Dr. Asten: Because you try to portray yourself as a serious political analyst, but you come off as a whiner...
Liberals, and some conservatives, hammer former Alaska governor, Sarah Palin, for whatever reason. They dismiss her views as illegitimate and claim her rhetoric bars her from being a serious political analyst. Usually, the same group of people who demean Palin for some of her less than stellar comments, are the ones who've engaged in rhetoric that would make Idi Amin blush. Keith Olbermann's latest Speshul Komint, much like the one he gave after the passing of Prop 8, is being lauded by the usual groups as a takedown of Palin, as well as Glenn Beck. Olbermann went after Palin and Beck for using "dangerously irresponsible" rhetoric, yet remained mum on his "dangerously irresponsible" rhetoric that occurs daily on his show. Olbermann, and the liberals who believe he's "speaking truth to power," and have engaged in their own irresponsible rhetoric have no authority to counsel others about theirs. The sentiment shared by Palin, and several elderly members of the electorate, is not unfounded. They're being told that ObamaCare will create a new bureaucracy, which I erroneously said it wouldn't, and that it would have specific powers in determining which insurance policies qualify as Qualified Health Benefits Packages (QHBP). I should also note while Olbermann was giving a tongue lashing to Palin and Beck about reading the bill, he hasn't read it either...stating that there would be no Health Choices Commissioner, but he didn't read page 41. Say what you will about former Governor Palin, but at least she contributes something substantive to the debate, unlike Meggie Mac, who whines about not being taken seriously.
Meggie Mac writes in a post on The Daily Beast about a statement made by Michelle Malkin about which conservative personality should "shut up." I have said at least once that Meggie needs to stop engaging in catfights with people who are her ideological supporters and take her fight to her ideological enemy. It does her no good to engage in public spats with women who can mop the floor with her in an argument. She doesn't recognize her role as the Obamedia's real life Stephen Colbert, as evidenced by her appearance on Real Time with Bill Maher. The entire conservative movement, save Kathleen Parker and David Frum, welcome moderate conservatives into the debate to counter Obama and his acolytes. The problem with Meggie Mac stems from her idea that she's smarter than the rest of the people in the room, when she's clearly in over her head. Throughout the article, where she's bitching about Michelle Malkin, Laura Ingraham, and Ann Coulter for not being civil, the girl doesn't mind being a little snarky herself, taking shots at Malkin and Coulter's publisher, Regenery. Someone needs to tell her, AGAIN, that taking pot shots at prominent, and attractive women on the Right, to cater to the Left is not going to build trust among the conservative base that really don't trust McCains anyway...except for The Other McCain.
Have a great day...
Showing posts with label Keith Olbermann. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Keith Olbermann. Show all posts
11 August 2009
Jay Bookman: The "mob" uses lies and distortions...
...I just can't point them out...
Jay Bookman, not to be confused with Florida Evans' building superintendent from the TV series, Good Times, ridicules the "mob" in a blogpost for the Atlanta Journal-Constitution, specifically talking about an article on the conservative website, Human Events which cites an editorial from Investor's Business Daily. His entire post centers on a paragraph which says that a person who has the same condition as reknown scientist, Stephen Hawking, who has Lou Gherig's disease, would not stand a chance in the British health system, based on the point-system used by the United Kingdom's National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. The fact that Dr. Hawking still lives in the UK and and breathes there too, does not render IBD's criticism of the British healthcare system moot.
The section of the House Bill, 1233 (pages 425-430), which talks about "end-of-life counseling," or advanced care planning, has met the ire of not only SarahCuda, but several older men and women, who are concerned that the Obama Administration is advocating euthanasia. Based on my reading of the bill, it mandates a counseling session between the individual and their practitioner if one hasn't occurred in the past 5 years. It discusses several programs available to the individual, and makes plans for the patient if s/he becomes unable to communicate their wishes, due to health problems. These plans, between the patient and under the guidance of a trained healthcare official, are subject to change as the patient's condition deteriorates or progresses. It does not mention any bureaucracy being created to determine whether an elderly person lives or dies, it does mention the creation of a Health Choices Commissioner. In my view, the talking point coming from some on the Right about Obama's "death panel" is wrong. Keith Olbermann took Sarah to task recently in a Speshul Komint, essentially blaming her for any violence that may come from any future town halls. There was no Speshul Komint from Keith when he was comparing President Bush and Republicans to Nazis and Fascists. Also notably absent are Speshul Komints from Keithy over shenanigans by Code Pink and the anti-war movement.
That was the only thing about ObamaCare that I believe the Right got wrong. There are, however, more things about the bill where the Right's opposition would gain a little traction, like the costs. If the Right continues to hammer the expense into the minds of the electorate, this plan is toast. No plan by the White House, nor Democratic members in Congress, have been able to prove that revolutionizing 15% of the economy will be deficit neutral. When you start getting flak over the costs of the program, you can best bet the vulnerablility of the plan has been exposed. I've perused several left-wing blogs, who've spared no expense in poking fun at Kenneth Gladney, but they don't mention how much the program will cost over the longterm, and how the proposals used to pay for it, will not adequately pay for the expansion of the healthcare system. This seems to be an indication of how Obamists will plan to focus the debate on ObamaCare, and George Soros is waiting in the wings...
Obama holds a town hall meeting of his own today in Portsmouth, New Hampshire. He will be limited on what he can say about the bill, as it hasn't been finalized (not that it's stopped him before). The Obama White House is changing its strategery to reshape the debate on ObamaCare. They've released a new website at whitehouse.gov called "Reality Check," which serves as a ObamaCare Media Matters, of sorts, and shows videos of several members of the Obama Administration trying to "correct conservative misinformation" about ObamaCare (yea, that'll convince people...getting members of the White House to convince me the plan's well worth the anticipation. Liberals didn't believe "spin" coming from the Bush White House, but they want me to believe it coming from Obama? They really think I'm stupid...). Dorothy Rabinowitz has other thoughts...
Have a great day...
Jay Bookman, not to be confused with Florida Evans' building superintendent from the TV series, Good Times, ridicules the "mob" in a blogpost for the Atlanta Journal-Constitution, specifically talking about an article on the conservative website, Human Events which cites an editorial from Investor's Business Daily. His entire post centers on a paragraph which says that a person who has the same condition as reknown scientist, Stephen Hawking, who has Lou Gherig's disease, would not stand a chance in the British health system, based on the point-system used by the United Kingdom's National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. The fact that Dr. Hawking still lives in the UK and and breathes there too, does not render IBD's criticism of the British healthcare system moot.
The section of the House Bill, 1233 (pages 425-430), which talks about "end-of-life counseling," or advanced care planning, has met the ire of not only SarahCuda, but several older men and women, who are concerned that the Obama Administration is advocating euthanasia. Based on my reading of the bill, it mandates a counseling session between the individual and their practitioner if one hasn't occurred in the past 5 years. It discusses several programs available to the individual, and makes plans for the patient if s/he becomes unable to communicate their wishes, due to health problems. These plans, between the patient and under the guidance of a trained healthcare official, are subject to change as the patient's condition deteriorates or progresses. It does not mention any bureaucracy being created to determine whether an elderly person lives or dies, it does mention the creation of a Health Choices Commissioner. In my view, the talking point coming from some on the Right about Obama's "death panel" is wrong. Keith Olbermann took Sarah to task recently in a Speshul Komint, essentially blaming her for any violence that may come from any future town halls. There was no Speshul Komint from Keith when he was comparing President Bush and Republicans to Nazis and Fascists. Also notably absent are Speshul Komints from Keithy over shenanigans by Code Pink and the anti-war movement.
That was the only thing about ObamaCare that I believe the Right got wrong. There are, however, more things about the bill where the Right's opposition would gain a little traction, like the costs. If the Right continues to hammer the expense into the minds of the electorate, this plan is toast. No plan by the White House, nor Democratic members in Congress, have been able to prove that revolutionizing 15% of the economy will be deficit neutral. When you start getting flak over the costs of the program, you can best bet the vulnerablility of the plan has been exposed. I've perused several left-wing blogs, who've spared no expense in poking fun at Kenneth Gladney, but they don't mention how much the program will cost over the longterm, and how the proposals used to pay for it, will not adequately pay for the expansion of the healthcare system. This seems to be an indication of how Obamists will plan to focus the debate on ObamaCare, and George Soros is waiting in the wings...
Obama holds a town hall meeting of his own today in Portsmouth, New Hampshire. He will be limited on what he can say about the bill, as it hasn't been finalized (not that it's stopped him before). The Obama White House is changing its strategery to reshape the debate on ObamaCare. They've released a new website at whitehouse.gov called "Reality Check," which serves as a ObamaCare Media Matters, of sorts, and shows videos of several members of the Obama Administration trying to "correct conservative misinformation" about ObamaCare (yea, that'll convince people...getting members of the White House to convince me the plan's well worth the anticipation. Liberals didn't believe "spin" coming from the Bush White House, but they want me to believe it coming from Obama? They really think I'm stupid...). Dorothy Rabinowitz has other thoughts...
Have a great day...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)