When did blatant lies become transformed into 'legitimate opinon'? The American people WANTED health care reform and yet in the face of that well-documented fact,
they refused to be part of the process if they couldn't have their own way.
Whether the American people wanted healthcare reform in the form of the Obama healthcare bill is open for debate and discussion. Data would not support it as being fact.
Also your opinion of Republicans not wanting to be a part of the process is largely inaccurate. If I remember right there was over some 700 amendments offered by the Republicans which somewhere near 150 were accepted. That is not just sitting on the sidelines, or taking one's ball and going home. I realize that one could make the argument that most of those were technical or were unrealistic amendments which had no chance of adoption, however; one could also make the argument that Democrats and the White House had already shown their level of willingness to cooperate with the interesting procedures used in order to get the bill to a vote. Fairness and transparency could be called in to question. It isn't as cut and dry as many would like to believe. If you have sources which may help me turn your opinions to facts in my mind please post them. I on the other hand believe there was and still is plenty of debate as to what the American people actually wanted in regards to healthcare reform.
Being on the more conservative side of the political spectrum I appreciate your decision to not join in liberals demonizing conservatives merely because of their label. I try to think that way as well! Many Liberal Democrats are not as reasonable or reflective as you are. Unfortunately,even your own post passionately puts forth a couple opinions and/or debatable points as facts. This happens on both sides, media and information outlets run with opinions and analysis and presents them as fact, this isn't exclusive to just one side. My opinion is that the result is an attitude of one side asking how the other could be so ignorant, foolish. From there it is not far to conclude they are stupid, evil, or hatemongers etc etc. Of course with that language (comes from both sides) people get defensive and usually react negatively rather than intelligently or with reason.
When Mark Pocan (just an example, not a generalization) and a good deal of the national media refers to a group with a certain common concern as a vulgar euphemism, he is not countering a differing political opinion, he is disrespecting and dismissing their opinion crudely and it is not surprising the response is similar. Many only want to see part of the exchange and make judgements which fit their opinions and beliefs. This of course happens on both sides, but to act like the vitriol and tone originates from only one side of the spectrum is ridiculous. Everyone thinks their opinions are facts, Everyone thinks their side is right, Everyone thinks the other side is at best misguided and foolish, and Everyone is human and is prone to lack of civility when passionate subjects are debated. Using tragic events coupled with opinions to further demonize or discredit a political foe is dishonest, and adds to the uncivil tone and convinces no one. Just because one side yells louder and uses more witty labels doesn't mean their opinions are realistic and true!