It has been high drama on health care the last couple of weeks. Congressman Vic Synder says one thing, Senator Blanche Lincoln says another.

And a growing citizen's group called the Tea Party (of which I am a member) just wishes that any of them would give a straight answer to some honest questions.

As if we aren't spending too much now, Synder says that he favors a public option. This basically means that the government starts its own health insurance company to compete with privately held insurance companies. Lincoln says she does not support a public option, but wants Uncle Sam to start a non-profit company to do it. That sounds like a health care version of Freddie Mae and Fanny Mac, the housing giants that we just bailed out to the tune of $1.5 trillion dollars.

Synder was scheduled to hold a public event with the 4th District Congressman, Mike Ross. The Pulaski County Tea Party (the Tea Party is

organized as independent county groups which work together when needed) thought to show up and ask them about the health care legislation. When word of this got out, Synder and Ross changed first the format of the event, then the location of the event, and finally the time of the event - all within the last 24 hours.

When the location was changed to the Children's Hospital, the Tea Party leaders advised against protesting. But they also accused Synder and Ross of trying to hide behind sick children to avoid the protests. By the time of the event the location was again changed, the meeting was held away from the sick children's wing. Some Tea Party mem

bers and many independent citizens showed up and gave Synder and Ross heck.

Much has been made of the eight seconds in which the crowd shouted down Synder after he asserted that President Obama did not support a single payer plan. In a single player plan the government replaces all private insurance companies. I personally have heard Obama say that he does support a single payer plan.

He was telling the crowd, already ancy because he had switched the meeting location on them, something that they knew was untrue.

Given all that, I find it curious that some in the press tried to make the reaction of the crowd for those eight seconds the issue. Citizens have tried being civil. On the bailouts for example, our calls and letter ran about 90 to one against it, but they all voted for it anyway. Now we are obligated to cover the favored bank's losses - they could run into the trillions of dollars. Then they have a town hall meetingand assert something that the crowd knew was not true.

How does one behave when civil disagreement is ignored and honest dialogue is lacking?

If they want us to be civil, perhaps they should get our bailout money back, and try not telling us things that are untrue. And they could also hold some unstaged Town Hall meetings.

Now don't get me wrong, the Tea Party demonstrated against Blanche Lincoln both Thursday in Springdale and Saturday in Bella Vista and everyone agreed that the protesters were civil. At the protest in Bella Vista, the location was also changed the day before. Adding to the confusion, various Democrat organizations were putting out conflicting stories of whether or not the event was a public one. The protesters were civil, but they were also firm. They have questions about the various health care proposals being floated, and they want straight answers and honest dialogue. Don't you?

Opinion, Pages 4 on 08/19/2009