When you login first time using a Social Login button, we collect your account public profile information shared by Social Login provider, based on your privacy settings. We also get your email address to automatically create an account for you in our website. Once your account is created, you'll be logged-in to this account.
DisagreeAgree
Connect with
I allow to create an account
When you login first time using a Social Login button, we collect your account public profile information shared by Social Login provider, based on your privacy settings. We also get your email address to automatically create an account for you in our website. Once your account is created, you'll be logged-in to this account.
@openid.aol.com/runnswim: So it’s ok to shout BOOOOO and NOOOOO in the House Chamber and you can call Bush a LIAR or HITLER or anything else as long as it’s not in the House chamber?
Really Larry… You really do bend over backwards to excuse the inexcusable.
You’ve got some nerve pointing a finger at our side!
Mike
14 years ago
Larry, you are just one of a long list of hate Bush Democrats who now whine about this? Get a life dude!!
So it’s ok to shout BOOOOO and NOOOOO in the House Chamber and you can call Bush a LIAR or HITLER or anything else as long as it’s not in the House chamber?
Absolutely not. All of that s*&^ is reprehensible and people who talk that way do the country a great disservice. There is, however, a difference between shouting “boo” and “noo” and shouting out “liar.” You can boo me all you want, and you can disagree with me all you want, but I won’t stand for being called a liar. I’m sure that you feel the same way.
And Obama was not being truthful when he denied that illegals wouldn’t be covered. Wilson reacted! At least he has some passion, and doesn’t just pass the buck, and then show up and read a teleprompter.
Real American Patriot
14 years ago
Actually, Mike after last nights outburst YOUR the one that has some nerve pointing fingers.
On top of that You actually called to Thank him for his lack of judgement?? Did you really? That makes one wonder about YOUR judgement.
Larry, we’re still waiting for Harry Reid to apologize to President Bush for calling him a “liar.” And I’d like an apology for him calling me an “evilmonger.”
Answer Sara’s point: Is it ok for Obummy to call Sarah Palin a LIAR on the House floor???
@Real American Patriot: With people like you opposing my viewpoint it only makes me all the more certain that I am right.
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 by prominent politicians, that we plan to set up panels of bureaucrats with the power to kill off senior citizens. Now, such a charge would be laughable if it weren’t so cynical and irresponsible. It is a lie, plain and simple. (Applause.)
There are also those who claim that our reform efforts would insure illegal immigrants. This, too, is false. The reforms — the reforms I’m proposing would not apply to those who are here illegally.
AUDIENCE MEMBER: You lie! (Boos.)
Sounds to me like Wilson was offering a rebuttal to Obama throwing the *lie* word…
@sarainitaly: What our Dem friends are trying to suggest is that we should have to sit here and take it when they scream and yell and carry on. We have no right to respond.
No oppostion to Obama is permitted. We’re all racists and liars!
that’s teabagging, swastika wearing, evil mongering dangerous violent mob spreading lies, innuendo and rumor racist! please, get the title right. hahaha
That’s what my last post was about… what short memories they all have.
Apparently Obama is too delicate to get the same treatment that Bush endured… wouldn’t that make them racist, by assuming Obama is not eligible for the same treatment as any other president?
Larry, we’re still waiting for Harry Reid to apologize to President Bush for calling him a “liar.” And I’d like an apology for him calling me an “evilmonger.”
Mike, you are preaching to the choir. I already agreed with you that I don’t like any of that bulls—, from either side of the aisle.
To my knowledge, in something like close to 20,000 internet debate postings, dating to 1995, I’ve never called anyone I’ve ever been arguing with a “liar,” and, despite many disagreements with our former President on a number of issues, I never called him a “liar” either (I have accused him of misleading the American public on certain issues, but, if you like, I can find issues where Obama has misled the public, also, but misleading the public is an ubiquitous strategy for winning elections and getting laws passed. Misleading the public requires only being literally truthful, but counting on the ignorance of the public and their incapability of connecting dots. Lying means just what it says — deliberately stating a falsehood, which one knows to be false).
Virtually all politicians mislead, at times, in the furtherance of their objectives. But there should be no tolerance for deliberate lies, in our system, nor for the lying liars who tell them.
And today AP fact checked him….is Obama going to call himself out?
SoCal Chris
14 years ago
Someone filling in for Medved just made the point that, uh, didn’t Obama, only SECONDS before Joe Wilson called him a liar in fact accuse radio/cable talk show hosts AND Sarah Palin of communicating lies?? Helloooo? But, Joe has to apologize. Right.
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.
There are also those who claim that our reform effort will insure illegal immigrants. This, too, is false – the reforms I’m proposing would not apply to those who are here illegally. And one more misunderstanding I want to clear up – under our plan, no federal dollars will be used to fund abortions, and federal conscience laws will remain in place.
Where is it in any of the bills that any federal funding in those bills will go for “illegals?” Just for my own information? That’s what the “lie” comment was about. Show me where Obama was “lying.”
Despite statements to the contrary, the Obama administration could force the American people to pay for the healthcare of millions of illegal immigrants in the U.S.
The Democrats’ bill in the House, H.R. 3200, contains gaping loopholes that will allow illegal immigrants to receive taxpayer-funded benefits. And these loopholes are no accident.
The legislation contains no verification mechanism to ensure that illegal immigrants do not apply for benefits. Republicans offered an amendment to close this loophole — it would have required verification using the existing methods that are already in place to verify eligibility for other federal benefits programs. But, when they were asked to put the language of the bill where their words were, in a party-line vote, House Democrats rejected the amendment to require verification and close this loophole.
The bill also leaves open the possibility that if one citizen family member is eligible for benefits, then the entire family — including illegal immigrants — is also eligible for the benefits.
From Legal Insurrection – The House Bill Does Cover Illegals
Technically, Obama was correct that his plan does not cover illegal aliens because Obama has no plan that has been released, only concepts. So if Obama says his plan doesn’t cover illegals, then by definition it does not cover illegals — at least until we see the language in his plan. Similarly, the Senate HELP Committee bill defines an “eligible individual” in numerous places throughout the bill to include only citizens and legal residents (including for the public option, at page 111 of the bill).
So using the two measures, the non-existent Obama bill and the draft Senate HELP Committee bill which was not a full Senate proposal, Obama was correct.
But if the standard is the full House Bill, HR3200, then it appears that Obama was incorrect. There is nothing in HR3200 that excludes illegal aliens from the various coverage provisions (with a few limited exceptions). The Congressional Research Service agrees with this assessment (full report embedded below). For example, with regard to health care exchanges, the CRS found:
H.R. 3200 does not contain any restrictions on noncitzens—whether legally or illegally present, or in the United States temporarily or permanently—participating in the Exchange.
Since the Obama administration wanted a full House vote passing HR3200 prior to the August recess, Obama was okay with a bill that included illegal aliens.
Mike, great post. I, for one, was glad to hear some honesty and passion from Congressman Wilson. Our current president, and all former Presidents, should be given respect because of the office they represent.
However, when our president lies about illegal immigration, he needs to be called on it. It was also interesting the our president just stopped in his speech. Was he expecting someone to arrest the man who shouted out? He cannot be interrupted during his prepared speeches because to speak spontaneously would only show him to be the liar and imposter he is.
Keep up the good work!
Craig
14 years ago
I guess Larry W has no response to the gaping loopholes in the bill that sarainitaly posted…
SoCal Chris
14 years ago
By the way, I meant to mention, Sean Hannity announced that Joe Wilson would be on his radio show at the top of the next hour–like a couple minutes from now.
In its subsection on health insurance subsidies (known as “affordability credits”), HR 3200 does state, “Nothing in this subtitle shall allow Federal payments for affordability credits on behalf of individuals who are not lawfully present in the United States.” That would seem to solve the problem, but it’s more rhetoric than reality.The bill contains no verification requirement or enforcement process for citizenship or legal residency, as exists for other federal benefit programs. The only verification required for the subsidies pertains to family income. Beyond that, as the CRS reportnotes, everything is left in the hands of the Health Choices Commissioner.
House Democrats defeated all attempts in committee to add an enforcement mechanism that would require proof of citizenship or legal residency for those getting subsidies.
And if you notice, Obama dropped 17 Million people from his 47M uninsured claim. He called them 30 M last night. SO, initially, he was including the illegal figure in with the uninsured total – it would make sense to think he was intending to thus insure them. He has since dropped them from the discussion.
however, considering they are a large chunk of the uninsured in America, what is his plan to handle those millions of people?
they will still be showing up at emergency rooms for care?
And as Aye points out, I provided the link to the Congressional Research Service Report in my post as Aye did in his comment. You can read it for yourself.
Like Abortion and death panels, a pathway for illegals to receive care under this bill IS IN THE LEGISLATION.
Patvann
14 years ago
Another thing these Progressive Fascists seem to forget, is that the man now slated to be Regulation Caesar, will simply included/exclude anything he wants into any passed bill, and if anyone thinks that he WON’T let illegals be covered, I’ve got a bridge for sale.
-The insiders in the Admin have admitted that it is their intention to have vague bills passed, then rework the bills to their satisfaction during the regulation-writing part that comes after.
Jarrett also had a hand in recruiting Obama friend Cass Sunstein, a former colleague of the president’s at the University of Chicago Law School, and now administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs within the Office of Management and Budget. Known inside the White House as the “Regulation Czar,” Sunstein is tasked with developing regulations around the policies for environmental, healthcare, and safety issues.
According to administration sources, Sunstein’s office is looking for ways to impose through the regulatory process those Obama White House health care, environmental, and labor policies that do not survive the legislative process.
“The goal from this White House is to have as much nonspecific language passed by Congress in policy areas like health care and the environment and then use Sunstein’s office to put in place the regulatory language called for by Congress that gets us to where we want to be. It may very well be the most important job in this administration, given the lack of success we may have on Capitol Hill,” says a White House source.
“Jarrett also had a hand in recruiting Obama friend Cass Sunstein, a former colleague of the president’s at the University of Chicago Law School, and now administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs within the Office of Management and Budget. Known inside the White House as the “Regulation Czar,” Sunstein is tasked with developing regulations around the policies for environmental, healthcare, and safety issues.
According to administration sources, Sunstein’s office is looking for ways to impose through the regulatory process those Obama White House health care, environmental, and labor policies that do not survive the legislative process.
“The goal from this White House is to have as much nonspecific language passed by Congress in policy areas like health care and the environment and then use Sunstein’s office to put in place the regulatory language called for by Congress that gets us to where we want to be. It may very well be the most important job in this administration, given the lack of success we may have on Capitol Hill,” says a White House source.
I trust Bama half as far as I could throw him, as long as I’m not on anything tall…
If I took all the “objectivity” claimed by the Left, and put it in a gnat’s ass, it would look like a BB in a box car. Willfully blind morons, the lot of them.
I read the report. It makes it perfectly clear that “illegals” are not covered.
(Sorry for the crummy formatting, result of hard carriage return line breaks from a document which was PDF and not HTML) –>
In 2013, under H.R. 3200, some individuals would be eligible for premium credits (i.e., subsidies
based on income) toward their required purchase of health insurance. To be eligible for the
premium credits under H.R. 3200, individuals must be lawfully present in a state in the United
States, excluding most nonimmigrants (i.e., those in the United States for a specific purpose and a
specific period of time). The exceptions for nonimmigrants who could obtain premium credits
under H.R. 3200 would be trafficking victims, crime victims, fiancées of U.S. citizens, and those
who have had applications for legal permanent residence (LPR) status pending for three years. It
is expected that almost all aliens in these excepted nonimmigrant categories will become LPRs
(i.e., immigrants) and remain in the United States permanently. Furthermore, unauthorized aliens
would be barred from receiving the premium credit.
H.R. 3200 as reported from the House Energy and Commerce Committee (E&C) would extend
Medicaid eligibility up to 133 1/3% of poverty for populations that previously were not covered
(e.g., childless adults and many parents). This extension of benefits could mean an increase in the
number of noncitizens who already meet the immigration status requirements for Medicaid
eligibility who would be eligible for Medicaid. Also, H.R. 3200 as reported by E & C would
make eligible for full Medicaid noncitizens who lawfully reside in the United States in
accordance with the Compacts of Free Association between the Government of the United States
and the Governments of the Federated States of Micronesia, the Republic of the Marshall Islands,
and the Republic of Palau, and are otherwise eligible for such assistance. This report will be
updated.
You’re only beef is that the enforcement provisions are not sufficiently strong, in your opinion. And you feel that this fully justifies calling the President of the United States a liar, to his face, on the floor of the House of Representatives, in the middle of his address to a joint session of Congress.
You turn the definition of “to lie” on its head. It’s the same sort of hyperbole which claims that the Obama administration is “Marxist.” It’s flagrant exaggeration and distortion.
As I said on another thread, the way the esteem with which history treats leaders is proportional to the strength and vitriol of the opposition which they were forced to overcome. I am sticking with the predictions in the other thread that Obama will ultimately succeed with this, the American public will come to be very happy with the changes to be made, and the historical impact of the achievement will be magnified by the aggressiveness of the current opposition.
Just as Bush’s place in history will be enhanced by the possibility of a good outcome in Iraq, in the face of his own critics.
Right now, I’m predicting that history will end up judging Obama in a favorable light, because health care reform will succeed and the economy will recover and Obama will put the nation on a path to reducing debt:GDP.
– Larry Weisenthal/Huntington Beach, CA
Brittancus
14 years ago
The only way President Obama has any possibility of passing health care reform, is a commitment to remove illegal immigrants from gaining entrance to any public option? In the health care bill they must–PROVE–to the majority of the American People that–NO ILLEGAL FOREIGN NATIONAL–will be able to bleed the government extension in the package. An amendment to the 1000 page reform bill, must guarantee–IN THE WORDING– that a very thorough background identity check is performed on any applicant who applies? E-Verify would be a progressive identifier, with an initial examination of Social Security number in conjunction with Homeland Security Databases.
To complete the operation of E-Verification this PC application, must branch out across the country as a permanent tool in business and industry for every worker newly hired or long time employee. Thousands or even millions of illegal workers could be hiding in plain site in the workplace, as they have never been checked as a citizen or legal residency compliance? It also seems that the auditing of 1-9 forms around the country, that the federal authorities forget to mention that irregularities by employers only allows them to dismiss the applicant? The fact is that ICE raids have trailed off, so that any illegal workers–ARE NOT DEPORTED–they can move onto yet another workplace. Anybody who is suspected of being in this sovereign nation illegally should be detained and held for ICE inspection, not released into the public mainstream?
We all know that Fraudulent ID is so prevalent, that all security systems have been compromised, with even al-Qaeda murderers who brought down three passenger jets. On 9/11 these terrorists had in their possession numerous authentic drivers’ licenses and other picture ID. E-Verify is not perfect and can be cheated, but as it’s modified, collecting more tools to compliment the enforcement program it success rate will become exemplary. Those hired workers who then find themselves under suspicion, can have errors resolved through any Social Security agency. That special interest groups have remained silent about this matter, doesn’t need any explanation? most Americans want enforcement at our borders, the workplace, so contact your reluctant politician at 202-224-3121 MORE HONEST INFORMATION AT NUMBERSUSA & JUDICIAL WATCH. REMEMBER NO MORE BLANKET AMNESTIES!
Democrats don’t apologize, they blame Republicans.
– Larry W, if you think that President Obama will drive wounded and sick illegals into the street, denying them healthcare, then there is nothing that can be done for you.
Wilson was right. He was just impolite.
Mr. Gray
14 years ago
If wounded and sick illegals were driven into the streets and denied health care, would that look like an American Victory or an embarassing human rights nightmare? I dont want Illegal immagrants Leeching off a system to which they do not contribute as much as you do, but it raises a good question here, what is a good solution to this problem? I don’t think we want people literally bleeding out in our streets, a few blocks from our homes. Are there already some proposed solutions out there? If they can just go to the Emergency room and get care anyway, then it is a lose-lose situation for Americans.
Mr. Gray, please tell me you are joking and that I didn’t get it.
It’s not a serious discussion, the President is lying.
He liiieed, dude.
Tom N
14 years ago
He called Sarah A liar and worse from the Preisdents Podium. I thought we were a national of people where Kings were not allowed and the president was to respect all our citizens.
After a lot of back and forth, Tapper closes with this:
Could the House bill expand emergency Medicaid laws as they already exist, perhaps – perhaps — expanding coverage for illegal immigrants in keeping with current law?
As long as I have your attention, I should point out that all of us already pay the costs of health care for illegal immigrants — through emergency room visits, Emergency Medicaid, hidden fees by hospitals, workplace safety incidents, and the like. This idea that we all aren’t paying for this one way or another is non-reality-based.
Sounds to me that either through expanded emergency care, or illegals receiving care the same way they currently are, they would in fact, be covered – one way or another.
Until DC comes up with a way to provide health care to those residing in the US illegally, they will be covered, whether it is worded in the bill or not.
Also, I read somewhere that excluding them might be against the constitution or something like that?
@Mike: I’ve stated elsewhere that’s it’s great that people are going through this with fine tooth combs and looking for loopholes and things which can be strengthened, omitted, or modified. For example, Palin raised the Death Panel issue, so now oncologists will simply continue getting rich pushing in chemotherapy right until the end (by far the most common situation for end of life counselling), as opposed to sitting down with the patient and explaining why the time may have come to just try to enjoy whatever time may be remaining. No more death panels.
So let’s also insert a provision, if we must, to imprison any person who provides medical care to an “illegal” at taxpayer expense. Whatever. But that still doesn’t make Obama a “liar,” regarding the health care for illegals issue. For goodness sake, the law, as proposed, states no participation for illegals. If some creative government bureaucrat wants to take the chance of being outed by Rush Limbaugh and give the GOP a campaign issue, and maybe get prosecuted by a future GOP Attorney General for breaking the law, then that’s kind of a small risk, in my opinion, but if everyone gets all fired up about it (as in Palin’s death panels), then it will be changed, in order to get the Blue Dogs to their comfort level.
I’ve got my own solution to the health care for illegals problem. Let’s start fining every single employer who hires an illegal (including private GOP homeowners, right here in Orange County, CA, who hire gardners, maids, handymen, and child care workers) $500 per day for every day that an “illegal” was employed and put all the profits into a fund to pay Medicaid levels of health care to the uninsured. This will solve the “illegal” health care problem and stop illegal immigration in its tracks, as there will be no more jobs for them.
Of course, large sectors of the economy would collapse (e.g. farming) and consumer costs for a large variety of things would go up, but unemployment just might go down.
– Larry Weisenthal/Huntington Beach, CA
Inspectorudy
14 years ago
I view what Wilson did as the only level playing field response he will ever have. Once the speech was over and the MSM quoted all of their friends in the Obama admin. Wilson would NEVER have the voice he had last night! Apology not with standing, he did the right thing for the American people. That was our voice at the most important townhall meeting we will ever have. I sent Mr. Wilson $100 and hope that some of you will do the same.
You’re only beef is that the enforcement provisions are not sufficiently strong, in your opinion.
Don’t go trying to put words in my mouth.
I didn’t say that the enforcement provisions are not strong enough.
I said that there are no enforcement provisions.
There is NO requirement in the law for patients to present any sort of ID when they want care.
Furthermore:
House Democrats defeated all attempts in committee to add an enforcement mechanism that would require proof of citizenship or legal residency for those getting subsidies.
So, if the Dims want illegal aliens to be excluded, as they would want us to believe, then why work to prevent the enforcement mechanisms from being added to the bill?
Finally, from your own home state of CA, we have learned from experience that the Courts do not look kindly upon excluding certain groups of individuals from eligibility for benefits.
The citizens of CA voted at the polls to prevent social services from being extended to illegals. That outcome was challenged and two different Courts ruled that if the State of CA offers something to a citizen (i.e. state aid, welfare, etc) then those same programs MUST be extended to illegals as well.
The Supreme Court refused to take the case on appeal so that decision is now precedent for the nation.
Surely Dear Leader, the “Constitutional Lecturer” knows that.
So, basically, this is what we have:
1) There is no provision in HR3200 to force patients to prove their citizenship when they request medical care. BO knows that.
2) House Dims worked to prevent enforcement mechanisms from being added to the legislation. BO knows that.
3) Case law from CA has set the precedent that programs offered to citizens must be extended to everyone, including non-citizens and illegal aliens. BO, the “Lecturer” certainly knows that as well.
So, let’s take the three things above, and weigh them against the definitions of the word “Lie”:
lie2 (lī) pronunciation n.
1. A false statement deliberately presented as being true; a falsehood.
2. Something meant to deceive or give a wrong impression.
Having done that, the only conclusion one can reach is that Obie LIED to the Congress and to the American People last night.
You turn the definition of “to lie” on its head.
Actually, that’s exactly what you tried to do with your parsing of the meaning of the words “lie” vs. “mislead” on the other thread.
Projection much?
It’s the same sort of hyperbole which claims that the Obama administration is “Marxist.” It’s flagrant exaggeration and distortion.
Easily supportable and immensely provable does hyperbole, exaggeration, or distortion make.
Inspectorudy
14 years ago
Larry, I don’t know you but I know about you. My Mom died of cancer after fighting it for a long time enduring painful treatments and debilitating nausea. Not once did she want to give up hope and act reasonably. I hope you never find yourself in her situation and in fact if you did yourself in now you could save us all a lot of money. As for as the dastardly oncologist, they don’t need to extend there patients treatment because there is an endless supply. Don’t ever say that you will act differently until you are on the stage!
@rudy: I know a bit about this, being an oncologist myself and having given my share of end of life counseling.
There comes a time when it is obvious that chemotherapy will accomplish nothing, save for making the patient more miserable. At that point, the oncologist can (#1) spend an hour talking to the patient and explaining all of the various options, which are many or (#2) simply write an order for the form of infusion chemotherapy which will make him/her the most money (and an excellent study by the Harvard School of Public Health showed a strong correlation between profit to the oncologist and choice of chemotherapy in breast, lung, ovarian, and colon cancers (the only diseases studied)). #2 is simple and profitable. #1 is time consuming, loses money for the doctor that he/she might have made under option #1 and is a service which, thanks to Palin, will have to continue to be given away for free, for those doctors who have the personal integrity to do it.
@Aye: The House bill is simply a bill. It’s not the Senate bill. It’s not what is going to be signed after reconciliation. Obama made a very clear statement as to what he wants in the bill he’s going to sign. He wasn’t making a defense of the House bill. In fact, he said he wanted certain things in the final bill which were not in the House bill. He’s on record as saying that the bill he wants to sign should not include benefits for “illegals.” It’s perfectly appropriate for the public, if it wishes, to raise the heat level regarding enforcement provisions. But none of this makes the President a “liar,” for goodness sake.
NO, the California case didn’t become “precedent for the nation.” It is merely a precedent that State courts should be left to decide these issues for their own states, not that the decision of California courts should be binding on Texas! I am frankly surprised that you don’t understand this. Texas courts might reach a different decision, regarding a similar case, tried in their courts, and the Supreme Court of the US would presumably defer to the Texas court, as well, regarding the way that the Texas constitution (different from the California constitution) addresses the issue. And neither court’s decision would have any impact whatsoever with regard to a FEDERAL law! You really didn’t understand this?
– Larry Weisenthal/Huntington Beach, CA
Mike
14 years ago
News flash, it’s the illegals in our healthcare system now that cause all of us to pay more for helathcare!! This idea that obamacare won’t include illegals is absurd and a lie. You can dress it up all you want but why would it not happen given it already does. In addition, the idea that fixing fraud and abuse in our healthcare system will pay for his plan is also absurd. There is no way you can add 40 million people to free healtcare without increased cost. Also, do you really believe there are enough doctors and nurses to cover this care. I’m sorry but the obama Kool aid is not working. No wonder the boy is having trouble selling this snake oil!!
Scrapiron
14 years ago
Republicans proposed amendment’s’ that would strickly prohibit providing medical care for illegals, aka criminal border jumpers, and every amendment was killed by ‘democrats’. I should have kept the link but today someone’s research showed at least 5 instances that would allow the ‘medical panels, aka death panels to provide medical care to criminal border jumpers. Democrats were jumping through each others butts today trying to white/black out every thing in the multiple bills that President O’Dumbo lied about last night. I pity anyone under 50 if O’Dumbo and his communist clowns get their way. Me, at 68 I’d rather die fighting for my country than by the hand of a death panel. Democrats would sell their parents, grandparents and probably their children for a silver dollar and a chance to lick O’Dumbo’s colon.
@openid.aol.com/runnswim: Even worse than the non specific language which leaves loopholes big enough to drive a Mexican truck through is the issue of regulatory implementation. The Obama folks are already quoted suggesting that that’s where they expect to do some of what Congress might otherwise forbid if it had a direct vote.
THAT is why the Dems have been voting against the specific provisions we’ve discussed previously.
They know they can count on the unaccountable panels (like the death panel) to fix it.
Have you seen the organizational chart from the House Bill Larry?
Plenty of room in there for all kinds of mischief making.
I don’t care what a conference between the Senate and the House come up with. Unless we have solid assurances on these and many more issues NOW I don’t trust the Democrats to take care of it in conference! Why should they?
It doesn’t matter what they say about illegal aliens. Their strategy is to get health care through and on the wings of that win, they will go for immigration “reform”, giving amnesty to all the illegals here now. Bingo. Problem solved before the next election and millions of new Dim voters to sweep them back into office. The only saving grace I can see is that they must lose the majority next year so Fraudo can be contained. I will do the happy dance when Nancy has to step down as Speaker and that creep Reid goes bye-bye.
NO, the California case didn’t become “precedent for the nation.” It is merely a precedent that State courts should be left to decide these issues for their own states, not that the decision of California courts should be binding on Texas! I am frankly surprised that you don’t understand this. Texas courts might reach a different decision, regarding a similar case, tried in their courts, and the Supreme Court of the US would presumably defer to the Texas court, as well, regarding the way that the Texas constitution (different from the California constitution) addresses the issue. And neither court’s decision would have any impact whatsoever with regard to a FEDERAL law! You really didn’t understand this?
Hmmmmm….
Seems that someone is confused about the Prop 187 case, how it was decided, and the reasoning of the Court on this case.
1) there were supposedly not enough illegal aliens students in Texas public schools to be a financial burden to Texas, and
2) Congress was contemplating an amnesty for illegal aliens in the U.S. (that occurred in 1986), and illegal alien students who were to be made legal would not be educated. Neither of those conditions existed in 1994.
See that?
It was a CA law litigated into the federal court system ruled on by a federal court judge based somewhat on a Texas case.
Further background reveals that the judge ruled that Prop 187 was unconstitutional. That would be the US Constitution that she was referring to when considering 187.
Judge Pfaelzer’s ruling is now a precedent just as Plyler v. Doe was utilized as precedent.
Expanding her summary judgment ruling of November 20, 1995, U.S. District Judge Mariana Pfaelzer issued a final judgment, on March 13 in the challenge to the anti-immigrant Proposition 187, confirming the federal government’s exclusive authority over immigration and declaring the measure unconstitutional.
A federal judge in Los Angeles ruled Friday that Proposition 187, the divisive 1994 ballot initiative targeting illegal immigrants, violates both the Constitution and last year’s sweeping congressional overhaul of welfare law.
You’re welcome.
JohnMcClane
14 years ago
For those on EPA Mike’s side,
go here:
joewilsonforcongress.com
Larry W: So let’s also insert a provision, if we must, to imprison any person who provides medical care to an “illegal” at taxpayer expense.
Not likely… employers can’t ask for proof of citizenship unless they want a serious lawsuit on their hands. Lenders can’t ask for proof. Landlords. Even a law enforcement officer can’t ask for proof of citizenship. Hang, we don’t even check that at voting polls. Not unless you want the ACLU on your back big time.
Just where would you assume medical personnel will be able to tread on what is considered profiling and discrimination, Larry?
It comes down to this. Obama’s parsing words to cover his butt. Well, to put it less indelicately, he’s lying thru his teeth. The system most certainly will cover illegals because if they are employed with group insurance, they aren’t asking for proof of citizenship either. Therefore, they are covered because no one is permitted to profile and discriminate… a pesky detail in the legislation that needs no explanation because it’s common fact.
But I guess the Big Zero figures if it’s not spelled out in simple language, it just doesn’t exist for his purposes.
But about this illegal alien and/or uninsured bit…. Larry and I were debating about the value of malpractice law reform on another thread. The fact is, it brings down provider costs… which is part of the necessity of curbing increasing health care costs. But it is not the only reform necessary.
According to a Kaiser fact sheet, government compensation for the uninsured (i.e. emergency room care that O’bummer says is breaking the bank) was projected to make up only 2% of the health care costs in 2008. This is even less than the 5% that malpractice constitutes in the costs scheme.
But as I mentioned to Larry, these things… while not making a major dent by themselves… tend to be cumulative when you start putting them all together. However it is unlikely that anyone present in this nation will be denied health care when needed. We don’t do it now, and we won’t do it in the future.
Kaiser also noted that were all the uninsured to get insurance, it add .08% to the share of the GDP going to health care – from 16.5% to 17.3%.
This is all so tedious and, frankly, small. It’s not only un-Christian, it’s bordering on inhuman. I guess that this is just a classic conservative versus liberal thing. The definition of a Puritan is someone who obsesses that someplace/somewhere there is someone who is actually having some fun.
It seems that the definition of a conservative might be someone who obsesses that someplace, somewhere there may be an undocumented worker, lured here by legions of Republicans with farms, restaurants, meat packing plants, construction companies, and homes who want cheap labor, who gets a 6 inch gash while operating a hedge clipper in a million dollar Orange County yard, and who is rewarded with free emergency room care.
You’re barking up the wrong tree, Larry. I have no problem with immigrants, support a work program to citizenship, nor feel they need to be cut out of health care. Yes, I do think they should contribute, but no… wouldn’t want to see anyone sans help. Most who are here illegally *are* working… and many paying taxes.
I am the granddaughter of immigrants, married an illegal alien… as did my sister, as did my nephew. My daughter in law is second generation Latina. I have a wide plethora of multi-cultural friends of all races, none of which I would ever ask their legal status, nor care. They all work, they contribute.
Frankly, I find your “tedious and frankly small” definition of conservative highly and personally offensive. And very typical of the class warfare and neatly divided little Americans in boxes that is common to your party. If you pride yourself on not being insulting, I’d say you blew it.
And yes… Obama is lying when he says they will not be covered. There is no way to demand proof of citizenship by medical professionals without facing discrimination lawsuits. All will be covered… those working and in a group plan, and those that apply via the proposed exchange. For you see, that insurance exchange will not be able to demand proof of citizenship either.
What you seem to be missing is that I don’t find this a problem… covering illegals that *are working* here in the US. As I said, and have known for some time.. the uninsured and illegals only constitute a very tiny percentage of the US health care costs. There’s bigger potatos to fry. Everyone gets care in the US… no one is turned away from county/public hospitals.
What I do find a problem is Obama lying about it to pander to a nation that is touchy about illegal immigrants. He is blatantly lying for political cover. If Obama were smart, he’d admit it does, and let the GOP appear heartless by raising a stink.
Just caught up on yesterday’s news — I watched the speech but did not notice that a Republican Congressman walked out of the speech before it ended…from Illinois.
To be honest — I would welcome a more robust Congressional Chamber — This is not a parlor and I would prefer some honest open dialogue/Q&A – between the President and Congressional members… instead of yet, another Barry Obama campaign speech…
@mata (#47): Firstly, I’m sorry. That WAS both “small” and insulting of me. It was mainly the tedious part of it. I made a couple of comments today, earlier, and I was determined — for once, to take the discussion to the bitter end, answering each and every critic. But I just got overwhelmed. I’d clicked “notify me of follow-up comments via e-mail.” In just the next 12 hours, I had 54 such “comments” for my counter-response. Each counter-response generates exponentially-growing counter-counter responses. At a certain point, I just gave up. Utterly overwhelmed. It’s the challenge of being a near-lone liberal on a conservative blog (I’m sure it’s the same way being a lone conservative on a liberal blog). At a certain point, defending one’s position (and honor) becomes an exercise in futility. I ended up pretty much blowing a full day’s work, to the disadvantage of those who count on me to show up for them. Anyway, I think that I was just venting more about my disgust at myself for getting my own priorities out of whack.
I’ll close here, but I still don’t accept the proposition that Obama was “lying” about the coverage of “illegal” issue. I don’t even accept the fact that he was “pandering.” He is in the middle of trying to do something of historic importance, against a barrage of withering criticism which makes my own little share of tribulation on Flopping Aces look like a single bone in a fillet-of-fish by comparison. He saw what was made out of that ridiculous “death panel” thing and he was doing his best to touch all bases and anticipate all the objections.
And, once again, as much as everyone on this board (and politicians like Boehner) want to claim that the President is defending the House bill, he clearly wasn’t. You can’t use the House bill to attack the President’s own final health care bill; you can only attack what the President says that he wants in his own health care bill, at the end of the day, which is for it not to cover “illegals,” as an identifiable cohort of beneficiaries. Of course, it can’t possibly be so surgically precise that some “illegals” do not get covered in some way. One could make the same criticism regarding the bill not paying for abortions with federal dollars. There is going to be a little bit of mixing. But the same thing could be said about Bush’s funding of stem cell research. It’s virtually impossible to assure that absolutely no federal dollars ever have gone into unapproved stem cell research at Universities who receive federal dollars for a variety of purposes. When Bush and Congress said that no federal dollars would support unapproved stem cell research, they weren’t lying to anyone; they were only saying that use of any federal dollars to support unapproved stem cell research was prohibited. They couldn’t guarantee that there would not be a mixing of federal dollars at some level, on some occasions.
Obama’s strategy at the beginning was a very good and wise one. He’s continuing to follow this strategy. He’s letting the House bill and the Senate bills all be “stalking horses” to attract both support and criticism. Only after all the commotion has played out and the dust has settled will he get down to the final details, during the House/Senate reconciliation process. What he did in his speech to the joint session of Congress was to outline the provisions which he wanted to see in the final bill he signed — among these would be a provision for no Federal dollars from this bill to support care of “illegals,” which I’m sure he’s doing for pragmatic reasons — meaning that he knows he has to take this position to get a bill passed, not that he’d want this provision, were it not required for passage.
But you just can’t go calling him a liar — much less to his face in the Chamber of the House of Representatives during a formal address to Congress and the nation — based on provisions of a House bill which is not the President’s own bill and which is certainly not going to be the final bill which the President will ultimately sign. Well, you actually can call him a liar — it was just done. But it was very bad manners and it was a sad chapter in the continued deterioration of once civil discourse over the important issues of the day.
I’m going to go on sabbatical again (meaning actually get back to my day job), but I’d like to offer a few, I think relevant, thoughts.
I look around the world, at the people I’ve known, and I see much more good than bad. I think that most people do many things out of self-interest; human evolution favored the survival of people who were good at that. But human evolution also favored the survival of people who treated other people with decent fairness and even generosity.
I am very touched by my experiences in my trips to Japan, which is a virtually areligious society. Most people have no religion at all and Buddhism, the dominant religion of those who are religious, is more of a philosophy than a religion, in the sense that you and I think of it.
What Buddhism does is to “channel” the basic human instinct for goodness into a more or less organized set of life’s practices. Buddhism neither believes nor disbelieves in a deity, but the concept of a deity is not a central feature. For Japanese who don’t consider themselves Buddhists, there is the over-arching concept of honor. And the equally-powerful concept of shame.
But I’ve been struck by the basic goodness and kindness of people I’ve met, where ever I’ve traveled. Hotel and restaurant workers, taxi drivers, customs agents, strangers on the street. From Turkey to Thailand to South Korea to Japan and to Europe. And even in the USA. Society works, all over the world, not because of religion and not because of government regulation, but because of the basic goodness of most people. Here in California, we live among the “illegals,” but these are overwhelmingly good people.
I try to give everyone the benefit of doubt, on a personal level, from my auto mechanic to my political opponents on Flopping Aces to my own political soul mates, and I’ve been constantly rewarded, in terms of personal happiness. I’m alert to treachery and danger; both obviously exist, but the world I inhabit and visit is no jungle.
I am saddened by efforts to make everything in life a case of us versus them. I don’t know who “them” are. I do know who “us” are. “Us” are practically everyone.
– Larry Weisenthal/Huntington Beach, CA
Ditto
14 years ago
Fox’s Judge Napolitano, thoughts on illegal immigrant coverage if a public health-care system is instituted:
“… No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”
“I could be totally off base. One of my other thoughts on the subject is that the Supreme Court might rule the health care bill is unconstitutional if the law categorizes on the basis of race or national origin or infringes a fundamental right (strict scrutiny doctrine). If a person were denied public health-care, an illegal immigrant, and sued for coverage would the SCOTUS rule in the favor of the immigrant, or hold that the federal governments health care plan was unconstitutional in discriminating against a person based on their national origin.”
Under current laws if illegals go to an emergency room, they get treated. As a result, they go there for even the most minor of medical problems, and as a result it takes forever to get treated in emergency rooms.
I think Larry has a point with using hefty fines on businesses and private individuals who hire illegals, but use it to pay-down the incurred costs for the problems and costs by these immigrants who flaunt our laws. Maybe if we treat illegal immigration like Mexico does our health-care costs will go done. As will the costs of those in our jail and prison system, the costs associated with a revolving door deportation/recrossing policy. California would suddenly be solvent. As more Americans would have to be hired at fair wages to fill the jobs the illegals were employed in unemployment would drop and payroll taxes from said jobs would go back into the system. I think we should look at fixing the current health-care system first and foremost which is what the American people really want. They did NOT ask for another big government bureaucracy.
Old Trooper
14 years ago
I’ll be a little blunt here on this because it needs to be understood in blunt terms.
Unless the legislation contains specific language prohibiting Federal Funding for treatment of Illegals and prohibits funding for abortion, those actions will be funded. Unless the legislation contains specific language limiting Tort Claims it will not get the votes to pass. Unless Max Baucus
drops his provisions for Unionizing the Health Care Industry it should not pass.
The Congress Bill is a trojan horse. The Senate Bill will be worse and the final version will be cost prohibitive and punitive to the Nation, Employers and the Consumer. The MEDICARE cuts will be a rationing tool as there are not enough Doctors, Nurses or quality facilities to take on additional patient load.
For goodness sake, Mike, no one ever screamed out “liar” to President Bush during an address to a joint session of Congress.
Free speech still does exist, thank goodness, but so do standards for good manners.
– Larry W
@openid.aol.com/runnswim: So it’s ok to shout BOOOOO and NOOOOO in the House Chamber and you can call Bush a LIAR or HITLER or anything else as long as it’s not in the House chamber?
Really Larry… You really do bend over backwards to excuse the inexcusable.
You’ve got some nerve pointing a finger at our side!
Larry, you are just one of a long list of hate Bush Democrats who now whine about this? Get a life dude!!
Absolutely not. All of that s*&^ is reprehensible and people who talk that way do the country a great disservice. There is, however, a difference between shouting “boo” and “noo” and shouting out “liar.” You can boo me all you want, and you can disagree with me all you want, but I won’t stand for being called a liar. I’m sure that you feel the same way.
– Larry Weisenthal/Huntington Beach, CA
Just mere seconds before Wilson screamed out LIE to Obama, Obama accused Palin and other Repubs (and the media) of lying.
http://tinyurl.com/kw36h9
And Obama was not being truthful when he denied that illegals wouldn’t be covered. Wilson reacted! At least he has some passion, and doesn’t just pass the buck, and then show up and read a teleprompter.
Actually, Mike after last nights outburst YOUR the one that has some nerve pointing fingers.
On top of that You actually called to Thank him for his lack of judgement?? Did you really? That makes one wonder about YOUR judgement.
@openid.aol.com/runnswim:
Larry, we’re still waiting for Harry Reid to apologize to President Bush for calling him a “liar.” And I’d like an apology for him calling me an “evilmonger.”
Answer Sara’s point: Is it ok for Obummy to call Sarah Palin a LIAR on the House floor???
@Real American Patriot: With people like you opposing my viewpoint it only makes me all the more certain that I am right.
From WH.gov:
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 by prominent politicians, that we plan to set up panels of bureaucrats with the power to kill off senior citizens. Now, such a charge would be laughable if it weren’t so cynical and irresponsible. It is a lie, plain and simple. (Applause.)
There are also those who claim that our reform efforts would insure illegal immigrants. This, too, is false. The reforms — the reforms I’m proposing would not apply to those who are here illegally.
AUDIENCE MEMBER: You lie! (Boos.)
Sounds to me like Wilson was offering a rebuttal to Obama throwing the *lie* word…
@sarainitaly: What our Dem friends are trying to suggest is that we should have to sit here and take it when they scream and yell and carry on. We have no right to respond.
No oppostion to Obama is permitted. We’re all racists and liars!
that’s teabagging, swastika wearing, evil mongering dangerous violent mob spreading lies, innuendo and rumor racist! please, get the title right. hahaha
That’s what my last post was about… what short memories they all have.
Apparently Obama is too delicate to get the same treatment that Bush endured… wouldn’t that make them racist, by assuming Obama is not eligible for the same treatment as any other president?
Mike, you are preaching to the choir. I already agreed with you that I don’t like any of that bulls—, from either side of the aisle.
To my knowledge, in something like close to 20,000 internet debate postings, dating to 1995, I’ve never called anyone I’ve ever been arguing with a “liar,” and, despite many disagreements with our former President on a number of issues, I never called him a “liar” either (I have accused him of misleading the American public on certain issues, but, if you like, I can find issues where Obama has misled the public, also, but misleading the public is an ubiquitous strategy for winning elections and getting laws passed. Misleading the public requires only being literally truthful, but counting on the ignorance of the public and their incapability of connecting dots. Lying means just what it says — deliberately stating a falsehood, which one knows to be false).
Virtually all politicians mislead, at times, in the furtherance of their objectives. But there should be no tolerance for deliberate lies, in our system, nor for the lying liars who tell them.
– Larry Weisenthal/Huntington Beach, CA
Obie’s plan of action from last nights’ speechifying:
Obie misrepresented what was in the plan and Congressman Wilson called him out.
Aye Chihuahua
Exactly!
And today AP fact checked him….is Obama going to call himself out?
Someone filling in for Medved just made the point that, uh, didn’t Obama, only SECONDS before Joe Wilson called him a liar in fact accuse radio/cable talk show hosts AND Sarah Palin of communicating lies?? Helloooo? But, Joe has to apologize. Right.
By the way, anyone who wants to help Congressman Wilson out (as he’s probably going to need it) can go here: https://www.completecampaigns.com/public.asp?name=Wilson&page=2
Where is it in any of the bills that any federal funding in those bills will go for “illegals?” Just for my own information? That’s what the “lie” comment was about. Show me where Obama was “lying.”
– Larry W
From The Hill:
Despite statements to the contrary, the Obama administration could force the American people to pay for the healthcare of millions of illegal immigrants in the U.S.
The Democrats’ bill in the House, H.R. 3200, contains gaping loopholes that will allow illegal immigrants to receive taxpayer-funded benefits. And these loopholes are no accident.
The legislation contains no verification mechanism to ensure that illegal immigrants do not apply for benefits. Republicans offered an amendment to close this loophole — it would have required verification using the existing methods that are already in place to verify eligibility for other federal benefits programs. But, when they were asked to put the language of the bill where their words were, in a party-line vote, House Democrats rejected the amendment to require verification and close this loophole.
The bill also leaves open the possibility that if one citizen family member is eligible for benefits, then the entire family — including illegal immigrants — is also eligible for the benefits.
From Legal Insurrection – The House Bill Does Cover Illegals
Technically, Obama was correct that his plan does not cover illegal aliens because Obama has no plan that has been released, only concepts. So if Obama says his plan doesn’t cover illegals, then by definition it does not cover illegals — at least until we see the language in his plan. Similarly, the Senate HELP Committee bill defines an “eligible individual” in numerous places throughout the bill to include only citizens and legal residents (including for the public option, at page 111 of the bill).
So using the two measures, the non-existent Obama bill and the draft Senate HELP Committee bill which was not a full Senate proposal, Obama was correct.
But if the standard is the full House Bill, HR3200, then it appears that Obama was incorrect. There is nothing in HR3200 that excludes illegal aliens from the various coverage provisions (with a few limited exceptions). The Congressional Research Service agrees with this assessment (full report embedded below). For example, with regard to health care exchanges, the CRS found:
H.R. 3200 does not contain any restrictions on noncitzens—whether legally or illegally present, or in the United States temporarily or permanently—participating in the Exchange.
Since the Obama administration wanted a full House vote passing HR3200 prior to the August recess, Obama was okay with a bill that included illegal aliens.
listen to Wilson explain why:
http://www.mediaite.com/online/joe-the-heckler-not-yet-ready-for-prime-time/
Mike, great post. I, for one, was glad to hear some honesty and passion from Congressman Wilson. Our current president, and all former Presidents, should be given respect because of the office they represent.
However, when our president lies about illegal immigration, he needs to be called on it. It was also interesting the our president just stopped in his speech. Was he expecting someone to arrest the man who shouted out? He cannot be interrupted during his prepared speeches because to speak spontaneously would only show him to be the liar and imposter he is.
Keep up the good work!
I guess Larry W has no response to the gaping loopholes in the bill that sarainitaly posted…
By the way, I meant to mention, Sean Hannity announced that Joe Wilson would be on his radio show at the top of the next hour–like a couple minutes from now.
@openid.aol.com/runnswim:
Here you go:
And if you notice, Obama dropped 17 Million people from his 47M uninsured claim. He called them 30 M last night. SO, initially, he was including the illegal figure in with the uninsured total – it would make sense to think he was intending to thus insure them. He has since dropped them from the discussion.
however, considering they are a large chunk of the uninsured in America, what is his plan to handle those millions of people?
they will still be showing up at emergency rooms for care?
@openid.aol.com/runnswim: I’m pretty sure you and I don’t sing in the same choir.
And as Aye points out, I provided the link to the Congressional Research Service Report in my post as Aye did in his comment. You can read it for yourself.
Like Abortion and death panels, a pathway for illegals to receive care under this bill IS IN THE LEGISLATION.
Another thing these Progressive Fascists seem to forget, is that the man now slated to be Regulation Caesar, will simply included/exclude anything he wants into any passed bill, and if anyone thinks that he WON’T let illegals be covered, I’ve got a bridge for sale.
-The insiders in the Admin have admitted that it is their intention to have vague bills passed, then rework the bills to their satisfaction during the regulation-writing part that comes after.
Jarrett also had a hand in recruiting Obama friend Cass Sunstein, a former colleague of the president’s at the University of Chicago Law School, and now administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs within the Office of Management and Budget. Known inside the White House as the “Regulation Czar,” Sunstein is tasked with developing regulations around the policies for environmental, healthcare, and safety issues.
According to administration sources, Sunstein’s office is looking for ways to impose through the regulatory process those Obama White House health care, environmental, and labor policies that do not survive the legislative process.
“The goal from this White House is to have as much nonspecific language passed by Congress in policy areas like health care and the environment and then use Sunstein’s office to put in place the regulatory language called for by Congress that gets us to where we want to be. It may very well be the most important job in this administration, given the lack of success we may have on Capitol Hill,” says a White House source.
“Jarrett also had a hand in recruiting Obama friend Cass Sunstein, a former colleague of the president’s at the University of Chicago Law School, and now administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs within the Office of Management and Budget. Known inside the White House as the “Regulation Czar,” Sunstein is tasked with developing regulations around the policies for environmental, healthcare, and safety issues.
According to administration sources, Sunstein’s office is looking for ways to impose through the regulatory process those Obama White House health care, environmental, and labor policies that do not survive the legislative process.
“The goal from this White House is to have as much nonspecific language passed by Congress in policy areas like health care and the environment and then use Sunstein’s office to put in place the regulatory language called for by Congress that gets us to where we want to be. It may very well be the most important job in this administration, given the lack of success we may have on Capitol Hill,” says a White House source.
I trust Bama half as far as I could throw him, as long as I’m not on anything tall…
If I took all the “objectivity” claimed by the Left, and put it in a gnat’s ass, it would look like a BB in a box car. Willfully blind morons, the lot of them.
@Aye (#21):
I read the report. It makes it perfectly clear that “illegals” are not covered.
(Sorry for the crummy formatting, result of hard carriage return line breaks from a document which was PDF and not HTML) –>
You’re only beef is that the enforcement provisions are not sufficiently strong, in your opinion. And you feel that this fully justifies calling the President of the United States a liar, to his face, on the floor of the House of Representatives, in the middle of his address to a joint session of Congress.
You turn the definition of “to lie” on its head. It’s the same sort of hyperbole which claims that the Obama administration is “Marxist.” It’s flagrant exaggeration and distortion.
As I said on another thread, the way the esteem with which history treats leaders is proportional to the strength and vitriol of the opposition which they were forced to overcome. I am sticking with the predictions in the other thread that Obama will ultimately succeed with this, the American public will come to be very happy with the changes to be made, and the historical impact of the achievement will be magnified by the aggressiveness of the current opposition.
Just as Bush’s place in history will be enhanced by the possibility of a good outcome in Iraq, in the face of his own critics.
Right now, I’m predicting that history will end up judging Obama in a favorable light, because health care reform will succeed and the economy will recover and Obama will put the nation on a path to reducing debt:GDP.
– Larry Weisenthal/Huntington Beach, CA
The only way President Obama has any possibility of passing health care reform, is a commitment to remove illegal immigrants from gaining entrance to any public option? In the health care bill they must–PROVE–to the majority of the American People that–NO ILLEGAL FOREIGN NATIONAL–will be able to bleed the government extension in the package. An amendment to the 1000 page reform bill, must guarantee–IN THE WORDING– that a very thorough background identity check is performed on any applicant who applies? E-Verify would be a progressive identifier, with an initial examination of Social Security number in conjunction with Homeland Security Databases.
To complete the operation of E-Verification this PC application, must branch out across the country as a permanent tool in business and industry for every worker newly hired or long time employee. Thousands or even millions of illegal workers could be hiding in plain site in the workplace, as they have never been checked as a citizen or legal residency compliance? It also seems that the auditing of 1-9 forms around the country, that the federal authorities forget to mention that irregularities by employers only allows them to dismiss the applicant? The fact is that ICE raids have trailed off, so that any illegal workers–ARE NOT DEPORTED–they can move onto yet another workplace. Anybody who is suspected of being in this sovereign nation illegally should be detained and held for ICE inspection, not released into the public mainstream?
We all know that Fraudulent ID is so prevalent, that all security systems have been compromised, with even al-Qaeda murderers who brought down three passenger jets. On 9/11 these terrorists had in their possession numerous authentic drivers’ licenses and other picture ID. E-Verify is not perfect and can be cheated, but as it’s modified, collecting more tools to compliment the enforcement program it success rate will become exemplary. Those hired workers who then find themselves under suspicion, can have errors resolved through any Social Security agency. That special interest groups have remained silent about this matter, doesn’t need any explanation? most Americans want enforcement at our borders, the workplace, so contact your reluctant politician at 202-224-3121 MORE HONEST INFORMATION AT NUMBERSUSA & JUDICIAL WATCH. REMEMBER NO MORE BLANKET AMNESTIES!
Democrats don’t apologize, they blame Republicans.
– Larry W, if you think that President Obama will drive wounded and sick illegals into the street, denying them healthcare, then there is nothing that can be done for you.
Wilson was right. He was just impolite.
If wounded and sick illegals were driven into the streets and denied health care, would that look like an American Victory or an embarassing human rights nightmare? I dont want Illegal immagrants Leeching off a system to which they do not contribute as much as you do, but it raises a good question here, what is a good solution to this problem? I don’t think we want people literally bleeding out in our streets, a few blocks from our homes. Are there already some proposed solutions out there? If they can just go to the Emergency room and get care anyway, then it is a lose-lose situation for Americans.
@openid.aol.com/runnswim: Larry, You are obviously not reading carefully.
There is plenty of wiggle room to cover illegals.
Again, if that were not the case WHY did Dems vote against a specific amendment on that topic?
Mr. Gray, please tell me you are joking and that I didn’t get it.
It’s not a serious discussion, the President is lying.
He liiieed, dude.
He called Sarah A liar and worse from the Preisdents Podium. I thought we were a national of people where Kings were not allowed and the president was to respect all our citizens.
After a lot of back and forth, Tapper closes with this:
Could the House bill expand emergency Medicaid laws as they already exist, perhaps – perhaps — expanding coverage for illegal immigrants in keeping with current law?
According to CRS: Yes.
http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2009/09/from-the-fact-check-desk-illegal-immigrants-and-health-care-reform.html
And he also wrote:
As long as I have your attention, I should point out that all of us already pay the costs of health care for illegal immigrants — through emergency room visits, Emergency Medicaid, hidden fees by hospitals, workplace safety incidents, and the like. This idea that we all aren’t paying for this one way or another is non-reality-based.
Sounds to me that either through expanded emergency care, or illegals receiving care the same way they currently are, they would in fact, be covered – one way or another.
Until DC comes up with a way to provide health care to those residing in the US illegally, they will be covered, whether it is worded in the bill or not.
Also, I read somewhere that excluding them might be against the constitution or something like that?
@Mike: I’ve stated elsewhere that’s it’s great that people are going through this with fine tooth combs and looking for loopholes and things which can be strengthened, omitted, or modified. For example, Palin raised the Death Panel issue, so now oncologists will simply continue getting rich pushing in chemotherapy right until the end (by far the most common situation for end of life counselling), as opposed to sitting down with the patient and explaining why the time may have come to just try to enjoy whatever time may be remaining. No more death panels.
So let’s also insert a provision, if we must, to imprison any person who provides medical care to an “illegal” at taxpayer expense. Whatever. But that still doesn’t make Obama a “liar,” regarding the health care for illegals issue. For goodness sake, the law, as proposed, states no participation for illegals. If some creative government bureaucrat wants to take the chance of being outed by Rush Limbaugh and give the GOP a campaign issue, and maybe get prosecuted by a future GOP Attorney General for breaking the law, then that’s kind of a small risk, in my opinion, but if everyone gets all fired up about it (as in Palin’s death panels), then it will be changed, in order to get the Blue Dogs to their comfort level.
I’ve got my own solution to the health care for illegals problem. Let’s start fining every single employer who hires an illegal (including private GOP homeowners, right here in Orange County, CA, who hire gardners, maids, handymen, and child care workers) $500 per day for every day that an “illegal” was employed and put all the profits into a fund to pay Medicaid levels of health care to the uninsured. This will solve the “illegal” health care problem and stop illegal immigration in its tracks, as there will be no more jobs for them.
Of course, large sectors of the economy would collapse (e.g. farming) and consumer costs for a large variety of things would go up, but unemployment just might go down.
– Larry Weisenthal/Huntington Beach, CA
I view what Wilson did as the only level playing field response he will ever have. Once the speech was over and the MSM quoted all of their friends in the Obama admin. Wilson would NEVER have the voice he had last night! Apology not with standing, he did the right thing for the American people. That was our voice at the most important townhall meeting we will ever have. I sent Mr. Wilson $100 and hope that some of you will do the same.
Don’t go trying to put words in my mouth.
I didn’t say that the enforcement provisions are not strong enough.
I said that there are no enforcement provisions.
There is NO requirement in the law for patients to present any sort of ID when they want care.
Furthermore:
So, if the Dims want illegal aliens to be excluded, as they would want us to believe, then why work to prevent the enforcement mechanisms from being added to the bill?
Finally, from your own home state of CA, we have learned from experience that the Courts do not look kindly upon excluding certain groups of individuals from eligibility for benefits.
The citizens of CA voted at the polls to prevent social services from being extended to illegals. That outcome was challenged and two different Courts ruled that if the State of CA offers something to a citizen (i.e. state aid, welfare, etc) then those same programs MUST be extended to illegals as well.
The Supreme Court refused to take the case on appeal so that decision is now precedent for the nation.
Surely Dear Leader, the “Constitutional Lecturer” knows that.
So, basically, this is what we have:
1) There is no provision in HR3200 to force patients to prove their citizenship when they request medical care. BO knows that.
2) House Dims worked to prevent enforcement mechanisms from being added to the legislation. BO knows that.
3) Case law from CA has set the precedent that programs offered to citizens must be extended to everyone, including non-citizens and illegal aliens. BO, the “Lecturer” certainly knows that as well.
So, let’s take the three things above, and weigh them against the definitions of the word “Lie”:
Having done that, the only conclusion one can reach is that Obie LIED to the Congress and to the American People last night.
Actually, that’s exactly what you tried to do with your parsing of the meaning of the words “lie” vs. “mislead” on the other thread.
Projection much?
Easily supportable and immensely provable does hyperbole, exaggeration, or distortion make.
Larry, I don’t know you but I know about you. My Mom died of cancer after fighting it for a long time enduring painful treatments and debilitating nausea. Not once did she want to give up hope and act reasonably. I hope you never find yourself in her situation and in fact if you did yourself in now you could save us all a lot of money. As for as the dastardly oncologist, they don’t need to extend there patients treatment because there is an endless supply. Don’t ever say that you will act differently until you are on the stage!
@rudy: I know a bit about this, being an oncologist myself and having given my share of end of life counseling.
There comes a time when it is obvious that chemotherapy will accomplish nothing, save for making the patient more miserable. At that point, the oncologist can (#1) spend an hour talking to the patient and explaining all of the various options, which are many or (#2) simply write an order for the form of infusion chemotherapy which will make him/her the most money (and an excellent study by the Harvard School of Public Health showed a strong correlation between profit to the oncologist and choice of chemotherapy in breast, lung, ovarian, and colon cancers (the only diseases studied)). #2 is simple and profitable. #1 is time consuming, loses money for the doctor that he/she might have made under option #1 and is a service which, thanks to Palin, will have to continue to be given away for free, for those doctors who have the personal integrity to do it.
@Aye: The House bill is simply a bill. It’s not the Senate bill. It’s not what is going to be signed after reconciliation. Obama made a very clear statement as to what he wants in the bill he’s going to sign. He wasn’t making a defense of the House bill. In fact, he said he wanted certain things in the final bill which were not in the House bill. He’s on record as saying that the bill he wants to sign should not include benefits for “illegals.” It’s perfectly appropriate for the public, if it wishes, to raise the heat level regarding enforcement provisions. But none of this makes the President a “liar,” for goodness sake.
NO, the California case didn’t become “precedent for the nation.” It is merely a precedent that State courts should be left to decide these issues for their own states, not that the decision of California courts should be binding on Texas! I am frankly surprised that you don’t understand this. Texas courts might reach a different decision, regarding a similar case, tried in their courts, and the Supreme Court of the US would presumably defer to the Texas court, as well, regarding the way that the Texas constitution (different from the California constitution) addresses the issue. And neither court’s decision would have any impact whatsoever with regard to a FEDERAL law! You really didn’t understand this?
– Larry Weisenthal/Huntington Beach, CA
News flash, it’s the illegals in our healthcare system now that cause all of us to pay more for helathcare!! This idea that obamacare won’t include illegals is absurd and a lie. You can dress it up all you want but why would it not happen given it already does. In addition, the idea that fixing fraud and abuse in our healthcare system will pay for his plan is also absurd. There is no way you can add 40 million people to free healtcare without increased cost. Also, do you really believe there are enough doctors and nurses to cover this care. I’m sorry but the obama Kool aid is not working. No wonder the boy is having trouble selling this snake oil!!
Republicans proposed amendment’s’ that would strickly prohibit providing medical care for illegals, aka criminal border jumpers, and every amendment was killed by ‘democrats’. I should have kept the link but today someone’s research showed at least 5 instances that would allow the ‘medical panels, aka death panels to provide medical care to criminal border jumpers. Democrats were jumping through each others butts today trying to white/black out every thing in the multiple bills that President O’Dumbo lied about last night. I pity anyone under 50 if O’Dumbo and his communist clowns get their way. Me, at 68 I’d rather die fighting for my country than by the hand of a death panel. Democrats would sell their parents, grandparents and probably their children for a silver dollar and a chance to lick O’Dumbo’s colon.
@openid.aol.com/runnswim: Even worse than the non specific language which leaves loopholes big enough to drive a Mexican truck through is the issue of regulatory implementation. The Obama folks are already quoted suggesting that that’s where they expect to do some of what Congress might otherwise forbid if it had a direct vote.
THAT is why the Dems have been voting against the specific provisions we’ve discussed previously.
They know they can count on the unaccountable panels (like the death panel) to fix it.
Have you seen the organizational chart from the House Bill Larry?
Plenty of room in there for all kinds of mischief making.
I don’t care what a conference between the Senate and the House come up with. Unless we have solid assurances on these and many more issues NOW I don’t trust the Democrats to take care of it in conference! Why should they?
@openid.aol.com/runnswim:
The House of Representatives moves to close the illegal alien coverage loophole that “doesn’t exist”.
This is remarkably similar to the Senate moving to eliminate the death panels that “didn’t exist”.
Eliminating things that “don’t exist”…..there seems to be a pattern developing there.
It doesn’t matter what they say about illegal aliens. Their strategy is to get health care through and on the wings of that win, they will go for immigration “reform”, giving amnesty to all the illegals here now. Bingo. Problem solved before the next election and millions of new Dim voters to sweep them back into office. The only saving grace I can see is that they must lose the majority next year so Fraudo can be contained. I will do the happy dance when Nancy has to step down as Speaker and that creep Reid goes bye-bye.
@openid.aol.com/runnswim:
Hmmmmm….
Seems that someone is confused about the Prop 187 case, how it was decided, and the reasoning of the Court on this case.
Hint: It’s not me.
See that?
It was a CA law litigated into the federal court system ruled on by a federal court judge based somewhat on a Texas case.
Further background reveals that the judge ruled that Prop 187 was unconstitutional. That would be the US Constitution that she was referring to when considering 187.
Judge Pfaelzer’s ruling is now a precedent just as Plyler v. Doe was utilized as precedent.
More here:
You’re welcome.
For those on EPA Mike’s side,
go here:
joewilsonforcongress.com
For those not on his side,
go to :
http://www.actblue.com/entity/fundraisers/19079
Who will raise more money?
Not likely… employers can’t ask for proof of citizenship unless they want a serious lawsuit on their hands. Lenders can’t ask for proof. Landlords. Even a law enforcement officer can’t ask for proof of citizenship. Hang, we don’t even check that at voting polls. Not unless you want the ACLU on your back big time.
Just where would you assume medical personnel will be able to tread on what is considered profiling and discrimination, Larry?
It comes down to this. Obama’s parsing words to cover his butt. Well, to put it less indelicately, he’s lying thru his teeth. The system most certainly will cover illegals because if they are employed with group insurance, they aren’t asking for proof of citizenship either. Therefore, they are covered because no one is permitted to profile and discriminate… a pesky detail in the legislation that needs no explanation because it’s common fact.
But I guess the Big Zero figures if it’s not spelled out in simple language, it just doesn’t exist for his purposes.
But about this illegal alien and/or uninsured bit…. Larry and I were debating about the value of malpractice law reform on another thread. The fact is, it brings down provider costs… which is part of the necessity of curbing increasing health care costs. But it is not the only reform necessary.
According to a Kaiser fact sheet, government compensation for the uninsured (i.e. emergency room care that O’bummer says is breaking the bank) was projected to make up only 2% of the health care costs in 2008. This is even less than the 5% that malpractice constitutes in the costs scheme.
But as I mentioned to Larry, these things… while not making a major dent by themselves… tend to be cumulative when you start putting them all together. However it is unlikely that anyone present in this nation will be denied health care when needed. We don’t do it now, and we won’t do it in the future.
Kaiser also noted that were all the uninsured to get insurance, it add .08% to the share of the GDP going to health care – from 16.5% to 17.3%.
Mata, He’s not lying through his teeth.
This is all so tedious and, frankly, small. It’s not only un-Christian, it’s bordering on inhuman. I guess that this is just a classic conservative versus liberal thing. The definition of a Puritan is someone who obsesses that someplace/somewhere there is someone who is actually having some fun.
It seems that the definition of a conservative might be someone who obsesses that someplace, somewhere there may be an undocumented worker, lured here by legions of Republicans with farms, restaurants, meat packing plants, construction companies, and homes who want cheap labor, who gets a 6 inch gash while operating a hedge clipper in a million dollar Orange County yard, and who is rewarded with free emergency room care.
– Larry Weisenthal/Huntington Beach, CA
You’re barking up the wrong tree, Larry. I have no problem with immigrants, support a work program to citizenship, nor feel they need to be cut out of health care. Yes, I do think they should contribute, but no… wouldn’t want to see anyone sans help. Most who are here illegally *are* working… and many paying taxes.
I am the granddaughter of immigrants, married an illegal alien… as did my sister, as did my nephew. My daughter in law is second generation Latina. I have a wide plethora of multi-cultural friends of all races, none of which I would ever ask their legal status, nor care. They all work, they contribute.
Frankly, I find your “tedious and frankly small” definition of conservative highly and personally offensive. And very typical of the class warfare and neatly divided little Americans in boxes that is common to your party. If you pride yourself on not being insulting, I’d say you blew it.
And yes… Obama is lying when he says they will not be covered. There is no way to demand proof of citizenship by medical professionals without facing discrimination lawsuits. All will be covered… those working and in a group plan, and those that apply via the proposed exchange. For you see, that insurance exchange will not be able to demand proof of citizenship either.
What you seem to be missing is that I don’t find this a problem… covering illegals that *are working* here in the US. As I said, and have known for some time.. the uninsured and illegals only constitute a very tiny percentage of the US health care costs. There’s bigger potatos to fry. Everyone gets care in the US… no one is turned away from county/public hospitals.
What I do find a problem is Obama lying about it to pander to a nation that is touchy about illegal immigrants. He is blatantly lying for political cover. If Obama were smart, he’d admit it does, and let the GOP appear heartless by raising a stink.
Just caught up on yesterday’s news — I watched the speech but did not notice that a Republican Congressman walked out of the speech before it ended…from Illinois.
http://www.swamppolitics.com/news/politics/blog/2009/09/shimkus_walked_on_obama_frustr.html
To be honest — I would welcome a more robust Congressional Chamber — This is not a parlor and I would prefer some honest open dialogue/Q&A – between the President and Congressional members… instead of yet, another Barry Obama campaign speech…
That would be outstanding reality tv!!!
@mata (#47): Firstly, I’m sorry. That WAS both “small” and insulting of me. It was mainly the tedious part of it. I made a couple of comments today, earlier, and I was determined — for once, to take the discussion to the bitter end, answering each and every critic. But I just got overwhelmed. I’d clicked “notify me of follow-up comments via e-mail.” In just the next 12 hours, I had 54 such “comments” for my counter-response. Each counter-response generates exponentially-growing counter-counter responses. At a certain point, I just gave up. Utterly overwhelmed. It’s the challenge of being a near-lone liberal on a conservative blog (I’m sure it’s the same way being a lone conservative on a liberal blog). At a certain point, defending one’s position (and honor) becomes an exercise in futility. I ended up pretty much blowing a full day’s work, to the disadvantage of those who count on me to show up for them. Anyway, I think that I was just venting more about my disgust at myself for getting my own priorities out of whack.
I’ll close here, but I still don’t accept the proposition that Obama was “lying” about the coverage of “illegal” issue. I don’t even accept the fact that he was “pandering.” He is in the middle of trying to do something of historic importance, against a barrage of withering criticism which makes my own little share of tribulation on Flopping Aces look like a single bone in a fillet-of-fish by comparison. He saw what was made out of that ridiculous “death panel” thing and he was doing his best to touch all bases and anticipate all the objections.
And, once again, as much as everyone on this board (and politicians like Boehner) want to claim that the President is defending the House bill, he clearly wasn’t. You can’t use the House bill to attack the President’s own final health care bill; you can only attack what the President says that he wants in his own health care bill, at the end of the day, which is for it not to cover “illegals,” as an identifiable cohort of beneficiaries. Of course, it can’t possibly be so surgically precise that some “illegals” do not get covered in some way. One could make the same criticism regarding the bill not paying for abortions with federal dollars. There is going to be a little bit of mixing. But the same thing could be said about Bush’s funding of stem cell research. It’s virtually impossible to assure that absolutely no federal dollars ever have gone into unapproved stem cell research at Universities who receive federal dollars for a variety of purposes. When Bush and Congress said that no federal dollars would support unapproved stem cell research, they weren’t lying to anyone; they were only saying that use of any federal dollars to support unapproved stem cell research was prohibited. They couldn’t guarantee that there would not be a mixing of federal dollars at some level, on some occasions.
Obama’s strategy at the beginning was a very good and wise one. He’s continuing to follow this strategy. He’s letting the House bill and the Senate bills all be “stalking horses” to attract both support and criticism. Only after all the commotion has played out and the dust has settled will he get down to the final details, during the House/Senate reconciliation process. What he did in his speech to the joint session of Congress was to outline the provisions which he wanted to see in the final bill he signed — among these would be a provision for no Federal dollars from this bill to support care of “illegals,” which I’m sure he’s doing for pragmatic reasons — meaning that he knows he has to take this position to get a bill passed, not that he’d want this provision, were it not required for passage.
But you just can’t go calling him a liar — much less to his face in the Chamber of the House of Representatives during a formal address to Congress and the nation — based on provisions of a House bill which is not the President’s own bill and which is certainly not going to be the final bill which the President will ultimately sign. Well, you actually can call him a liar — it was just done. But it was very bad manners and it was a sad chapter in the continued deterioration of once civil discourse over the important issues of the day.
I’m going to go on sabbatical again (meaning actually get back to my day job), but I’d like to offer a few, I think relevant, thoughts.
I look around the world, at the people I’ve known, and I see much more good than bad. I think that most people do many things out of self-interest; human evolution favored the survival of people who were good at that. But human evolution also favored the survival of people who treated other people with decent fairness and even generosity.
I am very touched by my experiences in my trips to Japan, which is a virtually areligious society. Most people have no religion at all and Buddhism, the dominant religion of those who are religious, is more of a philosophy than a religion, in the sense that you and I think of it.
http://www.religioustolerance.org/buddhism8.htm
What Buddhism does is to “channel” the basic human instinct for goodness into a more or less organized set of life’s practices. Buddhism neither believes nor disbelieves in a deity, but the concept of a deity is not a central feature. For Japanese who don’t consider themselves Buddhists, there is the over-arching concept of honor. And the equally-powerful concept of shame.
But I’ve been struck by the basic goodness and kindness of people I’ve met, where ever I’ve traveled. Hotel and restaurant workers, taxi drivers, customs agents, strangers on the street. From Turkey to Thailand to South Korea to Japan and to Europe. And even in the USA. Society works, all over the world, not because of religion and not because of government regulation, but because of the basic goodness of most people. Here in California, we live among the “illegals,” but these are overwhelmingly good people.
I try to give everyone the benefit of doubt, on a personal level, from my auto mechanic to my political opponents on Flopping Aces to my own political soul mates, and I’ve been constantly rewarded, in terms of personal happiness. I’m alert to treachery and danger; both obviously exist, but the world I inhabit and visit is no jungle.
I am saddened by efforts to make everything in life a case of us versus them. I don’t know who “them” are. I do know who “us” are. “Us” are practically everyone.
– Larry Weisenthal/Huntington Beach, CA
Fox’s Judge Napolitano, thoughts on illegal immigrant coverage if a public health-care system is instituted:
“… No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”
“I could be totally off base. One of my other thoughts on the subject is that the Supreme Court might rule the health care bill is unconstitutional if the law categorizes on the basis of race or national origin or infringes a fundamental right (strict scrutiny doctrine). If a person were denied public health-care, an illegal immigrant, and sued for coverage would the SCOTUS rule in the favor of the immigrant, or hold that the federal governments health care plan was unconstitutional in discriminating against a person based on their national origin.”
Under current laws if illegals go to an emergency room, they get treated. As a result, they go there for even the most minor of medical problems, and as a result it takes forever to get treated in emergency rooms.
I think Larry has a point with using hefty fines on businesses and private individuals who hire illegals, but use it to pay-down the incurred costs for the problems and costs by these immigrants who flaunt our laws. Maybe if we treat illegal immigration like Mexico does our health-care costs will go done. As will the costs of those in our jail and prison system, the costs associated with a revolving door deportation/recrossing policy. California would suddenly be solvent. As more Americans would have to be hired at fair wages to fill the jobs the illegals were employed in unemployment would drop and payroll taxes from said jobs would go back into the system. I think we should look at fixing the current health-care system first and foremost which is what the American people really want. They did NOT ask for another big government bureaucracy.
I’ll be a little blunt here on this because it needs to be understood in blunt terms.
Unless the legislation contains specific language prohibiting Federal Funding for treatment of Illegals and prohibits funding for abortion, those actions will be funded. Unless the legislation contains specific language limiting Tort Claims it will not get the votes to pass. Unless Max Baucus
drops his provisions for Unionizing the Health Care Industry it should not pass.
The Congress Bill is a trojan horse. The Senate Bill will be worse and the final version will be cost prohibitive and punitive to the Nation, Employers and the Consumer. The MEDICARE cuts will be a rationing tool as there are not enough Doctors, Nurses or quality facilities to take on additional patient load.
There is no free lunch.