I started with context, reminding the host that the last time I called in it was to criticize the President and that I was no apologist of his. But, I said, electing Republicans in 2010 will do nothing to reign in deficits, and it is simply factually untrue that Obama created the deficit.

Then the host started talking about how we bought General Motors.

I didn't take the bait, and responded, "That's not the point. The point is that debt didn't come from Democrats. Neither did deficits. In fact, the last time we DIDN'T have a deficit, Bill Clinton was in office. The truth is that when Reagan entered office (earlier the host had claimed that Reagan and JFK proved that "tax cuts work") the national debt was under $1 Trillion and when he left it was almost $3 Trillion. Bush I added about a trillion and a half in four years, then Clinton added 1 trillion in eight years. And then the last administration doubled the debt, despite tax cuts AND domestic spending cuts."

He responded, "All presidents add to the debt. But I'm saying..."

And I jumped back in, "So you'll admit that Reagan doubled the debt."

He said, "Yes, he probably did."

I said, "And you see that voting for Republicans is no solution to our debt problems."

He said, "Both sides are just as bad...we just have to get spending under control."

Then I pressed him more, saying, "What spending would you cut? We're never going to cut the big ones - social security, medicare, medicaid, or the military. What would you cut?"

He starts talking about the stimulus again.

I say, "But that isn't enough. You can wipe everything Obama has done off the map and we STILL have mountains of debt, two unfunded wars, etc. We can't just blame a party. We need to talk about REAL solutions."

Then he gets angry. "OK Mr. Know-It-All, what's the REAL solution then?"

And I explain the progressive tax system, finishing with, "In fact, I agree with President Reagan (again, who this guy idolizes). I think an upper marginal tax rate in the mid-50s would be great. That's fiscal responsibility to me - paying for our programs."

Then I used a metaphor to explain what I meant, and when I finished he said, "We gotta go!" and cut to commercial.

I felt great about what I was able to get out of him. But I was unsure of what the next callers might say. This is a show that covers all of northern Indiana and thousands listen, so I was expecting to be called a lot of names. After all, the callers before me had all been talking about how America was going to be "over" by November because of Obama, and that we need to impeach him. Another caller before me was pro-Tea Party and thought that was the solution.

But after my call? Every caller started by saying, "I agree with (my name)...but". They weren't ready to go to a progressive tax system as the answer. One thought we should go to a fair tax. Another thought we should cut Welfare (that wouldn't do anything, of course, but whatever...) but now people were talking about details. It was no longer a festival of misinformation and Republicans in 2010 campaign talk.

When the hour ended and the subject of discussion went on to something local, I was thrilled. I had succeeded in changing what people were hearing on their drive home from, "Obama is evil and is destroying America," to "Here's how I think we could actually make a change since BOTH parties add to debt."

It was still conservative, and it was a far cry from support for progressive policy, but it was a distinct break and change in the narrative of the afternoon drive.

The truth CAN change the narrative. Keep talking.