Levin: "Let me suggest ... if anybody's hurt" at town hall meetings, "this White House has some responsibility for it"
August 07, 2009 10:07 pm ET
From the August 8 edition of Fox News' Hannity:
Also says, "If something terrible happens at one of these town hall meetings, I think the president in part can be held accountable."
Previously:
Dobbs: "[W]hat this White House is leading us to is direct confrontation, a physical confrontation"
The other right-wing media mogul you should worry about
Palin's book and Obama's bow: a media week to forget
Media Matters: The Palin chronicles
Union workers = Lowest form of life
No, no, no...that would be the Republican/Health Care Industry slime who have convinced ignorant, gullible Americans that Barack Obama's health care reform includes beauracratic death panels to dictate when old people must die. You can't get much lower than that...
Private Sector union workers are quite a bit less than 10 percnet of the workforce by the way.
The non-union workers earn their keep.
- Medicare Cuts
- Quality of Life panels
- Forbidding busineeses to offer health insurance past a certain.
All of this is in the bill and indisputable.
Flat-out lies. But it proves where you got this dose of garbage from--the Sarah Palin Facebook page. Par for the course, I'd say...
Obama wants to murder the elderly. It's in the bill. It's Indisputable.
Obama wants the government to tell you what doctors you can see and what procedures you can have. It's in the bill. It's Indisputable.
Obama wants to destroy Social Security. It's in the bill. It's Indisputable.
Of course, all of this is total BS. "Its in the bill, it's Indisputable" is Cheney telling us to stop focusing on the facts, take him at his word (which, as we all know, is worth a pile of steaming excrement) and end the discussion. He never seems to get that no one here buys any of his pathetic talk show parroting, and that clearly frustrates the hell out of him.
I am telling to READ THE BILL. Not just the web sites of Mediae matters, Think Progress, Daily Kos and the DNC. READ THE BILL
You aren't listening
Never said anyhting about Social Securty. What does that have to do with health care. Stop trying to muddy the waters.
Oh my God, it really IS Cheney.
And not the Sarah Palin Facebook page, where the "death panel" garbage got its start!
We expect nothing less from the uninformed.
TRANSLATION: I have no proof, of course.
You've offered no proof, only invective. Surely if you are as knowing and intelligent as you claim, you will be more than happy to show us exactly where we have it wrong.
Also, I really doubt that you read the bill because you posted complete falsehoods above.
Why this is essentially true.
The Health Care Act (AAHCA) prohibits new private health insurance beginning in 2013 (called Y1 in the bill), unless it is an "exchange-offered" plan, which means it must contain certain elements of coverage and compete against the public option.(p.19)
Grandfathered plans (those private plans in effect before Y1) are allowed to continue subject to the following:
New enrollees are not allowed. No changes may be offered to their plans. (p.16, lines 1-26)
For the new plans, pre-existing condition exclusions will not be allowed (p. 19) e.g. smoked all your life and have cancer? They still must take you. Insurers will be subject to specific regulations on pricing and coverage such that they will not be able to make a reasonable profit unless they charge higher rates vs. the public option. (Insurers need a profit to continue, government does not). Net effect, private employers will drop private coverage and pick up the public option.
Because of the costs, only public sector entities will be able to provide non-public option care. Congress should put in wording in the AAHCA that indicates their members must use the public option coverage when available. Then we could count on a fair bill.
AAHCA available at http://energycommerce.house.gov/Press_111/20090714/aahca.pdf
(link there easily from www.speaker.gov)
So what is the answer?
It begins with moving the cost of healthcare closer to the individual. Here are some suggestions:
1. Pass legislation that encourages the use of HSA's.
2. Pass legislation that allows for deductions of healthcare expenses for individuals at a lower rate than 7%. Allow for deductions by the self-employed.
3. Require minimum copays for procedures in any health plan. (An office visit should cost something.)
No one expects to have no out of pocket expenses if their auto breaks down. It should be the same for health.
Each of us has a responsibility to maintain our health, as we maintain the other aspects of our lives.
At last, someone who is willing to be reasonable and cite their sources and explain their position without once using the word 'Nazi' or 'socialism'. I salute you!
"For the new plans, pre-existing condition exclusions will not be allowed (p. 19) e.g. smoked all your life and have cancer? They still must take you. Insurers will be subject to specific regulations on pricing and coverage such that they will not be able to make a reasonable profit unless they charge higher rates vs. the public option. (Insurers need a profit to continue, government does not). Net effect, private employers will drop private coverage and pick up the public option."
So, for-profit health coverage, subject to the same rules as the public plan (the exchange system) will necessarily cost more based solely on the fact that is run on a for profit basis. This will lead to the end of for profit coverage. I believe this is the crux of your argument?
First, I believe there will always be people in this country willing to pay more for better or more comprehensive health care. Some people will be willing to pay more just because they can afford to. How else do we live in a land where some women carry $6,000 purses? This will certainly lead to competition for what will likely be a diminishing market.
If anyone is so opposed to the public option, even a group of employees at a private business, all they have to do is pay the higher rates from a for profit insurance company, and keep their private insurance. Hear me out on this one.
The reason I suggest they should simply keep the more expensive private insurance is simple: This is what they would have had -anyway-! It's what the current system looks like if we stand by and do nothing, which is what most opponents of health coverage seem to want. No public option at all. So, the people who are so opposed to it can keep the for profit insurance industry alive, and their profits intact, just by continuing to pay higher premiums that they've already demonstrated a willingness to pay by arguing for the status quo.
While I agree that there will be some market loss by the for profit insurers, for those that pay the premiums, their costs should go down as competition forces those private insurers to keep pace with the public option.
I agree that there should be minimum copays for everything but checkups. After all, we -want- people to get more checkups. I also agree that there are restructurings of the current model that will allow for better results for the average consumer, such as HSAs. I do think that only a private option will rein in the costs of health care in this country, and it is of vital interest to our future health and our economy that we do so as quickly as possible.
Each of us has a responsibility to maintain our health, as we maintain the other aspects of our lives." - hilltopper
That type of "logic" makes sense . . .
. . . right up until the moment someone gets a contagious disease . . .
http://healthcarereformmyths.org
You keep saying "indisputable"...but it's being disputed. Which means, "Show me the money!" Or in this case, the evidence. And don't say "READ THE BILL," because I have! And THIS clear thinking American who HAS read the bill is telling you...YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT!!
The neo-con movement is the most overt evidence that the "dumbing down" of America is alive and well. Fortunately these morons are a small and ever-shrinking miniority. Most people truly have better sense to buy this crap.
As for Obama saying anything about this ridiculous death panel claim . . . he has, but if you're watching Fox, you didn't hear it. It goes against their propaganda agenda.
Matter of fact, what bill did you read?
I only ask because---and this is a small point, I know---there isn't any freakin' bill to read. There is no bill before the House and no bill before the Senate.
Just like a Conservative- NEVER get your facts straight. Just spit out nonsense and when called on it, just Lie, divide, distort, obfuscate.
It's his assertion, so he should back it up. Feel free to explain why that's unfair.
This conservative finds you offensive.
You said it's in the bill when you knew there was no bill, only proposed bills in several committees.
You're the one being obtuse when you call numerous forms of proposed legislation still in committee a bill.
I still am wondering which bill to read..Aren't there different versions and none of them are the ACTUAL bill.
Dick Cheney, or is it Morris, I am your friend, which bill? Shut these people up once and for all. We can do it together. Which bill? You can tell me, I can keep a secret, you know that.
Your Buddy,
Scooter
"Then the King will say to those on his right, 'Come, you who are blessed by my Father; take your inheritance, the kingdom prepared for you since the creation of the world. For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in, I needed clothes and you clothed me, I was sick and you looked after me, I was in prison and you came to visit me.' "Then the righteous will answer him, 'Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you something to drink? When did we see you a stranger and invite you in, or needing clothes and clothe you? When did we see you sick or in prison and go to visit you?' "The King will reply, 'I tell you the truth, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers of mine, you did for me.'
Kinda sounds like Christ thought we SHOULD give and do for others.
Anyway, the elderly teabaggers have certainly distinguished themselves here: "No socialized medicine. And keep your government hands off my Medicare."
You're going to bring up Kennedy? What about all the thousands of dead Americans Bush piled up playing cowboys and Indians in the desert? The Right has far more blood on it's hands than the Left.
Incidentally, this thread is actually about somebody (Levin) trying to blame the White House for hatred and violence stirred up by conservatives in the media and on the web. Of course, since that's just factually accurate, I can understand why you wouldn't want to discuss it, and seek to shift the topic to what you consider safer ground. Hey, why don't you bring up Senator Byrd while you're at it? C'mon, anything not to deal with the subject at hand, right?
And I love how wingnuts like fairlyawingnut love to bring up Kennedy's 40-year-old accident {or Byrd's 50-year-old KKK association, or Clinton's 15-year-old BJ} . . . but have a FIT if someone makes a judgement about GW Bush's admin -- which ended eight months ago . . .
As for the One Nation under God . . . based upon your posts here, you really don't follow the teachings of Christ very well, so I find it offensive that you even use that term. Christ didn't teach hatred and exclusion, Christ didn't teach that it was "every man for himself."
. . . an attack he was warned MORE THAN FIFTY SEPARATE TIMES ABOUT -- an attack wingnuts like you CONTINUALLY like to blame CLINTON for . . .
Dick Cheney chose to be a coward on five different occasions when he asked for Selective Service deferments.
Five times, he swore that he could not fight in a war he claims he supported. Each of those times, someone else was chosen to fight the war, while Cheney proved his cowardice.
I'll give you one for Kennedy but that pales in comparison to Cheney's five.
Demonstrably false. Read the bill (HR 3200) and look at more than the Section 102 which has to do with existing employer plans. The reason the lie has cropped up has to do with Section 101 (REQUIREMENTS REFORMING HEALTH INSURANCE MARKETPLACE.) [Caps because it's the header]
You see, dear, the bill is altering the way plans can be offered and requires plans, whether purchased by consumers or offered by employers.to include provisions that may not be in existing employer plans. The bill would permit such plans to exist but only for a specific time.
The Medicare cuts? If you would reference a specific section, somebody here may read it and explain it for you, it's a big bill.
Quality of Life panels? Why is this a bad thing? Outcome based assessments should help lower costs by sharing what works in patient care rather than what individual doctors think might work.
You're welcome.
http://factcheck.org/2009/07/false-euthanasia-claims/
Karl Levin posts on MMFA too? Will wonders never cease...
You mean the economy improving {EVER so SLIGHTLY}, and other nations respecting the US again?
Yeah, I like that. Why don't you?
It's all indisputable too (Cheney2012)
Do you have a link to the broken legs bit?
And where was RACE mentioned by me?? I can't criticize the President because he is a black man?
The pathetic attempts to make this about conservatives not wanting a black president to succeed is a joke. But to be expected from the Left. When substance fails throw the kitchen sink.
You liberals don't have facts or truth on your side. Give it up
I think the primary reason you criticize him is BECAUSE he's a black man.
We won't back down on phony charges of racism or that protests are not authentic. Get used to it.
You keep using that word... I do not think it means what you think it means.
Obama was, by far, the superior candidate. I didn't care if his skin was green.
Stop playing the race card. It is pathetic.
/snark week on the Discovery Channel
You talking about the same Alan Keyes who ran against Obama for the US Senate from IL in '04 -- despite NEVER living in Illinois?
OMG!
You have confirmed that you're bat crazy!!
Some people want the doctors to do whatever it takes to keep them alive even one more day. Some, like myself, would rather they just let me go once the end is imminent. I have had the unfortunate opportunity to sit in on these consultations with loved ones. It is absolutely imperative for any quality of care at the end of life.
The bills that I have read just make sure that doctors now get compensated for these consultations, which would, of course, ensure that these absolutely imperative conversations between a doctor and their patient take place. It is a wonderful thing that should already be a part of all healthcare plans. Unfortunately, our healthcare plans now are based upon profits and not what is in the best interest of the patient.
Even more unfortunate are these buffoons (like Cheney) who would trump this nonsense up into what they know are lies just for the sake of politics. Party over country. Party over the sick and dying. Party over everything...right, Dick? Shame on you and your pathetic excuse for a national political party. Although, clearly at this point, you have become shameless.
This is Cheney's bumper sticker:
PROFITS OVER PEOPLE
There is a great book titled "What's the Matter with Kansas" that touches on alot of this. Even after reading it though, it is still hard for me to fathom the mindset. How can you be so blinded by politics as to argue against doctor consultations with dying patients to determine the patient's wishes? And to not only be against it but to purposefully lie and attempt to convince people that Obama wants to kill the elderly. You are arguing your party politics over your own citizens who are sick and dying. Who cares what their political stripes were - they are dying and deserve the best care available. That is a truly unhealthy mind at work.
I know many of the protestors are given their marching orders from lobbying groups hired by the insurance company vampires.
I know that many of the protestors are not interested in a debate on the issues, rather are just their to stifle debate.
What do you know?
More and more people are realizing that Obama's election was a mistake and that his only real talent is campaigning. The libs response, cry racism. Look at the facts, people who don't support Obama, there are racist. People who attended the tea parties, they are racists. People who critisize acorn, they are racists. People who protest the at the town hall meetings, they are racists. It is their answer to everything.
(Hint - they want their country back from the BLACK MAN)
I guess you missed the part that under all of these plans being constructed in congress you will be allowed to keep your over-priced, under-covered, for-profit insurance.
That's a choice.
"More and more" like WHO, fairlyawingnut? The voices in your head?
I GUESS THAT'S WHY OBAMA'S APPROVAL RATINGS REMAIN SO HIGH . . .
America has been guilty of a certain arrogance. We went into Iraq simply because it was the will of Bush/Cheney, and overthrew their government. That was arrogance, pure and simple. It was also illegal, but let's not try to deal with that here.
Despair? The economy is abruptly getting better, not worse. Even better than the projections of the economists who designed the stimulus. Do you know when this economic slide started, serious sandra? In the spring of 2007, as a result of deregulation of the banking and investment industries begun under Reagan, continued under Clinton, and finished under Bush. You cannot blame Obama for an economy he quite clearly inherited.
Hopefully, things are done getting worse. They'll likely stay somewhat dispiriting for a while, but at least the slide into depression has been stopped. What would really help would be if the media would report some good ecomonic news every once in a while, if only for the placebo affect on consumer confidence.
CheneySentencedIn2012 would just call a private security guard or private nurse.
You know how wingnut neoKKKons like to outsource and privtize everything . . .
Now, now... just because they have actual jobs is no reason to get bitter.
Oh, and you are using the objective pronoun incorrectly, and you are using the possessive "one's" incorrectly. You probably need to stop trying so hard to be seen as "intelligent," it's not working.
I mean, SERIOUSLY, sandra, the contents of your posts belie your attempts.
And, he would be shocked to discover a presidential administration trading arms for hostages.
Oh wait . . .
How many more?
You are an idiot. Levin is 100 percent correct. Obama is inciting violence with his speeches and his thugs from SEIU are carrying out his directives.
In fact, of the people you named I see O'Reilly's show occasionally. And that's all. So, as usual you dont know what you are talking about.
You'll find it interesting, I guarantee it.
Seriously, Sandra, you just proved my point. You aren't conservative, you are a groupie. These people spew their lies and you believe them because you worship them. They LAUGH at people like you. You are their bread and gravy, the underinformed, hate-filled groupies who tune in faithfully to their ENTERTAINMENT programs [well, except Palin and all I can say about that is WOW! This woman, if she had a brain would take it out and play with it. She is an EMBARRASSMENT to professional women everywhere.] These people don't care a flip about their country, they care about how much money they can make . . . your lack of curiosity helps them make it. They are LAUGHING at you!
Just because you agree with these non-conservatives doesn't mean you're a conservative. Most likely, you have no idea what the term even means.
I think Palin's already gone . . .
That statement is as bizarre and outrageous as anything Glenn Beck or Rush Limbaugh would say...and as factually incorrect. Would you mind citing one example, just one, of a Barack Obama speech that is in any way inciting violence?
"If you get hit we will punch back twice as hard"
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0809/25891.html
they did that in Tampa and St. Louis last night apparently
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_kxaGfClPws
http://gatewaypundit.blogspot.com/2009/08/tea-party-protesters-attacked-1-man.html
Now that's more proof than any of libs have posted about ANYTHING
Gladney was there to hand out literature against health coverage reform. He is also, by his own admission, a tea party protester. There is no video of the beginning of the altercation, so there is no way to know how it started. There has been no trial, there has been no verdict.
"If you get hit we will punch back twice as hard"
"They showed video clips of the confrontational town halls that have dominated the media coverage, and told senators to do more prep work than usual for their public meetings by making sure their own supporters turn out, senators and aides said.
And they screened TV ads and reviewed the various campaigns by critics of the Democratic plan.
“If you get hit, we will punch back twice as hard,” Messina said, according to an official who attended the meeting. "
This from Yahoo! news, who puts that quote into some kind of context. They are talking metaphorically about the battle over health coverage reform, Cheney2012. They are not the ones who wrote a playbook on how to disrupt town hall meetings and shout down discourse. They are trying to open a dialog between people and their elected officials, and to protect that discourse (a cornerstone of democracy, by the way) from astroturfed protests.
by the way, the moron in that picture was our president not a mere 9 months ago, yet you wingnuts still complain about clinton, carter and all those loony left wingers. oh, the irony.
why dont you give us a jingle when that "substance" you were talking about comes around for you?
You're deranged. The incident you cite was an event HOSTED by SEIU. They didn't just show up and refuse to let people in because they were teabaggers, they were there because they hosted it. I watched the video. Those people were banging on the doors like chidren who don't get their way.
They don't want a discussion and they don't want to be heard, they just want to disrupt meetings and they want health reform to fail....PERIOD.
When Sarah Palin says that Obama is hanging around with domestic terrorists because he thinks America is imperfect, that's fine. That's free speech, her right, nothing anyone can say about that. Never mind that this sort of speech coincided with a rise in death threats against Obama.
Now...
So this is not Obama talking, as you said. Secondly, this is reported as his statement. Also, he's talking about hitting back, which would be reciprocal, not unprovoked behavior. And on top of all that, it would seem to be metaphorical, not literal.
To sum up:
When Palin accuses Obama of being someone who chooses to "pal around" with people who kill his fellow Americans, that's free speech. When Obama's deputy Chief of Staff reportedly makes a seemingly metaphorical comment about hitting back after they hit you, then that reported comment somehow overwhelms people and inspires them to take unprovoked violent action, and that equals "Obama inciting violence with his speeches".
Is that about right?
. . . says the one who kept repeating "just read the bill" . . .
Does Limbaugh own the Tea Party? Rush does more to incite riots than anyone in the media. I would like to think that no one listens to him but, alas, it's not true.
The Tea Party is nothing but a bunch of "thugs" who are willing to do the bidding of Rush.
Cheney, you could not quote one line from President Obama to support your claim of him inciting violence. Not one.
Neither is Dr. Seuss's Sleep Book, and for much the same reason; they're not intended for fully-functional adults...
Just channeling George W. Bush. Or is it Sean Hannity? Or Mark Levin?
Seriously, sandra, you really need to become more informed.
That's probably because they're (MMfA staff) still laughing their collective butts off after trying to read the first chapter not completely sure whether or not to take the book seriously enough to finish critiquing it!!
Probably the only true thing you've posted here, Cheney2012.Just as nobody can really go after McDonald's on their "cuisine".
I don't want to pump up your ego too much, Cheney, but you may be the biggest moron to post here, ever, based on this thread alone. And there are a handful of Republicans that have set the moron bar pretty high (or low).
I thought the same thing -- till I saw Serious Sandra's rants . . .
Here is an amazing review of "Men in Black", from Dahlia Lithwick. It gives insight into why NO-ONE talks about Levin's books.
Randy
That was a particularly nice turn of phrase, fantagor.
'Racist' because one of the righties' three favorite words (along with 'socialist' and 'Nazi') oh, right around Jan. 20 of this year; I'm pretty sure that it's now the official code-word for 'uppity'.
Rove and Cheney, together with Fox, Rush, et al, just followed Goebbels' lead.
Well, Mark -- let ME suggest that your fellow wingnut noisemakers such as Beck, Insanity, and Limpballs have PRIMARY responsiblity, since all their talk has serve to rile up those who disrupted the town hall meetings.
{Oh, and additionally, Mark -- I'd like to suggest that I think you and Chris Elliot were separated at birth:}
We Satanists have feelings too you know.
Why do you hate America?
I hide behind the men who die, while I cut their benefits,
And I'll drive up next to you in my new HumVee,
And I'll gladly take away your rights in the name of securiteee!"
I mean, SERIOUSLY, sandra.
After watching part of Rachel Maddow's show, where she did a very factual expose of the money behind the phony townhall screechmonkeys, I turned to Fox, where Hannity was at his Freedumb concert in San Diego with Hugh Hewitt (who thinks the Democratic Party is in a meltdown), a good looking but moronic female wingnut, and a Fox News analyst with long grey hair.
They had a fair & balanced discussion about how pointing out lies is censorship,and hand-picked the better looking members of a happy concert crowd to represent the pretend version of the angry old mobs at the town halls.
then came Oliver North & Mark Levin.Really fascinating, if you can stand to watch it.
The right wing is treating any efforts at responding to anti-health care propaganda the same way they framed the Fairness Doctrine; Any opposing opinion is censorship.
Oh yeah, and they're chanting "USA!!" a lot.
Really? Don't remember this for anti-war protesters when their numbers were ten fold.
Colonel, I applaud your digestive system for being able to stomach watching and listening to the right-wing screechers. Although I have to admit that Glen Beck shrieking "get off my phone" was a real gem and should not be missed.
Wow -- last time I checked, there was a Democratic President, a veto-proof Dem majority in the Senate, a solid Dem majority in the House, and the POTUS's choice for SC just got confirmed easily.
Here's hoping that "meltdown" continues in '10 and '12 . . .
I've been hearing that a lot,in the past several years since I started paying more attention to the mainstream conservative media.I heard it throughout the last presidential election campaigns, the Dems were always in chaos and almost extinct.
It plays to a couple of important components of right wing faith: Groupthink, that the GOP must always be portrayed as more stable and in-lockstep than "the enemy", and the constant need for wingnuts to be told things to counter reality.
It explains how Obama's approval ratings can be 50-55% -- and be "dropping like a rock."
It explains how the first African American POTUS in US history can appoint the first Hispanic female ASCJ in US history -- and both are "racists."
And, it explains how wingnuts can disrupt town hall meetings on orders from Limpballs, Insanity, and Glenda Beck -- and Obama gets blamed for it.
Mr. Levin,
please get your head out of your rear end and see what YOUR people are doing.
He's the one being called: Racist, communist, fascist, terrorist, muslim, evil, hitler-like, oh...socialist, can't forget that one.
But he'll be to blame if someone is hurt. Riiiiiiight.
Please just provide some page #s and section references that back up some of your claims. If these things are in the bill, I'd like to read them -- I'm sure everyone would.
When I found out that he's just 51 I was surprised. He looks and sounds horrible for a man of 51.
If anything happens it will come from there side.
But basically the "great one" is giving his side permission to be more aggressive
Because they already know who they wanna blame it on "if something happens"
Ny vet if SOMETHING WILL HAPPEN on purpose and it will be blamed on Acorn or Seiu..
Hannity will say " Obama sent Acorn and SEIU to these townhalls to start FIGHTS
Watch .....
Makes sense.
I suppose Obama caused the Norman Conquest in 1066, too.