Thursday, August 13, 2009

No myth about viewer's reaction to Health Care Interview

I've received quite a few emails today .. from folks who took issue with last night's FOCUS issue with Dr. Jason Johnson, a political science professor from Hiram College.

Monica and I invited Johnson to come on and analyze some of the key complaints about the health care proposal, specifically whether they are myths. I always find it interesting that viewers seem to think that we should beat up people whom we've invited to come as guests. Does that make any sense? Again, we asked him to come on the air with us .. so should we beat him up? Especially a guy who is not in the health care field and doesn't have a stake in the plan?

Some viewers felt that Johnson was too open about being in favor of the program or is flat out Pro-Obama on this topic. I invite most to watch the interview again .. and to understand its intent.

Everyone seems to have an opinion on the topic .. but just because someone calls one of the charges -- the "death panels" for instance -- to be a myth, is not the same as saying that you endorse the health plan.

I'll agree the Johnson editorialized a bit on the final points, but he also took aim at President Obama at the end of the interview for failing to follow through on his part of developing the plan.

We plan a great many more segments on this topic, including an upcoming town hall meeting here at TV3.

Again, few people email to tell you when they like a segment .. so I don't read too much into the idea that criticism filled my in-box.


Anonymous said...

Hi Eric,
I've go to admit that it's been a while since I stopped by your Blog. I was wondering if you are blogging about national issues. I'd like to make a comment regarding the term "death panel".
We've all seen how some people try to denigrate and belittle those who don't share their beliefs. One favorite tactic is to try to make the other side look scary, or crazy, instead of responding directly to the issue at hand. Calling people "evil-mongers", "astro-turf", and part of "the mob" has now become a favorite way of disparaging those who don't understand, or don't like what they've heard about the bills to reform health care in this country. But when that tactic is used against them, such as Palin's use of the term "death panel", they invariably respond by referring to her as stupid, and not worthy of a response to the actual wording in the legislation.
I observed that attitude yesterday, during an interview on CNN's Lou Dobbs show.
So now we see that the "change of life" provision in the bill will be dropped. So, was she right to be concerned?

Anonymous said...

If I may, I'd like to leave one more comment about the health care proposals.
John Mackey, CEO of Whole Foods Market, Inc, dared to put forward his own ideas about health care reform:
He stated that "the last thing our country needs is a massive new health-care entitlement that will create hundreds of billions of dollars of new unfunded deficits and move us much closer to a government takeover of our health-care system".

He added his own ideas as to how we can revise the system, and not bankrupt ourselves in the process.
Naturally, some have already called for a boycott of Whole Foods, for daring to suggest an alternative to what has become known as ObamaCare.
It's becoming typical to try to shut down any opposition to a new federal government entitlement system, by claiming that everyone has a "right" to health care. What is the next "right"? The right to government provided food and housing?