Two Outbursts
By Mitch Berg
When former President Bush gave his state of the union a few years ago, a clutch of Democrat legislators, hidden by their numbers, booed. They profaned their office and attacked the dignity of the President’s address – and not a one of them had the cojones to identify themselves, much less either apologize or elaborate. It was sophomoric at best, cowardly and solopsistic at worst.
Rep. Joe Wilson broke protocol, and rudely so, by standing up and called the President a liar during his Health Care pep rally campaign speech address earlier this week. Unlike his Democrat forebears, he apologized later.
But let the record show, as an emailer pointed out this morning, that Wilson was right:
President says his proposed health insurance law will not give taxpayer-funded health insurance coverage to illegal aliens. Proposed law says specifically that illegal aliens are not covered.
BUT . . . proposed law also says the government is forbidden to ASK if the person is an illegal alien, or to demand proof of citizenship/legal residence.
In my mind, that’s like Don’t Ask – Don’t Tell. Official military policy is that gays are not allowed to serve in the military. But the military is forbidden to ask if you’re gay. So the end result is that gays DO serve in the military as long as nobody talks about it.
I wish the President would explain why that won’t be the same result with the insurance plan. Illegal aliens will show up to apply for taxpayer-funded health insurance coverage, the government won’t be allowed to ask if they’re illegal, so the illegal aliens will get coverage as long as nobody talks about it, right? If not right, why not?
The President who says the law will not give insurance to illegal aliens but the Congressman who says the President is lying about what the law will do. I’m on the Congressman’s side in this one.
There’s a time and a place to attack the President. I’m not entirely sure that a glorified campaign stump speech isn’t one of them – but nonetheless, at the very least we are to respect the office if not that man, his (misguided) policies and his (misleading) rhetoric.
Might have been rude to interrupt the speech. But he was right. I’d rather my Congressman risked being rude to be right. Good for him. Wish we had a few like him from Minnesota.
Well, we do; Michele Bachmann isn’t one to hold back when she’s on a tear – to her occasional chagrin.
Doesn’t seem like such a bad trait, sometimes, these days.
September 11th, 2009 at 12:02 pm
“Well, we do; Michele Bachmann isn’t one to hold back when she’s on a tear – to her occasional chagrin”
You far right types really seem to go for batshit-crazy politicians.
September 11th, 2009 at 12:06 pm
Now angryclown gets funny!
September 11th, 2009 at 12:09 pm
Apparently disagreeing with Angry Clown == batshit crazy.
September 11th, 2009 at 12:11 pm
Mitch you are absolutely correct to criticize rude behavior to President Bush. I agree and support you in that 100%.
Applauding Bachmann for condoning rude behavior, so long as someone thinks it was right? By right, you must mean political orientation, because it certainly is not right in the sense of correct.
Not even close, and I’m disappointed that you would go along with that thinking. It guts any honesty out of your initial, very correct criticism.
Shall we try for a single standard of behavior, not one standard for those who disagree with you, and another standard for Wilson and Bachmann?
Shame on the unidentified individuals who booed Bush, and equal shame on Wilson and those who promote or condone his behavior; double shame on those who use it to raise money….something the unknown opposition to Bush never did with their rudeness.
September 11th, 2009 at 12:14 pm
This whole dispute is bizarre. I had a liberal on my blog arguing that what Joe Wilson did was a worse breach of decorum than the time in 2007 when Speaker Pelosi’s Bay Area colleague, the lovely and talented Fortney “Pete” Stark, went to the floor of the House chamber and argued that kids were getting “their heads blown off for the president’s amusement.”
September 11th, 2009 at 12:14 pm
I doubt it’s that personal with angryclown. He seems to pickup any old aspersion that others have already cast, and then he gives it another toss.
September 11th, 2009 at 12:23 pm
You far right types really seem to go for batshit-crazy politicians.
Right – those damn wingnuts like Cyndi McKinnon and Denny “Moonrabbit” Kucinich and Babs Boxer and Al “Body Slam Dissidents” Franken and…
Applauding Bachmann for condoning rude behavior, so long as someone thinks it was right?
There seems to be a crossed wire here; Bachmann hasn’t gone on record “condoning” anything. Her only link to the story is my citing her as an example of a pol who isn’t especially calculating in what she says (and how refreshing that is); she has been unremittingly gracious to her many detractors, many of whom in turn disgrace themselves with their deranged hatred of the Representative.
Just so we’re clear on that.
September 11th, 2009 at 12:40 pm
From Foxnews.com
“In the Senate, Democrats in the so called “Gang of Six,” a group of bipartisan senators on the Senate Finance Committee which is the last panel yet to release its bill, began moving quickly to close the loophole that Wilson helped bring greater attention to.
“We absolutely assure that those who are here illegally would not get the benefit of any of these initiatives,” Sen. Kent Conrad said.”
Thank you Joe Wilson.
September 11th, 2009 at 12:50 pm
Let’s not forget the time Cindy Sheehan was given a ticket to observe the State of the Union address in 2006 by Democrat Congresswoman Lynn Woolsey of California. She only had time to unveil her anti-war message T shirt before she was escorted out, so technically she didn’t get the chance to be verbally disruptive. Anyone care to argue that she would have sat respectfully through the entire speech?
September 11th, 2009 at 12:51 pm
From the Washington Times.
“The Senate Finance Committee’s bipartisan “Gang of Six” is working to strengthen the citizenship requirements for obtaining health care coverageand a new medical malpractice provision in light of President Obama’s speech to the joint session of Congress Wednesday. “
September 11th, 2009 at 12:51 pm
It doesn’t matter if illegals are singled out in the law. That part of the law will be determined unconstitutional.
El Presidente Obama, the Constitutional Law Scholar (Who somehow didn’t write anything on the subject) would know that.
September 11th, 2009 at 1:03 pm
double shame on those who use it to raise money….something the unknown opposition to Bush never did with their rudeness.
Look in the mirror lately, Dognabbit? Wilson’s ‘tic challenger Miller just hit the jackpot! And that unknown opposition? – that’s what their lunatic supporters paid them to do. Still waiting for that apology from Zero for lying to the American people. Oh, and did Stark Raving Mad ever apologise?
September 11th, 2009 at 1:09 pm
double shame on those who use it to raise money….something the unknown opposition to Bush never did with their rudeness.
Uh, you are aware that Betty McCollum sent $1000 to Wilson’s opponent. She put out a press release and everything, she was so proud of her actions.
September 11th, 2009 at 1:28 pm
Don’t forget the flood of money El Tinklenberg got in the aftermath of the Chris Matthews interview, and the subsequent increase in Bachmann’s contributions. So I guess we can look to Representative Tinklenberg….hey, wait a minute….all that money didn’t help, did it?
Even my 11 year old son thought Wilson should have said it; decorum be damned right now, because heaven knows the anonymous booers from years past have been canonized by the left. It’s about time we become a little more like the British Parliament. Didn’t Obama tell his follwers to get in our faces???
September 11th, 2009 at 1:53 pm
Mr. D says:
>
“Uh, you are aware that Betty McCollum sent $1000 to Wilson’s opponent. She put out a press release and everything, she was so proud of her actions. ”
D, no I was not aware of that information, thank you for calling it to my attention. The same thing goes for Ms. McCollum. What Wilson did was not acceptable, not desirable, should not be condoned, and adamantly should not be used to raise money – for either side. To do so only promotes more bad behavior, and more manipulation of people to create division and antipathy after bad behavior.
That doesn’t really benefit anyone, and it sure as hell – pardon my language – doesn’t make our system of government work any better.
I’m sick of this idea that one side or the other is evil, I’m sick of hearing how ONLY one side (doesn’t much matter which) is intelligent or honest or entertaining or decent or attractive — or worth spending any time with in the same room in a civil, never mind in a PLEASANT manner.
Today is 9/11. If ever there were a day in the year when we should be feeling unity with each other instead of division, I would think it would be today. It is NOT right for decorum to be damned, and this is about a good deal more importance than simple decorum. It is about the very essential values of how we treat each other.
September 11th, 2009 at 2:19 pm
Even the Huffington Post understands the results achieved by Joe Wilson’s outburst.
“Health care negotiators in the Senate pressed for a way to ensure that illegal immigrants can’t get access to government-funded insurance, a contentious issue now front and center after a Republican congressman’s outburst during President Barack Obama’s speech.”
September 11th, 2009 at 2:19 pm
sorry
September 11th, 2009 at 2:20 pm
Close the tag!!!
September 11th, 2009 at 2:23 pm
September 11th, 2009 at 2:56 pm
A fat, horny California Republican said:
“I am deeply saddened that my inappropriate comments have become a major distraction for my colleagues in the Assembly, who are working hard on the very serious problems facing our state. Duvall said in a statement on his Web site that had been set up for his 2010 run for the Assembly. I have come to the conclusion that it would not be fair to my family, my constituents or to my friends on both sides of the aisle to remain in office.”
A Tourette’s sufferer from South Carolina said:
“This evening I let my emotions get the best of me when listening to the president’s remarks regarding the coverage of illegal immigrants in the health care bill. While I disagree with the president’s statement, my comments were inappropriate and regrettable. I extend sincere apologies to the president for this lack of civility.”
Master of Bation said: “sorry”
September 11th, 2009 at 2:57 pm
DG says: “Today is 9/11. If ever there were a day in the year when we should be feeling unity with each other instead of division, I would think it would be today.”
Well said my fellow American.
September 11th, 2009 at 3:11 pm
A effeminate former Democrat Presidential Candidate said:
“It is inadequate to say to the people who believed in me that I am sorry, as it is inadequate to say to the people who love me that I am sorry. In the course of several campaigns, I started to believe
that I was special and became increasingly egocentric and narcissistic. If you want to beat me up – feel free. You cannot beat me up more than I have already beaten up myself. I have been stripped bare and will now work with everything I have to help my family and others who need my help.”
My apology is far more sincere than Pretty Pony’s.
September 11th, 2009 at 3:12 pm
“In the Senate, Democrats in the so called “Gang of Six,” a group of bipartisan senators on the Senate Finance Committee which is the last panel yet to release its bill, began moving quickly to close the loophole that Wilson helped bring greater attention to.
So basically Wilson was likely telling the truth that illegal aliens would receive benefits under the legislation and Obama was not.
Which begs the question – what about the other claims Obama made Wednesday night?
Is the bill really “only” going to $900 Billion over ten years or will it be more and if so, how much more? If Obama said we would wait four years to phase in the plan to make sure it’s done right – should those first four years in the ten year estimate? If we start estimating the cost from the first year when the plan is fully implemented, what would it be then?
Will the bill add to the deficit or will it not? If the deficit neutrality of the bill is based on “cuts,” where are those “cuts” and who will be making them?
If there is really $500 Billion in “waste, fraud and abuse” in Medicare, why hasn’t Obama simply pushed to find those savings first? Wouldn’t achieving that address much of the objections about the cost of his proposal and whether those “savings” are real?
Will people who have existing coverage actually be able to keep their coverage or will the bill incentivize employers to dump them on the “public option”? If people don’t get dumped into the “public option,” will the government force them to change their existing plans anyways so that they match the “public option”?
Will the public option pay for abortions or won’t it? Will private insurance plans be required by the “exchanges’ to pay for abortions or won’t they? Can Obama guarantee that under this bill neither will happen and if not, why was the amendment that would have explicitly prohibited this defeated on a straight party-line vote?
If the point of the “public option” is to create competition, why doesn’t the bill allow for the sale and purchase of health insurance across State lines just like auto insurance, life insurance and every other legal good and service? If there are hundreds if not thousands of companies that already sell health insurance, why not let them compete against each other instead of having the taxpayers create the FanneMae of health insurance?
When Obama says that the “public option” won’t be financed by our tax dollars, how can he promise that? Will it pay for its own administrative costs or will it be paid for by other parts of the federal government (like Medicare)? Will it be bailed out if it goes insolvent? And if it doesn’t require taxpayer funding, why are there tax increases in the proposal?
September 11th, 2009 at 4:10 pm
Angryclown said…nothing. As usual.
You’re more pathetic than ever. Piss off.
September 11th, 2009 at 4:50 pm
At first when I heard it live I applauded him not even knowing who he was and thinking I never would. I was doubly surprised when he “came out” and then apologized. Frankly I was disappointed at the apology, he could have gained more traction if he had stuck to his guns or at least said something along the lines of “I regret my actions, but I still stand by what he said” his way of handling this situation may sadly cost him his congressional seat even though in my opinion, he did absolutely nothing wrong. Go watch some tapes of Brown and Blair addressing the House of Commons and Lords, what Wilson did in comparison was tame. Frankly I sometimes wish that we handled things like the British a little bit more. An occasional fistfight down in the House or Senate chambers might be what some of those losers in DC need.
September 11th, 2009 at 4:51 pm
correction that should have read “I regret my actions but I still stand by what I said”
September 11th, 2009 at 4:54 pm
Ben, the Democrat party is the party of children. They are the ones who break things and throw tantrums. Wilson should have maintained his dignity. He regained it, which is more than can be said for the children on the other side of the aisle.
September 11th, 2009 at 5:19 pm
When former President Bush gave his state of the union a few years ago, a clutch of Democrat legislators, hidden by their numbers, booed. They profaned their office and attacked the dignity of the President’s address – and not a one of them had the cojones to identify themselves, much less either apologize or elaborate. It was sophomoric at best, cowardly and solopsistic at worst.
As if that was the first time.. and more, Mitch, since you once admonished me for not showing the ‘proper respect for the office of the President’ when I called Bush ‘shrub’, where exactly does your complaint lie again? It sure sounds like you want the Democrats (ONLY) to show ‘respect’ for your favored “President” but usage of terms like “The One” etc.. or outbursts like Wilson’s, that’s perfectly ok..
Ok, got it. Respect the Office, except when you don’t want to. Complain about jeers, except when it’s your party jeering – got it.
September 11th, 2009 at 5:26 pm
Bozo, you f—ed up again. Your post should have said: A fat, horny Democrat President from Arkansas said:….
September 11th, 2009 at 5:59 pm
Peev, our guy apologized. Yours didn’t.
Our guy pointed out a loophole, which your guys realized they had left and are closing. Your guys engaged in pure hatred.
By the way, Peev, you prove yourself once agin an asshat.
September 11th, 2009 at 6:27 pm
Pen,
Read back on the post(s) I’ve written on this subject. I eschewed Wilson’s action, while noting that he was in fact correct; Obama DID lie.
You keep missing both of those parts.
September 11th, 2009 at 7:05 pm
What is it with these presidential worshippers? All politicians lie. They work for us, not the other way around.
It is never unacceptable, outside of a court of law, to call a lie what it is.
September 11th, 2009 at 10:43 pm
That loophole isn’t closed, it’s big enough to drive a Mack truck through.
If illegals are excluded from public funds they will sue and in all probability they will win.
September 11th, 2009 at 11:05 pm
Before conservatives can take on the Democrats they need to take on the Republicans. The capitalists and businessmen need to know that they will not be allowed to import illegals to make money for them and shift the cost of their healthcare, etc, to the taxpayers. They have no choice — the alternative to Obama isn’t a pro-amnesty, pro-business Republican. McCain lost.
September 12th, 2009 at 9:22 am
From MSNBC
http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2009/09/11/2065287.aspx
“Today, for the first time as far as we know, the administration is backing a provision that would require proof of citizenship before someone could enroll in a plan selected on the exchange.”
Thank you Joe Wilson.
September 13th, 2009 at 8:13 am
Obama lied! Grandma died!
September 13th, 2009 at 8:49 am
jpmn said: “If illegals are excluded from public funds they will sue and in all probability they will win.”
Nice job pulling that out of your ass, jpmn. Or to address you wingnuts in your own particular form of intellectual argument:
Liar!
September 14th, 2009 at 4:48 pm
AC the land of fruits and nuts CA passed prop 187 several years ago. Illegal groups sued and got it overturned.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_Proposition_187_(1994)
AZ passed prop 200 Illegal groups have sued but so far haven’t been successful.
Illegals can get Social Security Benefits.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2006/may/18/20060518-114132-2456r/
Where would I get the idea that they would also get a Health Care benefit?
I don’t pull stuff out of my ass AC. And I expect an apology.
September 14th, 2009 at 5:00 pm
Pernicious Peevee, at least AssClown tries to add a bit of humor to his foolish rantings. You act like such an asshat; you spout lies, nonsense, and Liberal Fascist talking points and then you go run and hide on Penisblog after you are repeatedly taken to task.
BTW, Peev, do you still want, and these are your own words, “put another nail in the coffin of the idea of Isreal”?
Is that your final answer? solution?