L.A. Times: Health Care Repeal Too “Divisive” What with Our New Need for Civil Rhetoric
The L.A. Times reports: GOP in a bind over healthcare repeal vote.
The deck headline: “House Republican leaders are eager to fulfill their promise to vote to repeal the legislation, but taking up the divisive issue could hurt the party at a time of calls for rejecting partisan rhetoric.”
As lawmakers promise a new era of comity after the Arizona shooting attack that left six dead and Rep. Gabrielle Giffords (D-Ariz.) in critical condition, Republican leaders grappled with how and when to return to an issue that brought political discourse to a boiling point.
. . . .
Rep. Robert E. Andrews (D-N.J.) called [a GOP approach to push the repeal] a mistake. “I think good judgment would say, let’s extend this period of healing before the House returns to something as divisive as healthcare,” he said.
Because, what with Giffords’ shooting being motivated by partisan right-wing rhetoric, it’s only right.
Oh, I’m sorry: I got the mantra wrong. We don’t know what motivated Loughner, but nevertheless, it is a good time to discuss the awful rhetoric that the GOP is using to poison the discourse.
Never mind that the “calls for rejecting partisan rhetoric” are based on a huge steaming pile of lies. This is the New Reality. They have repeated it again and again and you will fall in line.
They will tell you what to say. They will tell you when to say it. They will tell you what bills you are allowed to bring.
In the meantime, I ask you (very calmly) to shut up, so you can stop inciting murders the way you have been.
By the way, both Pat Dollard and one of my commenters contacted the reporter on that rotten and Godawful L.A. Times piece claiming that Loughner’s views were “rooted in the far right.” The reporter told them that she hated the headline and asked them to change it. Sure enough, it has now been changed:
Experts see echoes of extremism in Loughner’s ramblings
Experts say the suspect in the Arizona shooting rampage is fixated on issues cited by other extremists. But he also appears to have been influenced by the far left.
The story is still crap, but that’s less of a blatant lie than the original. Progress! Sort of.
Now if we can just get them to allow us to discuss health care repeal, and call ObamaCare what it really is (dangerous), and so forth.
I think if we wait until the time is right, and ask nicely, they may just let us do it.
Or, we could just say: we’ll call this bill what it is, and we’ll seek to repeal it immediately. Take your calls for civility and shove them.
Me, I’m kinda sorta done being nice with the people who have spent the past five days calmly accusing conservatives of responsibility for the murder of a nine year-old.
This debate will be “divisive”?
Great. Let’s have it NOW.
I don’t think America is all that divided over Obamacare. The vast majority think it stinks on ice.
IgotBupkis, President, United Anarchist Society (c9dcd8) — 1/12/2011 @ 11:36 pmBest thing Boehner could be telling the “young guns” to do right now that he probably isnt:
Get their staffs to churn out an Obamacare repeal and some kind of very modest healthcare reform. Take a week. Two maybe. Then introduce it.
Not much value unless kept secret until introduced, which is of course impossible because no one in Washington can keep their damn mouth shut.
They just need to have something ready in a week. Don’t go Tea Party rally when you hold the presser. Just the facts ma’am and get off the damn podium. The best thing the GOP can do to keep Tea Partiers and independents happy is to put their best out there and then be receptive to feedback. But I wonder if the party discipline and focus necessary exists. Probably not.
DeepElemBlues (a78b16) — 1/12/2011 @ 11:37 pmi’ve been “done” with trying to be civil regarding politics with the leftists i know because their idea of “civil” is allowing them to say anything they want and your only options are to either remain silent or agree with them.
anything else, no matter how politely put, causes an immediate hissy fit at best, a shrieking rage at worst, or a rejection of you and your existence because they know they have no argument, so they have to dismiss you instead.
they can all go to hell, preferably at a great rate of knots.
redc1c4 (fb8750) — 1/12/2011 @ 11:37 pmI agree. No mercy to the guilty.
Brad (28313e) — 1/12/2011 @ 11:37 pmI’m with you, Patterico. Let’s reopen the Obamacare debate and ask Democrats to explain the following:
1. How they plan to “bend the cost curve in a downward fashion”
2. Whether they still believe that people who like their current insurance will be able to keep it.
3. Where they will begin in cutting the $500 billion in Medicare costs over the next ten years that they promised in order to pay for their bill.
4. And, just for fun, let’s make them defend the slimy way in which the legislation was passed, what with the Cornhusker Kickback, the Louisiana Purchase, Deem & Pass, and all the other garbage they pulled.
All that can be done in a very calm and respectful manner, despite what the LAT editorial board might think.
JVW (4463d3) — 1/12/2011 @ 11:39 pmI am so glad to hear that you want to fight. Today it seemed everyone wanted to fold. I’m way too mad to be done.
alwaysfiredup (23de9f) — 1/12/2011 @ 11:39 pm@2: the Beltway RINOs would rather retain their status and power as members of a minority party than surrender their perks.
redc1c4 (fb8750) — 1/12/2011 @ 11:39 pmFunny, I feel much the same way about immoderate Islam…
That is, until the moderate Islamists (which I do realize exist) actually show up regularly and vocally, ALL of Islam.
IgotBupkis, President, United Anarchist Society (c9dcd8) — 1/12/2011 @ 11:40 pmi say we sound El Degüello and attack.
redc1c4 (fb8750) — 1/12/2011 @ 11:42 pm“Honor, justice, and humanity, forbid us tamely to surrender that freedom which we received from our gallant ancestors, and which our innocent posterity have a right to receive from us.”
— Thomas Jefferson
sounds like ol’ Tom was a H8r too.
redc1c4 (fb8750) — 1/12/2011 @ 11:59 pmand we know my hero, Sam Adams, was:
redc1c4 (fb8750) — 1/13/2011 @ 12:01 ami think Emperor Misha over at the Rot has the ultimate take on civil rhetoric, at least from a conservative POV. NSFW, btw…
it was difficult to find a quote that wouldn’t hit the filters here, but hey, that’s Misha for ya. %-)
redc1c4 (fb8750) — 1/13/2011 @ 1:43 amObama’s goal is for all of us to helplessly die one day in squalid government hospitals I think.
happyfeet (aa4bab) — 1/13/2011 @ 6:41 amUntil recently, I had no idea that calling anyone or a gov’t program “socialism” was de facto hate speech and an incitement to violence. Good to know.
Dmac (498ece) — 1/13/2011 @ 6:45 amDon’t forget racist, someone at McClatchey pointed that out because of Robeson and Dubois, or something.
narciso (6075d0) — 1/13/2011 @ 6:49 amThe Times’ staff has been reduced to a small fraction of what it once was. So, apparently, has their informational bubble. Agnew was right.
Kevin M (298030) — 1/13/2011 @ 7:11 amYou really live in a typical conservative world of guilt and fantasy. No one that I have ever read had accused conservatives of being directly responsible for the deaths of anyone so your blanket statement to that effect involving a nine year old child is yet another symptom of your conservative self-inflicted sense of victim-hood.
And no one has suggested that liberals want to shut down debate and criminalize dissent as your blowhard friends on the radio have said.
What is said is that the deliberate stoking of fear and hate have consequences. You cannot tell people that their lives are in danger, that they want to pull the plug on grandma, that there are death panels in the health care bill and that the constitution is being shredded and they better arm themselves and not expect violence.Those are lies circulated for political gain and you act like you are totally unaware of them.
Conservatives have continually made comparisons to Hitler and Stalin and this health care bill and that is also poisoning the atmosphere. That is the point that others are trying to make but one that you just dont seem to be able to see. Or perhaps you just don’t want to see it as you did not want to see that you got us in a war in Iraq for false reasons.
You have got to wonder why a Democrat was targeted and which side it is that preaches vicious anti government rhetoric and continually accuses the others of hating the country.
Here is just a typical example of the kinds of staetments that create that fear..
“Obama’s goal is for all of us to helplessly die one day in squalid government hospitals I think.”
See? There is no basis for such a statement at all but its done all the time and you obviously have no recognition of its poisonous impact.
Vietnameravet (35c6c1) — 1/13/2011 @ 7:33 amSome proponents of free speech would have us believe that:
– a teenager can play “Grand Theft Auto” all day without affecting his/her state of mind or decision making, or
– that mocking a religion and its followers by putting a Crucifix in a jar of urine is art, or that
– movies depicting an assassination of a President are fine, or
– saying that the Republican form of health care reform is to let people die, or that
– people who think the US should control it’s borders like every other country in the world (but without the excessive violence that other countries, like Mexico, use) is a hater… .
but at the same time ask us to believe that:
– a picture of crosshairs on a map showing which Congressional Districts are “targeted” for strong campaigns to defeat the Democratic incumbants lead to assassination attempts.
Such people need to step back a second and look at their claims. If they persist, they are either lying through their teeth, not serious, or incapable of logical thought.
MD in Philly (3d3f72) — 1/13/2011 @ 7:50 amMD in Philly, are you aware that the movie about Bush’s killing was made by a British company and failed to be widely distributed in the US? Probably not.
Jim (87e69d) — 1/13/2011 @ 7:56 amComment by redc1c4 — 1/12/2011 @ 11:37 pm
Unfortunately, a lot of your comment also applies to a number of conservative websites. Generally, not here, however, which is why this is one of the only places I bother with.
Get their staffs to churn out an Obamacare repeal and some kind of very modest healthcare reform. Take a week. Two maybe. Then introduce it.
Exactly. Putting in the phrase “job killing” in the current bill is blatantly advertising the fact that it is pure kabuki, a gesture they don’t think will have any real effects.
The bill they ought to offer should be literally a repeal and replace:
Title: Health Care Access Reform Act of 2011
Section 1–repeals [whatever the official title of the Obamacare bill is] in its entirety
Sections 2 et seq.: outline a real world alternatve.
This bill would be attacked, stymied in the Senate, vetoed if it ever gets to the Oval Office–but it would be the GOP offering a real alternative, not just engaging in theatrical gestures.
kishnevi (2d88a8) — 1/13/2011 @ 8:03 amComment by Jim — 1/13/2011 @ 7:56 am
It was certainly defended, and even cheered on, by the US Left. No non-conservative criticized it, IIRC (although I’d be glad to find out I was remembering incorrectly).
kishnevi (2d88a8) — 1/13/2011 @ 8:08 am“MD in Philly, are you aware that the movie about Bush’s killing was made by a British company and failed to be widely distributed in the US?”
Jim – So if wasn’t made in the U.S., won an award at a Toronto film festival, wasn’t widely distributed in the U.S., but was discussed endlessly on the internet, that is just fine. Equivalency is my game and Jim is my name!
How widely was it distributed in the U.S. and is it available on the internet or for rental? Do you have stats or are you just pulling this crap out of your ass?
daleyrocks (e7bc4f) — 1/13/2011 @ 8:10 amJim-
And your point is? Was it not distributed in the US because leading Democrats vocally opposed it? If so, please show me the evidence, and I’ll be happy to come to your conclusion on that point.
Meanwhile, you can try to refute the logic of my other points.
MD in Philly (3d3f72) — 1/13/2011 @ 8:11 amVEV is off its meds yet again. And just so wea re clear, I am referring to you and only you.
JD (109425) — 1/13/2011 @ 8:11 amthe strategy of the left, aided by the palace guard in the media: Heads I win tails you loose.
quasimodo (4af144) — 1/13/2011 @ 8:12 amAnd irresponsibly violent!
Look: who thinks ObamaCare will be repealed while Obama is present? This is about getting people on the record.
And engaging in irresponsibly violent rhetoric!
Patterico (3eb8b2) — 1/13/2011 @ 8:12 amComments are fast and furious today, but time to get to other things.
MD in Philly (3d3f72) — 1/13/2011 @ 8:17 amhttp://www.imdb.com/title/tt0853096/
Here’s the link. My point was that almost no one in the US saw it. I don’t know if it’s available for rental in the US.
And my other point is that blaming the left for this film (which was not financially successful and was not made in the US) is like blaming all of the right for killing gays and abortion providers.
Jim (87e69d) — 1/13/2011 @ 8:32 amMD, as to Piss Christ: It was 20 years ago and received a $15,000 government grant. It’s not at all clear it was intended to mock Christ or a religion: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piss_Christ.
As to Grand Theft Auto, most people can draw the distinction between reality and games. Do you think the government should prohibit the distribution and production of any violent video games (Australia does that currently).
And the fact is that the current health insurance programs do have problems. Look at AZ; a person just died because the new AZ Republican governor decided that AZ Medicare would not cover some transplants (I agree that the comment is not correct overall and that my examples relate to Medicare, not Obamacare).
Jim (87e69d) — 1/13/2011 @ 8:41 amAh yes, civil rhetoric; civil images. Imagine getting your likeness beat to hell and decapitated…. in Tucson :
On Thursday a protest against Maricopa County, Arizona Sheriff Joe Arpaio was held in front of a Tucson Barnes and Noble where he was holding a book signing. Arpaio is working with Immigration and Custom Enforcement (ICE) to enforce immigration laws in his area, and, needless to say, those who support illegal immigration don’t like that one bit.
In front of the store, protesters savagely beat an effigy of Arpaio, severing it’s head (video link). Then, Isabel Garcia of Derechos Humanos carried the severed head around (video link). Then, the protesters carried the body around (video link). See the writeup from Jon Justice of the radio station 104.1 FM The Truth here.
As of 2006, Derechos Humanos was collaborating with the Mexican government, and to make it even worse Garcia is on the payroll of Pima County (home of Tucson) as their Public Defender.
Needless to say, the Arizona Republic downplays the violent protest (“Arpaio’s appearance at Tucson bookstore draws protesters” by Blake Morlock, link), saying only that the protesters “also pummeled a pinata meant to resemble Arpaio”. Morlock also quotes far-leftie Reverend John Fife, an associate of Reverend Robin Hoover of No More Deaths, another person who is/was collaborting with the Mexican government.
john b (5e1374) — 1/13/2011 @ 8:47 amLook: who thinks ObamaCare will be repealed while Obama is present? This is about getting people on the record.
“Getting people on the record” is pure kabuki.
If you want to get Obamacare actually repealed, you need to offer a real alternative, and then drum up the support for it until 1)you replace him in 2012 or 2)make it politically impossible for him not to go along.
Simply calling for the repeal with blatant gesture is, however, meaningless.
And engaging in irresponsibly violent rhetoric!
Careful there. The same idiots who think the phrase “job killing” is irresponsibly violent won’t be able to figure out you’re being sarcastic there.
(Hmm, It probably means something when an aspie like me can easily see metaphorical speech for what it is, and a pundit can’t–or won’t.)
kishnevi (2d88a8) — 1/13/2011 @ 9:03 amComment by john b
Thanks for the info, but it looks like your links didn’t work.
So, if Arpaio is the victim of an attack the “protestors” will be charged as accessories in a conspiracy???
MD in Philly (3d3f72) — 1/13/2011 @ 9:10 amMan… I despise the congressional Democrats at this point – have for a while now, even as a liberal. This is so sordid, so cynical, and I’m pretty cynical to begin with.
I don’t like the congressional Republicans, either, but if they cave in to this blatant politicoercive horseshit I’ll like them even less, because it’ll mean they’re just like their scumbag colleagues across the aisle (which I think they are, anyway). It’ll mean they’re more concerned with their reelection prospects than they are with standing on principle – a principle which denies a manipulative entrenched power to slander you under the guise of unification, buying a political victory with the blood of a child.
This is so fucked up… the latest in a series of stark and compelling reminders that the political reality of this country needs to change, soon, and in a big way – certainly in a bigger way that either of these two parties of bastards can hope to provide.
Leviticus (1ecdf8) — 1/13/2011 @ 9:16 amHalf of all States of this republic are now suing to stop Obamacare. In addition to the unconstitutional insurance ‘mandate’, they well understand that they all face huge additional Medicaid costs as an Obamacare consequence.
Ramming on partisan principles, with no regard for the consequences, aint the most enlightened form of ‘self-government’.
Insufficiently Sensitive (b6274d) — 1/13/2011 @ 9:59 amIf they really want to back away from the divisiveness and inflamed rhetoric of the past, and thrive together, perhaps a gesture on their part would be appropriate. Such as, oh, I don’t know, how about agreeing to repeal the most divisive act of the past two years, that was forced through over the strenuous objections of the public? If the Democrats and Obama are serious about switching to a more civil sort of politics, let the House pass the repeal, let the Democrats pass it in the Senate, and let the President sign it. Then we can resume discussing what to do about health insurance, in calm and collected tones of voice. But for them to force their way though by hook or by crook and then to say now we must be civil and bipartisan? Hell no!
Milhouse (ea66e3) — 1/13/2011 @ 10:07 amAnd jerks like me will remind voters in 2012 that any GOP type that votes for repeal also voted for elimination of any practical way for someone with pre-existing conditions who loses his/her job from getting affordable health insurance, setting up exchanges which would require insurance companies to compete with each other for business, eliminating lifetime and annual caps and the ability to keep college-age (and beyond) kids on parents’ policies through 26.
Jim (87e69d) — 1/13/2011 @ 11:21 am“…No one that I have ever read …”
The controlling quote of VeVians delusionary world.
AD-RtR/OS! (b8ab92) — 1/13/2011 @ 12:14 pmJim:
The only problem with your logic is that most people already know those things and they still want it repealed.
I am not anti-government. It is necessary and we all benefit from it. But when the majority of people tell the government to not pass a huge entitlement bill during tenuous economic and they are ignored and ridiculed, they might get testy.
I’m sorry your convictions are not popular, but there you are.
Ag80 (e03e7a) — 1/13/2011 @ 5:50 pmThat’s cool. I think that’s a winner for the GOP, and hope you have plenty of GOP types to complain about in 2012.
but, at any rate, that’s how it should work. Just tell them the truth about what they voted against, and let the voters decide.
Perhaps they will repeal unpopular portions of the legislation? My hope is the just repeal the whole thing, but they are better politicians than I am.
Dustin (b54cdc) — 1/13/2011 @ 6:05 pmThe Dog Trainer is acting like a concern troll. With about as little credibility and finesse as most concern trolls.
elissa (7ec58b) — 1/13/2011 @ 6:16 pmJim- I share your concerns about specific issues in health care, but the monstrosity that is the health care bill as passed I think should be scrapped and the good taken up with a new effort. Otherwise, it may take a while to “see everything in it” to cut out bit by bit.
MD in Philly (3d3f72) — 1/13/2011 @ 6:43 pmIt is the mentality of the politicians to frame and reframe laws, and if there are proposers of a law, there surely would be people to oppose them. This has long been recorded in political history.
software company (3752a7) — 1/14/2011 @ 9:03 pmAnd every law no matter how much it is accepted or repealed will have its positive influence on some and negatives influence for few and no law is perfectly accepted by all members of the society. But the Government is bound to maintain law and order in the country and avoid violent activities based on the bill pending in the senate.