When President Barack Obama announced his intention to deliver a speech before a joint session of Congress regarding health care reform, few anticipated much more than the usual applause and polite laughter at the president's jokes. Apparently, no one told Joe Wilson, a Republican congressman from South Carolina.

While the president was busy denying charges that his healthcare reform package would extend coverage to illegal immigrants, Congressman Wilson shouted, "You lie!" in the middle of the president's speech. Bear in mind that the typical way in which a congressman exhibits his displeasure during a speech is by keeping quiet during pauses for applause, not by calling the president a liar on the House floor in front of both chambers of Congress and millions of Americans watching on national television.

To be clear, I found Wilson's conduct unacceptable. Not only does such an act set a bad precedent for future presidents who choose to address Congress, including future Republican presidents who might now receive the same treatment, but it also debases the House, an institution that lies at the heart of American democracy. Wilson's outburst, however, is only the most recent in a succession of increasingly hostile acts towards the president, particularly by conservatives. How is it that some people can be so quick to argue with and attack a president who seems so open-minded and welcoming towards bipartisan ideas?

The answer to such a question is complex, but fundamental to understanding how and why the political climate in our nation has become so factitious. To begin with, it's worth understanding why Congressman Wilson said what he did. In House Bill 3200, one of the health care reform packages currently before Congress, entitled "No Federal Payment for Undocumented Aliens," it's explicitly clear that no federal subsidies will be given to illegal immigrants. So, Obama was telling the truth, right? He said health care reform wouldn't cover illegal immigrants and that's what one of the bills clearly states.

The reality, however, is that the bill gives no specifications whatsoever as to how to enforce the stipulation and doesn't even authorize any law enforcement agency to actually prosecute violations of law were the bill to pass Congress. Without such details, the prohibition is toothless, ineffective and law in name only. Congressman Wilson and several other House Republicans tried repeatedly to convince the Democrats to insert enforcement provisions that would make the legislation less ambiguous, but were rebuffed on multiple occasions. Only after Wilson called Obama a liar and more scrutiny was placed on Obama's claim over illegal immigration, incidentally, did both the House and Senate finally approve enforcement provisions in the legislation. While what Wilson did was clearly wrong, it shouldn't take such conduct to bring about fairly reasonable changes to a bill. What kind of precedent does that set?

Of course, as I mentioned earlier, the Wilson incident is only the latest in a string of confrontations between conservatives and the Obama administration. Indeed, the very night John McCain gave his concession speech, Republicans in the crowd loudly booed and jeered at the very mention of Obama's name. Compared to the tea party protesters, town hall meeting activists, and so-called "birthers" questioning Obama's citizenship, those guys were a welcoming committee. So again, the question must be asked, 'Why?' How is it that such a friendly, smart, open-to-all-ideas kind of guy like Barack Obama is so despised by the right? Surely those conservatives have something wrong with them.

The truth is that Obama is only open to ideas that will ultimately achieve his desires, not those that will fall short of his liberal idealism. It shouldn't be surprising that Republicans won't propose or support policy initiatives that help the president expand entitlement programs or create a trillion-dollar health care package that America can't afford. If they did, they would probably be Democrats. Unlike Bill Clinton, who modified his best-case-scenario goals so he could work with Republicans to create the kind of change—such as welfare reform and NAFTA ratification—that proved beneficial, Obama only wants to hear ideas that get him most, if not all, of what he wants.

Even when Obama does reach out to Republicans, it's typically in a half-hearted and superficial way. Much was made of, for instance, his promise to "look at" medical malpractice reform during his address to Congress. Sure, it sounded nice and it even received a lot of applause from Republicans. In a speech lasting around forty minutes, however, and one in which he had plenty of time to criticize his Republican predecessor, the fact that Obama only spent a few seconds promising to look into tort reform was the political equivalent of saying you'll get around to cleaning the attic someday. As a side note, the person who Obama put in charge of "looking into" tort reform, Kathleen Sebelius, was the former director of the Kansas Trial Lawyers Association. You'll forgive me if I don't hold my breath waiting for reform.

So many at this point would simply be inclined to say, so what? Big deal. Maybe Obama isn't listening to Republicans much. But they've had their chance at running the country and now it's the liberals' turn. Besides, Obama was elected fair and square and that means he can advocate the kind of policies he wants. Truthfully, those people would be right. Keep in mind, however, that simply because you like what the current president says or does, doesn't mean he isn't alienating or offending those who disagree with him. When people begin to feel ignored or disrespected by their government, their change in conduct is not quite as pleasant as the kind of "change we can believe in."

Jose Cespedes is a member of the Class of 2012.