CPC Report; An unabashedly liberal perspective
Conservatives define themselves in terms of what they
oppose. George Will
19 September 2009
So Much Ado About Nothing
It is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing. William Shakespeare, MacBeth
President Obama vs. Representative Joe Wilson on Health Care Reform- Who's the liar?
President Obama declared before a joint session of Congress that illegal immigrants will not qualify to receive health care benefits under the legislation he supports. Representative Joe Wilson of South Carolina, breaking House rules of decorum, interrupts the speech by calling the President a liar. Who is telling the truth?
According to a CNN truth squad, this is false. The legislation could require illegal immigrants to buy coverage, but denies subsidies for that coverage to illegal residents. What Joe Wilson based his concerns on were two amendments, which were voted down in committee, denying subsidies for such coverage in which in fact has already been denied. In short, his argument is based on the fallacy of the red herring and is so much ado about nothing. For more information click on the following link;
An Update On the Most Recent Lies Concerning Health Care Reform & on Rush's Fear of Circumcision
The Right Wing lying Machine (RWLM) have presented a horrific futuristic vision of our country being a nation where the weak, elderly and the unborn are given the lowest priority in the alleged rationing of health care under the health care proposals being debated.
One of the lies is from the seemingly addled-minded Rush Limbaugh who has bombastically broadcasted on the radio airwaves that the legislation would mandate circumcisions for all American males. One need not take this too seriously, considering the source.
Also targeted for denial of care supposedly be women with breast cancer and Republicans. In regards to the former, of all the kinds of cancer, why would breast cancer be singled out? The answer is obvious. The motive of the lie is to scare women who tend to vote for Democrats. Why Democrats would favor this is beyond belief.
Supposedly this fear is based on the health care system in a country like Great Britain promoting the rationing of health care. The citizens of that nation are angry about their health care system being portrayed in this country by the insurance companies and the RWLM in such a manner. The root of this anger is because the claim is an outright lie. Stephan hawking, although not a minor, is nevertheless severely disabled.
Supposedly this fear is based on the health care system in a country like Great Britain promoting the rationing of health care. The citizens of that nation are angry about their health care system being portrayed in this country by the insurance companies and the RWLM in such a manner. The root of this anger is because the claim is an outright lie. Stephan hawking, although not a minor, is nevertheless severely disabled.
Two questions are hereby raised in regards to what has been written so far; Who are you going to believe? And why would it be any different in this country?
If one is truly concerned about health care rationing in America, the bad news is we already have it. Insurance corporations provide it. The rationing is based on the profit incentive. Business typically wants to minimize costs and maximize profit. How else would they do this other than deny coverage to patients whose expenses have gotten too high. Is this the system that Representatives Cathy McMorris Rodgers and Trent Franks of Arizona (R) want? A system in which health care is left entirely to the insurance industry? A system in which would deny coverage for Cathy Rogers' child with Down Syndrome and Trent Franks with a cleft palate as a means of maximizing profits? Is this not rationing?
Fortunately in America we do have socialized medicine available for many children under two government ran programs- S-CHIP and Medicaid. But what of the children who do not qualify for these programs? (See "A Town Hall Meeting In Kansas", 29 August 2009)
Health care really should be considered a right in America, not to be denied by the right. It is much too important to be left to those overly thrifty, greedy, inhumane health insurance behemoths, which is a position that the left takes.
*See Stephen Hawking Endorses the National Health Service (NHS) of the UK, 29 August 2009
For information on more lies running amuck among us, click on the link below.
http://www.newsweek.com/id/214254
The Last Word- George Will is Wrong Again
In an article I had only recently discovered, was published in Newsweek (20 April 2009) entitled "The Last Word". It is a very partisan attack on Susan Rice who is the current UN Ambassador. It seems to be basically the concept of a "community of nations". However, this has nothing to do with that. On some of the article, I actually agree with George Will. On much of it I am noncommittal by virtue of my ignorance of the particulars given. I must admit that I am leery of George Will's truthfulness since that article he wrote denying global warming in the Washington Post used a university study on global warming to buttress his argument. The problem is that the study in question actually argued the opposite of George Will's argument on that subject. That was insipid intellectual dishonesty on his part. Before that I had respect for Mr. Will, even though I often disagreed with him. This is no longer the case. What he did was sleazy.
Another example of sleaziness appears in this Newsweek article. In spite of its name, it will not be the last word insofar as what I have to say. That is unless "The Last Word" is only a reference to it being on the final page of the magazine.
Before quoting the relevant passage that I take exception to, it is necessary to provide context. In a part I actually agree with were the criticisms of Saudi Arabia, which is unfortunately true of much of the Arab world. My dissent is only indirectly related to this.
George Will noted that George W. Bush boycotted the U.N. Human Rights Council because "it includes despotic regimes that are ludicrous auditors of other nations' respect for human rights."* Again I have no argument, although it should be noted that the torture of enemy combatants undertaken by the Bush Administration is a violation of civil liberties. This will be addressed on 21 November later this year.
His criticism is leveled against the Obama's decision to join that U.N. Council. Although I support President Obama in general, I tend to side with George Will one this as well. However, I cannot help to wonder about Mr. Will's opinion on some of the "despotic regimes" we have cuddled up to in the past, such General Pinochet's regime of Chile who was not only responsible for murdering his opponents in his own country, but also in this one as well. Again, I digress.
The passage in which is the root of this dissent is as follows;
"An unmarried 23-year-old Saudi woman became pregnant when abducted and gang-raped. She was convicted of adultery and sentenced to a year in prison- and to a perhaps fatal 100 lashes after her child is born. Another woman was visited by two men- one had been breast fed by her; another was bringing her bread. Convicted of the crime of being in the presence of men who are not family members, she was sentenced to 40 lashes, which is perhaps a death sentence to for a 75-year-old."*
These stories are believable. I have read of similar tales, such as a teenage Iraqi girl who was cruelly raped by her own brother and summarily executed in order to protect the family honor. The boy was not punished. This occurred during the occupation of American troops.
It is ironic that George Will would use Saudi Arabia as a example of a despotic regime since the Bush family has had close relations with the House of Saud. Ex-president George W. Bush of which George Will had written so highly of in regards to promoting human rights, was no exception. In his dealings with the Saudi royal family, it is doubtful that violations of civil liberties were ever brought up. Once more, I digress.
The problem is that out of necessity we must deal with governments in which are despicable in the treatment of their citizens. In the case of Saudi Arabia, it's all about oil. These are facts that George Will ignores.
The following is the statement in which I take exception with- "The 'community of nations' that liberals like Rice believe in certainly has what liberals celebrate: diversity."* Celebrating diversity does not mean that there are no boundaries in regards to human rights; that violations as described are to be acceptable in the name of diversity. That statement was made without a proper foundation being laid capable of supporting it. Since World War II liberals have always been the ones promoting civil rights at home and abroad. To say otherwise is to lie.
Civil liberties are a concern world-wide. Susan Rice in particular has criticized the failings of the United Nations in a speech at New York University's Center for Global Affairs. (In fairness to George Will, this speech was made since his article was published. But just the same he made no effort to be fair.) Her criticisms included U.N. policies in which promote the status of women as being "uncoordinated, inefficient, and ineffective.'"** From these remarks, it should be clear that Susan Rice is concerned about the civil rights of women abroad. She went on to declare;
"Sitting on the outside will not . . . defend those bleeding under the boot of despots. Real change does not come from sitting on the sidelines. Real change can only come through painstaking, principled diplomacy . . . It will not be easy. It will not be quick. But let's remember the words of a former university president who once said, 'If you think education is expensive, try ignorance.' Well, if you think engagement is imperfect, try isolation."**
The world is a place lacking perfection. We have to deal with nations in which habitually violate the most basic human rights. Short of invasion and overthrowing these regimes, like we did in Iraq, what is the alternative? The problem is that are too many such regimes to deal with in such a manner.
George Will is wrong. His remarks about liberals in general and Susan Rice in particular are libelous. Then again, what would one expect from a liar.
*George Will
**Politics Daily (Website) "Envoy Susan Rice to UN: 'The United States is Back' ", 13 August 2009
PSYCHO PSEUDO HEADLINES
BETTY MCCAUGHEY, DEATH PANEL INVENTOR, ACCIDENTALLY TELLS THE TRUTH
RUSH LIMBAUGH'S CIRCUMCISION GOES AWRY; ACCIDENTALLY GETS CASTRATED INSTEAD; INSURANCE REFUSES COVERAGE FOR "ELECTIVE SURGERY"
JOE WILSON ACCUSES HIMSELF OF LYING; REFUSES TO APOLOGIZE
RUSH LIMBAUGH TO OPEN AT THE MET SINGING SOPRANO
GOVERNOR MARK SANFORD GOES HIKING ON APPALACHIAN TRAIL; PRESUMED LOST IN BERMUDA TRIANGLE
EX-GOVERNOR SARAH PALIN GOES HIKING; TINA FEY TO TAKE HER PLACE AS STAND-IN
GLENN BECK'S PARANOIA IMPLICATES HIMSELF IN HIS LATEST CONSPIRACY
SEAN HANNITY TELLS JOKE ON PURPOSE
DEATHER KILLS BIRTHER IN HIT AND RUN
GRIM REAPER TO HEAD DEATH PANEL
DEATH PANEL LETS MICHELLE BACHMAN LIVE; ORDERS LOBOTOMY FOR HER INSTEAD
ANN COULTER'S RABIES DEEMED INCURABLE; DEATH PANEL ORDERS EUTHANASIA*
*See 15 August 2009
Glynn Braman
