Rage in the Health-Care Debate
I agree with Kathleen Parker that the rage on display at the health-care town halls is genuine ["Anxiety Attacks," op-ed, Aug. 9]. But that doesn't make such anger well reasoned.
If Ms. Parker's friends are anxious about their unemployment, our current system, in which health insurance essentially depends on employment, can't be easing their anxieties. If the Florida real estate appraiser knows five couples who have lost their homes and cars, wouldn't it be nice if they weren't also losing their health care? I would think that the closer we can get to universal coverage, the less anxiety people will feel. And that's before we get to the retirees who are on Medicare yet claim to be totally opposed to government involvement in health insurance.
Suggesting that we must have regard for people's feelings, regardless of how disconnected to facts those feelings are, strikes me as exactly the sort of thing for which conservatives normally mock soft-headed liberals.
After decades of highly organized protests by liberal groups, we now find the left and the many media sources complaining that the recent protests against the Obama administration's plans for health-care changes have been orchestrated, as if this makes the protests wrong. Tom Toles even had the gall to show this in his Aug. 7 cartoon. I didn't see any complaints from him that antiwar protests were not spontaneous.