But you have to love this comment by right-wing blogger/Fox commentator Michelle Malkin.
“When a family and Democrat political leaders drag a child down to Washington at 6 in the morning to read a script written by Senate Democrat staffers on a crusade to overturn a presidential veto, someone might have questions about the family’s claims. The newspapers don’t want to do their jobs. The vacuum is being filled. If you don’t want questions, don’t foist these children onto the public stage. Fight your battles like adults and stop hiding behind youngsters dragging around red wagons filled with your talking points.”
For Malkin and the other smear artists of the right, it's all about the joy of shooting Bambi, of taking a 13 year old kid and pumping him full of lead, humiliating him within an inch of his life, or at the very least stealing his lunch money.
She loves it.
The more innocent or worthy the representative of a liberal position, the more joy that people like Michelle Malkin and Ann Coulter take in smearing them.
If you're an innocent kid like Graeme Frost, they'll attack your family. If you're a war hero like John Kerry or a Marine colonel like John Murtha, they'll get extra big kicks out of tearing into your military record.
That's why Michelle Malkin blames Democratic Senate staffers for her smear campaign. If they're going to put a kid out there, they should know that Malkin will take extra pleasure in smearing him. The Democrats just should have known.
What a great country!
Lucky the Virgin Mary wasn't a liberal. The smear-artists of the right would have asked a lot of tough questions about one of her sons and there would be no "Christian traditions" to defend.
Posts
15 comments:
You really are one disingenuous person. Nobody is attacking the kid, or in your childish way of speaking, filling Bambi full of lead. The Dems and the parents are being rightly criticized for pimping out a disabled 12 year old to make a political statement, and then using that 12 year old as some kind of human shield from criticism.
Your post, and accompanying lies, were as predictable as the sun setting in the west.
That the Dems and Oppurtunistic, and fairly successful, parents whore out their kid gives no one on the right to question them over it. They are doing it FOR THE CHILDREN. Sure, they could have found a kid that was actually sick, and actually poor enough to need the program, but why go through the trouble of finding a real story when the fake story could be true if they really tried looking around. And for Malkin to insist that the actual facts support the story, well that's just inexcusable.
should read more like "both sick and poor enough" Hurried typing reads like I'm questioning Frosts medical condition, which is not the case.
P.S. Feel free to Limbaugh me with the quote from now to eternity, even though I've clarified it with later comments.
This latest right wing smear is beyond disgusting. What the fuck is the matter with the leaders of the Republican party? Is there anyone besides millionaires and large corporations who are off-limits?
I was actually taken aback (and that rarely happens), when I saw how the President and his people treated Graeme Frost. HE'S TWELVE!! You do not attack twelve-year olds in the press, especially when they are speaking from experience about something important.
As soon as the child spoke out and told the story of how S-CHIP had literally saved himself and his sister as well as their parents. Right-wing leaders and bloggers began an ad-hominen smear campaign...against the child.
The fact is, the Frost family qualified for aid under the law. If your child is hurt and you need help, and you qualify for some kind of assistance, you take it. It's that simple. That's why it is there. That's the end of the story.
The real story that's emerging now is that a 12-year-old child and his family are being attacked and harassed for speaking out on an issue of public policy
Just when I think they can't get any more shallow, they manage to drain more water out of the well.
There are absolutes in life. One of those absolutes is that society owes all its citizens health care coverage regardless of ability to pay. It is not a privlidge as some would contend. It is a human right and it is WAY past time to cover everyone. Certainly the children.
These hypocital self-righteous pricks are truly beyond belief. Their President claims a divine mandate then violates a central tenet of Christianity. The Bible, as well as other religious traditions, teaches us to measure ourselves by how we treat the “least of these.” It is inexcusable that vulnerable children should be deprived of health care so that the President and the few remaining supporters he truly has in the House and the Senate wage an ideological argument.
Nine million children go without health insurance in this country. A broad bipartisan majority in both houses of Congress, including such die-hard conservatives as Senator Orrin Hatch of Utah and Chuck Grassley of Iowa, voted to expand the S-CHIP program to cover about half of those. About five million are already covered by the S-CHIP program.
The President and conservative and liberal Senators agree that the program works. This isn’t about reckless spending. The expansion is paid for by an increase in taxes on cigarettes.
President Bush's twisted logic about this issue is that expansion of the program would cover middle income families. Given the cost of private health care it isn’t clear what would be wrong with that. But, in any case, it isn’t true.
This bill would allow states to cover children of people who make up to two times the poverty line. In a family of four, that would be according to the Kaiser Institute about $41,000 for a family of four. That's not much per year to take care of four people. They need S-CHIP.
Does anyone other than the president born of privilege have any doubt that families raising two children on $40,000 a year will struggle with health care costs? Making sure kids can go see a doctor when they are sick is inexpensive and it is the right thing to do.
White House spokespeople also say the main issue is an ideological one. They say it would lead to government run health care for every American.
Again, this wouldn’t be bad were it true. Recipients of government sponsored health care; Medicare, Medicaid, Veteran’s Health Care, federal and state government employee’s insurance are perfectly happy with those programs. They don't want to deal with insurance companies.
Just as a matter of efficiency, health care dollars should be reallocated away from overpaid insurance companies and into greater benefits for both Medicare beneficiaries and S-CHIP children.
Savings in administrative costs alone make this a good idea. As a percentage of operating budget, Medicare, Medicaid, and S-CHIP, utilize approximately 1-2% of their total budgets in administrative costs. Private insurers routinely spend over 20% on administrative costs.
Moreover, this is not a new issue that jumped out at us all at once. Increasing numbers of uninsured have skyrocketed over the last 25 years. We'll have to enact universal health care legislation before too much more time has passed anyway.
People want this bill. They want health care for their children. The President’s veto is contemptuous of both the health of America’s children and the will of the American people. Apparently, the President feels that funding this critical program for five years is not worth the cost, even as he spends the same amount to continue the occupation of Iraq for three months.
It is fortunate that an overide of that veto is a possibility. It is worth the trouble
you need help, and you qualify for some kind of assistance, you take it.
As a matter of first principles, I prefer: If you can take care of it yourself, do so. Don't dig into someone else's pocket before your own.
One of those absolutes is that society owes all its citizens health care coverage
Other than, you say so, could you maybe pose a small argument to support that point? Just try it. I'll be gentle.
The current batch of "rights" shares one thing in common. Exercising them does not impose an obligation on private citizens or deny that same right to others. Anyone can make political speech. Anyone can own a firearm, etc. Some wiccan friends of mine have a saying (don't know that it's religious, but it uses "ye" so it sounds wiccan to me), Harm none, do what ye will, that sums up nicely the reasoning for rights in the first place. Anything I can do that does not impose on you, is my right to do.
Health care requires the rendering of a service by others. To call it a right is to obligate those that have completed medical school to service without just compensation. There are ethical codes in place that do require Medically trained personnel to render aid (first responders, doctors, nurses), and rightly so, but those are professional ethical standards.
Onto the frost family... The dems are absolute cowards on this issue like so many before. Hand somebody, carefully selected for pity factor, a script and air it to the world. When the tiniest bit of research shows it to be a fraud, blame others for hating kids, old ladies, mothers, puppies, flowers, rainbows, Santa Claus or whatever the Dems are using for political cover. It's the propaganda equivalent of human shields. Graeme Frost is 12. I doubt he has a deep understanding of his family's finances, knowledge of his father's succesful business, or of the options out there for business owners to get group insurance, but his parents told him how much Bush hates him. He trusted his parents and read the script. I feel bad for the kid. I'm furious at his parents.
Todd Mayo jumps in, sparing no hyperbole whatsoever, and proceeds to trot out the Pelosi/Caric party line, but manages to make good ole' Nancy seem positively statesmanlike in her restraint.
TODD MAYO - When was the last time either party used a 12 year old to deliver a political speech in rebuttal to the President's weekly radio address?
Poverty is now up to $82,000 per year, except when it is time for tax cuts, and then $80,000 is uber wealthy.
Children is now being defined to include people out of college, and other adults.
At least todd is consistent.
There is a legitimate debate to be had on this topic, except with Todd who puts health insurance on par with the freedom of speech. However, the Dems avoided actually discussing the topic from the moment it came up, choosing to fall back on the old reliable "Republicans was to kill kids" meme. Then, to make sure there was never a debate, they find a family willing to pimp out their disabled kid to give a political speech, and then use the kid as a shield from criticism of the Dems or the parents.
Why did the parents not have health insurance prior to the automobile accident, when it most certainly was not cost prohibitive? How can a family that owns a home, owns commerical property, and drives a new Suburban be considered poor?
Caric, certainly Todd, and the others on the Left that continue to flat out lie about this topic are doing so intentionally. It is simply not possible to be so dumb that they could arrive at their positions rationally. They are ginning up their faux moral outrage, using a disabled 12 year old as a political prop and human shield, and laughing because the media will continue to let them get away with it.
Unfortunately, the opposition missed the real problem with the Democrat Party response.
How is a child that got their treatment paid for on the current SCHIP program an argument for expanding that program?
Shouldn't the Democrats have pimped out a sick child who was not on the program?
Thought about it News, but its just not as interesting as Pelosi using a 9 and 12 year old kids to ward off rhetorical JDAM's.
The real disconnect here is between the far right wing nuts (who will go unnamed here) and the more intelligent national conservatives. Mitch McConnell's staff mutter ing about how they feel lucky not to be drug into Malkin's stalking a family is fascinating.
It's also fascinating to watch insurance executives and Protein Wisdom goons attacvk a program they barely understand. S-Chip is a block grant, boys. It's eligibility are set, in true federal fashion, by the states. That they do not understand means testing and how it has worked for 40 years shows the shallow conservative thought is.
The average right winger's social conscience has just moved past the 1920's.
if they think S-Chip is such a disgrace, wait to see what's coming next. "Oh no," the genius posters at Protein Wisdom will expound, "now all the 12 year olds are covered. Just like the system we set up in Iraq! Just like every modern country!"
The horror of all those free-loading 12 year olds will cause so many right wing suicides.
Poor guys.
Professor, the new Krugman book is coming out. Any interest? i'd purchase it, but the income gap in this country is so great, I'll have to wait for the library's copy (that's an inside joke for us libs, you guys. Pay no attention to the grown ups and keep screaming about fearsome 12 year olds and granite counter tops....you know, the "important" stuff).
Who has criticized the child, timmah?
Shall we mark you down in the column for those that approve of a family and a political party using 12 year old accident victims as a human shield and spokesman?
Yep. Mark me down with approving of the President showing up at his Social Security "townhalls" with a nine year old, or the babies the President bravely put on stage when he signed his anti-stem cell/anti-science/pander to the social cons bill (long names for bills are a hallmark of the torture administration).
I also don't object when the President (of either party) presents a bunch of human props at the State of Union.
Lastly, I remember the ultimate pander from the family values movement, which used a 12 year old kid to vilify everything federal, when it wanted to keep a child from his father. That would Elian Gonzalez.
Also, I remember when many of these dopes pimped a corpse for votes. That would Teri Schiavo and the way the Republicans nationalized a family fight into a embarrassment of irrational silliness.
So, no, props don't bother me. I have a problem when non-politicians are run through the ringer because they opposed the President. The President you people slavishly follow, but never talk about.
He's the prop that needs your disdain, JD, since he won't be canceling anyone's insurance any time soon.
These people entered the political arena when they allowed their 12 year old to deliver a politcal speech, written by the Dem staffers.
Whose insurance got cancelled? Nobody in this story, but feel free to beat up some strawmen.
Had these parents been resonsible enough to purchase insurance before the auto accident, they would not have ever been in this situation. I wish I could spend my insurance dollars on something else, rather than taking care of my family.
Way to dodge yet again!!! Just when I think you might have to respond on point, you run off somewhere elsewhere.
"Tell me, Tim, do you support kids as props"? Clear implication: Jd does not. Answer points out several instances where Republicans and Democrats use kids and the dying as props.
Instead of saying, "well, I don't like it" or "I'll be honest and admit I never thought of it like that." Or: "Gee, I see I was displaying rank hypocrisy", we get a rehash of the original argument stated in post one. Here's something I've learned, JD, saying something over and over does not make it true.
So, how many double standards does that make for you, JD?
Jeff Goldstein threatens dissenting posters and posts their personal information on the internet. Even though the result of that treatment for those hapless people is roughly similar to the grotesque perversions of that one lady...JD does not protest.
Dan Collins calls a well-known and far more successful blogger a "faggot" and JD, defender of gay rights ad infinitum, defends the slur.
In the comments to that post, Jeff uses the "n" word, freely and without shame. JD, who takes vast offense at believing someone is calling him a racist, says nothing.
A liberal blogger posts information on Malkin's home residence (remember it's okay for Goldstein to invite Pablo to email people's employers) and JD goes nuts. This is the same Malkin who refused to take down a post which revealed the names and phone numbers of anti-war folks (resulting in death threats toward those folks). JD, in the comments at PW, defends Malkin (It's those kids' fault you know).
In essence, we have JD, ostensible Christian, declaring that anyone who has a tragedy in his life deserves the back of our hand (the Frosts didn't choose to be destitute and pay for insurance they could not afford, so damn them), declaring that social programs benefit the lazy and weak (helping the poor, the same poor, mind you, we are supposed to sell our Saabs and 7000 foot homes for, so we can give the money to them and follow Jesus) .
"Verily I say unto you that it easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than a rich man to see the Kingdom of God."
Hypocrisy, selfishness, defending the attacking of a family, defending the slurring of a another citizen by a man (Collins) so bigoted in his faith, he thinks folks in graduate school hate him for wearing a cross...
Yeah, I'd like to see the dodge of this entry, JD. I nailed you last week on federal responsibilities and you are now defending a woman who won't even debate an opponent. All in the service of some chump in Denver,. so he can get links from her. Your integrity is something to behold.
Oh, and when you typed that last paragraph of tripe (I'm sure health insurance is a HUGE bite out of the 6 figures and bonuses you bring home) were you humming America the Beautiful? Because rarely have I seen something more self-serving than that paragraph.
Rarely has a paragraph been written that is so chock full of self-righteous satisfaction which would make a man less sure of his greatness blush.
Guess that's another thing you're immune to.
timmah - You know so very little about me that I absolutely refuse to even enter into a discussion that you do not, objectively, enter in good faith.
I will not even bother to respond to your accusations against me, as they are not in good faith, and in doing so, I would only give them some modicum of validity.
You, Caric, todd mayo, and the rest of your ilk absolutely objectively and intentionally ignore the truth with no consequence, aided by the pols and the media which share your world view.
You have succeeded in making me no longer willing to even bother to attempt to engage you.
The fact that you consider the actions of the Dems and the Parents Frost to be honorable and decent tells much about your character, and who you choose to associate yourself with.
Enjoy your moonbat echo chamber.
Post a Comment