In a piece of irresponsible journalism passed off as Op-Ed, Maureen Dowd puts forth the argument that Joe Wilson’s “You lie!” outburst during the Presidential Address Wednesday night, 9/9/09, is nothing but racist-fueled fear that has nothing to do with the Address itself, but a desperate attempt for American Bigots to keep their clenching fists on an America which is growing and spreading beyond the confines of color. Ms. Dowd pooped out her piece Saturday the 12th in the pages of The New York Times.
And she is a good writer. Don’t get me wrong. Unlike me, she is a professional in her field and gets paid for it. She did put in the piece facts on Wilson and the South that, put in the right place, supports her claim that Wilson did not shout out out of emotional frustration to what Obama was mouthing, but only out of his deep-rooted hatred for the idea that a black man is in the White House.
How is this even an issue? How does this line of thinking actually consider the issues on the table? Is it nothing but a clouding of the mind, a distraction put out there to keep people from demanding truth and transparency? How many times has this race issue been pulled out without any follow-through on the facts being questioned?
They are, in fact, two different issues. Whether Joe Wilson puts on clean sheets and burns badly-made crosses, whether the majority of the GOP resents a black man as Commander-in-Chief, these ideas have nothing to do with whether Obama is being entirely truthful in the presentation of his Plan. These ideas have nothing to do whether or not Wilson considered Obama’s words to be blatant lies. No matter how much it is argued, racial tension has nothing to do with the questionable validity of Obama’s health plan. To insist it does is irresponsible and criminaly misleading, especially for a professional journalist. No problem if you want to swear you seen these guys throwing homemade bombs in the basement windows of churchs, that is part of that Free Speech thing. But there needs to be actual responsibility taken by journalists, Right and Left alike, who have the power to influence public thought with their words. Expression of personal opinion is part of our American Life, but it should not be used to detract from actual facts, especially when such an issue is at the forefront of every American’s concern.
As exhaustive as Joe’s two words would seem, it seems important to look at what might prompt him to such an emotional outburst which is completely disrespectful to the Office of the President (though it seems that booing, from either side, has always been permissable).
1. The Democrats did veto a proposed amendment to a plan which would tighten verification processes for citizenship in hospital care. That is a fact. However, it was the Democrats who shot it down, not Obama himself.
a. the same could be said of preventing abortions from being covered under the plan as well, another amendment was put on the table by Republicans and shot down by Democrats.
2. Obama has been in works to quicken citizenship processes, which could give truth to his statement because, by 2013, when the Plan would be in effect, illegal aliens would no longer be illegal aliens.
a. which raises the question as to how wording is so important. Might there be agreement if the term “illegal aliens” is struck from the Plan and replaced with “those who’ve entered the country illegally“?
The debate on this issue has been running full-force now for months. Obama is right: the status quo is not acceptable. But he is wrong in forcing his sole plan down on top of the American people. His plan is not the only idea on the table, a fact that he ignores to mention. And he does not consider the ideas and how they might be implemented into his own ideas. Instead, he makes his plan and himself indivisible. Those who oppose his plan oppose him, not exactly the way Democracy works. He declares that his door is always open and he will listen to “a serious set of proposals” but, it seems, that means very little in the concept of consideration.
Like all Americans – Republican, Democrat, Conservative, Liberal, black, white, or any other label that is needed – I am concerned with how health care reform is going to affect me and how health care is in dire need for actual reform. But I don’t see much getting accomplished. Obama shoots down those that don’t agree with his plan and those who look towards its realistic flaws as points that need ironed out as opponents that are only trying to undermine him. What consideration has he given to the ideas which have contrasted with his ideas? How can he bemoan the attitudes of his opposition if he portrays those same attitudes?
He has advertised his plan without giving clear, understandable explanations of its workings. He’s used quotes and numbers out of context as scare tactics to overwhelm those that depend on health coverage. He touts his “no time to accept the status quo” as though that is the only alternative to his plan, a very misleading implication. He wants his Plan passed this fall without clear understanding, but it doesn’t take effect for four years; if it is so wonderful, why wait so long? Trying to get a clear view of what his plan is is not an easy thing; the rhetoric put out on numerous websites make it all sound very attractive, but this is the government: how is the fine print going to bend us over? where is that fine print? He claims that already-established health insurance coverage will not suffer in competition with a government insurance program (or, if it does suffer, it deservedly does so because of a better plan running it out of business), but does he consider how current health insurance will be negatively affected while doling out benefits? Is his plan going to step up to plate halfway through chemotherapy treatment because the initial insurance had no choice but to fold? He claims “cutting waste in Medicare” will help fund the Plan with hundreds of millions of dollars while at the same time saying Medicare recipients will not lose any benefits. If there is so much waste there, why wait to deal with that? Why have they waited this long? Obama claims that no additional taxes will be charged to fund his Plan and it will not raise our deficit one iota, but that is also untrue, as shown by numerous agencies which actually deal with the sort of thing.
Is it a terrible thing, government-run health insurance? I don’t know. The present model is a poor thing, for sure, but why hasn’t there been stricter reigns put on health insurance companies which do not act in the interests of the paying American people? Again, why wait four years to do something about that? Why has such abuse, both in the private sector and in government-run programs such as Medicare, been allowed to continue for so long if their acts are criminal? Is the government program going to be accepted everywhere, unlike present insurance companies, which are accepted only at certain providers, decisions made outside of the insurance and within state government agencies? Why is the health insurance market, already controlled by government in who gets to sell what where, so restrictive if Obama thinks an open market would be a great idea? Again, why wait?
What was my point here?
Ah, yes, Ms. Dowd’s irresponsibility in her article. While vehement in calling Joe a racist, she does nothing to show that Joe was wrong in calling Barry a liar. She does nothing to defend Obama’s truthfullness, pushing forth her idea of racism as a blanket to cover the real issue. She may be a hot-looking mamma, but her journalistic irresponsibility only serves to take attention away from actual issues and the pursuit of truth, thereby harming those Americans who need to know facts more than they need to listen to racial opinion. Whether Joe is a card-carrying Brother of the Klan and stores pre-made noose knots in his briefcase, does that clearly prove Obama is presenting the whole truth, and the whole Plan, to the American People? Or is the presentation of Wilson’s racial handicap necessary to pull attention away from actual facts and the misreprestation of those facts?
I stand behind Op-Ed presentations. It represents various ways to look at issues, it represents different views on topics that might have been overlooked. But it should not be used in place of real journalism, nor should it be touted as truth. The inclusion of facts does not displace the danger of Ms. Dowd’s opinions, but only strengthens it in the minds of readers who are not given any indication as to what are hard facts and what are ideas out of her pretty, little head. That is more damaging than any outburst in an already-stained public setting.
Tag Archive: health insurance
Ongoing coverage for the day’s March on Washington, depending on what news station you turn on, as tens of thousands (reportedly a hundred thousand) have made their way to the Capitol to protest, or speak out, or just wave really big signs, the Government’s intended direction on Health Reform (health care? health insurance?).
Health reform, in whatever phrasing is most effective, is the big showboat right now. Debates all over, name-calling and incomplete facts being repeated by every newscaster with a crooked mouth, and I hear they will be casting for a mascot later this week. Is the “Help! I’ve Fallen and Can’t Get Up!” lady still working?
The March on Washington is the culmination of “Tea Parties” across the Nation in opposition of the Democratic and Presidential Health Reform ideas. The “Tea Parties” stem from the idea of town hall meetings, which have been used in the debate on Health Reform but only so much that the President controlled the proceedings and any opposition was made to look like half-crazed, backhill trash. The March on Washington is Glenn Beck’s puppy, something he’s promoted and advertised through his television and radio shows.
Glenn Beck is a scary man. Not because he speaks up on ideas that frighten me, not because he has become is influential in the opinions of thousands of people, not because he has no political or legal background or training, not because of his past with drug and alcohol recovery and the Church of Latter-Day Saints. No, what scares me is his large, pasty-white face and pudgy fingers as he gets all het up. He is like a sweaty preacher yelling down fire and brimstone. And, honestly, he is only yelling out opinions and second-hand facts. He is not educated in government or politics, he admits as much, but he still wants to point fingers.
If anyone could use a March on Washington, it is Glenn Beck…
Bad humor aside, the march is not just in protest of the current Health Reform, but also in protest of Big Government getting any bigger, in protest of corrupt government, and in protest of unchecked government spending of Americans’ tax dollars.
Unfortunately, I can’t see the whole sha-bang becoming an effective medium. There is no strong political leader behind the event, and many political figures are staying as far away from the event. Mainstream media will poke their fun and concentrate on angles that make everyone present look like LSD-swilling Bible thumpers. The reality that these are thousands upon thousands of American citizens, of American voters, won’t matter a whit.
Unrelated to the March, but significant, Obama is in Minneapolis this day. Like that isn’t planned out. “Hey, I’m the President and there are thousands and thousands of American voters heading towards my house today… I better get the plane ready…” He is saying that he will accept responsibility for the success or failure of his Health Bill. Very noble of him; is that why the Bill is not slated go actually go in effect until 2013, after the next Presidential Election? In fact, negative repercussions will not be prominent for at least two years after the placement of the Bill. What responsibility is he actually accepting? What is he going to do to make it better? Retract the Bill and make things the way they used to be, back in 2009? Resign?
Why, if his Bill is such a good idea, why is it to be voted on this year and then left in the closet for four years? Why wait? Why not fix the problem now? Maybe because implememntation of the Bill’s laws will severely hurt his re-election chances?
Some states are pushing for legislation that will try to counter Barry’s Bill in one way or another, but it is said that such state actions is useless because the Bill is the trump card and will renege State laws which counter its directive. That is a very interesting fact. The country was set up to be local government to state government to federal government. In fact, there are instances where the federal government has told state and local governments “deal with it, it’s your problem.” But this issue is to be commanded solely by federal government. What’s next in the aspects that federal government wishes to control?
Barry’s numbers still do not add up. In his comments on taking responsibility for the effectiveness of the Bill (and, from what I’ve seen, any time any politician says they will “take responsibility,” the smartest thing to do is vote the other way…), he is saying nearly 50 million Americans are without health insurance. Nearly 50 million, while other reports say that it is closer to 30 million actual American Citizens which don’t have health insurance. And these numbers are not a constant. How many are without health insurance but will have health insurance next month? How many don’t have health insurance but are under Medicare/Medicaid? How many don’t have health insurance because they chose not to? How many Americans lost their health insurance because they lost their jobs under Barry’s Presidency? “Nearly half of all Americans will lose their health coverage over the next ten years” is a quote from his Minneapolis rally. A new Treasury report, but based on old numbers, spread out over the last ten years, for “a month or longer”? A complete scare tactic? How many of these Americans will lose their insurance because of his own Bill? He is putting out these phrases and numbers in public addresses which do not delve into the complete facts of what is completely true, only using the phrases and numbers which have the most impact. He will not set down and go into the complete facts.
Why, if health insurance companies are the problem, does the government just lift the ban on an open market for health insurance? Barry’s pointed out that there are states where three or four health insurance companies are doing the majority of the business, and Alabama (is that the right state? I think so) has only one predominant health insurance provider. But is is a government control which prevents multiple health insurance companies from servicing the market, which would lower costs and raise benefits through competition. If the government is disallowing open competition now, when their baby isn’t even in the race, how fair will it be once they have a stake in it?
I am surprised that Barry decided to leave Washington today. He knew the March was on its way, it’s been in the works since sometime in April. Aren’t these the people he wants to persuade? Aren’t these people American enough for him to address? Or is it only okay to talk to those people that already agree with him? The trip to Minneapolis seems a bit formulated. Why go halfway across the country to talk about health insurance reform when tens of thousands of people are coming to your front lawn?
I am not against any reform which benefits the people. It is needed. But government control has led to how many pains for the American people? The saying “you can’t please all the people all the time” is certainly true, but is it crooked if you are only trying to please the people that will vote for you?
You ever wonder maybe the attention given to health reform is to cover something else up?
I’m trying to keep pace with the intensity of politics in this country. This whole “health insurance” reform bill is a confusing jumble to start with; throw in a paper on Kant and an exam on Humanities & the Arts, and the weird work schedule I take on so some can have a decent week of crunkness… It gets a little hard to stay on top of the facts with so many factors proclaiming what those facts are.
I even watched the Presidential Address last night. And, now, all over is the coverage of South Carolina Congressman Joe Wilson yell out “You lie!” when Barry said that his plan would not cover illegal immigrants. (this was the point Pelosi’s eyes got all wide and she looked like someone asked her if she ever had a Dirty Sanchez…)
Wilson apparently apologized quick enough, though he couldn’t get it to Barry himself. Apparently, Barry’s feelings were so hurt that he couldn’t take the phone call and was having Rahm Emanuel screen his calls (doesn’t the name Rahm bring to mind a slobbering pit bull?). It wasn’t just the House which was shocked by Wilson’s outburst, and it isn’t just American citizens which think it was an ugly act of disrespect; even Wilson’s own constituents find it uncalled for. I man, who can dare call the President a liar? On national television? Ye gods…
Wilson doesn’t apologixe for the sentiment, but for the outburst. He’s been making the rounds to make that clear. I think that is important. Whether or not Barry is a liar remains to be seen; the Bill is some ways from even being passed.
But what is being ignored is how Barry will circumvent reality in order to make it not a lie. There is a period of four years, by Obama’s own statement, before the Bill wouold be in effect. He has already told Mexico that he is pushing for quicker citizenship for immigrants who enter this country illegally, a great way to build a voting mass. Also, is he saying that those who enter this country illegally and who are presently in this country illegally at this time will be excluded from the free version of government health insurance? Can it be supposed that an illegal migrant worker will be quickly granted citizenship and then given health insurance? Or that those who are presently in this country illegally will be citizens by the time this Bill becomes reality?
Barry presents two different numbers in his speech. There are 45 million Americans who don’t have health insurance, then there is 36 million. It has already been estabished that there are about 9.5 million people who are illegally in this country, a number which just so happens to mesh with the difference in Barry’s quotes. So, in one portion of the speech, he is taking these illegal immigrants in consideration, but at another point he isn’t?
Wilson admits his outburst was emotionally-fueled. But whether it is fact-based is another level. Wilson serves on a subcommitee which oversee admendments to the bill; he also interacts with other commitees which take the issue of illegal immigration as a reality. He knows there are plenty of illegal immigrants working out there.
And didn’t Barry specify “one part of this plan” or “one part of my plan”? So, could it be suspected that there are other parts which are not presented, parts which don’t make as much ideological sense? Parts where loopholes are just waiting to exploited? Coupled with his eagerness to grant citizenship to people who’ve entered this country illegally, he could very well be telling the whole truth, except that they will all be good, Democratic-voting citizens by the time the Bill goes into effect.
Wilson’s outburst is very nicely taking attention away from demands on transparency of Obama’s promises. Perhaps shouting out during a nationally televised broadcast is poor etiquette and disrespectful to the position of President, but should it be? Shouldn’t those that represent our citizens have the backbone to call out double-speak and do so in plain, understandable English? Half the reason so many in this country don’t know what is going on with this issue is because no one can understand what the hell is being said.
And, perhaps, did Obama choose the platform of an Address because it would avoid the chance of actual debate, it would avoid having to explain and talk about what he is saying? Rather than an open debate where he presents his ideas and opens the floor to questions and remarks, he picks a venue where everyone is supposed to sit there quietly until the applause sign comes on. The avenue he chose was premeditated to avoid confrontation and having to explain what he proposes. How many of his ideas come along with twenty pages of fine print? How much of what he said will be countered, at a later date, with unexpected circumstances? He brought up the deficit he inherited when he tookoffice, but he did not mention what the state of that deficit is now, or how it has nearly tripled as he bailed out the institutions which are responsible for the decline in our economy. He brought up how many jobs were being lost at the time of his entrance, but the regaining of those jobs is not discussed. Is it a good idea to take him on his word on this issue as well?
I am all for health care reform. That is, I am all for a re-evaluation for the state of health care in this country and something being done to make it superior to what it is. That is not exculsive to soley health insurance, but to the providers of health care, those that actually set the prices and deliver the treatment. Perhaps that should be looked to as a starting point? Insurance companies set prices that involve insurance coverage, but those prices are subject to what the medical field dictates. Is that concept not important? I am all for a national health insurance medium which will help control health insurane costs and bolster coverage, but I also see it as equally, if not more important, that health care providers operate under the same ideals. What good is health insurance, at any price, if the actual health care is unequal or unbalanced?
And I am all for the doling out of benefits to those who have supported this country, rather than those who use this country solely for their own gain. The channels of immigration are instilled so that the people of this country, the people who pay their hard-earned dollars, are not taken advantage of. Supporting any act which will allow illegal immigrants more rights and more benefits than those who break their backs for this country is immoral and unethical. To stand and support such acts should be synonmous with stabbing American citizens in the back.
And I applaud Joe Wilson. Whether or not the venue for his outburst was appropriate, he spoke truth and he is not backing down from it. He, unlike countless other politicians, is not considering his own gain in the issue, but only the concerns of those citizens which make him who he is. As inappropriate as yelling out in an Address may be, it is less innappropriate than that the Address was even held in the first place. Such an address was solely for the purpose of personal subjectivity and back-clapping.Without allowing for any sort of feedback from American citizens or their Representatives on the same level the address was given, it is both censorship or dictatorship. If Barry has no doubts that his ideas are for the best of this country, he should not have hesitated to give an open floor. Instead, he gave only what amounts to promises which cannot be verified and cannot be realized in his own words.
Here’s an interesting concept: make the Presidnt, and all other politicians, responsible for what they say. If some promise turns out to be false, there is no waiting period, there is no next ballet – they simply pack their bags and hit the door. Make these people truly accountable for what they promise. There is call for action against Wilson for his outburst; but shouldn’t there be calls for action for the countless fallen promises given to secure our votes?
Too many question marks. I suppose that happens when no question is ever fully answered.
