the truth comes out

From the Associated Press, on healthcare reform:

When the AP poll questions were framed broadly, the answers seemed to indicate ample support for Obama's goals. When required trade-offs were brought into the equation, opinions shifted -- sometimes dramatically.

...The health care debate is full of such trade-offs. For example, limiting the premiums that insurance companies can charge 50-year-olds means that 20-year-olds have to pay more for coverage.

"These trade-offs really matter," says Robert Blendon, a professor at the Harvard School of Public Health who follows opinion trends. "The legislation contains a number of features that polls have shown to be popular, but support for the overall legislation is less than might be expected because people are worried there are details about these bills that could raise their families' costs."

What I posted here, on October 5th:

Polls show steadily shrinking support for "the public option" over time.  Liberals point to their own polls, saying that when presented with a summary of their plan the public overwhelmingly supports it.

...The real difference, between the right's poll results and those of the left, is that support falls off quickly once the true cost of the "free" lunch is revealed.

Remember, the left has no magic tricks for making this healthcare plan work.  Their plan includes massive costs, both in terms of dollars and quality of care.  Their only "trick" is to get you to support the plan by pretending that those costs don't exist, or that "the rich" will pay them.

But that's not the important part.  What's important -- where the left needs to be challenged -- is why they don't just come out and admit to the costs, and persuade a critical mass of Americans to accept their plan on its face.

And the reason is the same reason it always is:  Because most Americans cannot be persuaded to accept the morality of the left.  Given all of the facts, you would not make the choice liberals want you to make.  Or, to put it more accurately:  Most Americans cannot be persuaded to surrender their own morality to a state which has none.

Comments

[Tom Mitchell]

The truth of our federal administrations of late is to be seen as the brightest beacon on the highest hill. To convey that the state itself brought us unequalled freedom and prosperity and happiness. To rule over healthy beautiful citizens who live in mansions and have perfect lives from sea to shining sea like the ones on the public airwaves.

America must have the best medical system in the world. America must treat its citizens better than any nation in the world.

To achieve this star-spangled grandeur they need you to do your part. You are not merely red state serfs or blue state serfs but American serfs toiling for the state to bring your children to a shining promised land of tomorrow.

You must buy this prideful inflationism and believe that we must have the best and be the best of everything even if it potentially means the ruin of us.

In addition to the original benevolent unseen hand of the market, there are now two additional unseen blue and red hands who will force you to work on their plantations to feed their inflationist fantasies of being the superest superpower of all time.

[cloudbuster]

There's no point in debunking all jacksmith's many mistatements and outright lies. He's clearly a propagandist for the liberal agenda.

But just for two:

He calls our health care system "A DISASTER!" Really? The health care system that has the higher cancer survival rates in the world? The health care system that has been the font of more medical innovation than any other nation in the world? Maybe more than all other nations combined. The health care system that has brought us new high-tech treatments and medicines on such a frequent basis that every decade we are privileged to have medical options that would have amazed us the decade before? Those innovations didn't come from China, from Britain, from Canada, from Russia. No, they came from "the only truly free market based healthcare system in the World" (actually, hah, I wish we were truly free market-based.)

And second, he says "providing or denying medically necessary care for profit motivations is wrong. Because it is WRONG! It's professionally, ethically, and morally REPUGNANT!, Animalistic, VILE and EVIL."

Again, really? This is so indefensible it is unbelievable. The key word in that little rant is "provide." Health care is something that someone has to provide to someone else.

If that someone, often a highly-trained profession with years devoted to the acquisition and honing of his skills, is evil for profiting from his hard-won knowledge. If he must, therefore, give the fruits of his mind and labor away with no thought of what he will receive in return. And if the government mandates such 'altruism,' then what has that highly-trained professional become? A slave, that is what he has become. A slave to an endless supply of stretched out hands who are willing to take and take and offer nothing in return, and a slave to the government that empowers them.

Profit not only makes good sense -- it is what motivates people to achieve -- it is utterly moral. And a free market system -- a system where a man is free to set his own price so long as other are willing to pay it, is the most moral system of all.

[John Galt]

Sorry about that, CB. He's a regular spammer; I've deleted his crap four or five times before.

I've turned on some blocking. We'll see if that slows him down any.

Nice rebuttal, though.

[Dagny Taggart]

I disagree with you on one key point, John.

Most Americans cannot be persuaded to surrender their own morality to a state which has none.

Most Americans want to eat Big Macs and watch American Idol. They want to drink whiskey and then climb behind the wheel of their Miata. Yet they complain incessantly about their deductibles and premiums and wait times at the ER. Most Americans want the government to protect them from their own decisions.

Perhaps you have more faith in humanity than I, but I meet very few people who are not seduced by the absurd promises made by Democrats regarding a "state option" which would force you to own a plan.

[John Galt]

I think it is a "faith in humanity" weakness on my part, a (possibly unwarranted) optimism. I think most Americans take the conservative route when presented with actual costs, or when going about their own lives.

And I think they still prefer freedom when they realize it's in jeopardy.

But that could just be me! ;)

[Dagny Taggart]

Clearly you must not live in California.