About us Login Get email updates
County Fair
Print

They don't feel -- or care about -- your pain

February 26, 2010 3:42 pm ET by John V. Santore

At yesterday's health care summit, Rep. Louise M. Slaughter (D-NY-28) related this story from one of her constituents:

I even have one constituent -- you will not believe this, and I know you won't, it's true. Her sister died, this poor woman had no dentures. She wore her dead sister's teeth, which of course were uncomfortable and did not fit. Do you believe that in America that that's where we would be?

What was the reaction from leading members of the conservative media?

  • On Twitter, Michelle Malkin wrote: "We need trillion-$ Demcare cuz someone had to wear their sister's dentures! O: "Terrific conversation""
  • On his radio program, Glenn Beck stated, "I've read the Constitution ... I didn't see that you had a right to teeth."
  • Author and radio host Laura Ingraham told Bill O'Reilly that Slaughter's tale was "ridiculous" and a "sob story."
  • Fox Nation, the website maintained by the Fox News Channel, labeled Slaughter's comments "Summit Insanity."

  • Tara Lynn Thompson, a commentator for the conservative website, Rightpundits.com, suggested that if Americans had fewer teeth, they would eat less, and hence would meet Michelle Obama's anti-obesity goals:

What Michelle Obama has overlooked, thus far, is the potential of poorly fitted teeth. Children, as well as adults, could benefit greatly by a few extra teeth pulled, fillings that fall out, or dentures from the dead.

  • Rush Limbaugh went out of his way to mock the story. "If you don't have any teeth, so what?" he said. "What's applesauce for?" Like Ingraham, he also referred to it as the "sob story of the day."

When criticized for such comments, media conservatives always claim they were joking and chastise their detractors for lacking a sense of humor. But they aren't kidding. Leading conservatives, especially those in the media, don't believe that the United States faces a health care crisis. And in one sense, they are right: their America doesn't.

Conservative media leaders have made fortunes peddling such blatant callousness. Consider the fact that Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, and Glenn Beck have all vehemently denied the urgent need for health care reform. Unsurprisingly, all three are inordinately rich and can afford the best health care money can buy.

And so, when Rush had a heart scare in Hawaii, he simply paid his emergency room bills out-of-pocket. As to the cost, he wasn't phased, describing it casually as less than half the "average SUV" of the "average American family."

He then shuts his eyes to the uninsured and under-insured Americans driven to bankruptcy by illness and injury. And he closes his ears to the estimated 45,000 Americans who die needlessly each year because they can't afford access to reliable care. After all, this is not the America that people like Limbaugh, Ingraham, Beck, and Fox News CEO Roger Ailes live in. Limbaugh makes an estimated $50 million per year. Beck made $23 million in 2009.

Politics aside, the real question is this: Why do ordinary Americans continue to listen to conservatives who don't even pretend to care about the senseless indignities and horrors experienced by countless citizens of this country? 

Expand All Expand 1st Level Collapse All Add Comment
    • Author by The_Cat (February 26, 2010 3:51 pm ET)
      3  
      What?! Rush Limbaugh went to a hospital? No. Way. With those evil librul elitist college educated doctors and nurses? No. Way. Wonders never cease.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by theselflobby (February 26, 2010 4:30 pm ET)
          1
        and he bragged about getting the best healthcare in the world.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by LeahD (February 27, 2010 2:21 am ET)
             
          Yes, the BEST. In Hawaii, where the state has run health care for the last 40 years.
          Report Abuse
        • Author by mikehuck1976 (February 27, 2010 5:06 pm ET)
          1  
          In Hawaii? You don't get the irony of those condemning the Democratic ideas of government intervention into healthcare telling us Hawaii has the best healthcare in the world?? You don't get it, do you? Look up the Hawaiian healthcare system. Maybe you will learn something. I doubt it, but maybe.
          Report Abuse
          • Author by theselflobby (February 27, 2010 8:10 pm ET)
               
            I wonder how fast companies will move overseas if a Hawaiian style employer mandate were to be adopted nationally? All Rush was saying is that the US has the best healthcare in the world, he certainly wasn't speaking exclusively about Hawaii. Thanks for the suggestion.
            Report Abuse
          • Author by Unreality (February 27, 2010 10:39 pm ET)
               
            Go ahead Mike, tell the chuckleheads about how Hawaii's socialized medicine actually works and is appreciated by Hawaiians. They can call you a commie instead of me.... ;^)
            Report Abuse
        • Author by The_Cat (February 28, 2010 10:13 am ET)
             
          It's only the best if you can actually afford it, theselflobby. Turns out, millionaires can. Go figure. Meanwhile, last year, 45,000 average Americans, who work every bit as hard as Rush for the most part and just aren't as well compensated, died before their time because they couldn't afford to purchase insurance, or were unable to be covered because of pre-existing conditions. The for-profit insurance industry has a very simple, if cynical, business model: Give us your money, and we'll just keep it. Las Vegas casinos pay out 80 cents for every dollar taken in. The insurance companies? More like 75 cents on the dollar.
          Report Abuse
      • Author by Tbone Slickens (March 01, 2010 9:34 am ET)
           
        . And he closes his ears to the estimated 45,000 Americans who die needlessly each year because they can't afford access to reliable care.


        This lie keeps getting pushed. The majority of these 45k deaths came at the end of the patients natural life and NOTHING could be done about it whether they had a cadillac plan or no health care. As far as how that statistic compares to other countries, the old there may not even go to a hospital so their numbers never get reported.

        More smoke and mirrors from the liars in charge.
        Report Abuse
    • Author by progressivevoicedaily (February 26, 2010 3:51 pm ET)
      4  
      And yet so called normal americans listen to these people? What the hell happened to this country??
      Report Abuse
      • Author by nerzog (February 26, 2010 4:59 pm ET)
        4  
        Republican sugardaddies bought up the country's A.M. radio stations, changed the formats to All Hate All the Time, and turned millions of Americans into mindless zombies.
        Report Abuse
    • Author by wookie294 (February 26, 2010 3:59 pm ET)
      5 1
      There's a reason we call conservatives the "Reich" Wing of America.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by theselflobby (February 26, 2010 4:21 pm ET)
          3
        wtf do you know about the "Reich". conservatives arent the ones kneeling. modern progressives believe in the almighty power of the State. be intellectually honest when painting people as nazi's...
        Report Abuse
        • Author by shadetail.us1808 (February 26, 2010 9:26 pm ET)
             
          Oh please. You people have spent the past ten years kneeling down before pictures of George Bush the lesser in his flight suit, and turning Ronald Reagan into a graven idol. Spare us the projection of your personal faults, Reich Winger.
          Report Abuse
        • Author by soze169880 (February 27, 2010 12:52 am ET)
          2  
          Actually, until a Democrat was in the White House, right-wingers believed in the almighty power of the State.
          Report Abuse
          • Author by Slow Cowboy (February 27, 2010 11:43 am ET)
               
            To be honest, this is very incorrect. There are Republicans who use the state, but the vast majority of conservatives believe in limited government. Do not confuse the two.

            I am sure you have heard the term RINO, which means Republican in Name Only. There is indeed a big riff within the GOP based on precisely the misconception you have. A big part of the dispute is how much the GOP should increase the size of the government and its involvement in our lives. Bush was criticized by many conservatives for going too far in big state direction. Mike Huckabee was doomed in large part for the same trait.
            Report Abuse
        • Author by political_left-religious_right (March 01, 2010 10:33 am ET)
             
          wtf [sic] do you know about the "Reich". [sic] conservatives [sic] arent [sic] the ones kneeling. modern [sic] progressives believe in the almighty power of the State. be [sic] intellectually honest when painting people as nazi's... [sic, sic, sic]

          Ah, more scolding about "intellectual honesty" from another semi-literate. You trolls provide so much unintended laughter.
          Report Abuse
    • Author by GBU-15 (February 26, 2010 4:02 pm ET)
      6 1
      Yeah, Teabaggers are all about how they have a better vision of the future for America. It's all about Christian values and the Constitution. Just don't come to me if you have some misfortune you bum. Your problems are your own and I don' have time to be bothered ( I got mine). And don't go anywhere else looking for help either because we don't need any welfare types hanging around here neither. What would be best for everbody is that you should go crawl off somewhere and die! And not anywhere I can see your good for nothing corpse becuase I don't want to have to clean that mess up either! AMERICA IS THE BEST COUNTRY IN THE WORLD! WOO HOO!
      Report Abuse
      • Author by theselflobby (February 26, 2010 4:27 pm ET)
          5
        independent organizations, churches, and charities would all see increases in their funding if our president would just do one simple thing...lower taxes. don't depend on people that want to rule you...
        Report Abuse
        • Author by whatIthink (February 26, 2010 10:51 pm ET)
          4  
          Yeah, last I checked, churches and non profit organizations and non profit charities do not get taxed. So, now you want to lower taxes on groups that don't pay taxes. That's real bright.
          Report Abuse
          • Author by ForTheLoveOfEllipsis... (February 26, 2010 11:42 pm ET)
            2  
            And what was it the right-wingers were saying when Obama was pushing a middle-class tax cut? Oh yeah, I remember--that they don't pay taxes anyway! But when it's the First Bahble-Beatin' Baptist Church they're talking about, it's perfectly okay to cut their nonexistent taxes. Sheesh...
            Report Abuse
          • Author by theselflobby (February 27, 2010 7:19 pm ET)
               
            Apparently I wasn't being clear. When taxes are lower, individuals have more money to give to charities/organizations/whatever. Didn't mean to confuse you. I realize charities/churches are mostly tax exempt.
            Report Abuse
        • Author by Unreality (February 27, 2010 10:44 pm ET)
          1  
          There is no way you have taken a university-level Economics course that covers the history of the US economy since 1980. You do know that Reagan raised taxes?

          You do know that capital gains rates are so low that Warren Buffett is ashamed his tax rate is lower than his secretary's?
          Report Abuse
    • Author by Major Tom (February 26, 2010 4:12 pm ET)
      4 1
      I love when Rush tells his listeners about what he did over the weekend... Flying to exclusive golf resorts, spending the holidays in Hawaii, the caribbean, or some other exotic locale... I always wondered, how do truck drivers, construction workers, and the other blue/white collar audience think of his lifestyle? Don't they feel any sense of outrage when silently comparing their work/money ratio to what Rush does 15 hours a week?
      Report Abuse
      • Author by theselflobby (February 26, 2010 4:23 pm ET)
          3
        his lifestyle is why we work hard. we want it too. work/money ratio is no reason to hate anyone.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by whatIthink (February 26, 2010 10:56 pm ET)
          4  
          No, it's pipedream that he's selling you. The bigggest con that the rightwing blowhards like Rush have pulled off is convincing people "Hey, someday, you might be as rich as I am, so vote now to protect your future riches. It may hurt you in the short term, but when you're rich like me, you'll be grateful you voted the way I told you to." When the sad reality is that 99% of the country will not become as rich as the richest 1%, no matter how hard they work. It's like the people who buy lottery tickets every week. Sure, some people win big, but the vast majority of them are thrwoing their money away. But, these people who listen Rush and agree with him have bought into the pipedream so much that they don't even realize when their positions are directly against their best interests.
          Report Abuse
          • Author by theselflobby (February 27, 2010 7:46 pm ET)
               
            voting for lower taxes and smaller gov't is against my 'best interests'?
            Report Abuse
        • Author by Major Tom (February 27, 2010 10:27 am ET)
          1  
          Your right about someone's wealth not being a good enough reason to hate anyone, theselflobby... It's not his weath that bothers me, or I'd wager, anyone else who says they hate Limbaugh. It's what he says, it's how offensive and intentionally subversive he is with his listeners. It's his unaccountability combined with his obvious, and self indentified power in political discourse, and the spread of (mis)information. I was bringing to light how he lives in a completely different 'class' of society from his listeners, and how the MMFA piece above is correct in their statements regarding the disconnect in living standards. Not saying that was the reason why I hate Limbaugh.

          His lifestyle has nothing to do with working hard, theselflobby. He works 15 hrs a week, usually not every week, and has been completely supported by Roger Ailes for around 20 years now. Does he have broadcasting talent? Yes, but they say Hitler had amazing speaking abilities too.
          Report Abuse
    • Author by wesley (February 26, 2010 4:21 pm ET)
        12
      -- he wasn't phased -- John Santore

      Huh?

      And the rest of this piece is nothing more than liberal penis envy about those that obtain more success than themselves...classic.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by bilbo_dies (February 26, 2010 4:33 pm ET)
        9  
        And the rest of this piece is nothing more than liberal penis envy about those that obtain more success than themselves...classic.

        Yes, you are obviously so right. If you aren't born rich, or don't work hard enough to be successful enough that you can afford to pay cash for false teeth, or just dental care, you deserve to be toothless.

        I mean really. Didn't George Washington get by with wooden teeth?
        Come on people. If you can't afford to go to the dentist, must carve yourself some new teeth.
        Report Abuse
      • Author by New Frontier (February 26, 2010 4:35 pm ET)
        5  
        Huh?
        Right on cue, a good example.

        As Santore says, "They don't feel -- or care about -- your pain".
        Report Abuse
        • Author by wesley (February 26, 2010 4:46 pm ET)
          1 8
          A 2004 study by Dr.Brooks found:

          -- When Brooks compared his findings to IRS data on the percentage of household income given away, he found that "red" states in the 2004 election were more charitable than "blue" states. Brooks found that 24 of the 25 states that were above average in family charitable giving voted for Bush in 2004, and 17 of the 25 states below average in giving voted for Kerry. Brooks concluded, "The electoral map and the charity map are remarkably similar."
          Report Abuse
          • Author by nerzog (February 26, 2010 5:04 pm ET)
            5  
            I wonder... does that study count money sent by little old ladies to scumbags like Pat Robertson? Conservatives are more likely to be brainwashed into dropping their money into a preacher's pocket, no doubt about that.
            Report Abuse
            • Author by overmars jr. (February 26, 2010 6:00 pm ET)
              3  
              Yes, it does. And his "religious givers" do about half their giving to... religion.

              The book is just more typical right wing reality bending. Same as usual, same as any of the people we talk about on here everyday. Total garbage. No wonder Wesley offered it as some sort of proof. Typical.
              Report Abuse
              • Author by spooky3 (February 26, 2010 7:35 pm ET)
                4  
                And I suppose not one of the red state "givers" inflated his/her deductions on his/her 1040, either.

                Sounds as if "Dr." Brooks may need a little brushing up on research methods...
                Report Abuse
          • Author by New Frontier (February 26, 2010 5:08 pm ET)
            5  
            Limbaugh: "If you don't have any teeth, so what?" he said. "What's applesauce for?"
            Glenn Beck: "I've read the Constitution ... I didn't see that you had a right to teeth."
            wesley: "nothing more than liberal penis envy"
            Notice a pattern? As Santore says, "They don't feel -- or care about -- your pain".
            Report Abuse
          • Author by spooky3 (February 26, 2010 11:39 pm ET)
            2  
            I found this review - complete with pretty specific information that you could check out if you really wanted to know about this book - to be very illuminating. You are aware, of course, that books do not go through as rigorous a review as articles in good academic journals.

            http://www.amazon.com/Who-Really-Cares-Compassionate-Conservatism/product-reviews/0465008232/ref=cm_cr_dp_hist_1?ie=UTF8&showViewpoints=0&filterBy=addOneStar

            ..."--no PhD has his name attached to it in the
            Dissertation abstracts database. I told him this, and he said he got his PhD from the "RAND graduate school" in Los Angeles. He expressed no curosity about that database or the absence of any mention of his in it. (NOTE: a library worker at the university library I use told me that that database probably has omissions. The absence of a Ph.D record for someone in it does not necessarily mean they don't have a Ph.D she said). "

            ..."--When I told Brooks about the amazon reviews that complained about his
            measuring caring by monetary giving of total income,
            rather than of disposable income, I was really disappointed by his response. I explained to him that this definition creates a bias favoring rural conservatives with low rent, growing their own food
            etc, and against liberals concentrated around
            universities and urban areas. His response was to prattle on and on about his not paying attention to such reviews and to other things in the "popular press", without ever addressing the content of the complaint"...

            Report Abuse
            • Author by spooky3 (February 26, 2010 11:44 pm ET)
              2  
              and, oh yes, a cursory search reveals that our Mr. Brooks is affiliated with the American Enterprise Institute, that bastion of fair and balanced research.
              Report Abuse
      • Author by cugagcmu805031 (February 26, 2010 4:37 pm ET)
        4  
        Has Blimpy ever invited you on one of his jaunts? I'm sure he has, as much as you shill for him against your fellow Americans. What you just don't get is that Blimpy is using you and his other listeners to line his own pockets, so essentially you're a tool of the RW Hate Corporation of America whose chairman is Rush "Blimpy" Limbaugh. I have no penis, therefore no penis envy. I also see that you're fully invested in the conservative meme that no liberals have ever attained financial or professional success. If you believe this, you're living in a fantasy world. It must suck to be you.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by Slow Cowboy (February 26, 2010 4:43 pm ET)
            5
          And no liberal has gotten rich using certain over the top rhetoric, either.
          Report Abuse
        • Author by dirtylittlereligion (February 26, 2010 4:45 pm ET)
          3  
          fantasy world.


          Oh man, Wingnut fantasy world sure does look great.
          Report Abuse
        • Author by wesley (February 26, 2010 4:54 pm ET)
            7
          -- I have no penis, therefore no penis envy. -- cugagcmu

          Penis envy in Freudian psychoanalysis refers to the theorized reaction of a girl during her psychosexual development to the realization that she does not have a penis...

          In contemporary culture, the term is sometimes used symbolically or metaphorically to refer to the idea that women wish they had a penis, or to refer to anxieties between men about the size of their genitals.

          Clear enough?
          Report Abuse
          • Author by bintx (February 26, 2010 4:57 pm ET)
            4  
            Thank you, Dr. Freud . . . I think most of the folks who post here are aware of that fact. Nice C&P, though.

            You are still incorrect. These people are successful . . . they have money and fame. That's not success. In my opinion, they are all losers. They've lost touch with their humanity. They are very, very sad, miserable people.
            Report Abuse
            • Author by bintx (February 26, 2010 4:58 pm ET)
              4  
              These people aren't successful . . . they have money and fame.
              Report Abuse
              • Author by Slow Cowboy (February 26, 2010 5:18 pm ET)
                  5
                Good you define success that way but does everyone else? Why are actors considered successful? Ball players? In part, because they make a lot of money. Another example are musical artists. Some of them are terrible but make a lot of money and are thus seen as successful.

                What I suggest is that you apply your definition of success broadly and not just toward those you don't like.
                Report Abuse
                • Author by New Frontier (February 26, 2010 8:02 pm ET)
                  3  
                  What I suggest is that you apply your definition of success broadly and not just toward those you don't like.
                  Maybe when you're done scolding bintx, you can suggest to Malkin, Beck and Ingraham that they apply their definitions of compassion and caring more broadly, and not narrowly towards those they don't like.
                  Report Abuse
                  • Author by Slow Cowboy (February 26, 2010 11:57 pm ET)
                       
                    Do you have anything to base your comment on? Scolding? Nothing in there to suggest I am scolding, only suggesting that all is applied equally.
                    Report Abuse
                • Author by ForTheLoveOfEllipsis... (February 26, 2010 11:46 pm ET)
                  1  
                  Go take your the-rich-are-better-than-you garbage and shove it up Mona Charen's tochis, Irrational CONservative...
                  Report Abuse
          • Author by New Frontier (February 26, 2010 5:11 pm ET)
            3  
            Are there any of you wingnuts who aren't fixated on the penis, a$$, anal poisoning, bending over, Botox, or Hillary's thighs? If so, it'd be a first.
            Report Abuse
      • Author by NothingButTheTruth (February 26, 2010 4:48 pm ET)
        7  
        Are you serious, Wesley?

        Are you that politically motivated that you can't condemn these comments?

        I have a friend who has Lupus right now along with skyrocketing medical bills. Is she also ripe for ridicule? I guess she shouldn't have 'chosen' Lupus, then, huh?

        If it were YOUR friend or YOUR mother/father...would these callous comments from the talking heads be fine and dandy? Does it even matter what side of the aisle they represent?

        The thing is..these stories ARE someone's mother/father/friend...

        Politics should NEVER trump humanity.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by Slow Cowboy (February 26, 2010 5:04 pm ET)
            6
          In all seriousness, NBT, define "humanity" because it seems to me that this could be a very loose term. Anything attached to any sort of emotion could be termed humanity, and since anything is essentially emotive could thus be included.

          I do think Conservative rhetoric does a disservice to their cause, as this article and the comments show how people react. They often are callous, and arguably empty, and I am not a huge fan of Rush for that reason.

          However, politics is arguably about "humanity". It seeks to determine how best do we maximize EVERYONE's humanity, not just a given group. Politics is about how to define society, and you cannot take "humanity" out of that.

          It becomes how to allocate resources best to get to the best solution. A policy that you think is "inhumane" may be a very valid policy. The simple truth is that we have limited resources, and sometimes tough decisions are made.
          Report Abuse
          • Author by soze169880 (February 26, 2010 7:45 pm ET)
            2  
            define "humanity" because it seems to me that this could be a very loose term.

            I love this. The sociopathic, objectivist right summarized in one sentence.
            Report Abuse
          • Author by whatIthink (February 26, 2010 11:01 pm ET)
            2  
            I'm not sure who said, but any society can be judged by how they treat their leas fortunate. And right now, we would not be judged very kindly.

            So, if politics is about defining society, our politics suck.
            Report Abuse
          • Author by whatIthink (February 26, 2010 11:01 pm ET)
            1  
            I'm not sure who said, but any society can be judged by how they treat their leas fortunate. And right now, we would not be judged very kindly.

            So, if politics is about defining society, our politics suck.
            Report Abuse
            • Author by Slow Cowboy (February 27, 2010 12:06 am ET)
                 
              Are you sure about that? Actually, we treat our less fortunate quite well. Certainly not perfect, but pretty darn well.
              Report Abuse
          • Author by ForTheLoveOfEllipsis... (February 26, 2010 11:49 pm ET)
            2  
            The simple truth is that we have limited resources, and sometimes tough decisions are made.

            By which you mean, Heartless CONservative, give all the resources to the rich and maybe they'll throw pennies at the poor. Heard this garbage before--stated better, in fact. Now go back and salaam to your Ayn Rand action figure a few more hours, Con...
            Report Abuse
            • Author by Slow Cowboy (February 27, 2010 12:08 am ET)
                 
              Do you wish to address the susbtance of my comment?

              Can I ask about George Soros? Or perhaps about any other rich liberal?

              Can you accept that neither side is perfect?
              Report Abuse
      • Author by bintx (February 26, 2010 4:54 pm ET)
        3  
        I'm not sure about the other folks here, but I don't have any "penis" envy [don't have one, don't want one, thanks] for these losers. Money and fame are not signs of "success" or happiness. Rush is no success . . . he's got tons of money, fame and he's working on his fourth marriage. He is the only member of his family who isn't educated, he's the only member of his family who isn't a lawyer, a judge or a former elected official . . . he makes his money making mean-spirited, dishonest rants on the radio. He appears to be one of the most miserable human beings I've ever seen in my life . . . so do the rest of these losers. If they are examples of "success," I'd rather be unsuccessful. I have a family that loves me, I have friends who love me, I have a church with people who love me, I have job, I have a roof over my head and I have food. I call that success.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by political_left-religious_right (March 01, 2010 10:41 am ET)
             
          And you have honesty, integrity, intelligence, character, and class. Five more points for you, and five more strikes against Limbaugh.
          Report Abuse
    • Author by Slow Cowboy (February 26, 2010 4:35 pm ET)
        7
      I'd buy into this story if Liberals did not have their own venom in their comments.

      Personally, I think such "joking" is not beneficial to the discussion because of the reaction you gave here. However, it is short sighted to call out the Conservatives for it without looking to Liberals who do the same.

      Don't believe me that Liberals do it? Ever watch Keith Olberman or any other Liberal commentator? How about Start Smalley before going to DC? Bill Maher? Even Chris Matthews gets some jabs in.

      I am not suggesting that because everyone does it is OK. I am suggesting two different ideas: it is hypocritical to call out only one side and such attacks are not useful to anyone.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by New Frontier (February 26, 2010 7:40 pm ET)
        3  
        it is hypocritical to call out only one side
        You're hypocritical---unless you're posting that exact same comment on conservative web sites.

        Furthermore, these are comments from obscure, anonymous posters on a blog---and they are made in response to hateful, anti-progressive remarks from national media figures.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by ForTheLoveOfEllipsis... (February 26, 2010 11:51 pm ET)
          1  
          You're hypocritical---unless you're posting that exact same comment on conservative web sites.

          Sure he is--and my name's Alexander Ovechkin...
          Report Abuse
        • Author by Slow Cowboy (February 27, 2010 12:09 am ET)
             
          Actually, I have called them out on conservative sites.
          Report Abuse
    • Author by Slow Cowboy (February 26, 2010 5:07 pm ET)
        7
      We're starting to see the very comments towards conservatives this article calls out conservatives for.

      Interesting, that's all.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by soze169880 (February 26, 2010 7:46 pm ET)
        4  
        How do you figure? Who here mocked a conservative for misfortunes beyond their control?
        Report Abuse
        • Author by Slow Cowboy (February 27, 2010 12:13 am ET)
             
          Soze, read the comments on Rush going to the hospital and you'll start to see the connection.

          It is not just about mocking someone for conditions beyond their control, it is the venom behind the comments that I am focused on.

          I have even been mocked for trying to say that this problem goes both ways. Do you wish to tell me that the left does not have their pointless venom?
          Report Abuse
      • Author by whatIthink (February 26, 2010 11:04 pm ET)
        4  
        There's a difference between calling someone a F%^&ing loser because they had to wear their sisters dentures and mocking them and calling someone a F%^&ing loser because they were calling someone who had to wear her sisters dentures and mocking her for it.

        If you can't see the difference between the two, then you are either intentional blind or unintentionally simple.
        Report Abuse
        • Author by ForTheLoveOfEllipsis... (February 26, 2010 11:52 pm ET)
          2  
          Third option, WIT; possibly heartlessly callous. Yeah, that's the one I'm putting my bet on...
          Report Abuse
      • Author by starwheel (February 28, 2010 10:43 am ET)
        2  
        That is a huge leap for someone who identifies him or herself as "Rational".
        Report Abuse
    • Author by patachon (February 27, 2010 6:21 am ET)
      1  
      The arrogance of indifference.
      Report Abuse
    • Author by toxicshock (February 27, 2010 9:07 am ET)
         
      I find it interesting that conservatives claim to be patriots, love their country so much, and accuse anyone even remotely to the left as "enemies" and unpatriotic. And yet conservatives - like those mentioned in this post - are the ones who really hate America. They don't want to protect and take care of America or it's citizens; they demonstrate this every time they oppose health care for their fellow Americans who can't afford it. Talk about hating your country!
      Report Abuse
    • Author by starwheel (February 28, 2010 10:28 am ET)
         
      This is one of the reasons I can no longer identify with modern day conservatism.

      They willingly miss the point entirely and once you peel away the layers of their "compassionate" conservatism, they are nothing but a bunch of callous, cynical and mean-spirited people who have absolutely no regard for the suffering and misery of other people.
      Report Abuse