The American Spectator : The Spectacle Blog : Liberal Whining a Sign They're Losing Health Care Debate

Text Size

The Spectacle Blog

Liberal Whining a Sign They're Losing Health Care Debate

By Philip Klein on 8.4.09 @ 6:04PM

I have a rule of thumb in politics that if one side is doing a lot of whining, it probably means they're losing. This was true, for example, when liberals were on an electoral losing streak and carped that Republicans were simply meaner people and better at Rovian/swift boat tactics; or when conservatives blamed the media for the fate of the McCain-Palin ticket. Liberals complained about special interests destroying health care legislation in 1993/94, while conservatives were forced to lament the dishonest demagoguery being used by the left to turn the public against Social Security reform in 2005. As I wrote yesterday, Democratic lawmakers have been at the receiving end of a public backlash against their health care proposals, and now they've been working with their liberal allies to discredit protesters by painting them as tools of insurers and the Republican Party. Today, a blogger for liberal activist group Campaign for America's Future equated opponents of liberal health care policies with Holocaust deniers, and the Democratic National Committee jumped into the fray today with a statement claiming that, "The Republicans and their allied groups - desperate after losing two consecutive elections and every major policy fight on Capitol Hill - are inciting angry mobs of a small number of rabid right wing extremists funded by K Street Lobbyists to disrupt thoughtful discussions about the future of health care in America taking place in Congressional Districts across the country."

This is silly. We can argue about how many of the anti-government health care protesters were encouraged to attend townhall meetings by larger groups and how many decided to organize at the local level. But either way, it doesn't really matter, because the whole reason activist groups exist is to encourage citizens who agree with them to get more involved. This is no different from what unions, liberal activist groups, the DNC, or Obama's own Organizing for America are trying to do. During last summer's Democratic National Convention, I attended a number of events in which self-described progressives argued that it was up to them to make sure that once elected, they forced Obama to govern as a liberal, just as past movements had pressured initially reluctant FDR and LBJ to create new social programs. And after Obama won the presidency on the strength of his organization, we heard lots about how he would harness his impressive grassroots apparatus to build public support for his policies.

If liberal organizations were succeeding in the current health care debate, they'd simply have larger numbers of people in support of their policies at all of the townhall meetings, allowing them to drown out the "small number of rabid right wing extremists." Instead, the meetings are being swamped by opponents of their proposals. Coordinated or not, the attendees of the meetings are real people with real concerns about what is being discussed in Washington. The fact that liberals are reduced to whining thus suggests they're losing the organizing war, and that they know it. With that said, it's important that conservatives not get too cocky. Losing is not the same as having lost.

View all comments (19) | Leave a comment

Bailey| 8.4.09 @ 6:26PM

Wow! Angry mobs consisting of average Americans, many pushing babies in strollers, like you and me.

Liberals don't know what angry mobs are--oh, yes they do--those Union rent a mob thugs who ACORN bussed in to threaten AIG executives and their families at home.

Liberal Reader| 8.4.09 @ 7:25PM

Liberals are whining?

The conservatives have become a mob of discontent, resentful whiners.

The whine and moon over Sarah Palin; any negative word about her becomes another episode in her long martyrdom;

They whine ceaselessly about taxes -- even those they themselves are not being asked to pay!

They whine, they whimper, they moan without end about any perceived inconvenience they might suffer as they country attempts to address problems that have built up over decades;

They whimper and whine about Christmas, like frightened children, claiming that liberals are "waging war" against it;

They whimper about fear, danger, and looming darkness: any government action, no matter how trivial, becomes a sign certain of growing tyranny in this country;

They whine about the desperate plight of white people, now the downtrodden victims of racism by bigots like Obama and Sotomayor.

The conservatives, no longer interested in personal accountability, have showed themselves to be led by people who are weak and cruel: Glenn Beck, who can't govern himself let alone give advice about how we should govern this country; Sarah Palin, who never misses an opportunity to brag about her victimization at the hands of the press, entertainers, and little Hollywood starlets who people her bizarre fantasias; Governor Sanford, who whimpered and whined about his poor little broken heart.

Conservatives have become screechy, shrill, and discombobulated: witness the mob shouting down a baffled Republican Congressman who had the audacity to admit the president of the United States is not an illegal alien.

Whine, complain, yell, bluster, blather, threaten, screech: the whole conservative movement has degenerated into a Wal Mart Saturnalia of boobs and nitwits.

But liberals are whiners! Oh, to be sure.

Careful: I might sue.

Smitty| 8.4.09 @ 7:29PM

Klein, we are winning the ObamaCare debate because we are strong and assertive, not squishy like you. If we had followed your timid advice of the last few months we'd be in a lot more trouble than we are now.

You have a lot of nerve lecturing us about being cocky. Sounds like whining to me.

Smitty| 8.4.09 @ 7:33PM

LR @7:25PM--the great nitwit has spoken!

Just wait, LR/Jeremiah, soon you liberal hogs at the trough won't be whining anymore--you'll be squealing like stuck pigs!

I can hardly wait.

Kevin| 8.4.09 @ 8:06PM

Liberal reader: Nice field of straw men you set up there. Similar to your Dear Leader's rhetoric, such as "some would have you believe that we should dump live kittens into baths of acid, but I believe . . ", etc. etc.

Roy| 8.4.09 @ 8:14PM

This is one of those arguments that implies a bunch of things which, examined more closely, are pretty substance free.

Take "winning the debate". This means what? Persuading more people to agree with them? All right, but this is irrelevant to substantive truth, especially in the short term. So it may well be that one side is "winning the debate", but is, nevertheless, wrong, and may be "winning the debate" due to superior lying, smearing and spinning. In which case, one appropriate response is to point out that they are doing this.

Which brings us to "whining". What does this mean, exactly? Pointing out the lies and deceptiveness of the other side? If they just go on lying, then, eventually, does pointing this fact out become "whining"? In short, is the accusation of "whining" anything other than a substance-free smear to silence people that point out your lying and spinning?

NOTE on the foregoing: I substantively agree with Mr. Klein on health care, but I hate this argument.

Smitty| 8.4.09 @ 10:20PM

Conservatives are telling the truth about ObamaCare and it's disingenuous to suggest otherwise.

We are winning this debate because the American people are smart enough to see through Obama's lies.

Barb| 8.4.09 @ 11:39PM

"Winning" at these town hall meetings won't mean a thing when they cram that monstrous health care deform through against the wishes of the american people. I can see them trying to ram through a bill ending term limits as quickly as possible too.
They are realizing that they really don't have us all fooled and are running out of time to do all this social engineering by stealth instead of by brutal force.

Heather | 8.5.09 @ 12:23AM

Such negative people! We have to keep up the pressure, but at least we're making progress against this ObamaCare monstrosity. Stop whining and get to work!

Auntie Em| 8.5.09 @ 12:38AM

The whine and moon over Sarah Palin; any negative word about her becomes another episode in her long martyrdom;
"The whine" - may mean THEY whine? Do you speakka da English?

They whine ceaselessly about taxes -- even those they themselves are not being asked to pay!
I cannot speak for you, but I already pay enough in taxes to support another family! However, here in NJ it probably wouldn't pay the average Real Estate Tax. And I am a lowly teacher. But rich guys like you wouldn't understand...I am SURE you are chomping at the bit to PAY more taxes!

They whine, they whimper, they moan without end about any perceived inconvenience they might suffer as they country attempts to address problems that have built up over decades;
"They country"...are you talking about the USA? Once again...do ya speaka da English?

Yeah, decades of your beloved Democratically controlled Congress, right?

They whimper and whine about Christmas, like frightened children, claiming that liberals are "waging war" against it;
We aren't frightened, just dismayed...saddened. And angry that we can no longer wish "Merry Christmas" in the public forum, thanks to Democrats! We must say, "Happy Holidays" or "Best Wishes" or some other such politically correct inane remark! Let's just elminate Christmas from the public/government calender and get it over with!!!

They whimper about fear, danger, and looming darkness: any government action, no matter how trivial, becomes a sign certain of growing tyranny in this country;
Actually, only the "government action" of this tyrannical administration! They truly have outdone ANY other administration in forcing the Nanny State on the American public. And YES...it is cause for alarm!! The deficit is THREE times what it has been, SINCE THE FOUNDING OF THE COUNTRY. No cause for concern on your party, right? Let you kids/grand-kids/great-grand-kids pay it. Nice!

They whine about the desperate plight of white people, now the downtrodden victims of racism by bigots like Obama and Sotomayor.
"They"...that mysterious group again! Do you mean Americans? Yes, well, "they" never said they were "downtrodden." "They" only said that any form of racism is wrong. And do NOT say that Black Americans cannot be racist. Or Hispanic Americans. Every human being has it in them to hate other 'groups' different from them. Just ask the African Rwandans!

Sorry, not sure how to respond to this irrational 'mini rant'..... you are all over the place with this one! I see that you hate Glen Beck (can't "govern" himself???? What does THAT mean?...) "Weak and cruel"...help me out here....are you talking about Beck or conservatives in general? And what do you mean? (I guess the drugs are kicking in?) Of COURSE you had to mention Sarah!! Why the heck does she bother you left-wingers so much? Don't you know you are keeping her in the media by your rants? The more you trash her, the more people want to read about her!! Who are these entertainers who "people her fantasias?" Again, do ya speakka da English? Or, are you simply unable to TYPE English? In any case, your rant loses MUCH credibility by your inablity to speak/type ENGLISH properly. Don't you know that people immediately dismiss you when you sound like an uneducated/possibly poor-English speaker? It does matter.

Gov. Sanford---like DEMS never did such a thing! Hipocrite! CLINTON....at least Sanford didn't get a BJ in the WHITE HOUSE you moral moron. Every Repub. you can site who has committed a MORAL OUTRAGE, I can offer you a DEM. who has done the SAME! GIVE THAT UP.

Probably, they learned their tactics from the "successful" Dems, who won the election by behaving in the SAME manner! Just as Saul Alinsky instructs to shout them DOWN...so you cannot actually hear what they are saying. You guys can give it, but you can't TAKE IT!

Look, I have a copy of my ORIGINAL Birth Certificate...and I was born a LOT sooner than Obamma. My mother does NOT have one...she was born in 1925 OR 1926! But Obamma was born in the 60's. Give me a break! Where is the Certificate that shows the hospital, the physician delivering the baby, etc. Standard! Yeah, I know, the state of Hawaii certifies he was born in Hawaii. I think it is time to move on from this. But if people want to see the Certificate of Live Birth, why is that such a BIG DEAL? Why doesn't Obamma just provide it? The ACTUAL Birth Certificate? Do you have one? Most everyone I know has one, which states the hospital, doctor, etc. The Certificate of Live Birth on-line does NOT provide this information. Just like Lou Dobbs says, Obamma (I mis-spell his name on purpose) could end all of this with a posting of this Certificate. But won't...can't?

Whine, complain, yell, bluster, blather, threaten, screech: the whole conservative movement has degenerated into a Wal Mart Saturnalia of boobs and nitwits.
Exactly!! Just like you did during the Bush years! We are just GOOD students!! The entire progressive movement has turned into a screeching, whining, hate-filled, conservative-bashing MORON FEST! Tit for Tat! LOVE IT!
Take a dose of your own medicine! Isn't pretty is it? This is what you looked like for almost 8 years! HA HA HA HA.....

But liberals are whiners! Oh, to be sure.
I agree! You guys WON but you are STILL filled with RAGE! WHY? And you despise any disagreement with your Obambi worship. WHY?

Careful: I might sue.
But you would LOSE!

Syntax| 8.5.09 @ 2:19AM

Liberal Reader: The healthcare debate doesn't even involve these people. There are rent-a-thugs invading town hall meetings and ambushing Democrats because of two reasons; one is they're just whining and trying to involve themselves in the debate using intimidation to stop any dialog with regular folks and two, they are being bankrolled by lobbyists of big insurance companies. The same lobbyist firms that bankrolled the dismal tea parties.

The debate over health care is between Progressive Democrats and "Blue Dog" Democrats. Let them believe what ever they want about "whining" but elections have consequences. We shouldn't be wasting any time on people who aren't a majority enough to be part of the process. It's a waste of time.

The Joker | 8.5.09 @ 4:05AM

Insurance companies bankrolled the Tea Parties AND the Town Hall rent a thug invaders? Who knew? Nancy Pelosi knew.

You Liberals better be careful--you're gonna get a spankin'.

Mike Dooley| 8.5.09 @ 6:01AM

Just where are these meetings where Conservatives hyperventilate over Obama's place of birth. I have been to several Conservative pow-wows and never heard the subject. The only Conservatives who are obsessed with the President’s citizenship I am familiar with are those I hear about on TV.

Besides, trying to remove Obama because he is somehow disqualified would be a disaster for the country It would be disaster not because Obama is such a wonderful person; but because removing Obama by any other means except the voting booth would be highly divisive all by itself. Nothing would be more harmful than successfully making an end-run around the voice of the majority.

Drider| 8.5.09 @ 6:50AM

I don't see this as a debate, the liberals want to force this down the throats of the vast majority of Americans and are possibly whining on how by doing so will result in them losing political power.
There is no true debate being most people are "rightfully" so adamantly against handing such power to the government.........and that would go for any US government regardless of who is running it at any given time, after all, we are Americans (which is a good thing).

Hence, they want their cake and wish to eat it too.
Thankfully, with the vast majority of Americans, the term "Better dead than red" still applies.

Mamba1-0| 8.5.09 @ 11:47AM

The reason that obots such as "liberal reader" and "syntax" actually believe that the "anti-health care bill" (and anti-cap and tax) are "paid thugs" is that the democrats have done that for so many years, that they cannot imagine anyone not doing it.
They simply cannot imagine that Americans - motivated entirely by patriotism and an aversion to government-enforced slavery - would get off the couch and demonstrate FOR FREE against a nanny-state plan to control their lives, against their wishes.
Didn't the great orator, barack obama, once say, "Iwant you to get out there and argue with them (Republicans)! I want you to GET IN THEIR FACES!"? Why, yes. I believe he did.
So that's what we intend to do.
And yes, it's scaring the hell out of the leftists and obots - because the believed that they could do anything they wanted with no danger of rousing the sleeping tiger that is the American people.
It's our turn to play the same game the left played for so long with impunity -- but we're going to do it for good, not to promote slavery.

EclecticReader123| 8.5.09 @ 2:16PM

I suggest we all get on with life and pursue real "change." For instance, in approximately 468 days there are 468 seats in Congress that need to be, and can be, won by conservatives. If all of the 58,343,671 voters who voted for McCain in the 2008 election (using CNN's stats) sent in a check for $4.68 to the RNC the total would be a staggering $273,048,380.28. That is enough pocket "change" to effect real "change" for a "change." For what it's worth, that's my solution.

Thank you,

orlandocajun| 8.5.09 @ 4:28PM

Stein writes an article about whining liberals and what do we get here...whining liberals.

EclecticReader123| 8.5.09 @ 4:35PM

* Conscientious objectors should take their cue from the President:

Rules for Radicals

In 1971, Saul Alinsky wrote an entertaining classic on grassroots organizing titled Rules for Radicals. Those who prefer cooperative tactics describe the book as out-of-date. Nevertheless, it provides some of the best advice on confrontational tactics. Alinsky begins this way:

What follows is for those who want to change the world from what it is to what they believe it should be. The Prince was written by Machiavelli for the Haves on how to hold power. Rules for Radicals is written for the Have-Nots on how to take it away.

His “rules” derive from many successful campaigns where he helped poor people fighting power and privilege

For Alinsky, organizing is the process of highlighting what is wrong and convincing people they can actually do something about it. The two are linked. If people feel they don’t have the power to change a bad situation, they stop thinking about it.

According to Alinsky, the organizer — especially a paid organizer from outside — must first overcome suspicion and establish credibility. Next the organizer must begin the task of agitating: rubbing resentments, fanning hostilities, and searching out controversy. This is necessary to get people to participate. An organizer has to attack apathy and disturb the prevailing patterns of complacent community life where people have simply come to accept a bad situation. Alinsky would say, “The first step in community organization is community disorganization.”

Through a process combining hope and resentment, the organizer tries to create a “mass army” that brings in as many recruits as possible from local organizations, churches, services groups, labor unions, corner gangs, and individuals.

Alinsky provides a collection of rules to guide the process. But he emphasizes these rules must be translated into real-life tactics that are fluid and responsive to the situation at hand.

Rule 1: Power is not only what you have, but what an opponent thinks you have. If your organization is small, hide your numbers in the dark and raise a din that will make everyone think you have many more people than you do.

Rule 2: Never go outside the experience of your people.
The result is confusion, fear, and retreat.

Rule 3: Whenever possible, go outside the experience of an opponent. Here you want to cause confusion, fear, and retreat.

Rule 4: Make opponents live up to their own book of rules. “You can kill them with this, for they can no more obey their own rules than the Christian church can live up to Christianity.”

Rule 5: Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon. It’s hard to counterattack ridicule, and it infuriates the opposition, which then reacts to your advantage.

Rule 6: A good tactic is one your people enjoy. “If your people aren’t having a ball doing it, there is something very wrong with the tactic.”

Rule 7: A tactic that drags on for too long becomes a drag. Commitment may become ritualistic as people turn to other issues.

Rule 8: Keep the pressure on. Use different tactics and actions and use all events of the period for your purpose. “The major premise for tactics is the development of operations that will maintain a constant pressure upon the opposition. It is this that will cause the opposition to react to your advantage.”

Rule 9: The threat is more terrifying than the thing itself. When Alinsky leaked word that large numbers of poor people were going to tie up the washrooms of O’Hare Airport, Chicago city authorities quickly agreed to act on a longstanding commitment to a ghetto organization. They imagined the mayhem as thousands of passengers poured off airplanes to discover every washroom occupied. Then they imagined the international embarrassment and the damage to the city’s reputation.

Rule 10: The price of a successful attack is a constructive alternative. Avoid being trapped by an opponent or an interviewer who says, “Okay, what would you do?”

Rule 11: Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, polarize it. Don’t try to attack abstract corporations or bureaucracies. Identify a responsible individual. Ignore attempts to shift or spread the blame.

According to Alinsky, the main job of the organizer is to bait an opponent into reacting. “The enemy properly goaded and guided in his reaction will be your major strength.”