If you can wade through the distractions this week (Obama's September 8th indoctrination of our youth, "I Pledge" video, etc,) health care reform is still the topic that needs our attention the most. The trillion dollar travesty is going to sink us into a hole we may never get out of. While the progressives have no problem with that, those of us that think America is a good an noble place who owes no one an apology for 200 years of fighting for our freedom and the freedom of others would like to see it maintain it's status as the greatest country on earth. The liberals are still using the tired old tactics of name calling and character assassination to make their points, but the public ain't buyin' it this time around. Here's a verbatim (spelling errors included) post which attempts to belittle Those Who Would Oppose The Chosen One (hereafter known as TWWOTCO):
"I was going to join this debate but since it seems that most who oppose healthcare reform still have yet to educate themselves by reading any of the propossed legislation, I will just say that my quess is these are the same people who want to keep there kids home from school because the president is going to talk to children about the importance of staying in school and getting educated."
I see what you're doing here and I don't like it. First, way to work in a defense of the Sept 8 Indoctrination Speech before it's even been delivered, but let's not get off track. I replied with a number of my talking points, and I closed my response with this message: "So please tell the great uneducated masses, exactly how is this boondoggle going to work. And I'm only being partially sarcastic...if you can make a better case for it than any of our elected officials, hats off to you." Of course he ignored this challenge and after numerous other people left comments he threw in the towel by saying "I give up ignorance is bliss so all should be happy here."
And this is the problem with this entire debate. The left is so desperate to pass this for the Chosen One that they shut out any and all comments to the contrary, and they lie, lie lie about it. Here are a couple of their lies:
- "This is an issue of vital concern to every American, and I'm glad that so many are engaged," Obama said in his weekly radio and Internet address Saturday. "But it also should be an honest debate, not one dominated by willful misrepresentations and outright distortions, spread by the very folks who would benefit the most by keeping things exactly as they are."[1]
- I see what you're doing here and I don't like it. Let me translate this: "You're all a bunch of liars who would rape your own mother to make a buck. Shut up already!" Honest debate is taking place in the guise of Harry Reid having townhall meeting by invitation only, with the people who are aggrieved not being allowed in. Honest debate is taking place in the guise of Organizing For America coaching it's members to stand and chant "Health Care Now" to drown out when someone (TWWOTCO) disrupts a town hall meeting. These are ways in which the left encourages honest debate.
- I see what you're doing here and I don't like it. Let me translate this: "You're all a bunch of liars who would rape your own mother to make a buck. Shut up already!" Honest debate is taking place in the guise of Harry Reid having townhall meeting by invitation only, with the people who are aggrieved not being allowed in. Honest debate is taking place in the guise of Organizing For America coaching it's members to stand and chant "Health Care Now" to drown out when someone (TWWOTCO) disrupts a town hall meeting. These are ways in which the left encourages honest debate.
- In debunking myths about the health care plan, Obama said the overhaul would not use taxpayer dollars to pay for abortions [1]
- Barbara Mikulski introduced an amendment to the bill that would provide for abortions. "Madame Chairman, would you be willing to put some language in that says, 'Not including abortion services'?" [Senator Orin]Hatch asked. "Then I think you would have more support." Mikulski concluded a convoluted response by saying, "So, no, I would not be willing to do that at this time." [2] This reminds me of the episode of the Simpson's where Marge asks Homer if he's licking toads (to get high) and Homer replies "I'm not not licking toads."
- Barbara Mikulski introduced an amendment to the bill that would provide for abortions. "Madame Chairman, would you be willing to put some language in that says, 'Not including abortion services'?" [Senator Orin]Hatch asked. "Then I think you would have more support." Mikulski concluded a convoluted response by saying, "So, no, I would not be willing to do that at this time." [2] This reminds me of the episode of the Simpson's where Marge asks Homer if he's licking toads (to get high) and Homer replies "I'm not not licking toads."
- Top White House advisers on Sunday challenged Republicans to offer alternatives and not simply criticize administration approaches [3]
- What happens when you offer alternatives? Ask John Mackey. He wrote an op-ed for the Wall Street Journal (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204251404574342170072865070.html ) with alternatives. The house bill? 1000+ pages. Mackey's plan? 8 bullet points, one page. The company, 270 stores and 54,000 employees, voted on the new plan and decided by a majority of 77% to go with the plan as Mackey describes in his op-ed. 77! That's even more, as a percentage, than voted for Obama. [4] What did Mackey get for his offer of alternatives? A liberal boycott of his stores. [5] I guess you could file this under honest debate as well.
- What happens when you offer alternatives? Ask John Mackey. He wrote an op-ed for the Wall Street Journal (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204251404574342170072865070.html ) with alternatives. The house bill? 1000+ pages. Mackey's plan? 8 bullet points, one page. The company, 270 stores and 54,000 employees, voted on the new plan and decided by a majority of 77% to go with the plan as Mackey describes in his op-ed. 77! That's even more, as a percentage, than voted for Obama. [4] What did Mackey get for his offer of alternatives? A liberal boycott of his stores. [5] I guess you could file this under honest debate as well.
- My favorite Obama line: "so let me be clear: If you like your doctor or health care provider, you can keep them. If you like your health care plan, you can keep that too."
- From HR3200, Page 16, section 102, subparagraph 2 [abridged]: You can keep your current coverage if the following conditions apply: Subject to paragraph (3) and except as required by law, the issuer does not change any of its terms or conditions, including benefits and cost-sharing, from those in effect as of the day before the first day of Y1. In other words, if your co pay or any other terms or conditions change, you must enroll in a plan that meets the government approved standards even if that means dropping your current coverage. In 12 years with my insurer there has never been a year where the terms and conditions haven't changed. So - what the plan REALLY says is "you can keep your current coverage - for a while"
- Further, page 17, paragraph (b) GRACE PERIOD FOR CURRENT EMPLOYMENT BASED HEALTH PLANS.—Subparagraph (1) GRACE PERIOD.— subparagraph (A) IN GENERAL.—The Commissioner shall establish a grace period whereby, for plan years beginning after the end of the 5-year period beginning with Y1, an employment-based health plan in operation as of the day before the first day of Y1 must meet the same requirements as apply to a qualified health benefits plan under section 101, including the essential benefit package requirement under section. In other words, if your plan doesn't look just like the government plan, you must switch to one that does. So after five years it won't matter if you're in the government plan, they'll all look like the government plan. So sure, you can keep you coverage if you like it - as long as nothing in any of the Ts and Cs changes for five years, but sooner or later, you WILL eat this cooking.
- From HR3200, Page 16, section 102, subparagraph 2 [abridged]: You can keep your current coverage if the following conditions apply: Subject to paragraph (3) and except as required by law, the issuer does not change any of its terms or conditions, including benefits and cost-sharing, from those in effect as of the day before the first day of Y1. In other words, if your co pay or any other terms or conditions change, you must enroll in a plan that meets the government approved standards even if that means dropping your current coverage. In 12 years with my insurer there has never been a year where the terms and conditions haven't changed. So - what the plan REALLY says is "you can keep your current coverage - for a while"
- Right wing extremists shattered windows and vandalized the DNC offices in Denver, according to Pat Waak (Colorado Democrat Chairwoman). "Clearly there's been an effort on the other side to stir up hate. I think this is the consequence of it." [6]
- Turns out, the culprit was a left wing extremist with an arrest on his record for protesting at the RNC in Minneapolis last year. Even more damaging was the report that he worked for a democrat and was paid by the SEIU. [7] Rahm Emmanuel said "never let a crisis go to waste." He could have added "If there is no crisis, invent one."
- Turns out, the culprit was a left wing extremist with an arrest on his record for protesting at the RNC in Minneapolis last year. Even more damaging was the report that he worked for a democrat and was paid by the SEIU. [7] Rahm Emmanuel said "never let a crisis go to waste." He could have added "If there is no crisis, invent one."
While the left is disingenuous at best and dishonest at worst, those on the right do themselves no favors by blindly reposting or repeating material without doing a little fact checking and research. Facts are stubborn things, as they say. Liberals don't let them get in the way of their arguments, but they can't out-debate you if you have them in your arsenal. You'll know you've won when they say "I give up" and call you ignorant on their way out the door. As Ann Coulter says, if you don't leave a liberal in an impotent, sputtering rage, you're not doing it right.
[1] http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/08/22/obama-calls-for-honest-de_n_265936.html
[2] http://townhall.com/columnists/TerryJeffrey/2009/07/15/how_senator_mikulski_slipped_an_abortion_mandate_into_the_health_care_bill?page=full&comments=true
[3] http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/20/us/politics/20cong.html
[4] Contrary to the revisionist history of the Obanauts, he is not the most popular president in history. Day 1 of his presidency saw him ranked 7th among presidents dating back to Truman with an approval rating of 64. Who was more popular? Truman (81), Johnson (78), Kennedy (72), Ford (71), Eisenhower (68) and Carter (CARTER!) (66). After six months in office he had fallen to 10th place with a rating of 55; even the left's favorite punching bag (seriously, when will someone tell Olbermann and Maddow that he's not the president any more!?) George W Bush was rated higher (56) than Obie Wan Baloney after the first six months.
[5] http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=33188
[6] http://www.denverpost.com/recommended/ci_13199902
[7] http://gatewaypundit.blogspot.com/2009/08/breaking-denver-vandal-worked-for-dem.html
No comments:
Post a Comment