Panties are everywhere in a bunch over the indecorous outburst from Congressman Joe Wilson (R – Ude) to the president’s health care speech yesterday:
His eruption — in response to Mr. Obama’s statement that Democratic health proposals would not cover illegal immigrants — stunned members of both parties in the House chamber.
Democrats said it showed lack of respect for the office of the presidency and was reminiscent of Republican disruptions at recent public forums on health care.
It was stupid outburst, both personally and tactically. Even if Wilson may arguably have had a point:.
(Most) fact-checking journalistic organizations deem the assertion that illegals would be covered by the Democratic efforts to be untrue. For instance, PolitiFact, a Pulitzer Prize-winning fact site, gives the statement a “Pants on Fire” negative rating.
Some Republican members of Congress, however, assert that the Democratic health bills do not contain language calling for verification that recipients of any health subsidies in fact are in the US legally.
That means that in practice, illegals would get coverage, they say.
But the congressman’s outburst contributed nothing to the debate, further diminished his party’s already soiled brand and made himself look like a boor in the process. All this while damaging the fragile tradition of civility within doors at Congress. There never has been much civility once out of doors, but some traditions are worth preserving if only because they serve as a reminder of who we ought to be.
Still, some of Wilson’s critics may protest too much. This is less a leap from the moral high ground than it is another step down the slippery slope of a degraded political culture. It is not so very far down that slope from the incivility that George W. Bush was subjected to when he attempted to expend some the political capital earned in his 2004 campaign by reforming the (still) creaking Social Security system. Nor yet the petulant eye-rolling and pouting that Hillary Clinton displayed during an otherwise well-received address by Bush to Congress on 26 September 2001. This, almost inexplicably, scarcely two weeks after a national disaster and while the ground was still smoking in lower Manhattan, her newly established home state.
Motes and beams, I suppose. And another stupid distraction from the real issues facing the Republic.
Update: The Hammer has more on civility. It ain’t what it used to be.
I applaud Joe Wilson. Sorry Lex but that was a bold faced lie by POTUS. Their is no language in any of the Dems bills that would require a citizen check. In fact, said check was voted down repeatedly.
As you say, just check back to the 05′ SOTU address and you will hear Dems booing and jeering at the POTUS.
It is OK for Dems but out of order for Repubs (because we are so much more civilized, don’t you know.)
I’m sorry, but a lot is riding on this. I am tired of being the party that rolls over.
The entire Repub congress should have gotten up and walked out last night.
I also applaud Mr. Wilson. Mr. Wilson should not have apologized as BHO is a liar and was one last night.
Respect the office, not the man is needed in the military; not in the civilian world. It’s about time, overdue in fact, for confrontation with the forces such as BHO that are doing grave damage to our county. I am tired of the Washington Kabuki Dance, and being “polite” and “civil” are not serving the interests of the country IMO.
I do not think that it was a stupid outburst -I do regret that Mr. Wilson was the only one to say that the Emperor was without clothes. Forum, protocol be damned.
Some Republican members of Congress, however, assert that the Democratic health bills do not contain language calling for verification that recipients of any health subsidies in fact are in the US legally.
Guess what, the Congressional Research Service, a non partisan research arm of the congress also confers that people in the country will not be subject to a citizen test.
Politifact is an arm of the St. Petersburg Times. Pants on fire, my ass… I read the salient portions of HR 3200 looking for how the federal gov’t would control enrollment in this brave new healthcare bill and I came up with nothing.
I think my reading comprehension is pretty good.
Harry Reid called Bush a “liar” and a “loser”. only difference – it wasn’t face to face. But as a SC republican I don’t take too much comfort in Joe’s apology. the damage is done; irregardless of whether or not you agree, the repubs look boorish, childish, and confrontational. They do, however, need a strong, well-developed, well-articulated counter-plan, and they don’t have one. This is their biggest failing, and their supporters’ biggest disbelief. Who amongst us couldn’t come up with a better plan than “squeeze medicare and medicaid and make it more efficient” and invoking the memory of a drunk with manslaughter in his closet, and histrionics like “if you misrepresent what’s in the plan we will call you out.” Oooh, boot shaking time there.
OTOH Joe does pay his taxes on time and did report all rental income. So there Pelosi/Reid/Rangel/Robinson.
The Republicans in Congress have repeatedly offered alternatives to nationalizing health care insurance.
But these stories have always been starved of oxygen. The press won’t cover that story. The meme is that Republicans are merely obstructionist, and nothing can get in the way of the meme.
Certainly, it was a breach of decorum by Rep. Wilson, and he correctly apologized. But seemingly, everyone forgets, that in the paragraph before that, the President called his opponents liars. So what’s the diff?
It just all seemed so “unpresidential” — almost juvenile, and school yard tauntish. I don’t think it moved the ball an inch, and probably damaged his personal popularity. You can’t appear that angry, that bitter, and stay popular, especially with moderates. It may have energized the left, but they weren’t his problem in getting to 60.
For all of his faults, it is hard to imagine George Bush giving that petulant a speech — calling legitimate disagreements “bickering”, for just one example — his opponents liars for another. Again, Axelrove is proven correct.
Bold faced lie or not, we respect the office, not the man. And I agree that the Dems did it to Bush all the time. Would that excuse have flown with your parents? Not mine.
Yes President Obama lied. And yes, it is proper to call him on it. But in the appropriate time and place. Rolling over, as you put it, is also known as living by the Golden Rule. The fact that the other side doesn’t should never excuse us from our standards.
I’ve noticed a fairly common trend, Congressman Wilson’s outburst sits poorly with most prior military folks, because it’s a disrespect of the rank. You might hate the man who holds it, but you still salute the rank.
As for the item in question… you can say the bill won’t give care to illegals till you’re blue in the face. If you don’t check ID’s, you’re full of bovine excrement.
Mike, I agree with you that I would never disrespect the office of POTUS… until now. We are looking at world class hard ball. To have OUR President stand before congress and spew lies that can easily be checked (even by a plebe such as me) is unpresidented in the republic.
Our “standards” are driving us to a socialist republic. The other side is playing by an entirely different set of rules. I do not want to be thrown into a gov’t approved MCA. I have been buying health insurance for over 30 years. We have been in every plan imaginable. I do not want to go back to a MCA, particularly one mandated by the gov’t that will, year after year, add more treatments that I will have to pay for. (viagra and hair plugs anyone?)
What is the appropriate time and place to call the President a liar?
They do, however, need a strong, well-developed, well-articulated counter-plan, and they don’t have one.”
1) Allow Americans to buy health insurance over state lines to increase competition. Much like auto insurance is currently sold.
2) Tort reform: Either loser pays or cap the pain and suffering portion of the award. (So that some moron that spills hot coffee in her crotch doesn’t win a multi million dollar pay day.)
3)De-couple health insurance from employment, allowing a tax break for insurance policies under a certain value. Make every person in this nation responsible for their health coverage.
4) Make EVERYONE, including the congress, federal workers and the unions subject to the legislation.
5) Raise the limit for medicade.
I am terribly sorry that there is a portion of our population that can’t get out of their own way. I contribute to charities to help these people. That does not mean that my world should be turned upside down.
The only reason you don’t think the Repubs have a viable alternative is because the media won’t let their message get any air time.
Dear Gentle Lady
Move to SC so’s I can votes fer you – often -me AND Paul Newman.
So I’m thinking this probably wouldn’t be the best time to note that in this socialist country, we check IDs and don’t offer free health care to those who fail to meet certain residency requirements (and the vast majority of the time, when our citizens go to other countries for healthcare either their provincial government or they, themselves, foot the bill – yeah, yeah, raz away…), allow a tax break on the cost of private health insurance premiums and have jury awards waaay lower than those crazy Yanks do (said in the most affectionate way, of course). Yeah, sorry. My bad.
Mike – Agree, but Dems have been getting away with this behavior for years with no negative consequences. Two wrongs may not make a right, but they need a taste of their own medicine.
Plus, I have problems being civil to those who have declared war on me and whose explanations consist of “Shut up.”
I keep remembering Reagan, in his Presidential debates, saying patiently to his opponent, “See, there you go again,” and the audience breaking up with laughter. Yes, we should publicly protest falsehoods, especially when they are uttered by those in power. But ridicule, when cleverly done, is a powerful weapon. And Reagan knew just how to use it.
Marianne
And, just by the way, one of you military gentlemen should be kind enough to explain to Mr. O, the difference between strategy and tactics. He doesn’t seem to know. He drones on and on about *strategy*, his goals for health care, but can’t seem to enunciate his recommended *tactics* [detailed plans on how to achieve his goals]. It just makes us realize more clearly that he doesn’t have any “detailed plans.”
Marianne
When P.BO says this:
If you misrepresent what’s in the plan, we will call you out.
Instead of honest debate, we have seen scare tactics.
then later in the same speech says this:
Everyone in this room knows what will happen if we do nothing. Our deficit will grow. More families will go bankrupt. More businesses will close. More Americans will lose their coverage when they are sick and need it most. And more will die as a result.
Then I cry foul on the whole affair. Threats, accusations followed by self-contradictions. Until now I’ve tried to focus on respecting the office, if not the man.
I’m with Babs – I just can’t do that anymore. I fully expect our politicians to lie to us – it’s what they do. Maybe not all of them, but certainly the majority.
When the President goes on national TV and lies thru his teeth about things that are so easy to factcheck on our own – I’m done. It’s bad enough that his own staffers won’t do the research that we pay them to do. But when P.BO – supposedly one of the most brilliant minds of our time cough – fails to do his own research it becomes very clear that what he wants for this country isn’t what our founding fathers envisioned.
He’s railroading future generations with this socialist bullshit. I think the vernacular of the day is “bring it on”. Well, it’s been “brung” and the fight is afoot.
Civility. yeah, that’s really Important when Dems are talking or trying to take the country to the left. Just as ‘bipartisanship’ and hands across the aisle are such cool things only so long as it’s the conservatives or the Repubs giving something up to reach “consensus” and agree with the left.
Just that it doesn’t work the other way. Ever. Frankly, the problem I have with Congressman Wilson’s “outburst” is that the remainder of the Repubs ’sat on their tongues’ so to speak and made him go it alone. They didn’t keep the faith with their colleague, with their principles, or with the people who don’t want to have the federal government get into the health care business any more than it already has. The rest of the Repubs should have all spoken at the same time when the misrepresentations were coming fast and furious. A single unified voice from the many saying “LIE” would have been much more impressive. Divisive? So What! As If we are unified in this country – ask GWB / check out the treatment the NYT gives to secret programs that protect us / check out the treatment the Dems give anyone they disagree with. This is not about being buddies; this is about the direction of the country and when you have an administration putting avowed communists in important jobs it is not a time for wussies to sit and be polite. We need to be more like the Brits in the sense that when the head guy talks to Parliament there’s a brisk back and forth and comment is fairly made.
Kudos for Congressman Wilson right up until he apologized. Boos to the rest of the girliemen Repubs who still don’t get what is going on.
STEVEC/
My sentiments EXACTLY. With you all the way. I’ve currently got a post in moderation (perhaps for the language in the quoted passages) that says much the same thing. (And you of course have company in butch & babs as well.) Can’t say enough how much I forcefully agree with every syllable and consonant you have written….
I’m on your team. Some are crying “Don’t be like the Left!” I agree. Don’t lie and call names, but do protest and take your facts to the debate, hard copy, their own words, not some “they saids” and broad sweeping “everyone” statements.
If we don’t emulate some of the tactics, but do them fairly, with truth, then we have nothing, but to sit and let them push us over the cliff.
Used to tell my officers, when I was XO: “Doesn’t do any of us any good if the bus is over the cliff and we’re doing the Wyle E Coyote thing to yell out “XO, you shouldn’t have done that!” Better to have me be a bit frustrated for a moment when you point out we’re hurtling towards a cliff and I need to pay attention and apply brakes.
We’re headed for a cliff, however, I’m cynical enough to believe The WON and his band of economic plunderers have packed their chutes slider down and have that plan for B.A.S.E. jumping this on in their play book already.
GOT to side w. babs & butch on this one.
And yes, I know, it makes us look bad with the very MOR “moderates” we are trying to win over–but that’s only because we have been so collectively spineless in calling out (to use Obama’s own favorite term) the illogical idiocy of all that the side opposite does on a consistent basis without falling all over ourselves apologizing beforehand for even having the temerity to bring it up. Such actions reek of a need for acceptance and go against our inate beliefs.
Remember when many were saying that our side should “tone down” the Town hall meetings and be more respectful? One of the best rebuttals to that is to be found by what Velociman said on this at his gem of a blog-site Velociworld:
“It doesn’t matter if PEOPLE are frightened by angry ‘mobs’ screaming at congressmen at townhalls. Those people aren’t voting on healthcare reform. What matters is if CONGRESSMEN are frightened by angry ‘mobs’ screaming at congressmen at townhalls. PEOPLE aren’t the dependent fucking variable here. The assholes voting for the bill are. And scaring the living shit out of them is the only hope we have of defeating this buttfucking colossus called Obamacare.”
Velociman goes on to argue that we are wrong just to tone it down for the sake of the yellow-dog democrats whom we lost a long time ago on this argument. This is no friendly game of gin rummy, he avers, but a high-stakes table game at Vegas “with the Bader-Meinhoff Gang on the other side dealing from the bottom of the deck.” The time for civil discourse is past, he argues, and what is needed, what excites the undecided “is seeing someone just like themselves standing up to a self-aggrandizing fool of a politician and taking the fucking switch to his ass in public.” “It’s hard-ball time,” he avers, “and no amount of faux hobo-killing or fake rotgut drinking tales will save you when the gangsters take over your blackjack table. One can either man-up and fight back when the gangster’s toadie slaps one’s face, or turn around and look at the crowd watching one get screwed at the table and say WE REALLY NEED TO FIND A MORE CIVIL GAME. TOO BAD THIS IS THE ONLY TABLE IN THE HOUSE.”
“Sometimes you can’t fold” Velociman opines. “Sometimes you have to play the hand out.” And that there WILL be a winner and a loser–and that “compromise” is “also known as the losing side.”
Go over to Velociman’s place and read the whole thing under the heading :The Uncivil War” on the 11 Aug 2009 post
@
http://www.velociworld.com
VX, this USMC Vet. sure didn’t sugar coat it at an Aug. TH meeting. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_rRE5UK6NQU.
Hope this works better.
Virgil, I strongly concur.
While serving, I had to respect the rank (for functional reasons, and legally by the UCMJ). Once I became a civilian again, I am not obligated to respect any “office” or person unless I believe it to be warranted.
And, God Bless America, I can call foul on anyone at anytime regardless of their position, stature, office or function.
I cannot think of any forum where I will show any respect to BHO.
What goes around comes around, and the democrats and leftoids have been boorish to say the least for the last 8 years.
They are now bewailing the fact that those of a less than liberal persuasion have discovered Saul Alinsky’s “Rules for Radicals”
http://www.amazon.com/Rules-Radicals-Saul-Alinsky/dp/0679721134
and are beginning to use the same tactics.
I HOPE that the democrats are foolish enough to push the reform bill through on a reconciliation. The public reaction should be awesome.
Isn’t Paul Newman dead?
Does he still vote???
Babs, only in Chicago and New Orleans.
I think Rep. Wilson would have been a bit more inclined to show respect for the office of the President, if the President himself had shown more respect for it.
I think the most disrespect shown to the office comes from the current holder, who stands before both houses of the Congress and lies. Shame on Obama.
Concur…excellent point.
I just don’t like that kind of behavior, period. Without regard to the current President’s policies and positions, such behavior I think disrespects the office and our traditions. There are better avenues for protest.
You do realize that the President just spent the preceding section of his speech calling OTHER people liars. Not wrong. Not mistaken. Liars.
Come call me a liar. I won’t yell at you.
I’ll punch you.
Shipmate,
The problem with your approach is that the subject(s) would first have to be able to grasp the concept of humility, honesty, and dignity. Sadly, those traits have been gone from the DNC since Tip O’Neill passed on.
The DNC, and it’s supporters, see the office of the President, in fact, the entire political process, as a means to enrich and empower THEMSELVES, rather than a means to provide service to the nation.
Apparently, they missed that whole JFK speech about “Ask Not.. etc…”
O’Neill? Humility, honesty and dignity? Him snoozing behind President Reagan during the State of the Union address? Burying the investigation of the call-boy ring out of Barney Frank’s house? Forgiving unrepentant man-boy lover Ed Markey (IIRC) for boozing up the under-age male aides? The ceaseless rhetoric of how Ray-gun was going to start a nuclear winter to freeze all the homeless Ray-gun’s policies had supposedly created? You remember O’Neill with rose-tinted lenses, and from my barstool, it appears the civility disappeared during the 1960s. But American politics has always been a rough business, and if a politician can’t take being called a liar every now and then, his skin is really too thin. Thicker-skinned politicians make for much greater amusement, and O’Neill had the skin of a rhinoceros.
And you, Tim, of all people should recognize the socialist agenda buried in those short, post-election (’cause he couldn’t have gotten away with it pre-election) lines, “Ask not what… “
Maybe you are correct as to their better avenues and more polite ways to protest. SO, HOWEVER, when and how do you think that the mainstream media would cover those polite requests? When other than on The One’s nationally televised presentation (during which he was throwing crap at his opposition BTW) do you think that a very large group of watchers would hear about our side? I for one do not believe that the more polite and better avenued approach would get much publicity and certainly not a fair hearing.
And another thing: I want to see the people who are supposed to be representing me and my side of this argument publicly engaging the enemy head on. I want to see and hear our arguments being put forward….not in a rant; not in a yelling match; but certainly head to head point for point. There’s a morale component here that nobody seems to talk about. The left has the their faces all over the media spewing their “right to health care” and we need our side talking (1) constitutional limitations, (2) budget limits, (3) and governmental waste and inefficiency. My morale suffers for our side being polite. My bankbook suffers and our kids suffer for being so polite as to allow the other side to win over the undereducated hearts and minds of the voters.
Flatlander – Please tell me what avenues you would use. This is not snarky.
The American people are faced with a radical change in their gov’t. What would you do that would “respect the office and our traditions?”
Apparently, the Good Mr. Wilson is the only Congress Critter who understands how to stop a bully. Good for him.
It is to be regretted that those who should also know, couldn’t be bothered to join in the confrontation.
More Wilsons. Fewer Obamas.
Please.
Too early to tell, but it appears there is going to be a good chance that the Democrats/Socialist, and some Republicans who want to punish him for “not respecting the office”, may not be able to serve the country past his current term.
That would be a travesty, and a damn shame.
I’m confused, it’s ok for our President to baldly and repeated lie to our face, but not ok to call him on it. Let him debate Wilson and devil take the hindmost. Wilson says he has read the Bill, I don’t believe Obama has even claimed to have done so.
How many tens of thousands of bumpers in this country are decorated with “Bush Lied, People Died”–or on some young idiot girl’s car “The Only Bush I Trust is My Own”. I’ve always thought that such posters said more about the girl than about the President.
We’re coming off 8 years of durn near every Democrat in the country calling the President a liar–and now one guy from South Carolina calls BHO out–and everyone in Congress suddenly gets the vapors? Man up folks.
For me, it boils down to two questions; When is it appropriate to call the president a liar and, when is it acceptable to call the president out and still demand he tells the truth while we “respect the office and our traditions?”
I personally don’t see any other alternative than to call him a liar in public. Maybe I am missing some nuance.
He is a liar…
I reckon we as a people would be more tolerant of a dissenting chorus in Congress during an address. An individual voice? Not so much.
***(but yes as soon as Rep Wilson’s site is back up and running I’ll be sending him a contribution).
Rep Wilson is like the doughboy who led (too)early from the trenches and was left laying on the wire for others to pass over later. Time may vindicate his spirit of resistance. The fault is his mates who didn’t join in the charge.
We on the Right will be held to our standards by the Left. The Left has no standard other than “by any means necessary.” Of course it’s not fair. That’s just the way it always is for the guy in the White Hat and Superman.
BHO can call us all liars and haters. We just need to smile and eat that sandwich with gusto. That means he’s hearing us.
As for us respectful .mil types. There’s external professional courtesy and then there’s attention to personal comforts.
I’ve stood in front of my own personal Capt Quigg accused of the crime of faithfully performing my duties and assuring a FMC aircraft. Seriously, that was his problem with me. But. That’s for another time and is at least a 3 beer story.
Suffice to say Capt QuiggNFO gave a lot worse than BHO gave last night. I still saluted, said “Yessir” and gave the mission my all (Bulls Brigade, Earnest Will ‘87). Shame though about the squadron mate who was TAD to ship’s laundry. Must have confused Capt Quigg’s laundry with the day’s trash.
“The fantail is open… Sponson 11 starboard side.”
I’m a dissenter. I just think there are some places where a modicum of civility should be kept. Last night was one of those places. It comes down to what we said over and over when the Democrats continued to act boorishly during George W’s term (take Hilly’s eye rolling, for instance), “Respect the office.” I do not hold much regard for Obama, but there is the Office he holds. I’d not walk across the street to shake his hand, but nor would I spit in his general direction, although the urge would be great.
That said, part of me grinned and laughed that Congressman Wilson did what he did. Just because I don’t think it was right, doesn’t mean I wouldn’t have WANTED to do it.
There are many a time and place to call the President out in public. Not included is that moment when he is addressing Congress. To my knowledge, there is no precedent for such an outburst.
And furthermore, I think it is not helpful to the cause of the opposition.
Your knowledge is lacking Flatlander. Do your homework.
Dunno. I think Congress is the only place you do it without the Secret Service taking you down first.
One can certainly see how poorly the Dems did in the most recent elections because of their boorishness. NOT. I, too, believe in being polite just like I believe in being honest in sports. But that is not the game right now. Right now we can be nice losers. I would hope that we choose to win this particular fight and all such constitutional fights no matter that it requires the taking off of gloves.
I think some of us political junkies worry waaaaaaaayyyyyy too much about individual actions like Rep. Wilson’s. It may not have been the smartest thing to do, but so what? Obama is hurriedly destroying his Presidency, and the brief outburst of one Congressman isn’t going to affect that self-destruction at all. The President’s blind supporters (and I say that because not only do they support him blindly, but they are also blind to the ways of the world) are all up in arms over this, revealing for the 5000th time their hypocrisy, while the average voter hasn’t even heard of this. Only about 10% of the American public watched the speech, anyway, and the vast majority of those have already made up their minds about this President. The Congressman’s actions may have affected a very small number of the illusory “moderates,” but they’ll be affected by dozens of other things between now and Nov. 2010, and most of those will work against the President.
Every time the Democrats have gained absolute power in the last 50 years, they have horribly overreached and there has been a disastrous (for them) reaction. Every time, the Republicans wound up in a stronger position than they started from (with the possible exception of the 1968 election). This current cycle will be no different, and the reaction will be even stronger than before, due to the extent of the overreach. Barring some unforeseen event, the democrats will suffer severely in 2010. No matter what they try to tell themselves, no matter how much this country seemingly deteriorates in moral fiber, this is still very much a center right nation, and becoming more so, despite the desperate protestations of the legacy media and Hollywood.
I also think there was some merit to Congressman Wilson’s actions, as shown by the responses here. It may have outraged the perpetually outraged, but it also fired up the base. And there are far more of the latter than the former.
Flat/
I understand your point about not being helpful to the cause (although I think it a close call that can be argued here either way, and I happen to reluctantly come down on the other side on this one–not eagerly, mind you, but forcefully nonetheless.) but you’re wrong about there being no precedent. There are You Tube vids all over the place today with the dems booing and hissing both Bushes during Congressional addresses–although as a group (but not in unison, however) and not as a lone voice to be sure, which is what I think you are objecting to, no?
Never quite got the whole “respect the President” thing, outside of the Service: yeah, sure, nation’s highest office and all that, but, still, filled by a damned politician regardless of era.
Maybe good, maybe bad, perhaps clueless, but a political creature regardless. Both Bush and Obama seem to be prisoners of their affiliations and supporters, to a great extent.
While we’re blue-skying, how about striking the two parties from the presidential process altogether?
Jumping into the fray late, having been toiling at the family biz most of the day… I believe vx has it nailed when it comes to preferences. Respect, huh? So that’s what it comes down to? For that part, I have a strong affinity to Tim’s way of thinking and then Babs asks if not in public where? Right on! The POTUS had just finished a long litany of people he labeled as liars and those who had simply been so small as to “bicker”.
Well, then… I too applaud the Gentleman from South Carolina for his courage, lack of restraint and good loud voice. Too bad so many have jumped his case rather than supporting him. Boos, hisses, guffaws rained down on “W”… why is The One exempt?
The Democrat/Socialists roundly criticized Bush 41 for his speech to America’s school children. They even opened an Congressional investigation regarding the $26,000 spent for 41’s broadcast. The problem is the double standard of acceptable behaviour we’ve seen by the Dems vs. Repubs since then; anything is fair game for the left, but woe be unto the right if they make one small mis-step. Perhaps it goes all the way back to Nixon and Watergate. Have we been playing make up since then?
No, it’s not quite the same thing, VX. Murmurring, hissing, or making Hillary faces is perhaps bad form, but shouting down the President is simply way past that point. It’s not smart and it’s not civil.
Where do we go next, screaming matches every time the executive meets the legislative?
You know what Flat, I am at the point of surrender. You find one person to be out of order and that dictates your view?
Did you review the tapes of the 05′ POTUS speech to the nation? Did you?
In any event,I think my family and I will be thrown into a gov’t mandated health ins. program, which I think will make you happy. We will pay through our premiums for viagra and abortions.
No matter how much I scream and howl, you and your ilk will win the day.
You can look at my previous posts to see my republican/conservative solutions to health care that do not involve massive gov’t intervention and massive gov’t mandates.
Are you aware of the fact that the NHS in the UK employs 1.25 million people? 3 bureaucrats for every one health care person? Scale it up to the US and we are talking about 7 million people involved in health and are now currently exempt from HR 3200 as federal employees. Good and true federal/union workers that would never vote themselves out of a job.
Do you have any idea how dangerous this is?
When you hear of people screaming at town hall meetings can you possibly understand that they are fighting for the maintenance of their lifestyle as Americans?
Flat/
Why are there two different standards for behaviour, depending on the side of the aisle? Have you taken the time to watch the Youtubes of “W”’s SOU speech delivered in the spring of 2008?
Obama “called out” the outspoken leaders from the right, saying that their time and the time of the Town Hall Americans’ bickering was over, now let’s move on. Does he really think it’s up to him to call the shots for the rest of the game?
Perhaps you’ve seen videos of England’s Parliament debates. If Obamacare is the right thing of America, shouldn’t it be able to stand up against open debate? The bottom line: POTUS did not tell the whole truth. For example, if there is no test of citizenship, how do they plan to not pay for illegal aliens? What do you call a panel of bureaucrats who make decisions as to what care is appropriate? Who believes abortions won’t be paid for with tax dollars? How do you save $500 Billion in the Medicare Trust Fund when there is no Medicare Trust Fund? (BTW, wasn’t it “W” who wanted to save Medicare and was booed, hissed, guffawed down during a speech to a Joint Session of Congress?
On and on, around we go… two different sets of rules. One man from South Carolina thought he’d speak up, the Dems are insulted… my, oh my. As they say in football, go complain to your momma.
Sorry … I just got to the dance a little bit late.
Flat/
Re: Screaming matches
yes, you’re right, that’s one of the problems in a system like ours vs a Parliamentary system that features something like “question-time” where good natured but serious rowdiness in the give and take of spirited direct debate with the PM and the opposition party can take place.
That, and the fact that, unlike those systems, we fuse the position of Head of Government and Head of State in a single person–as opposed to dividing them as is done elsewhere. Hence criticism of actions of the “Head of Government” part of the person is often read by the general public as attacks against the dignity of the office this same person represents as “Head of State.” This gives an American President great power and makes him almost semi-immune from the sort of criticisms/treatment most other nation’s political leaders receive from the opposition parties and the public at large–as we see here in the instance under discussion. But as of late this seems to have become a one way street, with the left side of the isle feeling free to slime Republican President’s at will.
And at some point principled restraint on our part only begins to seem like weakness and admission that the other side is morally superior on general principles alone, and thus above ANY criticism. I fear we are approaching that “tipping-point” if we have not already reached it. This is why ,IMHO, Obama feels free to stone-wall everything, lie thru his teeth about even the simplest things easily verified, and shout that the “time for talkin’, the time for debate is past!” even though there HAS BEEN NO SUBSTANTIAL DEBATE or even Congressional–formal or informal–without fear of contradiction.
Irony of ironies, we are dangerously close to being cowed into submission by appeals to “civility” from–as you should yourself well know–past masters of the “Chicago School” of slime-ball, steam-roller hard-ball politics. From MY pov for these people to NOW demand “civility” takes a Lake-Superior-sized vessel full of unmitigated gall. I feel that time is past, although I will freely admit you may be right and I am wrong insofar as the tactics of how it play’s out with the general public. All the “sensible” people want us to self-censor and “mollify” the MOR types. I demur. I think the MOR types are waiting for a standard to be struck to show the way to something they can rally to/around. Polite subservience and gentile civility has no place in a back-alley brass-knucks brawl.
Better to be hung for a Sheep as a Lamb.
(Back to the Barbancourt, Over.
)
* “Congressional HEARINGS” sorry
I’m not a Democrat. I can’t stand Obama. I absolutely loathe him and I have posted over at my site, that I intend to do all I can to pretend he’s not in office as POTUS for the remainder of his term. He absolutely sickens me. To the core of my soul.
But why do we have to wallow in the same mud as the classless lefties? Why is that what we want for ourselves? Why is it that because a man is lying, we have to stoop to the lows of the others. We all know he’s lying. The public knows he’s lying. He’s a Chicago politician. It’s a given. What has happened to our society as a whole that if one group acts boorishly that it becomes a tit for tat?
I have never regretted taking the high road. Never. But there have been more times than I can count that I have regretted taking the low road. Yesterday, as much as I agree with the sentiments of the man from SC, he took the low road. He has apologized. If he’d taken the high road… he’d not have had to. Perhaps, however, that was the goal. Perhaps taking the low road was an attempt to spotlight the lying. I don’t know. It would just be nice if Americans, left and right, behaved themselves. I personally don’t ever want to think I’m on the same playing field as someone like Hillary Clinton. I always hope I’m a bit better than that…
Bou, I’m an Independent. I cannot stand BHO.
Following your logic, I am sure that the Gypsies (and other groups) should take pride that they took the “high road” when they got on the trucks and trains to Treblinka to take a “shower” and perform their proper “civic duties”.
You know, being civil, respecting the rank and office, obeying legally constituted authority and all. Oh, and the transportees pretended that bad things were not going to happen. To the core of their soul.
Dislike using that analogy, but it is about as vivid an example as has happened in recent history.
Please see instructions on how to boil a frog. Personally, I think the temperature is too hot.
Rant over. Coffee and to work.
+1
Really? You’re really comparing Obama vs. Wilson to the Holocaust? Really? Interesting thought process. Can’t wait to get the view on this from my friends who were holocaust survivors.
Bou/
I think you mis-understand. What I THINK Ron Snyder is trying to do is point out is that it makes no sense to be civil solely for the sake of being civil–that when one is being sold down the river–either legislatively or for real–being civil gets one nowhere but consigned to oblivion. If you already haven’t suggest you (re)read
my post above@12:31, 10 Sept 09 (or that of STEVEC just prior) in which I quote extensively from Velociman on just this point and then hit the link and read his original post on the matter. Ron’s analogy IS correct, imho, insofar as it would seem that those who believe that our side shouldn’t “rock the boat” overmuch and be dignified in our opposition are using the same thought processes/mentality as those Jews and Gypsies who deceived themselves and meekly accepted their fate by denying the reality of what was actually happening to them rather than actively resisting even if it meant dying in the process–that if only they didn’t make their enemies mad they might yet somehow make everything come out alright. Much in the same way some on our side believe we should act not to engage our political opponents.
You are correct Virgil; Your explanation is more erudite than mine though!
Bou, you are being simplistic in characterizing my comment as “Obama v Wilson”. It was the logic and rational for behaviour that was at the core of my post. As to your “Holocaust Survivor Friends” comment -please stop the inanity.
A bit off topic, but on a personal note: I have vivid memories of my Dad showing me photographs that he had taken upon liberating a few Concentration Camps in Europe during his scenic tour of the ETO during WWII. Dad was proud of what he did, horrified at what he saw, and more, umm, aggressive against the Germans afterwards. Wish my Mother had not thrown the pictures away because “they were too awful for people to look at”.
The only Holocaust survivors that I’ve personally known, or at least was aware that I knew, was at the Holocaust Memorial Museum in DC.
I believe that BHO is the most existential threat to this country since 1861.
I am of mixed emotions on this. On the one hand it was a breech of parliamentary procedure. And that Rep Wilson apologized as soon as he did indicates he knew this as well.
On the other hand, the lie upon lie put forth with no hesitation what so ever, by the President, was to my (admittedly limited) mind unconscionable. As the head of our government he should be setting the example, especially in what is supposed to be, at least on the face of it, a formal meeting of state. That he has debased the office he holds on almost a daily basis, and now (continues) to spew forth with the most unseemly of comment and criticism of those who have chosen to (and rightly so) find fault with his (and his administrations) proposals/legislation. How can one rightly respect this individual (let alone even think about admiring the man) when his whole time in office has been nothing short of complete ineptitude on his part.(I am being very generous with words here, what first came to mind were words, which if proven true, would see any individual at the very least removed from office, if not facing a far more extreme punishment, especially in time of war.)
So yes, briefly chastise Rep Wilson, firing a shot across his bow. Than proceed to train all armaments on the ship of state, and prepare for a broadside. For their sins against the country, the people, and most importantly, the Constitution are far more egregious.
And as I am able, your site will be added to the rolls, us ol’ retired “squids” have to stick together.
When the folks at this site complained about the rude treatment that President Bush received that wasn’t befitting the Office of the President of the United States, I agreed despite my own questions about some of his policies. I’m frustrated to see how few support the same argument now; maybe I expected better here.
I don’t see any difference between the anti-Bush rhetoric and the Anti-Obama rhetoric. It’s all bs that only distracts. When “those people” is a hate-backed term,spit through the teeth to describe the other half of our citizenry (both sides do it, I’m including everyone here); it doesn’t say much about us as a nation with a future.
A pox on both your houses.
Yesterday, BEFORE the incident being discussed occurred, a bright young Republican undergrad at Berkeley was in my office, and we were discussing how hopeless it made both of us feel, although we see issues from different perspectives, that our “parties” couldn’t sit down as we were and discuss like reasonable persons the pros, cons, and middle spaces on issues–as she and I were, as we have in the past, as we will in the future, with no negative effects, hard feelings or vindictiveness on either side.
(As an aside, despite opinions expressed here to the contrary, believe it or not, faculty do not punish students for their political views. I have been working with this young woman for a number of semesters, she keeps coming back to visit, even when we don’t have a class together, so I don’t think she feels terrorized or oppressed by me. she has told me in the past that she seeks friendships with people across the political spectrum because it exposes her to more ideas while helping her really understand why she believes what she does. I mention this because I know I will merely be accused of being a horrible left-wing faculty manipulating young minds–she and I have only had these discussions because she came to my office and initiated them, and she seeks my advice on her organizing activities with the campus’ young Republicans group because I have some pr background. Really, there are places where free speech occurs, and there are those of us who don’t feel threatened to have our positions challenged or questoned–that’s actually how learning happens, and I’m the first to admit, I learn a lot from my students.
Maybe it’s because this young woman and I both recognize the sincerity and goals we share to make our community a better place are in agreement, even if we think there are different roads to take to reach that place.
She’s an outstanding young scholar with a bright future…we need more of those on BOTH sides of the aisle–hopefully their optimism and faith in reason and discourse won’t be crushed by the older generation. Otherwise, I do fear for the future of the Republic…
Laurie, I’m calling BS on your statement that faculty do not punish students for their political views. They did to me when I was school (though coming to school after being in the military I didn’t give a crap for their attempts at cooercion, and was happy to escalate a few issues), and numerous others that I have personally witnessed. I’m sure that Ward Churchill and Bill Ayers, just to use to random examples, were “even-handed” in their instruction to and treatment of their students.
The political activisim, heavily weighted to the Left, had IMO substantially increased over the last, oh, twenty years or so. While I confess that I am not smart enough to know why it has happened, my guess is a confluence of post-Vietnam/Nixon attitudes of the Left, increasing Government influence and the pernicious affects of the academic Unions.
Your personal view is just that. Even in the isolated and oh so hallowed halls of academia you know better.
I will finish with: if you do not see a difference between Bush (either one), and BHO, then a pox on your house.
Same experience. I had one professor tell me pointedly “Remember that HOW you participate in class will also affect your grade”. The department head also backed up the professor by explaining to me that it was the professors class, and he could and would teach it how he felt it should be taught. IOW, it was toe the party line, or get a failing grade.
I agree with Ron. I experienced it many years ago in the election of 1978. One of my teachers was quite left of everything and made no secret of it. Any kid who didn’t toe his line consistently got failing grades while those that did got passing grades for work that should have failed them. Parental intervention (mine) was the only thing that made it stop.
I see it today thru the children of friends. Laurie’s experience may be true, but it’s only hers.
“faculty do not punish students for their political views”
Laurie, I suggest you spend some time familiarizing yourself with the FIRE (foundation for individual rights in education) web-site of Harvey Silverstone, and the case studies therein. @
http://www.thefire.org
That, and spend some time talking with David Horowitz…
Thankfully, I’m no longer in the president’s chain of command, so while I may still respect the office I’ve no obligations at all to respect the man in it, nor the way it has been held by many of its occupants. That’s the beauty of our republic, the president works for us – he’s supposed to respect our opinions, not the other way around.
Congress is in a little different position, being part of the federal branch and all. And let’s face it, the president calling his opponents liars isn’t a great step above an opponent calling him a liar during his speech, the real difference being the latter interrupted his time speaking and was, hence, boorish behavior. Had the same been said during the rebuttal (which, yeah, there was one but so far it escapes notice in the media), it would have been entirely proper.
Had it been me, I’d have adopted a more subtle approach. While the “Bullsh*t” line from Top Gun the movie has a certain appeal, personally I think a more effective method would have been for the Republican contingent to have brought personal fans. You know, piece of paper on a stick you wave at your face to quietly generate a breeze during warm summer morning in church?
On the back, an American flag. On the front, white background and the word “LIE” in bold black. Turn it around every time the speaker pulls our collective leg, for about 3 seconds, while maintaining rapt attention to the speech. Even if it was just one person doing this, imagine the cameras *not* following that? Best of all, Obama would see it. During his speech. It would call him out right then and there — he can either dare to go off-script or not, but it places the onus for action squarely upon him.
Attempting to interrupt the speech is boorish, and the man was right to apologize for it. He has absolutely no need to apologize for pointing out when he’s being lied to.
– Max
Max/
I LIKE that. The fan bit, that is. Very sly. You’re ALMOST as devious a deviant as AW1Tim….
It’s the little things, you know ?
Update:
Dems have used Wilson’s outburst to raise over $100,000 for his opponent’s campaign chest. More than 90% from out of state. Cut ‘em out of the herd and cull them one by one they will try. Me, I’m with blackeagle, I’ll be sending the boy a contribution of my own.
Babs, I am sure we are in reasonably close agreement on the policy questions. I simply find the behavior boorish and disrespectful to the office and institutions of our government regardless of the issues and personalities.
On the other hand, I am quite happy to see conservatives fired up for a change, and hope it continues to carry forward into more constructive forums of expression.
As for Rep. Wilson, I’m sure he had already done the political calculus with regard to his district, and the more money the Dems send there, the more they will effectively flush down the drain.
I “respect the office” to the same degree the officeholder respects the Constitution. Not so much, in the case at hand.
I don’t think Wilson should have apologized. Clearly, the gloves are off in DC. Bickering about who removed them is like claiming Marquess of Queensberry rules in a street fight. Conservatives need to start using Alinsky methods right back at the liberals with NO apologies.
Did anybody see the legislator sitting there in the audience with the cardboard BS sign in his lap? I’ve seen no reference to that guy unless that was Joe.
While I said earlier that Rep Wilson needed to apologize for his incivility, there has to be some reciprocity. In a way, like how a salute is a sign of respect between both parties, not a sign of subservience on the part of the initiator. That is what all of the dems want — subservience. Remember the “I won” taunt?
In the Obama dictionary, to not be considered “bickering”, one would have to check their principles at the door — in short, it would require the Republicans to become Democrats. At some level (and Obama repeatedly demonstrates it), it is rooted in so strong a conviction in the moral superiority of your beliefs, that there can be no other positions with any validity. You could hear it in his speech, from the opening (only democracy with no ….) to the end (carry the life dream of TK). All of the talk about “my door is open” is eye wash. The “door” may be open, but the mind is closed.
So, it is like a squadron. If the troops ever think the CO thinks he is better than them, that his job is to command, and their job is to shut up and do what he says, then don’t be surprised when it grinds to a halt. There has to be mutual respect – a recognition that while the jobs and responsibilities may be different, they are all valuable, and everyone deserves to be listened to, respected, and appreciated. That’s where we are — the line, av/arm, and a/c divisions are all convinced. Admin, CMC and the ready room are on board, and cheering. Those closest to the front office are ebullient, but downstairs they are pissed — and since the CO went straight from first cruise to the front office, he is occludo. Wilson is just AD3 Jones — a lower impulse control level than most, willing to say what many others were thinking. The CO doesn’t realize, and frankly doesn’t care, that Jones is just the tip of the iceberg.
Scott, that last paragraph is a fascinating analysis that gives me some serious food for thought. Thanks!
As I reflected on this overnight, I can’t help but throw P.BO’s own words back out here:
If you misrepresent what’s in the plan, we will call you out.
Seems to me that Rep. Wilson was just doing as instructed.
CIVILITY & THAT: UPDATE:
Looks like the squeaky-wheel, Hunter S. Thompson/Joe Wilson/Velociman “Challenge the Bastards on their own turf” philosophy has just been vindicated. Fox news reports that the “Gang of Six” in the Senate is moving rapidly to close the loophole that would allow illegal immigrants access to healthcare and which occasioned Joe Wilson’s verbal charge of Obama as a liar–proving that Obama indeed WAS a an out-and-out LIAR–else why would this Senate group now be “scrambling” to fix something that wasn’t supposedly broken? Find @
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/09/10/rep-wilson-outburst-leads-senate-dems-close-loophole-health-reform.
Kris, you nailed it! Go, girl!!!
I just try to call ‘em like I see ‘em. Which is more than we can say for P.BO.
Ron Snyder@9:46/
FWIW, Dad had some pics he took when his 42nd Rainbow Div. liberated one of the last camps–can’t remember which now, would have to dig stuff up. He was at the time the 242nd Regimental G-2 (or is it S-2 at Regt level?) Intel OIC, so was in charge of documentation. Some grizzly sights…