Archive for Wednesday, September 16, 2009

Political lie detector needed

September 16, 2009

Advertisement

Wouldn’t it be nice, as the Beach Boys sang in another context, if there were such a thing as a liar meter? It would detect when a politician wasn’t telling the truth and alert the public. In the absence of such an invention, we are left to challenge our political leadership based on an objective look at the facts.

Rep. Joe Wilson, R-S.C., may have been out of order when he shouted “You lie!” in response to President Obama’s assertion in his congressional address Wednesday night that illegal immigrants would not be covered by his proposed health care plan. What if the administration plans to bar illegal immigrants from purchasing health care coverage, but as the New York Times reported, continues “to require hospitals to provide emergency treatment to illegal immigrants at taxpayer expense? Would that then absolve Wilson of his rude behavior?

If we believe the president when he promises there will be no “death panels,” does he lose honesty points when instead the government sends doctors who “counsel” the elderly about their “end of life options”? If bureaucrats end up rationing care so that only the “fit” or “near fit” still young enough to keep producing tax revenue receive treatment, does this weaken the president’s credibility?

If the sensibilities of the few who remember what “good etiquette” means were offended by Congressman Wilson’s shouted remark, shouldn’t they be equally offended by Democrats, including Majority Leader Harry Reid who called former President Bush a “loser” and a “liar” and then apologized for saying he was a loser, but did not apologize for saying he was a liar? “Bush lied, people died,” said the bumper sticker. No one apologized (much less repented) for that sentiment.

Is it a lie to say, as the president did, that his plan will be paid for and that the money will come largely from Medicare and Medicaid funds that are currently being wasted and/or fraudulently spent? According to the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, the House Democrats’ bill (the only one whose details we’ve seen) would increase the deficit by “$239 billion over the 2010-2019 period. A recent study by the Lewin Group, a healthcare policy research and management-consulting firm owned by United Healthcare Group, one of the nation’s largest insurers, found that “(in) the second 10 years ... the proposal would add an estimated

$1 trillion to the federal deficit.” Is saying otherwise a lie? Lewin also projects that two out of three Americans will lose their current health coverage and “the cost of private health coverage will skyrocket.” Is it an untruth to say otherwise, as the president has?

The president says federal dollars won’t pay for abortions, but in none of the bills under consideration is there a specific prohibition — as in the Hyde Amendment — against such spending.

The Senate confirmation last Thursday of Cass Sunstein as the administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs in the Office of Management and Budget means Sunstein will have the power to decide what Congress means by the laws it passes. Sunstein has written books and given lectures in which he says that animals deserve lawyers to argue for their “rights” and that the Second Amendment does not grant an absolute right to keep and bear arms. He also has said he wants to ban hunting. Sunstein’s defenders say those statements were simply academic exercises and would not be implemented as policy in his new position. Tell that to Bob McDonnell, candidate for governor of Virginia, who has been smeared by Democrats for a thesis he wrote more than 20 years ago in which he took “academic” positions his detractors say were anti-women’s rights.

The president and his defenders can’t have it both ways. They can’t be offended when they are called liars and think nothing of labeling as liars those they don’t agree with. President Obama regularly uses the “L” word, most recently in his Labor Day and congressional speeches in which he accused his critics of spreading “lies.” Are we to believe that he is the only one virtuous enough to tell the truth and anyone who disagrees with him is lying?

Someone please invent that political lie detector. We need it now more than ever.

Comments

Kirk Larson 5 years, 7 months ago

...Majority Leader Harry Reid who called former President Bush a “loser” and a “liar” and then apologized for saying he was a loser, but did not apologize for saying he was a liar?

There's the rub. Bush DID lie and substantially so. Reid was under no obligation to apologize.

remember_username 5 years, 7 months ago

"to require hospitals to provide emergency treatment to illegal immigrants at taxpayer expense".

I got this far into the editorial and wondered - If a person requires emergency treatment and they don't have an ID or SSN, how do you turn them away? "Yes, yes. I know it hurts, but you don't have the proper documents. You must leave. Please stop bleeding all over the waiting room, there's the exit. Do you want me to call security and have you escorted from the building?". Maybe Nurse Ratched could do it, most nurses couldn't, all doctors can't.

devobrun 5 years, 7 months ago

Logic compels me to agree with you Cappy. And that same thought process compels me to believe that Obama is a liar too.

The budget will increase if more health care is delivered to more people. Immigrants who walked into the country without papers and without the knowledge of our border officials are doing so against federal law. If they wind up with health coverage in the new system, then Obama will be caught in a false statement.

Will these be lies? If a statement is made that is knowingly false, then it is a lie. I think President O know that his statements in his speech are not going to happen.

I think that "lie" is probably a fair analysis. He's a politician, folks. What did you expect?

Should the congressman from SC have said it at that time and in that place? It was rude.......but it sure has a lot of people talking. I think that no matter what the house says in it's rebuke.....the congressman won.

This health care law will turn into the same kind of morass as tax code, military procurement laws, and many other laws that are so complex and overwhelming.

Next new business opportunity: Health accountants (HA). If it takes a firm with employees who have degrees and experience to fill out a tax form, it will take an HA to do the same for health decisions, diagnoses, payments, etc. Advisers who will steer the general population through the paperwork. The more a client pays these advisers, the better the scam against the gubment. Rich people will still get better treatment.

I see a degree at Juco and maybe at the university within 10 to 20 years HA will be the new growth business. Oh, computer programs will be sold for those who want to do this themselves. Put in your lab results, symptoms, MD diagnosis, MD recommendation for care and out comes advice on what to say to the doc. It will tell you how to present yourself to the system in order to maximize your health bennies. KU bidness profs.....get a head start on the new business op today! It'll be just like tax accounting. It will grow in sophistication as laws and countermeasures parry back and forth. For each new law there will be a way around it. Sophistication will lead to utter obfuscation.

And government will prevail. Will it be better? Yep, tax law is paradise. HA.

Scott Drummond 5 years, 7 months ago

Republican plan:

"“Yes, yes. I know it hurts, but you don't have the proper documents. You must leave. Please stop bleeding all over the waiting room, there's the exit. Do you want me to call security and have you escorted from the building?”.

tbaker 5 years, 7 months ago

What exactly did Bush lie about Cappy?

Could it be you think he lied about the war in Iraq? Before you answer - please, with equal advantage - recall how congress voted on that. Recall not once, but 15 times how the UN voted on that. Recall not one, but the conclusions of 22 different national intelligence agencies around the world, many of whom with competing interests not inclined to agree with the US. Recall as well that WMDs have not only been found in Iraq, but they have been used in attacks against US forces - certainly not in the quantities originally predicted, but clearly enough to establish the fact Iraq once had them, and the means to produce them. Recall the testimony of countless Iraqi officials who knew of the WMD program and spoke in great detail about what happened to the weapons post-invasion. Recall as well the fact "proving" Saddam had WMDs was a rather pointless exercise to begin with, considering the well-established fact he used them on his neighbors and his own people. I've seen a trunk-full of captured 152mm Mustard Gas artillery projectiles in Fallujah with my own eyes. I've got a picture of them.

Trust me: I'm no fan of the Iraq war. Knowing what we know now the US congress or the UN would have never approved of invading that country for Bush or any other President for that matter, and quite a sad number of my friends and colleagues wouldn't be dead right now.

So you'll understand my strong opinion when it comes to people whose understanding is no more than bumper-sticker-deep on this topic. The catchy phrase chanting is moronic, it detracts from substantive debate, and it further divides the country - be they Code Pink and Move-on, or Tea Party goers and irate SC congressman. Don't be one of those people.

SteelHorseRider 5 years, 7 months ago

tbaker - Thank you for your service and the rebuttal to Bush "lies".....

I myself have always wondered how so many can deny the fact Iraq used WMDs during their Gulf War with Iran? Where did they all go? Poof! Did they just disappear? I think not.

Not to mention the fact Iraq also used scuds effectively enough to kill Americans in Khobar 300+ miles away just a few short years later... Every time they launched there were literally hundreds of thousands of people either masking up or wishing they had a protective mask...maybe that was a lie too.

Lastly, if your #1 intel guy (head of the CIA) briefs the President and says it is a "slam dunk they have WMDs", should the President not believe him?

ralphralph 5 years, 7 months ago

They're all whores and liars. It's just against the rules to mention it on TV. We aren't allowed to talk about whether Obama was, in fact spinning lies --- hint: he was --- just whether the guy who pointed it out is a bad, bad man, and probably a racist to boot.

tbaker 5 years, 7 months ago

Thank you Steel. I appreciate it.

"In my opinion" they went to Syria mere days before 3ID closed on Baghdad. Not revealing that fact, moreover how we know it to be a fact, is in the best interests of the United States. Yes, many will howl upon reading this and lump me in with all the other conspiracy nuts, but the fact is I was there and I'll leave it at that. 50 years from now when the truth is finally revealed, people's opinion of W will change. By sitting on the truth, the man took the political butt-whipping of the century and he did it for his country. No, I'm not a republican (conservative libertarian actually) and no, I don't admire a great many things W did and didn't do - but this is one for the plus column.

Kirk Larson 5 years, 7 months ago

tbaker and Steel, Scott Ritter, former Marine and weapons inspector in Iraq, insisted repeatedly before the invasion of Iraq that virtually all Saddam's WMD's had been destroyed. Douglas Feith cherry picked intel in the DOD to make outrageous, and later found flatly false, claims about WMD. The "yellow cake" line in the State of the Union was removed twice by advisors who knew it to be false, but it was put back in by the Bush people.

On other issues, Bush, in the debate with John Kerry, said any surveilance of Americans required a warrant. Soon after the election the president's warrant-less wiretapping was revealed, first supposedly of only foreign communications but now we know that anyone was susceptible. Bush said there were no secret prisons, then there were secret prisons. Bush said we would follow the Geneva Conventions, then they were "quaint". It goes on and on.

KansasVoter 5 years, 7 months ago

If a political lie detector was ever implemented we would never hear another word out a republican's mouth, ever. All they do is lie, cheat, and steal.

Satirical 5 years, 7 months ago

I thought everyone knew the way to tell the tell-tale sign indicating a politician is lying: his/her mouth moves.

Shane Garrett 5 years, 7 months ago

tbaker: Thanks.
Politicians always love the people, as wolves do the sheep.

puddleglum 5 years, 7 months ago

why not let them have our soon to be passed health care? they steal or use for free all of our other socialist programs (police, fire dept, schools, highways, sewer systems, sidewalks, SLT's, welfare, marshmallows, and stuff) round 'em up and ship 'em back. It would take less than a week if everyone pitches in-then we can get back to a fair system.

gogoplata 5 years, 7 months ago

Obama is a liar, but what else should we expect.

"Read my lips, no new taxes.", "I did not have sexual relations with that woman", Weapons of mass destruction

He is just sticking with tradition.

puddleglum 5 years, 7 months ago

political lie detector needed..... I wonder how cheney would have done with that?

good one, Cal-

you ol' hippocritical fossil

ksdivakat 5 years, 7 months ago

If there were such a thing as a political lie detector, this country would have to go to a dictatorship, because BOTH sides, lie, cheat and steal!! LOL We would never have a politician for anything again.

Commenting has been disabled for this item.