(Another in a series of essays demonstrating precisely why I should never be entrusted with any sort of political power or authority)
Ever since I started asking awkward questions and challenging the wisdom of the push to expand the S-CHIP program, I've been assailed -- publicly and privately -- for doing so. It's not been fun. So I've decided to surrender and back the expansion.
In fact, I've decided to cover myself and push for it to be made even more encompassing. The bill wants to define "children" up to the age of 25. Well, there's an old saying that "life begins at 40" (something I'll find out in a couple of weeks), so let's push it up to that age. This silly debate about whether it should be available to families whose income is up to three times (the current bill) or four times the poverty level (the original proposal)? Forget that silly math. Make it available to anyone who says "we're too poor to afford our own insurance!" And forget that "tax on cigarettes" to fund it -- make it a tax on oxygen. Calculate how much oxygen an average person consumes in a year, run that against the estimated costs of the program, multiply it by 50% to cover the inevitable overruns, miscalculations, inefficiencies, and outright frauds that will be bound to occur, and that might -- just MIGHT -- cover it. S-CHIP for everyone! And if anyone dares question it, we try them for treason.
Whoops. I forgot. We don't do that any more. "Treason" is such an outdated concept. Instead, we'll charge them with "hate crimes."
But I've learned another valuable lesson from this whole thing. I would like to call on President Bush to adapt the tactics used by the backers of the S-CHIP expansion. For his next weekly radio address, he should find the child of a US soldier or Marine killed in Iraq. He should have his staff write a poignant speech for the boy or girl to read, talking about how his father (or mother) died while serving our nation and in pursuit of a free, independent Iraq and the reshaping of the Middle East into something besides a motley collection of tyrants (of the thuggish, thieving, and theocratic varieties), and how he or she hopes that America will not let that parent's death be in vain.
At that point, the anti-war forces will have no choice but to shut up and yield the argument entirely in the face of this unassailable position. After all, to disagree -- or even question -- the words that political staffers put in the mouth of this child is nothing less than an attack on the child itself, and that is simply intolerable.



Comments (30)
Graeme Frauds. A generic n... (Below threshold)1. Posted by kim | October 13, 2007 11:14 AM | Score: 3 (5 votes cast)
Graeme Frauds. A generic name for Democratic phony stories.
============================
1. Posted by kim | October 13, 2007 11:14 AM |
Score: 3 (5 votes cast)
Posted on October 13, 2007 11:14
2. Posted by Mark | October 13, 2007 11:41 AM | Score: 3 (5 votes cast)
That's what's you get with congress; a bunch of bullschip.
2. Posted by Mark | October 13, 2007 11:41 AM |
Score: 3 (5 votes cast)
Posted on October 13, 2007 11:41
3. Posted by mantis | October 13, 2007 11:46 AM | Score: -2 (8 votes cast)
For his next weekly radio address, he should find the child of a US soldier or Marine killed in Iraq. He should have his staff write a poignant speech for the boy or girl to read, talking about how his father (or mother) died while serving our nation and in pursuit of a free, independent Iraq and the reshaping of the Middle East into something besides a motley collection of tyrants (of the thuggish, thieving, and theocratic varieties), and how he or she hopes that America will not let that parent's death be in vain.
And the left will immediately begin digging up any and all records on the kids parents. Was his father (or mother) really in the military? Did he or she actually die in combat? What if that parent actually died in a vehicle accident in Kuwait? Bam! That kid was lying about how his father (or mother) died! They'll visit his house, ask his neighbors questions about his family; maybe dad drank too much while he was in the States! They'll find out what metals his parent may have been awarded, and find any justification to question them. They'll insinuate that the child's parent died of self-inflicted injuries. They'll find out what political party the parents endorsed, and use that to discount the child's words.
Oh wait, nevermind. That's what the right would do.
3. Posted by mantis | October 13, 2007 11:46 AM |
Score: -2 (8 votes cast)
Posted on October 13, 2007 11:46
4. Posted by jpm100 | October 13, 2007 11:52 AM | Score: 6 (8 votes cast)
"Oh wait, nevermind. That's what the right would do."
http://www.qando.net/Details.aspx?Entry=7047
Where Jon Henke writes:
Well, funny you bring that up, because that's not the way I recall it. There was...
Jesus' General and TBogg, who made sexual references to the kid...
Kewpie, who called him "a budding young fascist" and "dumb"...
DadaHead, who said the kid was "in desperate need of a good ass-kicking..."
Democratic Underground, where commenters wrote quite a lot of things that I don't care to reprint...
Salon's What Would Dick Think, Daily Kos and Atrios, who called the kid "Cousin Oliver"
And, at Ezra Klein's own blog, Melissa McEwan said his appearance was "indicative of a desperation reserved for policy proposals that are ready for the graveyard"...
4. Posted by jpm100 | October 13, 2007 11:52 AM |
Score: 6 (8 votes cast)
Posted on October 13, 2007 11:52
5. Posted by dr lava | October 13, 2007 11:52 AM | Score: -6 (8 votes cast)
We went to Iraq because of WMD. 3826 Americans are dead in this republican war.And you aren't pissed off because of THAT?
5. Posted by dr lava | October 13, 2007 11:52 AM |
Score: -6 (8 votes cast)
Posted on October 13, 2007 11:52
6. Posted by jpm100 | October 13, 2007 11:54 AM | Score: 0 (2 votes cast)
Wizbang comments fail at blockquotes!
All of the subsequent paragraphs should have been blockquoted as well in my last comment.
6. Posted by jpm100 | October 13, 2007 11:54 AM |
Score: 0 (2 votes cast)
Posted on October 13, 2007 11:54
7. Posted by nbpundit | October 13, 2007 12:05 PM | Score: -2 (2 votes cast)
Heh...
7. Posted by nbpundit | October 13, 2007 12:05 PM |
Score: -2 (2 votes cast)
Posted on October 13, 2007 12:05
8. Posted by mantis | October 13, 2007 12:13 PM | Score: -5 (7 votes cast)
jpm, where in all of those did they investigate the McCullough family, drop by their house, ask their neighbors about them, and enlist the legendary "fancy countertop defense?"
Anyway, let's look at the list Henke put together.
Jesus' General and TBogg, who made sexual references to the kid...
Well, I don't think Henke got the Judith Miller "Aspens" joke. And TBogg comparing Jeff Gannon to Peter Graves in Airplane was so obviously a joke, at Republicans' expense and not McCollough's, but whatever.
I'll give you Kewpie and Dadahead, and I'm willing to bet you and pretty much everyone else has never heard of those people. I know I haven't. Must have taken Henke some digging.
We all know that DU is a den of assholes. Nobody but the right links to them. What does that tell you?
Cousin Oliver? That's funny. Bring in a cute blond kid when the show is getting kind of stale and the writers are desperate for new material? It fits, and it's funny (mildly). How exactly is that "going after" him?
McEwan calls the Bush administration desperate for bringing a kid out to push social security reform. How is that "going after" him? If the right's response to Frost was "They're bringing a kid out now? That's desperate," do you really think there would have been a problem?
In any case, all Henke could dig up was a few mild jokes, most at the expense of Republicans and not McCullough. I didn't say that the left doesn't attack the wrong people sometimes, and I certainly didn't say they wouldn't make some off-color jokes, even at the expense of a kid. None of the things Henke cites come even close to what all the big hitters on the right have done to the Frost family.
8. Posted by mantis | October 13, 2007 12:13 PM |
Score: -5 (7 votes cast)
Posted on October 13, 2007 12:13
9. Posted by Paul Hooson | October 13, 2007 12:17 PM | Score: -4 (6 votes cast)
I only continue to strongly support the efforts of TOBACCO FREE KIDS, THE AMERICAN CANCER SOCIETY and other medical and health organizations to raise taxes on cigarettes to discourage smoking and the secondhand smoke problem which greatly impacts the health of children. Philip Morris openly admits that secondhand smoke causes the death of infants through SIDS on their website as well as respiratory illnesses such as asthma, ear infections and other illnesses that create both expensive and painful unnecessary suffering for children because of both tobacco corporation and smoker arrogance.
Tobacco interests brought slaves to America as free labor for their industry, helped to found the Southern Baptist faith as a religious farce to use God to justify their slavery, and helped to fuel the civil war in the U.S. to hang on to slavery. Now they fight against children's health care in the U.S. because it would raise the price of their tobacco products to pay for part of their sins against America.
My mother was a lifetime nonsmoker, but suffers terrible health problems such as asthma and emysema due to the secondhand smoke at her workplace from others that now cost her at least $800 a month in medicine so that she can only breathe. Yesterday, I had to spend the entire day making her bathroom handicapped accessible because her health has become so weakened because of the ravages of the secondhand smoke of others and the profits that the tobacco industry skunks wanted to make.
Tobacco executives are so comparably evil that they also make evil men like Osama Bin Laden look like a pious saint by comparison. They've bought and paid for their ticket to hell one cigarette at a time for all the damage that they've done to America and humanity.
9. Posted by Paul Hooson | October 13, 2007 12:17 PM |
Score: -4 (6 votes cast)
Posted on October 13, 2007 12:17
10. Posted by jennifer | October 13, 2007 12:32 PM | Score: 3 (5 votes cast)
For his next weekly radio address, he should find the child of a US soldier or Marine killed in Iraq. He should have his staff write a poignant speech for the boy or girl to read, talking about how his father (or mother) died while serving our nation and in pursuit of a free, independent Iraq and the reshaping of the Middle East into something besides a motley collection of tyrants (of the thuggish, thieving, and theocratic varieties), and how he or she hopes that America will not let that parent's death be in vain.
Hey in the spirit of taking this to another level, let's use a daughter of a man killed in Vietnam 2 months before she was born.
Here is how I feel 40 years after my dad was killed in a war the John Kerry's turned into a war of baby killers.
http://penofjen.blogspot.com/2007/04/in-honor-of-captain-david-p-gibson.html
Please take a chance to read this, it is really the making of a family and believe me I have already weighed in on the fact that it is time to stop the entitlements.
10. Posted by jennifer | October 13, 2007 12:32 PM |
Score: 3 (5 votes cast)
Posted on October 13, 2007 12:32
11. Posted by LaMedusa | October 13, 2007 12:49 PM | Score: 3 (5 votes cast)
Remember all that 90s crap about Taking Food from the Mouths of Children? It's a never-ending political ploy to gain public appeal. Using the child for childish means.
On the school-lunch issue, the Democrats have been attacking the Republicans with relish. "It is immoral to take food from the mouths of the children of this country," said Dick Gephardt, the Democratic leader in the House of Representatives, at a protest on Sunday which brought thousands of schoolchildren and their parents to Capitol Hill. (Oh, buh-ruther!)
11. Posted by LaMedusa | October 13, 2007 12:49 PM |
Score: 3 (5 votes cast)
Posted on October 13, 2007 12:49
12. Posted by kim | October 13, 2007 2:09 PM | Score: 3 (5 votes cast)
mantis, check out those Frost vehicles. They got the joneses bad for being the joneses. Big corporations just love idiots like that.
=================================
12. Posted by kim | October 13, 2007 2:09 PM |
Score: 3 (5 votes cast)
Posted on October 13, 2007 14:09
13. Posted by mantis | October 13, 2007 2:42 PM | Score: 0 (4 votes cast)
mantis, check out those Frost vehicles.
And it continues. Why don't you just swing by their house and toss a molotov, kim? They surely deserve it.
13. Posted by mantis | October 13, 2007 2:42 PM |
Score: 0 (4 votes cast)
Posted on October 13, 2007 14:42
14. Posted by marc | October 13, 2007 2:45 PM | Score: 0 (4 votes cast)
Is it just me or can anyone else tell, no matter how many words and paras follow it and no matter how hidden the name is "beneath" the monitors field of view, you can guess the name hooson appears at the bottom?
It's positively spooky I yell ya... I'm right every time. MeThinks I'm channeling Kreskin. Or something.
14. Posted by marc | October 13, 2007 2:45 PM |
Score: 0 (4 votes cast)
Posted on October 13, 2007 14:45
15. Posted by kim | October 13, 2007 2:49 PM | Score: 1 (3 votes cast)
Their life is not worth living, mantis, unexamined as it is.
=============================
15. Posted by kim | October 13, 2007 2:49 PM |
Score: 1 (3 votes cast)
Posted on October 13, 2007 14:49
16. Posted by mantis | October 13, 2007 2:57 PM | Score: -1 (3 votes cast)
Socrates was not referring to hacks poring over the details of your life in dishonest attempts at character assassination, he was talking about commitment to philosophy. But fine, Email me photos of your house, your income tax records, and a list of all your assets, kim, which I will then post online. Let's examine your life.
16. Posted by mantis | October 13, 2007 2:57 PM |
Score: -1 (3 votes cast)
Posted on October 13, 2007 14:57
17. Posted by kim | October 13, 2007 3:26 PM | Score: 1 (3 votes cast)
You miss the point, as usual, mantis. I examine my own life. That is all that is necessary.
===============
17. Posted by kim | October 13, 2007 3:26 PM |
Score: 1 (3 votes cast)
Posted on October 13, 2007 15:26
18. Posted by kim | October 13, 2007 3:27 PM | Score: 0 (2 votes cast)
And, if you'd examine your discourse, you are distracting. Sometimes the discussion, even examined, is not worth having.
=============================
18. Posted by kim | October 13, 2007 3:27 PM |
Score: 0 (2 votes cast)
Posted on October 13, 2007 15:27
19. Posted by WildWillie | October 13, 2007 4:06 PM | Score: 4 (4 votes cast)
We are still in Iraq, so now it is a democratic war.
Paul H. the science on second hand smoke is fuzzy at best. But I am sure you know conclusivly that second hand smoke damaged your mothers lungs. You also believe humans will destroy the earth. YOu probably believe the breast implants by Corning caused health problems. Cigarettes are a legal product. Until they are not, I cannot tell people not to smoke. Alchohol kills far more people then tobacco. So, you are against booze too? You are a typical liberal, wanting to control others or think you can. Republicans and I are more of the live and let live. Stay out of peoples lives unless they are innocent children. ww
19. Posted by WildWillie | October 13, 2007 4:06 PM |
Score: 4 (4 votes cast)
Posted on October 13, 2007 16:06
20. Posted by Mike | October 13, 2007 4:27 PM | Score: 2 (2 votes cast)
I think that these two instances compare favorably to the Frost incident ... but look which side the media was on:
Remember the guy at the town hall meeting who asked President Clinton if he could name any nation that had taxed itself into prosperity? The news media wasted no time thoroughly investigating him and attacking him because (correct me if 'm wrong) he was behind in child support payments. Which of course had absolutely nothing to to with the question he asked the President. I don't seem to recall any Democrats in congress defending this man's right to privacy.
I also remember reporters rummaging through Clarence Thomas' garbage during his Senate confirmation hearings, hoping to find some kind of "proof" that Thomas was doing something kinky or illegal behind closed doors. I don't seem to recall any Democrats in congress defending his right to privacy.
I guess the moral of the story here is that the world really is a target-rich environment, but only the news media and Democrats have the authority to sanction viable targets.
20. Posted by Mike | October 13, 2007 4:27 PM |
Score: 2 (2 votes cast)
Posted on October 13, 2007 16:27
21. Posted by kim | October 13, 2007 4:34 PM | Score: 2 (2 votes cast)
Why mantis wants to sign on as co-pilot to a kamikaze progressive is anyone's guess.
====================================
21. Posted by kim | October 13, 2007 4:34 PM |
Score: 2 (2 votes cast)
Posted on October 13, 2007 16:34
22. Posted by Mike | October 13, 2007 4:45 PM | Score: 2 (2 votes cast)
Another thing ...
The memo from Hillary 15 years ago that proposed federal children's health insurance as a gateway to nationalized health care made quite a bit of news two weeks ago.
I think that the SCHIP expansion plan also worked toward this goal in another way few others have not discussed.
The original SCHIP expansion plan was to be primarily funded by directing money away from Medicare Advantage supplements and into SCHIP. If you aren't familiar with Medicare Advantage, the program allows insurance companies to offer HMO-type coverage to senior citizens in exchange for Medicare supplementing the cost of the premiums. In other words, it is private insurance, supplemented by the government, that provides better service at a lower cost than Medicare.
If the supplemental funding for Medicare Advantage dried up, then insurance companies could no longer afford to offer this coverage. And this is where the trick comes in -- seniors would then be forced back into Medicare as their primary insurers. And a worthwhile plan that should be a model for future consideration (private insurance, with government supplements for the poor or those on a fixed income) would be starved to death, presumably to be buried and forgotten.
As it worked out, Republicans and Democrats compromised on a combination of redirected Medicare Advantage funding and the cigarette tax.
It seems like the original SCHIP expansion plan not only intended to expand the number of middle class families dependent on government health care, but it also was designed to force seniors out of private insurance and back into the government Medicare program. As irresponsible as I find the cigarette tax, it appears that the tax at least saved some part of Medicare Advantage.
22. Posted by Mike | October 13, 2007 4:45 PM |
Score: 2 (2 votes cast)
Posted on October 13, 2007 16:45
23. Posted by Knightbrigade | October 13, 2007 5:28 PM | Score: 2 (2 votes cast)
ABSOLUTELY--SHI(P)T is just the first step to Shillarys national health care. It's another part of the loony left agenda, plain and simple.
23. Posted by Knightbrigade | October 13, 2007 5:28 PM |
Score: 2 (2 votes cast)
Posted on October 13, 2007 17:28
24. Posted by Zelsdorf Ragshaft III | October 13, 2007 7:05 PM | Score: 1 (1 votes cast)
Mantis has morphed into Lee Ward.
24. Posted by Zelsdorf Ragshaft III | October 13, 2007 7:05 PM |
Score: 1 (1 votes cast)
Posted on October 13, 2007 19:05
25. Posted by kim | October 13, 2007 9:17 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
No, but he has issues to work through, like he and Richardson getting sandbagged about Iraq. And Gore and his KarbonKult. Maybe he's just cranky because he feels tied to the tracks with the Hillary Express bearing down on him. Well, I'm trapped in the middle of a narrow bridge, boo.
==================================
25. Posted by kim | October 13, 2007 9:17 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on October 13, 2007 21:17
26. Posted by kim | October 13, 2007 9:22 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
The whole flock prefers the cerphith with the verdant veritas turf. There is no comparison in taste and nutritiousness with the artificial variety. Squawk, SQUAWK!
========================
26. Posted by kim | October 13, 2007 9:22 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on October 13, 2007 21:22
27. Posted by kim | October 14, 2007 5:54 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
SQUAWK, SQUAWK, SQUAWK!. Roger that last transmission, but do we have a problem?
===================
27. Posted by kim | October 14, 2007 5:54 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on October 14, 2007 05:54
28. Posted by Paul Hooson | October 14, 2007 1:50 PM | Score: -1 (1 votes cast)
Wildwillie, nonsense. Both my mother and I experience serious sudden health problems from even one breath of secondhand cigarette smoke. What air can nonsmokers like us breathe? Tobacco smokers want to pollute and damage it all.
In Oregon the big tobacco companies have spent $10 million so far to defeat an expansion of health care for children. The evil bastards.
28. Posted by Paul Hooson | October 14, 2007 1:50 PM |
Score: -1 (1 votes cast)
Posted on October 14, 2007 13:50
29. Posted by marc | October 14, 2007 4:48 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Hooson:
Wildwillie, nonsense. Both my mother and I experience serious sudden health problems from even one breath of secondhand cigarette smoke.
With the possible exception of some type of allergy a single breath won't cause any "serious sudden health problems", you're full of more.. um, er... more *stuff* than a christmas fruitcake.
29. Posted by marc | October 14, 2007 4:48 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on October 14, 2007 16:48
30. Posted by DB | October 14, 2007 8:33 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
. The government has no money except what it takes from us. We spend 4% of GDP on defense and 30% on social programs. We need to reduce spending so lets really look at what we should be spending money on. The government is to provide for the common defense and welfare. (health, happiness, or prosperity; well-being) how will it do that bye taking money away for those who need it and giving it to those who do not. Or in this case those who will not make decision to benefit their family,
That some should be rich, shows that others may become rich, and hence is just encouragement to industry and enterprize. Let not him who is houseless pull down the house of another; but let him labor diligently and build one for himself, thus by example assuring that his own shall be safe from violence when built.
Reply to New York Workingmen's Democratic Republican Association (21 March 1864)
Lincon
You cannot strengthen the weak by weakening the strong. You cannot help small men by tearing down big men. You cannot help the poor by destroying the rich. You cannot lift the wage earner by pulling down the wage payer. You cannot keep out of trouble by spending more than your income. You cannot further the brotherhood of man by inciting class hatreds. You cannot establish security on borrowed money. You cannot build character and courage by taking away a man's initiative and independence. You cannot help men permanently by doing for them what they could and should do for themselves.
By William J. H. Boetcker
30. Posted by DB | October 14, 2007 8:33 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on October 14, 2007 20:33