<<< I agree that all these reforms all needed with tort reform added. Palin brought rationed care to the forefront. It was necessary to bring that consideration forward. Change the system; don’t dump it. I think several concessions are being made by the Administration. Thank God the bill didn’t pass as quickly as it would have without the people making a stand. Say what you will about townhalls; it made our government stop in its tracks and consider. Health care legislation is a big issue that needs debated, not rammed through.

“Nice stab at Palin, but I don’t think she said that the words “Death Panels” were used in the bill. It is the resultant effect for those who ponder the situation.”

Correct. she did not specifically state that the words “death panels” were in the bill. Instead she implied that the bill would set up death panels and such for the sick and the elderly. And there is no need to “stab at Palin.” She provides enough ammo for her detractors every time she opens her mouth and misspeaks.

As for the rebuke of Wilson? Even Barney Frank wasn’t down with that.

Maybe not Barney Frank (who cares) but thank goodness the rest of his colleagues in the House were willing to do something.

“The office of House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer (D-Md.) posted the full text of the resolution condemning Rep. Joe Wilson (R-S.C.) to be presented before the House of Representatives.”

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/58841-full-text-joe-wilson-resolution-

“I don’t know how old you are, or if you have elderly parents, but rationed care is a frightening thought.”

I do have elderly parents so I would agree with you. Rationed health care is a scary thought. So is the practice if denying people coverage due to prior conditions. Or companies dropping people for no reason. Or companies refusing to pay for treatments that may save your life. This is what is happening currently. Which is definately a frightening thought for me.

Nice stab at Palin, but I don’t think she said that the words “Death Panels” were used in the bill. It is the resultant effect for those who ponder the situation.

As for the rebuke of Wilson? Even Barney Frank wasn’t down with that.

I don’t know how old you are, or if you have elderly parents, but rationed care is a frightening thought.

As for the language in the bill,

http://www.fairus.org/site/News2/1929724780?page=NewsArticle&id=21337&security=1601&news_iv_ctrl=1012#1

And then

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/09/10/rep-wilson-outburst-leads-senate-dems-close-loophole-health-reform/

SEC. 246. NO FEDERAL PAYMENT FOR UNDOCUMENTED ALIENS.
“Nothing in this subtitle shall allow Federal payments for affordability credits on behalf of individuals who are not lawfully present in the United States.”

<<< The problem as I understand it is that Republicans wanted an amendment to verify the lawful presence of citizens, and the amendment was voted down. (lip service conerning illegals) It is also my understanding that after this brouhaha, documentation of aliens is now on the table again.

That may be true but that doesn't change the fact that it was not in the bill so the President did not lie. As of the speech there was no plan for illegal immigrants to get coverage under the bill. To make an accusation that someone is lying you would need direct proof that he/she is. And in this case the fact that what he specifically accused him of lying about is not in the bill. Period. That is what we are discussing.

<<< I recently heard Ambassador Keyes address this point and I will not be able to replicate his words exactly, but here is my best. That question is an insult to the people's intelligence. Of course the words death panels do not appear. No one ever said they did. When you add millions more people to a health care system with the same number of doctors/nurses, heath care will be rationed. Who will get "rationed out?" The elderly (and other vulnerable people).
Who will be making the decisions in health care?

Actually former Gov. Palin did use the word "death panels" in her infamous Facebook post. Secondly the Republicans proposed a plan where all people would be required to get insurance from providers or they would be fined. That would seem to do the same thing and add millions to the system. So where was the outrage then. Either way the bill nowhere indicates that people will be rationed out or dropped due to age or how sick they are. With all due respect to Amb. Keyes his response is a insult to anyone that can read. But the point was did the President lie? And since the bill does not call for whatever was implied about rationing care or dropping the elderly, then he did not. So again Rep. Wilson was wrong.

As for the AARP, USA Today: AARP loses members over health care stance… http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2009-08-17-aarp-health-overhaul_N.htm

You may not agree with CJ GRisham's perspective, but I would hope you would not consider him a racist.

I do not. He is expressing his opinion, which leads to stimulating debate. I believe calling someone a racist is a serious charge so if you are going to make that comment there had better be a lot of evidence to support you claim.

"So again where did the President lie? Mr. Wilson broke the rules of decorum and etiquette for the House of Reps."

I still stand by that statement, where did the President lie? Rep. Wilson either didn't read the bill or was misinformed. Either way he was wrong in accusing the President of lying and saying that in the venue he did.

<<< Do you REALLY want to go there- the rules of decorum and etiquette were ALWAYS followed for Bush, weren't they?

Maybe or maybe not. However I am positive that no Democratic Congressperson or Senator ever yelled out any comments while President Bush was speaking. That was the point. You just don't do that. Whether or not you agree with Rep. Wilson's politics he did breach the etiquette rules of Congress and that should be noted.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/19784205/090915-LWS-Affidavit-Reducedpx?classic_ui=1

Hmmm, Sinclair and Smith are saying some not so nice things about Dr. Taitz.

-Phil,

It appears they need to purchase glasses or learn how to count.

The Larry Sinclair Affidavit is on scribd now. It’s 6 pages long.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/19784205/0909 … assic_ui=1

Edit: Cynthia Davis was there with Orly, Smith and Sinclair.

Please repost the link in its full form.

-Phil

http://www.scribd.com/doc/19784205/0909 … assic_ui=1

Edit: Cynthia Davis was there with Orly, Smith and Sinclair.

SEC. 246. NO FEDERAL PAYMENT FOR UNDOCUMENTED ALIENS.
“Nothing in this subtitle shall allow Federal payments for affordability credits on behalf of individuals who are not lawfully present in the United States.”

<<< The problem as I understand it is that Republicans wanted an amendment to verify the lawful presence of citizens, and the amendment was voted down. (lip service conerning illegals) It is also my understanding that after this brouhaha, documentation of aliens is now on the table again.

Sharon2, I respect your opinion and he has an interesting perspective. But I do have one question. Was there language in the bill for the so called death panels? According to people that read it from both sides, there was not and language in the bill regarding that.

<<< I recently heard Ambassador Keyes address this point and I will not be able to replicate his words exactly, but here is my best. That question is an insult to the people's intelligence. Of course the words death panels do not appear. No one ever said they did. When you add millions more people to a health care system with the same number of doctors/nurses, heath care will be rationed. Who will get "rationed out?" The elderly (and other vulnerable people).
Who will be making the decisions in health care?

As for the AARP, USA Today: AARP loses members over health care stance… http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2009-08-17-aarp-health-overhaul_N.htm

You may not agree with CJ GRisham's perspective, but I would hope you would not consider him a racist.

"So again where did the President lie? Mr. Wilson broke the rules of decorum and etiquette for the House of Reps."

<<< Do you REALLY want to go there- the rules of decorum and etiquette were ALWAYS followed for Bush, weren't they?

http://www.politijab.com/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=25&t=2368&start=175#p67712

A new “official quotation” regarding the crowd size at the DC Tea Party is going viral on the right wing blogs. It is invariably a repost of this paragraph or some minor variation:

“The truth will out. Despite mainstream media attempts to characterize turnout as in the thousands, a spokesman for the National Park Service, Dan Bana, is quoted as saying “It is a record…. We believe it is the largest event held in Washington, D.C., ever.”

http://comments.americanthinker.com/read/1/419875.html
http://www.oilforimmigration.org/facts/ … ment-17842

“Unfortunately for the Right, there is no such person as “Dan Bana” working as a spokesman for the NPS. There is however a “David Barna” who does, and he has said exactly those words:

David Barna, a Park Service spokesman, said the agency did not conduct its own count. Instead, it will use a Washington Post account that said 1.8 million people gathered on the US Capitol grounds, National Mall, and parade route.

“It is a record,” Barna said. “We believe it is the largest event held in Washington, D.C., ever.”

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/artic … dc_record/

The problem, though, is that Barna was not speaking in September of 2009 about the Tea Party. He was speaking in January of 2009 about the Obama Inauguration.

So not only are the Tea Partiers fraudulently stealing old photographs to pump up their otherwise flaccid performance Saturday, they are also fraudulently stealing old quotations.”

Old news, my dear opposition commenter. I’ve already changed this posting to reflect what another commenter had already brought to this blog’s attention.

-Phil

September 15, 2009 at 8:37 am
Sharon 2 says:
September 14, 2009 at 10:32 pm
Black Lion,

This is another excerpt from A Soldier’s Perspective (CJ Grisham). I think it is a fair point. I have never seen CJ discuss the “birther” issue, but he certainly is in favor of tea parties to protest against our government. He is a member of our military.

***

The MSM was focused on the 4-day old fake controversy surrounding Joe Wilson when he shouted that Obama had told a “lie.” Funny that this is a controversy since the President had just called many of those in the room and a majority of Americans that they were liars.

“Some of people’s concerns have grown out of bogus claims spread by those whose only agenda is to kill reform at any cost. The best example is the claim, made not just by radio and cable talk show hosts, but prominent politicians, that we plan to set up panels of bureaucrats with the power to kill off senior citizens. Such a charge would be laughable if it weren’t so cynical and irresponsible. It is a lie, plain and simple.”

Not a misunderstanding. Not an inaccurate interpretation. He called a lot of people liars right there. Right after he said that, he went to basically call those who read the bill and saw no provision preventing illegal immigrants from seeking health care under this liars as well. After being called liars twice, once specifically and once implicitly, Joe Wilson fired back and said “You lie!” And THAT is the controversy, not that the President used that EXACT same chamber where Pelosi wants to censure Wilson to call the American people and many in that rooms liars!
___________________________________________________________________
Sharon2,

I just wanted to follow up regarding the article you submitted. The individual that is defending Joe Wilson by saying he was just responding to the “President’s lies” may want to check his facts again. I know I responded earlier regarding this issue but I wanted to provide some actual sources for you to read for yourself.

For instance in regards to illegal aliens being allowed to have coverage, on page 143 of the bill it says the following…

SEC. 246. NO FEDERAL PAYMENT FOR UNDOCUMENTED ALIENS.
“Nothing in this subtitle shall allow Federal payments for affordability credits on behalf of individuals who are not lawfully present in the United States.”

http://docs.house.gov/edlabor/AAHCA-BillText-071409.pdf

That pretty much states that people here illegally are not going to get covered. So where did the President lie?

And regarding the death panels for senior citizens, the bill actually says the following…

“The section that some claim is for death panels is “Section 1233 of H.R. 3200, which is titled “Advance Care Planning Consultation.” Factcheck explained a few weeks ago, that it “would require Medicare to pay for some end-of-life planning counseling sessions with a health care practitioner.” What this section actually does in the following “it modifies Section 1861(s)2 of the Social Security Act, defining what services Medicare will pay for. So if a patient receives a counseling session from a doctor or health care practitioner, he or she doesn’t have to pay for it – Medicare will. As we pointed out in our earlier story, Medicare will also pay for prosthetic limbs, but that doesn’t mean that every recipient gets those, too.”

http://www.factcheck.org/2009/08/palin-vs-obama-death-panels/

Or the following….

“We have read all 1,000-plus pages of the Democratic bill and examined versions in various committees. There is no panel in any version of the health care bills in Congress that judges a person’s “level of productivity in society” to determine whether they are “worthy” of health care.”

“The truth is that the health bill allows Medicare, for the first time, to pay for doctors’ appointments for patients to discuss living wills and other end-of-life issues with their physicians. These types of appointments are completely optional, and AARP supports the measure.”

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2009/aug/10/sarah-palin/sarah-palin-barack-obama-death-panel/

So again where did the President lie? Mr. Wilson broke the rules of decorum and etiquette for the House of Reps. Whether we agree with him or not. The House has every right to look to censure him if it is in their rules, which it is.

“So supporters of Saturday’s “tea party” protests against President Barack Obama were quick to highlight their big turnout. To bolster countless claims on blogs and Facebook, many posted a photograph that showed a gargantuan crowd sprawling from Capitol Hill down the National Mall to the Washington Monument.

It appears that the photo was actually taken in 1997 at a rally for Promise Keepers, a group for Christian men. According to the group’s Web site, nearly 1 million people attended the event. Photos of the Oct. 4, 1997, event that were posted on various Web sites in 2003, 2008 and earlier this year show either the same picture or a similar photo that has identical tents and what appear to be TV screens in the same locations.”

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2009/sep/14/tea-party-photo-shows-large-crowd-different-event/

The number may have been closer to 70,000…

http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2009/09/size-matters-so-do-lies.html

Not sure what this all means. But if the number was inflated what was the point of doing that begs the question.