creators.com opinion web
Liberal Opinion Conservative Opinion
Connie Schultz icon
Connie Schultz
8 Feb 2012
Funny Man, Karl Rove

After I saw the new Chrysler ad — starring Clint Eastwood and titled "Halftime in America" … Read More.

1 Feb 2012
Komen Caves, Women Pay

The Susan G. Komen for the Cure foundation has severed its ties with Planned Parenthood. As a result, … Read More.

25 Jan 2012
Answer the Question, Candidate Gingrich

You may have noticed that most of the presidential debates are moderated by men, which gives female … Read More.

Who Wins When Americans Are Afraid?

Share Comment

So many Americans believe only the people who scare them.

So a thoughtful debate over health care reform has devolved into scenes of screaming protests by mostly red-faced senior citizens looking frightened and enraged. Their terror is stoked by cynical political operatives who know that when it comes to stirring up the masses, nothing beats scaring people to death.

"In politics, the emotions that really sway voters are hate, hope and fear or anxiety," psychologist Drew Westen told Newsweek in 2007. He is the author of the book "The Political Brain: The Role of Emotion in Deciding the Fate of the Nation."

"The skillful use of fear is unmatched in leading to enthusiasm for one candidate and causing voters to turn away from another."

Substitute "issue" for "candidate" to describe what is happening now in the debate over how to give more Americans access to affordable health care.

Anatomy works against us. Humans trust fear over reason, researchers say.

"The brain ... is wired to flinch first and ask questions later," Newsweek's Sharon Begley wrote in a 2007 story titled "The Roots of Fear." Quoting 18th-century political theorist Edmund Burke, she added, "No passion so effectively robs the mind of all its powers of acting and reasoning as fear."

Westen wrote about fear's spillover effect. His 2007 example: "Fear that you cannot provide for your family because of an economic downturn can translate into hatred for immigrants."

The 2009 version: Fear that you will lose the health care you have translates into a me-first, you-never disdain for those who have no health care at all.

So far, Republican officials seem unwilling to douse the flames of hysteria if it means ending up in the cross hairs of Rush Limbaugh. How else to explain their silence as the talk show hatemonger compares President Barack Obama to Adolf Hitler?

Hitler.

References to swastikas, Nazis and Obama-as-Hitler have become so rampant that some of the most prominent Jewish groups in the U.S., including the Anti-Defamation League and the Simon Wiesenthal Center, have publicly denounced Limbaugh's tactics — and in the harshest terms.

Not to be outdone in the quest for ratings, former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin posted this last Friday on Facebook:

"The America I know and love is not one in which my parents or my baby with Down Syndrome will have to stand in front of Obama's 'death panel' so his bureaucrats can decide, based on a subjective judgment of their 'level of productivity in society,' whether they are worthy of health care. Such a system is downright evil."

There are no "death panels" mentioned in any version of the health care bill. None. Nobody familiar with the various proposals of health care reform could claim credibly that the government wants to kill the oldest and most vulnerable among us, including children with disabilities.

Limbaugh and Palin count on most Americans' never reading the proposed bills. They know that in such an environment, misinformation festers. It is particularly viral among those older than 65, which was the only age group to choose McCain over Obama — 53 to 45 percent — in last year's election.

There are physical realities of aging: We become more vulnerable and need more health care. We also need more patience from everyone around us.

In this youth-obsessed culture focused on how to avoid looking or acting our age, it's easy to see how our elderly could think America is so done with them. If we revered older citizens as we should, this preposterous notion would have died at conception.

But age does not sap intelligence. Most people older than 65 are living proof that with years comes wisdom. And so I ask two questions of our wisest Americans:

Why would anyone want you to believe you're so powerless?

Who wins when you are that afraid?

Connie Schultz is a Pulitzer Prize-winning columnist for The Plain Dealer in Cleveland and the author of two books from Random House: "Life Happens" and "... and His Lovely Wife." To find out more about Connie Schultz (cschultz@plaind.com) and read her past columns, please visit the Creators Syndicate Web page at www.creators.com.

COPYRIGHT 2009 CREATORS.COM


Comments

8 Comments | Post Comment
I thought that Senator McCaskill did it perfectly today when she asked the crowd how many had Medicare. Many hands went up, then she asked how many want to give it up. No hands. If the people there think about that they will be able to get past all of the yelling and name calling from the fear mongers. Senator Brown did a nice job on Maddow tonight also. Calm, reasoned, and determined to move the process forward.
Comment: #1
Posted by: JRGrissomCA
Tue Aug 11, 2009 9:58 PM
The problem as you say with people not wanting to give up their Medicare is that the bill scales back Medicare coverage. This is not to say that Medicare has money taken from it in fact under the bill I believe it will get larger. However, specific tests will no longer be available as health care providers no longer make the decisions and submit them to Medicare to be paid. A board will decide what tests are worth doing and which are not. So, instead of the Doctor telling you what tests you need he will have to consult a list. Now mind you no one has seen this list and it is probably still in the making. Lets assume it contains all tests but one. Even if it is the most useless test it was created at some point for the assistance of diagnosis of something. With 300 million people there are going to be a few people that get the disease that needs the test which isn't on the list. This is what scares people. What happens if the items not allowed are exactly what they need. As it stand now as long as we can convince a doctor we are good for it he will do as many tests as necessary until he finds it.
An Example:
When I was 16 I injured my back very badly while playing soccer. I got kicked in the back and was in excruciating pain. I had trouble lifting objects but as the skin wasn't broken and no bones seemed to be out of alignment I was told to rest and take relax and it should go away. After 2 weeks I was taken to the doctor and had X rays taken. The doctor couldn't spot anything so I was given a back brace and told to rest. After another two weeks and still not able to carry more than 10 pounds I went back and got a CT Scan. Again the Doctor found nothing. So I was scheduled for a MRI. After the MRI they still did not find anything. So I rested and took care of myself. My father began to be really upset thinking I was faking. I continued to plead my case that I really was injured and that I was having trouble lifting and stretching. Finally 3 months after my injury my doctor scheduled a Bone Scan. The Bone Scan is a different scan which is not normally performed my type of injury. However, it found the problem. I had a slight fracture in two Vertebrae in my lower back. The doctor said that it was possible those fractures could cause the pain and trouble lifting. The treatment was the same rest and relaxation, wear a brace, but I was prescribed something to take the edge off the pain. I was given an official doctors note allowing me to stay home from school and proving to my father that I was not faking. What happens when this type of situation comes up? When would the Government plan pull the plug on the testing? If after the first two scans they had found nothing and they wouldn't allow any more test there was a possibility that my father would have forced me back to school, and I would have complicated things more with my back. If I had been employed I would have to return to work because without a note saying I am incapable of lifting anything my employer would have me work or let me go. This is what scares people. I have heard similar stories from friends and family. What if a cancer patient fights off cancer and it comes back? What if it comes back more than once. Will we be covered for the first relapse? What about the 4th? What about drug treatment? Many addicts need to come in more than once and not always for drug related issues. Because they are on drugs they are more susceptible to infection and disease. Do we deem them worth assistance? If not I would have lost my sister and one of my nieces. These are the type of things we want spelled out before people start passing legislation that will cost everyone money and might decide the future for people.
Comment: #2
Posted by: Chrisoflucas
Wed Aug 12, 2009 1:18 PM
Also, Fear is not always a bad thing. Not fearing a lion can get you eaten. Not fearing God can leave you burning in hell, smoted or worse. Fear is a tool our body uses to keep us from taking unnecessary risks. The fact that there is no fear in any of the congressman that are supporting this bill is disturbing. They should be fearing the people that supported them and whether or not they want this health care item. They should be fearing whether the health care bill will open unintended avenues for corruption, scandal and waste. It is their job to represent us because we cannot. Thus they must take on all of the fears that we may have and either work to console us through clear concise language in regards to this bill or compromise on things in the bill to waylay the fears of the majority of their constituents. It is easy to play on fear, it is also very easy to extinguish fear. What are people afraid of in this bill? The unknown. So make it known and those that continue to spread fear will be in the wrong or will be tossed out on their ear for the fear mongers they are. Continue to be secretive and you only fuel the fire.
Comment: #3
Posted by: Chrisoflucas
Wed Aug 12, 2009 1:26 PM
I believe one great American was once quoted to have said " there was nothing to fear but fear itself". This goes to the heart of the matter, when individuals play on other people's fear, they may be doing more damage than good. But the employment of fear at times might be a good thing, if the populace is not alive to it's responsibilities, it behooves on the leaders to use any tactics whatever they find legally to get their attention. That is not to say the use of fear in this discussion is encouraged, we should note that there are some legitimate concerns, and these have to be addressed by the leaders of Democratic party and others in the Republican party that support this initiative. you can read more on this on my blog @ http://ridwanalah.blogspot.com/
Comment: #4
Posted by: Ridwanlah
Thu Aug 13, 2009 6:51 AM
Since there is no bill it is not possible to discuss its content. There are proposals, and these are being misrepresented in a blatant attempt to stifle and squash discussion. The Democrats want to reform health care the Republicans want to prevent reform of health care. The public is ill served by the tactics being used to prevent a public discussion of this important issue.
Comment: #5
Posted by: JRGrissomCA
Thu Aug 13, 2009 3:10 PM
Not long ago, the Attorney General stated we are a nation of whiner. I wonder how he feels now.
Comment: #6
Posted by: John C. Davidson
Sat Aug 15, 2009 11:43 AM
The person who said that we were a nation of whiners was Phil Gramm the former Senator that was reputed to be in line to be the Sec. of the Treasury for McCain. That would have been a disaster since his role in putting this country into near bankruptcy is well documented.
Comment: #7
Posted by: JRGrissomCA
Sat Aug 15, 2009 1:33 PM
Of course, the fear the republicans are instilling on healthcare is different then the fear the democrats instilled when trying to reform social security? How soon everyone forgets huh.
Comment: #8
Posted by: Mike
Sat Aug 15, 2009 9:37 PM
Already have an account? Log in.
New Account  
Your Name:
Your E-mail:
Your Password:
Confirm Your Password:

Please allow a few minutes for your comment to be posted.

Enter the numbers to the right:  
Creators.com comments policy
More
Connie Schultz
Feb. `12
Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa
29 30 31 1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8 9 10 11
12 13 14 15 16 17 18
19 20 21 22 23 24 25
26 27 28 29 1 2 3
About the author About the author
Write the author Write the author
Printer friendly format Printer friendly format
Email to friend Email to friend
View by Month
Author’s Podcast
Judge Napolitano
Judge Andrew P. NapolitanoUpdated 16 Feb 2012
Austin Bay
Austin BayUpdated 15 Feb 2012
Michelle Malkin
Michelle MalkinUpdated 15 Feb 2012

7 Sep 2011 Tea Party Express Hits the Brakes

4 Feb 2009 His Mother, My Friend

1 Mar 2009 Really, Rush, We're Not That Scary