Tag Archives: palin

Bogus outrages in the health care reform debate

Posted on by
4

In spite of comments to the contrary, I am genuinely outraged about the health care debate. Not because there are legitimate policy questions raised by the other side. But because there is a tide of lies–just outright lies–floating around the intertubes that pollute the entire discussion.

It started with Sarah Palin and her “death panels.” I figured everyone who can contain their own drool would have to agree that her remarks were outrageous, indefensible and entirely untrue. That excludes Glenn Beck, Newt Gingirch, other Republican officials and few conservative media figures. But everyday people possessing normal mental faculties would surely condemn her. Right?

Wrong. Here, in the pages of my own humble blog, folks have defended her allegations. This prompted some research on my part. Where are these people getting this shit? Is there something in the House bill that’s making them nuts? What is it?

That search eventually led me to a lengthy and bizarre list of outrages supposedly contained in the bill. Some highlights:

Page 50: All non-US citizens, illegal or not, will be provided with free health care services.

Page 126: Employees MUST pay health care bills for part-time employees AND their families.

Page 241: Doctors: no matter what medical specialty, will all receive the same compensation!!!! You can thank the AMA.

Page 354: Government will restrict enrollment of SPECIAL NEEDS individuals. Trig and other children with Down Syndrome will be excluded or accepted according to Øbama’s Death Panel.

Page 425: Advance Care Planning: Counseling for Senior Citizens, assisted suicide and euthanasia. Scary and evil!

And on and on and on. This list is all over the web. It’s everywhere. It’s on Palin fan blogs. It’s pasted into the discussions about health care articles on CNN.com. You’re saying to yourself “come on, that’s bullshit,” Right? That’s what I said to myself. So I hit up Google again.

First, I found a page on dailykos written by a “Duhboid” where the entire list is debunked. Problem is, I don’t know who Duhboid is, and kos is a highly partisan site. Nobody is going to be convinced by that.

Then I found the US House of Representatives Committee on Education and Labor had a page debunking the entire list, too. But, okay–that committee is chaired by a Democrat. I doubt whether they’d be able to lie with that volume and specificity on a US government web site, but okay. More searching.

Then I found a page on politifact.com–an aggressively non-partisan fact-checking site–also debunking the list. What motivates someone to disseminate what they have to know are outright lies? Money? I just don’t get it.

Anyway, if you or anyone you know has received an email containing this list, now you know where to direct them for a thorough reeducation spanking debunking.

Update: Wow, this is even getting some play on CNN. Nice! And notice that politifact also charges Obama with not being completely accurate in some of his claims, too. (Although I myself am given to wonder how the fact that your employer or insurer could decide to change your policy at any time amounts to it being only “half true” that the health reform bill will allow you to keep your current plan–but I’ll not nit-pick.)


Un. Be. Lievable.

Posted on by
30

“You gotta be fucking kidding!”

Remember John Carpenter’s 1981 remake of The Thing? Great movie, for you horror/sci-fi buffs. There was that scene where Norris’ head detaches from his body, sprouts spider legs and walks off, prompting that memorable line from one of the horrified onlookers.

I had that feeling a few minutes ago when I read the following from Sara Palin:

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.

[Link]

Whatever I think of her, Palin is undoubtedly one of the heavy hitters in the Republican party. She was a serious contender for vice president of the united states. And she couldn’t astonish me more if her head fell off and sprouted legs.

“Death panel”? What the fuck is wrong with her? Please–will some Republican leave a comment denouncing her statement as rigoddamndiculous before I lose all faith in American politics?

Oceania has always been at war with Eastasia

Posted on by
1

“We need to come to the defense of Southeast Alaska when proposals are on the table like the bridge and not allow the spinmeisters to turn this project or any other into something that’s so negative” — governor Sarah Palin of Alaska, speaking about the now infamous “bridge to nowhere.” October, 2006 [link]

“I told the Congress thanks but no thanks on that ‘Bridge to Nowhere.” — governor Sarah Palin of Alaska speaking about the now infamous “bridge to nowhere.” September, 2007 [link]

“FYI This does not include our nearly one million Dollars from the Feds for our Airport Paving Project. We did well!!!” — mayor Sarah Palin of Wasilla, Alaska, speaking about the millions in pork barrel spending acquired for projects in her town of 9,000 people. June, 1999 [link]

How exactly does a person who has spent the entirety of her brief political career championing incredible amounts of pork barrel spending position herself as the staunch enemy of such spending a mere matter of months later? Then finally she speaks to the press–Charlie Gibson–and he doesn’t ask about it?

What the hell is wrong with these people?

An intensely political choice

Posted on by
12

If you’re a political junkie like myself, you probably heard the howls of outrage and indignation from conservatives when vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin’s experience was questioned. Having been governor of Alaska for a mere twenty months, people wondered if her previous position, mayor of the small town of Wasilla, Alaska, was a meaningful preparation for being vice president of the United States. Foul! cried Republicans. They accused us of being anti-small town, or elitists, or something. They suggested that we just didn’t like reg’lar folks.

Well, just in case you allowed yourself for a moment to believe that this complaint was genuine, it’s not.

As a bonus, that video clip also exposes the disingenuousness and hypocrisy of their next complaint–that we Palin opponents are sexist.

McCain speaks and accepts the Republican nomination

Posted on by
6

I was really, really disappointed to see at least two protesters interrupting senator McCain in the Xcel Center. That’s simply not called for. They were hastily removed, thank goodness.

How did McCain do? Well, his delivery has improved since the last speech I watched, which isn’t saying much. I’m waiting for conservative pundits to call it “electrifying” or something. In fact, it was no more than adequate, but it was an improvement.

Message? It must be hard for a Republican to run on a platform of change when his party has been in control of Washington–house, senate and presidency–for so much of the last eight years. He himself has been in Washington for that entire time. If Republicans need change, what is it that they need change from? Themselves?

The senator has an amazing biography and I was moved afresh by stories of his military service and heroism.

If Republicans are nominating a man who thinks global warming is a serious threat that needs attention, then are they finally admitting that they have been wrong all these years? What does governor Palin think? And why wasn’t senator McCain speaking up about this years ago? Inquiring minds want to know.

He parsed his words very, very carefully when discussing Obama’s tax reform proposals. He didn’t actually say that Obama was going to raise my taxes (he won’t), but he did threaten that Obama’s tax increases would kill jobs. Same old Republican duck and weave. Yawn.

Senator McCain is a good man who has served our country for many years, but he’s the wrong guy at the wrong time. He and his party have had their chance. Look where it got us: an unnecessary and poorly conducted war, an anemic economy, people losing their homes, fuel prices choking family budgets, torture, secret prisons, an erosion of our constitutional right to privacy, and a world which views us with fear and distrust rather than admiration.

With their party in decline and America so displeased with them, I guess the Republicans needed to nominate their maverick. Their only chance is to put someone forth who has the most disagreements with the party platform and leadership.

But I ask you: is real change about electing the most mavericky member of the party that’s been in charge? Or is change electing someone from cut from an entirely different cloth? Someone from the opposing party? Someone who hasn’t had a decades-long Washington career?

Like I said, change is a tough pose to strike when you and your party have controlled Washington during our nation’s precipitous decent into it’s current state.

Palin, Obama and experience

Posted on by
27

Sure, experience is a valid question for someone running in a presidential election. Of course it is. And, let’s face it, Obama’s resume is a bit thin as far as these things go. But that’s why he’s been getting himself out there for two frickin’ years, meeting people, campaigning, debating, issuing detailed policy positions, letting the people inspect him to determine whether he’s got the right stuff. That’s what people have to do if they don’t have lengthy records to run on, and that’s exactly as it should be.

Obama has done this, and, judging by how far he’s come, he’s done a pretty good job of assuaging concerns about his limited experience.

Which brings us to Sarah Palin. She also has a very thin resume and a very short time in government. It is incumbent upon her to deal with it as Obama has done: get out there and sell herself, experience and all. We’ll see how she does, but my gut feeling is that she ain’t no Obama.

There’s a lot of reasons I wouldn’t vote for her. Her views on abortion rights and abstinence-only sex ed come to mind. But all that aside, she truly doesn’t strike me as presidential material. And, after all, that is the single most important criteria for a vice presidential candidate: she has to be ready to be president at a moment’s notice.

To me she looks more like a PTA president than a US president.

And then there are the scandals–both personal and professional.

This is who McCain thinks is the best qualified Republican to be on his ticket? Really?

This is the beginning of the end for McSame. The selection of Palin just put him over the edge. He has officially jumped the shark and is now on a fast track to becoming a very small footnote in the Barack Obama story.

Predictions.

1. Palin won’t drop out unless another scandal erupts. And it would have to be a really nasty personal one.

2. If she did drop out the narrative would be that she didn’t want to subject her poor family to the blast furnace heat of vicious liberal hatred directed at her via the “MSM”–not that she was found to be a poorly vetted, cynically chosen, ill-qualified, scandal-ridden nightmare of a running mate.

3. She’ll likely stay. But stay or go, Obama will win the election and the popular vote by at least 5 percentage points.