State of the health care debate

Brian Doherty:

The odd debate reveals something disturbing about how American progressives, in and out of power, view politics. After eight years of what they perceived as illegitimate, dangerous, and idiotic government, it was time for their set of sweeping solutions, so inarguably right, to be enacted. The attitude is disturbingly illiberal: They know the proper solution to a problem, a solution that involves commanding the resources and liberty of the entire country. Anyone who objects or obstructs is dangerous and deserves to be ignored, shouted down, marginalized, even deported.

There are decent, smart, independent thinkers who want to make sure all Americans should live and be well. Then there are those, wallowing in their own greedy crapulence, who, because either their pockets or their heads are filled with the filthy detritus of insurance industry cash and lies, want Americans to die. That second group, it should go without saying, scarcely deserves a place at the table of American democracy.

From the rhetoric I have seen in the comments section on various blogs -- and I don't mean DailyKos or Democratic Underground -- this rings fairly true. Those who don't believe in a big government approach to health care then are obviously animated by selfish motives and don't care if people die. Advocates for a free market solution and the power of capitalism to overcome our health care woes are shouted down as the henchmen of some corporate agenda.

Far more disturbing is that such sentiment appears to extend to the upper echelons of the Democratic party, which has refused to entertain alternatives to increased government intervention as a means of reforming and expanding health care. After all, why bother listening to those whose motives are rooted in selfishness and greed? The debate, and the legislation now being debated, has suffered accordingly.