Will media flip out over Sen. Coburn's "die sooner" claim?
December 02, 2009 11:19 am ET by Jamison Foser
Remember how the media flipped out when Rep. Alan Grayson said the GOP's health care plan was: "Don't get sick, and if you do get you do get sick, die quickly"? NBC Nightly News covered it, with anchor Brian Williams calling the comment "incendiary" and noting that Republicans wanted him to apologize. Politico's Roger Simon said Grayson is "like a guy on crack who is always searching for a bigger high."
CNN's Howard Kurtz claimed Grayson benefitted from a "media double standard" -- that Grayson's comment drew less criticism than GOP Rep. Joe Wilson's outburst during President Obama's address to congress.
Well, if Kurtz is right about media double standards, there should be a huge media firestorm over Republican Sen. Tom Coburn's statement yesterday that under the Democratic health care plan, seniors will "die sooner." Seems pretty unlikely to me, but we'll see.
Report a bunch of garbage, blast Democrats publicly, and then claim there is a liberal bias... if the media reports negatively, there is the proof of the bias. If they don't report, then the conservatives ignore it. It amazes me that nobody listens to the conservative bias of Fox News...
---------------------------------------
The Midnight Review
Coburn has to compete with the likes of Limbaugh, Hannity and Beck on thier side. He doesn't stand a chance.
Now it would be nice if the media played this statement up, but I am afraid it will just become another of those pieces on Fox that starts out with, "some people are saying", news item.
.... right after they find their collective spine and report on war criminal Dick Cheney's weak and dithering acts of Treason against the United States of America.
I sure do...and it makes little difference to me. I didn't flip out over Grayson's "die quickly" or Coburn's "die sooner"...or even Wilson's "you lie".
This is nothing more than a media catfight between competing egos...and perfectly suited for this site...a site that is about the media.
I don't know about the veracity of the "die quickly" or "die sooner" comments...but I do know this...Wilson was correct.
The democrats have repeatedly resisted language in the health care bills that would force illegal immigrants to prove their citizenship when applying for health care benefits...leaving the door wide open for their fraudulent participation.
I have always found talk like this to be very worrisome because it seems that Republicans are just being mean. We are talking about health care here. Do you really want to stand at the hospital door and demand proof of citizenship from the child crushed in a car accident, or the young mother in labor with a very premature child, or the man-boy gardener with the bleeding hand, the fingers hanging on by threads, injured at some good American's house? When I lived in Korea, a teacher had no American health insurance, and he wasn't part of the Korean system, so when his baby was born prematurely, they treated the child until he ran out of money, and when he did, they unplugged the baby, wrapped it in a blanket and handed him to Jim. The baby died in his arms. Is that the kind of health care system you want in America? What happens if you forget your birth certificate or insurance card and can't prove that you are a real American, should we turn you away?
The point I'm referring to is when people sign up for health care benefits...not when they're seeking treatment.
When they try to utilize their health insurance at the doctor's office or the hospital...they should do it in their own country...problem solved.
Illegal aliens did not all get here over night...so we can't deport them all over night...but we can sure as hell get started.
In the mean time we should aggressively purse and deport illegal aliens according to our laws...as well as punishing those employers that thumb their nose at the law by hiring them.
Look back at his first post.
He ignored the subject at hand, pretended that it was not important because HE didn't think it was important and because HE hadn't committed the sin, and went off on a tangent about immigrants that has absolutely NOTHING to do with the article.
Do you REALLY think that it was an innocent question on his part?
If you do, then you're a fool.
It was a troll post aimed at derailing the thread. And you bought into it hook, line and sinker.
Please don't feed the trolls.
This from your Politifact link:
-- illegal immigrants would likely be able to buy insurance on the national health insurance exchange. We don't see anything in the bills that would hinder that. A Congressional Research Service report issued Aug. 25, 2009, confirmed our observation. The House bill "does not contain any restrictions on noncitzens participating in the Exchange - whether the noncitizens are legally or illegally present, or in the United States temporarily or permanently," --
It's a wink and a nod by Pres.Obama and democrats to claim their healthcare reform does not include illegal aliens. Their is no mechanism to prevent them from fradulently enrolling and obtaining taxpayer-subsidized insurance or affordability credits.
Just like the wink and a nod our govt. has given to border enforcement for decades. Illegals are not supposed to cross the border but they do...just like they will enroll in public health care even if it's illegal.
Here's a little info that will clear it all up for you...and the importance of verifying the citizenship status and income to prevent illegal aliens from plundering the system.
It's simply not enough to just claim that it's illegal...without an enforcement method...else it's just that same old wink and a nod.
Well done!
Since you want to hang your hat on their accuracy...here's an acid test for you.
PolitiFact has judged 210 statements from Obama...with the finding that he is only half-truthful.
105 statements judged to be mostly true to true.
105 statements judged to be only half true...barely true...and outright false.
Believe in PolitiFact's judgment? Or only when it suits your purpose?
What scum you are, Weaselly.
That Obama said Indiana when he meant to say Illinois.
That he said that he is not a single payer supporter - and he's not. If our nation were different, he would support a single payer plan, but our nation is NOT different, and as a result, he's not a single payer supporter. He wasn't being dishonest.
That Obama was given wrong info about a man who was temporarily denied insurance coverage. Obama didn't lie about anything.
That Preventative care saves money. Obama never said that we had to pay for EVERY potential preventative care option, and he didn't MEAN that either.
Politifact is wrong about the obesity claim. They're wrong about the abortion ad. Obama was incorrectly informed about the flooding situation in the Midwest and the number of helicopters available - it's not a lie if you don't know that it's not true - that's why MMFA doesn't accuse people of LYING (or being not truthful), like you did. They were wrong about fundraising in Florida.
And that's just challenging some of the "false" statements - I could do more.
And on the Pants on Fire ones, they're off too on those - in fact, those are even more obnoxiously skewed against Obama. 2 out of three of them aren't even lies at all, and the third isn't that offensive given the political backdrop of the event.
If you think that Politifact isn't biased to the right, you have another thing coming.
I schooled them on two different emails recently, and got quotes from both of them included in their Thanksgiving posts where they did mea culpas. They have big problems with bias.
Tell me it ain't so!
John Hite, retired, Oklahoma City, & proud member of USAA & AARP.