I was just reading an article on the CNN website that points to a type of irrationality on the part of too many. Entitled "Obama's big problem in Big Sky country," and based on selected interviews with needy health care recipients in Max Baucus's home state of Montana, the article - while puncturing a big hole in the supposedly western state ideology of "rugged individualism" fails to go far enough in getting people to account for their own contradictions. It offers a clear example of what I would call lazy journalism, and there is way too much lazy journalism being done all the time, particularly around substantive issues like health care.
Apparently, according to this article, people out west want health care reform, but they don't want the government to be more involved.
Framing the issue as Obama's big problem, the article, written by Ed Henry who is out there on assignment, provides some anecdotal cases, such as that of Sonja McDonald, an Obama supporter who, inexplicably, doesn't appear to want the federal government involved in health care!
I arrived here a couple of days ahead of the president in order to get a better read on his reform effort by talking to people like Sonja McDonald, who told me her husband's job as a diesel mechanic doesn't provide health insurance for them and their two children.
So I found McDonald at a remarkable local clinic getting a low-cost tooth extraction because she has not been able to afford a trip to the dentist in a couple of years. She voted for Obama and agrees with him that reform is needed, but said she's worried about the details.
"I believe that there is a health care crisis, I really do," she told me from a dentist chair in the clinic. "Do I believe that the government needs to be more involved? No! Because I think that they just -- whenever they get their fingers in the pot it just kind of turns black."
Henry apparently found some of these interviewees at various federally funded health clinics, but he is somewhat unclear as to he set about interviewing them. But what is apparent is that he didn't seem to bother pressing them on the contradictory logic of: "I voted for Obama (to fix problems) and "government should not get involved." This is an absurd contradiction, which Henry and CNN takes at face value.
Instead, he concludes the following:
It's a common sentiment in this part of the country. There is great distrust for the federal government, especially after the string of bailouts, and that fatigue is clearly hurting the president's push for health reform.
He also quotes from a publisher of The Mountain Pioneer, a monthly newspaper, who offers the following response.
"We've just spent so much money on the stimulus and the TARP," Lewis said, noting that Social Security and Medicare are projected to be bleeding red ink soon too. "And then we're going to add another huge entitlement in terms of the public option."
and another quote from someone else claiming to have been an Obama voter.
"I think the West is all about independence and do it my way and I don't need anyone to tell me what and how to do," said Zimmer as she pushed her two adorable infants through downtown on a stroller. "And I think when government gets too involved in our lives there's some -- there's some discomfort."
Henry acknowledges that his interviewees were located in a health clinic in which "taxpayers pick up 50 percent of the clinic's $4 million annual budget."
He also indicates that he did try to get these individuals to address the contradiction of railing against government at the same time that one sticks one's palms out for funding. But, it does not appear that he pressed them very hard on this point. So as a result, he walked away with more less another collection of cliches about the "rugged individualism" of states like Montana and a cliched, pessimistic conclusion that the president's push is in trouble.
The CNN story also has an 800 number which one can supposedly use to ask ed Henry a question - 877-266-4189. I tried using it, but it was busy. I wanted to ask if he always bases his journalistic conclusions on irrationality and contradictions.
In the meantime, though, at the risk of perhaps a bit of regional stereotyping, I wonder if this type of muddled thinking is characteristic of the base of the blue dogs.