockstep mode, just like the Republicans when they were following Bush over the cliff in Iraq, with the Patriot Act, the Military Commissions Act, etc, etc.

[CreekDog]

6. I posted names of Senators voting and I think that is a legitimate basis of discussion

and I said precisely why it is a legitimate basis, in concert with other considerations.

and namecalling of the type you described by supporters of the bill is completely unhelpful too.

[Hello_Kitty]

4. Well, you guys might want to stop with the "you don't care about the 30 million uninsured" screed.

:shrug:

[Dr Fate]

7. Find people who agree with you, then recruit them to be DEM activists.

I dont really see what the problem is.

If yours is a popular take on what is going on, then you wont have any trouble recruting like minded DEM activists to help you argue for & support this move.

I for one wish you the best of luck.

[Bluenorthwest]

8. I have a hard time following this post

You speak in the singular about what is said to you, then you speak in the plural, about what 'we've explained, we get arguments back'. Is this just like the royal 'we' a kind of way of speaking? Or are you saying you represent a faction or something? I just don't follow the why the I turns to we. What's that about? Who is the rest of the we?
Just wondering. Strange post. Maybe I am missing the whole point. Which seems to be that you, which is either one person or a group of people, don't like how other people post. So they should do as you wish. You and the mouse in your pocket? Or the centrists or the Insurance shills or the True Scotsmen or what? The knitting club?

[CreekDog]

10. it's happened to me and others that support the health care bill as well

it's describing a dynamic i've seen in my threads and others.

i would love it if DU had a "draft" mode for posts so that I could sit on posts for a while and proofread for those types of errors and ambiguities before going final with a post.

[Bluenorthwest]

11. Thanks for understanding it is was an honest question

Tell you what, I just deleted an attempt to say something very specifically nice about the President because I could not write in in a way that I thought would be accepted. I wanted to be nice, for Christmas, but this is one hell of a tough room.

[levander]

12. Get used to it Creek

That's politics on the internet. I am here trying to popularize opinions, but I'm learning some people are worth talking to, others aren't.

A few times people have told me the reason no Republicans voted for it is just because, "they are a bunch of blockheads who don't think for themself so they vote in unison". It's like a lot of these people, they entirely do their thinking based on labels. They look at some information and ask, "is this liberal or conservative?" and that's their entire take on the issue.

I've made posts with titles like, "Another partisan bickerer...". But, we need some kind of more effective and funny meme to use against these guys who argue politics based on name-calling. 1.) It would be funny. 2.) Because it's the same name calling they use, maybe if we start to speak some of their language, maybe they would slow begin to understand the folly of their ways?