Oct
16
16
Once More, With Feeling
Wow.
Meet the New Frosts, Same as the Old Frosts
Another S-CHIP family.
I can’t even excerpt this yet. You can either read the whole thing now, or be kind and wait for me.
I need to take an icy shower and roll around numbly on the floor for awhile, banging my head with a hammer.
Inter-Alia Update:
Above: Journalist Hemingway
NobodySpecial said,
October 16, 2007 at 17:10
On the conference call, Dara admitted to me that she and Brian had been talking about having children since before they were married. She further admitted that after they were married she voluntarily left a job at a country club that had good health insurance, because the situation was “unmanageable.” From there she took a job at a restaurant with no health insurance, and the couple went on to have a baby anyway, presuming that others would pay for it[...]
Because, of course, ALL double-income parents have others pay for it when they have kids.
Jesus, we’ve entered not the Looking Glass, but the Dark Crystal. At least these folks, with their obvious hatred for kids, won’t be breeding anytime soon.
Moonbat Rising said,
October 16, 2007 at 17:10
Screeching Howler Monkeys dispatched to root through the family’s trash in 5..4..3..2..
NobodySpecial said,
October 16, 2007 at 17:11
Oh, yeah, and check out the Dolchstoss cartoon they got there. I can’t wait for the Myspace page that plays the Horst Wessel Song to be linked from there.
Five of Diamonds said,
October 16, 2007 at 17:20
“I’m such a meanie that I immediately Googled her and found out that Bethany was recently voted “Tampa Bay’s Most Photogenic Baby.”…Now all you have to do is call you local liberal activist group and boom! Your child books her first national advertising campaign!”
So Mom is a crazy-obsessed beauty pagent mother? It’s hard to “book her first national advertising campaign” when the little girl is DEAD.
Moron.
owlbear1 said,
October 16, 2007 at 17:24
After the Graeme Frost affair, you’d think there would be lessons learned all around the folly of manipulating children to make a political argument.
This is what cornered weasels sound like…
sophie brown said,
October 16, 2007 at 17:28
So many of these wing-nut rants focus how readily available employer-sponsored health plans are. And how anyone who is not in a job with employer sponsored health care is irresponsible. And how it is appropriate to force people to toil in unpleasant and unmanageable jobs simply because they provide health care. What a load of crock.
It’s starting to sound like a Monty Python skit: I got up two hours before I went to bed to walk 100 miles to work in a sweatshop with health care. And I LIKED it.
Candy said,
October 16, 2007 at 17:29
I’m a coward. I can’t click on any of the links to Malkin et al. I can only look at what Malkin and Teh Winged Ones are saying obliquely, via the mirror of braver Sadly commenters. I’m afraid I’ll have a stroke.
I can’t begin to express how violently this whole S-CHIP debacle has upset me. Perhaps this is because, for the last six years, my son has either been on Medicaid - (while I was a temp and uninsured myself) - or on Hawk-I, which is Iowa’s version of S-CHIP - (while I was working for Big Financial Co. and insured myself but completely unable to afford to carry my son on my insurance). Now I’m back to uninsured and my kid’s back on Medicaid. Hopefully when I finish school in the summer of 08 I’ll land a good job and be able to insure both of us. Or I’ll move to Canada. In the meantime, thank the stars I live in a town with a great county hospital, Broadlawns, and in the event we need services they can’t provide, a great teaching hospital at the University of Iowa. But it’s all very scary nonetheless. I’ve taken a big chance, trying to improve my life, and my son’s, for the better. Isn’t that what we’re supposed to do in America? Get an education and get jobs where we better contribute to society? Seems the Rethugs want you to just curl up and die, if you’re poor. One less mouth to feed, I guess.
The thing is, I can see where people might think I’d made some faulty choices along the line, and I’ll be willing to admit that I’ve always been a risk taker, and the risks have not always worked. In my defense, I had some unforseeable disasters strike me as well, in the form of family deaths and financial blows that I couldn’t have prevented. But the thing is - my son and Graeme Frost and this poor little girl never did anything risky nor made any bad decisions and do not deserve to die or suffer so the wingnuts can feel the parents have been properly punished.
Sins of the fathers indeed.
J— said,
October 16, 2007 at 17:31
Re: “I’m such a meanie…”
Bwa ha ha ha. He took the bait. From the America’s Most Photogenic Babies home page:
Smooth move, Mark.
Southern Beale said,
October 16, 2007 at 17:32
Mark Hemingway, clearly got his job because of his name … another GOP legacy appointment?
Tom said,
October 16, 2007 at 17:32
*Sigh*
The right just refuses to accept the fact that there is a huge gap in coverage between Medicaid and private insurance, and God forbid if your kid has a life-threatening condition or you have a catastrophic event.
No, it’s all about lazy parents and their refusal to find jobs with the ever-shrinking business sector that actually provides coverage.
stakkalee said,
October 16, 2007 at 17:33
Man, talk about ‘Stop me before I shoot myself in the foot again!’ It’s like a so-terrible-it’s-funny pratfall - “He’s not going to dump the whitewash down his pants again, is he? Ha, he did, but this time he let go of the bucket and hurt his nuts!” That kind of funny.
owlbear1 said,
October 16, 2007 at 17:36
Now, pause for a second. Are you reading this at your computer at work, in a job that you don’t particularly care for or even downright detest because you have a spouse and child that depend on you? You wouldn’t be the first or last person to make that choice.
Unintentionally, the dipshit hits on the base reason why his masters are SO SO SO afraid of National Health care.
If we didn’t NEED health insurance through employers we wouldn’t put up with ALL the bullshit!
Bookish said,
October 16, 2007 at 17:36
How long until the entire conservo-facist gasbag punditry collectively falls writhing on the floor like so many snake-weilding churchgoers and screaming, “I AM HATE INCARNATE!”?
Peanutcat said,
October 16, 2007 at 17:36
Read. Gagged.
MrWonderful said,
October 16, 2007 at 17:37
The issue of health insurance is, by definition, one where abstract matters of finance, budget, taxes, etc., are embodied in actual people and their histories. As opposed to, say, the defense budget, where everything is technology and hypothetical “events.”
This, then, is how they get to write about “politics” by doing the only thing they can do, which is character assassination. (With a sub-theme of moralizing.) It’s Reagan’s welfare-queen all over again: political “principle” expressed in fables about undeserving (and immoral) low-lifes scamming the system.
BushCo has spawned a generation of the pundit as sniggering creep, the spiritual descendants of Lee Atwater and Karl Rove.
Meanwhile, the actual scams? The lost billions in Iraq? The bottomless pit dug and maintained with lies? Actual deaths and dismemberments (in the tens of thousands)? And, for that matter, the actual use by politicians of their own children in campaign ads? Ignored.
This is what they live for: the chance to feel righteous by beating up someone weaker.
Roxanne said,
October 16, 2007 at 17:38
Good to know we’re all held hostage by employee benefits.
Trilateral Chairman said,
October 16, 2007 at 17:38
Wow. Hemingway and Chris Horner are tied for the Midge Decter Memorial Prize for the Most Incoherent Writer at National Review. I briefly wondered why most of the major flubs and grammatical errors hadn’t been caught during the editorial process. Then I remembered that the editor of NRO is Kathryn Jean Lopez, meaning that there’s no editorial process (she is not capable of it).
My favorite line, though, was this:
“Dara admitted to me that she and Brian had been talking about having children since before they were married. ”
Shocking! Horrifying! These two have committed the egregious crime of…TALKING ABOUT THEIR PLANS FOR THEIR FAMILY BEFORE TYING THE KNOT?!
That’s it. Case closed. Lock ‘em up and throw away the key.
slippytoad said,
October 16, 2007 at 17:38
I think that currently only 60% of employers provide a health insurance plan. Is Hemingway going to talk about those people any time soon?
ifthethunderdontgetya™³²®© said,
October 16, 2007 at 17:38
It’s starting to sound like a Monty Python skit: I got up two hours before I went to bed to walk 100 miles to work in a sweatshop with health care. And I LIKED it.
Beyond that, there’s the old Archie Bunker “my tax dollars are being wasted on these deadbeats” riff, which falls so flat when one considers how much money Deer Leader is wasting in Iraq, much of which is going straight into the coffers of wealthy Republican donors…All with the enthusiastic cheerleading of these same people.
Proud dupes of the tycoon party, they are.
Righteous Bubba said,
October 16, 2007 at 17:40
For Dara and Brian Wilkerson, the fact that they don’t have health insurance is less about falling through the cracks than the decisions they’ve made.
Ah, freedom. It’s over there in a display case. Don’t touch it.
Southern Beale said,
October 16, 2007 at 17:41
“… banging my head with a hammer. … “
The inevitable result of all this, I fear, is that the righties will do the banging for you. After what happened to Randi Rhodes, I’m increasingly suspicious of the unhinged loonies on the right and their ability to restrain themselves.
cowalker said,
October 16, 2007 at 17:43
“Which brings us to another salient point — Bethany Wilkerson is healthy. She is covered by existing programs and has already received the much of the medical care she needs. The current debate centers on expanding the program, not kicking the Frosts and the Wilkersons to the curb.”
Does he really not get that the Democrats are showcasing SUCCESS stories, or is he pretending not to get it? The point is, look how well this program worked! Let’s save more children and at the same time prevent other families in marginal circumstances from being bankrupted by medical costs.
It will be interesting to see if the chiding from right wingers for unplanned pregnancies while uninsured becomes a trend. If it does, I’ll expect to see No Right to Lifers yelling at pregnant women outside free clinics, urging them to get abortions.
Bullsmith said,
October 16, 2007 at 17:46
So the argument now is all American must be abstinent until they have firmly established themselves in the middle class? No more babies for the poor? Seriously, this is the argument? The Republican Party is against parenthood?
Kiss that Catholic vote good-bye.
atheist said,
October 16, 2007 at 17:49
The inevitable result of all this, I fear, is that the righties will do the banging for you. After what happened to Randi Rhodes, I’m increasingly suspicious of the unhinged loonies on the right and their ability to restrain themselves.
Damn, Southern Beale, I read that story and I don’t know whether to be furious or terrified.
atheist said,
October 16, 2007 at 17:50
It’s kinda what I always figured they wanted to do, however.
JK47 said,
October 16, 2007 at 17:52
The inevitable result of all this, I fear, is that the righties will do the banging for you. After what happened to Randi Rhodes, I’m increasingly suspicious of the unhinged loonies on the right and their ability to restrain themselves.
I’m afraid that we’re going to be seeing more of that and worse. The humiliation that Wingnut Nation is suffering now is going to be nothing compared to the suffering they’ll be doing starting in November 2008 when President Clinton is elected. You think they’re rabid, frothing assholes now? You ain’t seen nothin’. Their worst nightmare is about to come true.
Legalize said,
October 16, 2007 at 17:52
Yuck, even when they are totally incoherent (which is more and more often lately), the hate still oozes through all over my shoes. What nauseating and stupid people these wingers are.
ahem said,
October 16, 2007 at 17:53
Having fucked up big style with the Frosts, they’re just desperate to find a ‘millionaire wastrel S-CHIP family’. Eventually, they might find someone who comes close, and say ‘a-ha! we win!’
But they’re just fucking demented. And the longer they press this, the more it makes those who don’t buy into the whole Calvinist model of the elect and damned realise they’re demented.
Legalize said,
October 16, 2007 at 17:57
That Randi Rhodes story is horrifying. Unforunately, as the wingers become more and more aware of the certainty of their power slipping from their slimy fingers, the violence against people who dare to speak out against them, will only mount. I really hope KO and Rachel Maddow have competent people watching their backs.
JK47 said,
October 16, 2007 at 17:57
The Dems need to keep wielding S-CHIP like a blunt object. Health care is going to kill the GOP in the 2008 elections. They’re sowing the seeds of doom.
Spokane Moderate said,
October 16, 2007 at 17:58
For Dara and Brian Wilkerson, the fact that they don’t have health insurance is less about falling through the cracks than the decisions they’ve made.
At least now they’re pro-choice.
ahem said,
October 16, 2007 at 17:58
Are you reading this at your computer at work, in a job that you don’t particularly care for or even downright detest because you have a spouse and child that depend on you? You wouldn’t be the first or last person to make that choice.
Wow. National Review: pro healthcare slavery. He might as well just write: ‘proles, know your place.’
Remember what Tony Benn said in SiCKO? Sickness (and the money worries associated with ill health) keep people in their place. A healthy, invigorated populace is harder to keep in check.
J. Smith said,
October 16, 2007 at 18:00
Sure, you must toil at a miserable job with crap pay–and forget about college or anything to improve your station and that of your children–merely in order to get health benefits. But once you get them, the Reichwing will nover stop complaining about the exhorbitant cost that malcontent employees saddle upon helpless employers.
How many time has the Reichwing complained about the “outrageous” health benefits received by autoworkers or other unionized employees? Or those of federal and state employees? Or school teachers. Or . . . the list is endless.
How loudly does the Reichwing cheer when a Jack Welch or some other John Galt wannabe slashes or eliminates benefits? Thunderously.
The bottom line is that these people do not think that anyone should have benefits, regardless of whether they are paid for by public or private funds. They simply don’t care. The well-off and wealthy can buy healthcare out of pocket, but everyone else is just another slug-like mooch.
jim said,
October 16, 2007 at 18:00
The closest I can figure is that their ideology literally will not allow them to consider a situation where people voluntarily pool funds together to help each other, *without* profit for someone at the top of the pool.
This distributed caring terrifies them, and causes them to react to these children as if they were Damien.
Insurance companies taking money from millions and distributing risk, so that (theoretically) those who are sick get taken care of while those who are healthy simply pay a monthly premium - no problem.
Set up the exact same thing via a government pool, but now with no profit being taken from all levels - patient, doctor, hospital, testing, drugs - and they **freak out**.
Fascinating.
Wally Whateley said,
October 16, 2007 at 18:00
I can’t believe they’re still on about this.
After the beating they’ve been taking on this, I’d be looking for ANYTHING else to talk about. Parachute pants, aardvarks, “Manimal,” breakfast cereal, you name it.
Modern conservatism is a refuge for stupidheads.
Nuff Ced McGreavey said,
October 16, 2007 at 18:02
“So the argument now is all American must be abstinent until they have firmly established themselves in the middle class? No more babies for the poor? Seriously, this is the argument? The Republican Party is against parenthood?
Kiss that Catholic vote good-bye.”
You’re right. I think Hemingway is calling for mandatory abortions for the uninsured.
ahem said,
October 16, 2007 at 18:03
Plus, the point Krugman made last week still holds:
Candy said,
October 16, 2007 at 18:06
Well, when I had health insurance I couldn’t afford the monthly deductions to have my son on my insurance. And he doesn’t even have any major health problems, just the standard occasional strep throat and flu stuff of childhood. So employer sponsored health care isn’t necessarily Teh Awesome the wingnuts are implying.
I got my last job by starting as a temp. I was doing difficult, very responsible work with 401K plans. When I was hired full time, I was hired at the salary I was making as a temp, which wasn’t good in the first place, so now that I was having deductions taken out for health insurance and 401K, it actually meant a pretty big cut in pay. I could only afford to contribute 1% to 401K, ironically. It’s too bad when you are working about ten hours a week of overtime on average and you still can’t afford to insure your child or contribute to a retirment plan.
Lest some wingnut start thinking about sifting through my trash, I’ll do it for them: I drive a 12 year old car. I don’t have cable. I don’t smoke and I rarely drink these days, and I’m not buying twelve year old scotch when I do. I live in an inexpensive apartment and the heat is included in the rent. I’m not in any way living high on the hog. I’ve worked ever since my son was five months old. I’ve never been on standard “welfare”, but I sure as hell don’t begrudge people who are. I don’t understand the whole “I’ve suffered and you should too” line of reasoning at all. I want to have a good job and I don’t mind paying taxes for programs which help people, although I do begrudge every penny that goes to pay for ridiculous, unnecessary wars and fucking corporate welfare.
I’ve been saying for years that what the right really wants is a nation of corporate serfs. it’s understandable that the pigs on the top of the pile want this, but what the fuck is wrong with all these average joes out there who go along with it? Stockholm syndrome? I will never understand it.
Rightwingsnarkle said,
October 16, 2007 at 18:08
Mr. Hemingway sez: “the issue really at hand is one of bad behavior.”
How ’bout this idea: overweight wingnuts are evidence of their bad behavior. No healthcare for them (including lap bands, gastric bypass surgery, or prescription weight loss aids) until they drop down to the consensus weight/BMI.
The same with smokers.
Because the issue at hand is really one of bad behavior. And choices.
Rufus said,
October 16, 2007 at 18:09
Don’t pick on Hemingway. He’s practically a child, himself. Quite unsportsmanlike.
JK47 said,
October 16, 2007 at 18:14
I’ve been saying for years that what the right really wants is a nation of corporate serfs. it’s understandable that the pigs on the top of the pile want this, but what the fuck is wrong with all these average joes out there who go along with it? Stockholm syndrome? I will never understand it.
Most of them are suckered in by what they perceive as low taxes. My ex-girlfriend’s Dad was a wingnut. He managed a K-Mart in Indiana and was not a particularly wealthy guy. He says he votes Republican because he likes having a little more money in his paycheck. Penny-wise, pound foolish. They’re dupes.
sophie brown said,
October 16, 2007 at 18:15
Candy, I don’t see where you need to apologize for your choices in life, or why you find yourself in a position where you can’t afford health care for your child working more than full time. I feel like I, as one of those people who happens to be in an over-valued profession, should be apologozing to you.
Choices. As if we’d all be rich and happy if we just made better decisions. Said as the barriers to access to the middle class grow higher and higher. Sigh.
atheist said,
October 16, 2007 at 18:23
I feel like I, as one of those people who happens to be in an over-valued profession, should be apologozing to you.
I feel the same way, at times. Damn, these proto-fascist wannabes disgust me. I think they just want to tear down someone.
Dhalgren said,
October 16, 2007 at 18:27
I’m loving the twisted absurdity:
While the debate around the Frost family at least initially centered around their relative wealth, the issue really at hand is one of bad behavior. While USAction and a labyrinthine maze of leftist activist groups prepare to rally around images of Tampa Bay’s Most Photogenic Baby holding up a crayon sign that says “Don’t Veto Me,” Dara and Brian Wilkerson are real poster children — for irresponsible decisions…..
For Dara and Brian Wilkerson, the fact that they don’t have health insurance is less about falling through the cracks than the decisions they’ve made. We know that Dara is at least capable of getting a job with insurance — so why does she not have one now? Even if it is difficult insure her child’s pre-existing condition, what about her and her husband’s health? Perhaps it’s rude to ask that question, but I think it’s rude to accept huge amounts of public assistance and then express gratitude by asking taxpayers to extend a Children’s health program to cover college-age kids who come from households making more than $80,000 a year.
Wow, indeed
Candy said,
October 16, 2007 at 18:31
Thanks, sophie.
My point is that we never know where our decisions in life are going to lead us. Several of the chances I took, if they’d turned out well, would have been very beneficial. So much of life is a matter of luck. I’ve had some bad luck. On the other hand, when someone is born into a old money family, educated at the best schools, gets into Yale despite being a mediocre student at best, had and effed up several great business opportunities, and had the presidency handed to you by daddy’s friends, I guess it could be said that you’ve had good luck. Do I think that, if Bush had been thrown out by his dad for being such a lousy businessman and fallen on rough times, Jenna and Barbara should have been denied healthcare (or food or a good public education) because Laura was trying to support a family of four on a Texas teacher’s salary and couldn’t afford these things? Of course I don’t. That would be wrong in every way. But the right wing would be happen to see those kids with rickets and scurvy, sleeping on a sewer grate.
My granny used to say, “There but for the grace of God go I.” This is a concept that the wingnuts don’t seems to grasp.
MCH said,
October 16, 2007 at 18:34
And how it is appropriate to force people to toil in unpleasant and unmanageable jobs simply because they provide health care. What a load of crock.
This, of course, is the only real reason why we have employer-based health insurance. By tying people down to their employer, wages and working conditions can be driven downward with far less risk of employees switching jobs or doing anything to rock the boat at their present one.
Lame Man said,
October 16, 2007 at 18:34
a nation of corporate serfs
Shhh … the boss is coming!
owlbear1 said,
October 16, 2007 at 18:35
My granny used to say, “There but for the grace of God go I.” This is a concept that the wingnuts don’t seems to grasp.
Nope to them its, “God must hate that person.”
Candy said,
October 16, 2007 at 18:36
Wow, I wrote that last one too fast. Excuse the multiple boo boos. It’s a sign that I should be working on my school work. I’d better get to it, so I can get my degree and get to benefitting society . . .
Lesley said,
October 16, 2007 at 18:37
As long as most people are forced to carry the full burden of their health care and depend on private insurers for coverage you’ll have bozos like this one judging the merits of individuals who qualify for gov’t assistance. It’s called petty jealousy.
Universal single payer fees where the eligibility requirements depend solely on residency and citizenship or landed immigrant/refugee status would give everyone equal status and equal access. Nobody would be talking about Joe Blow’s health care plan or Betty Sue’s “choices in life.”
Marco said,
October 16, 2007 at 18:39
“After the Graeme Frost affair, you’d think there would be lessons learned all around the folly of manipulating children to make a political argument.”
Yeah, you’d think.
God, these people….
JK47 said,
October 16, 2007 at 18:43
The Republican approach to healthcare is the same as their approach to everything: wait way too long to fix the problem, then when it descends into complete madness, lose a bunch of elections and hand it to somebody else to fix.
..................................... said,
October 16, 2007 at 18:44
i love some body but im scared he doesnt luv me back
MCH said,
October 16, 2007 at 18:45
The Rhodes thing, the continuing Dolchstoss, the GoE et al are the best self-interested arguments I can think of for liberals to be against gun control.
And if the Rhodes thing happened to a Malkin or a Steyn, I’m sure it would be front-page news of liberal terrorism on the rise.
sophie brown said,
October 16, 2007 at 18:45
Candy, Go for it. Meanwhile, I am going to the gym. See? That’s benefitting society for yah.
fardels bear said,
October 16, 2007 at 18:49
Everytime I read these people, I hear the words in the voice of Lee J. Cobb:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wYAuzs-AxXA
Righteous Bubba said,
October 16, 2007 at 18:59
The Rhodes thing, the continuing Dolchstoss, the GoE et al are the best self-interested arguments I can think of for liberals to be against gun control.
Why?
Candy said,
October 16, 2007 at 19:01
fardels bear, this was what they make me think of:
everlast
sophie, there but for bad knees go I!
Now I’m going to go do something constructive for reals.
Hysterical Woman said,
October 16, 2007 at 19:02
“Doesn’t that beggar own a bowl? He could sell it for doctor’s money!”
- Republican Jesus
tb said,
October 16, 2007 at 19:06
Man, they just can’t let it go. Like really dumb, over-aggressive poker players, they get ahead for awhile by pushing everyone around, and develop the misconception that they’re masters of the game and somehow “entitled” to win. Then they lose everything by continuing the mindless aggression when, inevitably, the cards start breaking against them and the other players start pushing back.
Yeah, watch out when the humiliation of rejection really kicks in.
Kathleen said,
October 16, 2007 at 19:06
what a disgusting, though unsurprising, article.
Will Roberts said,
October 16, 2007 at 19:07
owlbear1 is exactly right:
“If we didn’t NEED health insurance through employers we wouldn’t put up with ALL the bullshit!”
mikey said,
October 16, 2007 at 19:17
Yay! Hell yeah! Keep at it, Right Wing idiots. Keep digging that hole and piling the dirt right around the edge.
Keep kicking kids. Keep demanding sick kids be allowed to die in the name of corporate profits, an ugly, greedy sense of scarcity and fear of loss and a latent racism that seems to inform all your decisions.
While you’re at it, why don’t you look into even LESS popular positions. Like maybe flower the meerkat was a bad mom, and really just wanted to have gay sex with that snake.
Maybe you could start shrieking that puppies carry disease, and need to be thrown alive into large incinerators.
I’m sure if you guys all get your paranoid, evil little heads together, you can come up with even better ways to make the rest of the world perceive you for what you really are…
mikey
Gavin M. said,
October 16, 2007 at 19:20
Whoah, dude. Meerkat Manor is dirty pool…
[RIP Flower]
Dorothy said,
October 16, 2007 at 19:21
So the argument now is all American must be abstinent until they have firmly established themselves in the middle class? No more babies for the poor? Seriously, this is the argument? The Republican Party is against parenthood?
Seriously, this actually has been the anti-choice, anti-contraception, anti-abortion argument for a very, very long time. These people regularly make statements like “If you can’t afford kids, don’t get pregnant” at the same time they oppose comprehensive sex education and actively campaign against most forms of contraception, even for married people. .
They’re not just saying that having children are a privilidge of the middle and upper classes: they are saying that having sex is reserved for rich people, too.
Why? Who knows. Maybe because poor people = brown people in their minds, or maybe because they are so hard up for self-esteem that they must, absolutely must have something to lord over someone, they have to have some tangible way to show that they are better than “all those lazy, good for nothing poor people”.
Honestly, I think they are all bullies, in the truest sense of the word: they attack the weak to make themselves feel strong. The more suffering they cause, they better they feel about their own pathetic little lives.
NobodySpecial said,
October 16, 2007 at 19:21
I don’t understand the whole “I’ve suffered and you should too” line of reasoning at all.
What, you think they’ve suffered? Well, I mean, if you call no Porsche at 16 ’suffering’, I guess….
They’re all third base dependents. They got off their parents’ teat straight to Scaife’s.
The only reason they want you to suffer is the malicious joy they feel in watching you drown.
Gavin M. said,
October 16, 2007 at 19:29
[Updated the post]
sophronia said,
October 16, 2007 at 19:29
Wait a minute, aren’t these the same exact people who, every time somebody wants to enact some kind of worker protection from rapacious, dangerous employers, sit around chirping “Well, if you don’t like it, just find another job!” And now suddenly they’ve discovered what all thinking people have known for quite a long time: changing jobs means losing benefits. Gosh, is he actually admitting that maybe the free market is not the infallible answer to every single problem in the universe?
Johnny Coelacanth said,
October 16, 2007 at 19:38
Update in re Randi Rhodes:
Rhodes’ lawyer told the Daily News she was injured in a fall while walking her dog. He said she’s not sure what happened, and only knows that she fell down and is in a lot of pain. The lawyer said Rhodes expects to be back on the air Thursday. He stressed there is no indication she was targeted or that she was the victim of a “hate crime.”
SamFromUtah said,
October 16, 2007 at 19:38
Like really dumb, over-aggressive poker players, they get ahead for awhile by pushing everyone around, and develop the misconception that they’re masters of the game and somehow “entitled” to win.
Interesting - I was just thinking along these same lines. I’d thought of it a bit differently, not that they’d gotten ahead by pushing everyone around but that they thought they had. In late 2001, for instance, just after the WTC attacks, lots of people - including me - were scared shitless. In my case I was a bit afraid of attacks because the Olympics were about to come to town, but much more afraid of the martial law / government thuggery I was sure was about to follow. At that point, I figure the flying monkeys thought their torrents of abuse and death threats against “America haters” were what was keeping people down, when in fact their screeching was really just the visible face of a much more frightening and powerful group.
Now that the institutions are seeming less scary, the flying monkey screeches don’t do much but make them look like assholes. Not that it ever did much else, but that’s all it does now apart from crapping on the lives of their targets.
Lesley said,
October 16, 2007 at 19:56
I didn’t realize baldness, a double chin, and looking like a Sopranos’ fetchit boy qualifies a person to be an expert on health care.
Rightwingsnarkle said,
October 16, 2007 at 19:57
Mr Hemingway seems to be a bit…portly, with three chins and no neck. That was his choice. It’s a matter of bad behavior.
So, until he gets his weight down as previously described, no health care services or payment coverage for his sleep apnea, bed-wetting, or snack food compulsion.
He made his choices. It’s a matter of bad behavior.
MCH said,
October 16, 2007 at 19:58
Why?
Because it was a dumb thing for me to say. I blame my internal copy desk for letting that one go out. It was a bit senseless and incoherent for just a Tuesday, especially since it’s far too early in the day for me to use High Life as an excuse.
g said,
October 16, 2007 at 20:00
the fact that they don’t have health insurance is less about falling through the cracks than the decisions they’ve made. We know that Dara is at least capable of getting a job with insurance — so why does she not have one now?….Are you reading this at your computer at work, in a job that you don’t particularly care for or even downright detest because you have a spouse and child that depend on you?
This talking point mystifies me. What is it that’s so sacred about health insurance that it should be the linchpin that enslaves people to a life of unhappiness? Why is it a virtue to endure “detestable” conditions in exchange for health insurance, instead of, say, pay, commute time, your own health factors, opportunity for professional development, childrens’ education, more time with the family, job security, retirement benefits, etc?
People make employment decisions based on a balance of factors. Is it satisfying work? Can I increase my earning power? Is the pay good? Can my body endure it? Will the job be here for me tomorrow? Is there a pension? How far do I have to travel to get here?
Why have these RW’ers, in this debate, determined that the dominant factor, the most important thing, the one lodestone that trumps all other factors is employer-provided health insurance?
Given the fact that there IS a government safety net in place that provides health insurance for your children, it just seems like it makes sense for people to consider this a factor when balancing their decisions. “This job is going nowhere and it may even be detrimental for me to stay here. I’m healthy, there’s a state program available in the event of disaster, why not take a risk, hope 2-3 years out I improve my gross income/employment skills/build my business/allow me time with my kids when they’re small?”
There are no safety nets for some of the other factors that might prove detrimental if you opt to stay for health insurance alone. Stay in a job with no future? Sorry - retrain yourself while your family starves. Job conditions affect your health? Sorry - there’s workers’ comp and disability, but good luck getting private insurance afterwards. Long commute that prevents you from raising your kids right?Too bad. At least they have health insurance!
With the increasing cost of employer provided health insurance, it’s likely that someone who chose to stay in a hateful job just for the health insurance will eventually pay more out of pocket for less coverage. So it’s just plain dumb to allow that one factor to trump all others when making employment or life decisions.
So this is the new RW talking point - “You should be miserable and less prosperous, to keep our taxes down!”
Righteous Bubba said,
October 16, 2007 at 20:03
I blame my internal copy desk for letting that one go out.
You are so awesome that I’m sending Mickey Kaus straight over to blow your goat. Free!
Pvt. Joker said,
October 16, 2007 at 20:14
Let me get this straight. A blastocyst is to be protected at all costs, but the life of a child is worth only as much as her parents can pay in medical costs.
Wingnuts’ heads would have exploded if Terri Schiavo was a child covered by S-CHIP.
Professor Illuminata said,
October 16, 2007 at 20:18
This argument’s double standard is killing me — Dara quit her job with benefits because the situation became “unmanageable.” That doesn’t necessarily equate with “I didn’t like it.” It may have had something to do with having to balance child care with work. The wingers keep telling women they are supposed to stay home with their children, not flit off to their careers each day abandoning their children to the horrors of day care (unless you’re a welfare mom, in which case you’re supposed to work no matter what, even if that means leaving your children home alone, apparently). But when a mother decides to attempt to balance work and family, this guy is going to slam her for it? ARGH!!!
Hoosier X said,
October 16, 2007 at 20:27
I often wonder what would have happened in Iraq if Saddam Hussein had been a member of the NRA.
moondancer said,
October 16, 2007 at 20:30
I recognize that face. He posted a lot of swill a while back about Edwards being a little effeminate. Also stuff about macho GOP vs. pansy dems. I remember because when I saw his face i broke out laughing. A soft gooey pile of whitebread dough with a name like Hemingway.
Legalize said,
October 16, 2007 at 20:34
Gad, Hemingway certainly looks out of shape and unhealthy - must be due to his moral failings.
mat said,
October 16, 2007 at 20:36
What a smug, preening, fat fucking asshole.
Speaking of choices, how come this blubber butt, Mr. “I love America,” hasn’t chosen to served in the military? Why are working class kids getting their asses blown off half a world away while these right-wing creeps like Hemmingway, Jonah Pantload, Malkin, et al. are home egging on what can only be interpreted as a class war. Their obvious contempt for working class people is repugnant.
Such concepts as rational disinterest, shared sacrifice, magnanimity, and noblesse oblige are completely foreign to these spoiled brats of the right. The working class is providing a majority of soldiers to fight the right-winger’s war in Iraq, and what does the right do while it sits safely at home, far from the war they wanted so badly? Why, they’re trashing the working class, by golly!.
Compassionate conservatives my ass. I’d like to kick the crap out of all of them, except I’m far more civilized than that.
Trilateral Chairman said,
October 16, 2007 at 20:37
Dara quit her job with benefits because the situation became “unmanageable.” That doesn’t necessarily equate with “I didn’t like it.”
That’s what I find so appalling about the article. Most of the attacks aren’t well-grounded in anything the family actually did or said. Hemingway (and what an insult to Papa this guy is!) simply presumed the worst and wrote it as if it were true. She says that the situation was “unmanageable.” What does that mean? Did she leave after a coworker made a snarky remark about her hairstyle? Or were the hours too irregular? What if the boss wanted more overtime than a new mother was able to give? We don’t know, and as far as we can tell Hemingway doesn’t know either; he just picked the assumption that fit his preconceptions. It’s sloppy at best.
That’s not unusual for conservative publications these days–they’ve really started scraping the bottom of the barrel. Heck, never mind the (odious) content of Hemingway’s piece; just look at the mechanics. The thing is a mess. He leaves out key words, he misspells names, and he writes sentences that are so garbled that you have to rewrite them to figure out what he’s trying to say, . The article flows poorly–the fourth paragraph, in which he acknowledges that Bethany won the award as part of a *hospital fundraiser*, reads as though Hemingway found out about it in a last-second ass-covering Google search and shoehorned it into the article without bothering to fix anything else.
Once you combine the mechanical flaws with the elementary flaws of reasoning, you end up with a piece that’s pure crap, yet managed to be published on the front page of a prominent conservative website. Is no one paying attention over there? Does no one give a damn about looking stupid?
oudemia said,
October 16, 2007 at 20:42
Johnny Coelacanth: Yeah, Gawker is now saying via a commenter that the “fall” — no longer a mugging — was preceded by 14 Bloody Marys at a midtown Irish bar. Who knows? But it certainly doesn’t sound like a hate crime.
Trilateral Chairman said,
October 16, 2007 at 20:44
*sigh* In other news, David Frum reports that John Podhoretz has apparently just taken over the editorship of Commentary.
Nepotism *and* incompetence–the Right’s new guiding principles.
(If you need a laugh, scroll down the Corner to Jonah Goldberg’s debate over the Cold War. He spends a few dozen paragraphs making the following point:
1. The Cold War was really nasty at times.
2. Therefore, if a less nasty strategy were available to us–and who can say if it was?–we should’ve taken it.
He had to do a lot of thinking (or what passes for thinking in Goldberg’s head) to get there, though. I mean, he really gave the idea a lot of thought.)
Spokane Moderate said,
October 16, 2007 at 20:46
Perhaps it’s rude to ask that question, but I think it’s rude to accept huge amounts of public assistance and then express gratitude by asking taxpayers to extend a Children’s health program to cover college-age kids who come from households making more than $80,000 a year.
Yeah!! What kind of ungrateful bastards want others to be helped by a program that helped them!!??
If a program’s successful, just shut up about it.
Galactic Dustbin said,
October 16, 2007 at 20:51
Life must be protected at conception, after birth you are on your own squirt.
Mothers should stay at home, that is the most importiant thing- unless I got to pay for the welfare /healthcare queen.
The noble people of Iraq must be free, even if we have to kill every one of those ungrateful godless savages to do it.
I person should stand on thier own two feet, just like the pioneers of yor….WHAAA, my Gas Grill fell over, send me money via PayPal to get me a new one!
SAP said,
October 16, 2007 at 20:56
Damn, Gavin. You should be getting hazard pay for willingly exposing yourself to shit like this.
I need to go calm down myself now.
Doodle-bean said,
October 16, 2007 at 21:02
Count me in as one of those who are working a job they hate for the health insurance (and to be able to pay rent, buy food, buy catfood and have some retirement savings, if I must be honest).
Also count me in as one of those who has no trouble with tax dollars going to health care since it saves us all money in the long run. As well as enables us to have a better society.
If I may add my pet cause: Please stop calling the wingnuts “The Right” or “on the right” or “right”. I work with average people who honestly believe that the rabid neo-cons are correct because they are called “The Right”.
Please get in the habit of only calling them conservatives, cons, neo-cons, wingnuts, theo-cons, religious nuts, nuts, crazy awful people, the Reichwing… you get the idea.
It’s a tiny bit of framing but a crucial one for long-term gains on our part.
Thank you.
Candy said,
October 16, 2007 at 21:24
Doodle-bean: You made me smile. I always used to refer to the religious right as the religious wrong. I believe I’ll start that up again.
J— said,
October 16, 2007 at 21:24
Re: the job at the country club
Steve Benen at The Carpetbagger Report: “Dara left that job seven years before Bethany was born.”
Lawnguylander said,
October 16, 2007 at 21:43
A soft gooey pile of whitebread dough with a name like Hemingway.
Mark Hemingway’s fake tough guy act was noticed by Greenwald and Instaputz not too long ago. Greenwald showed that you can lampoon the appearance of fake tough guys without coming under attack from anyone on the left as long as no giant hero sangwiches are involved.
Corley said,
October 16, 2007 at 21:53
Word up, Galactic Dustbin.
It’s like a comedy of fuckwit inconsistencies.
New GOP platform issue: C.H.U.D. babies 4 allz!
Galactic Dustbin said,
October 16, 2007 at 21:54
Greenwald showed that you can lampoon the appearance of fake tough guys without coming under attack from anyone on the left as long as no giant hero sangwiches are involved.
I’ve had it with your hate speech! Any mention of giant hero sandwiches makes you worse then Malkin!
Kathleen said,
October 16, 2007 at 21:58
I like to think that Mark Hemingway found this thread, and is suffering an attack of conscience and shame. Nice job SN commentariat.
freddy said,
October 16, 2007 at 22:21
Don’t make an assumption about his having a conscience.
Maybe this is their way of celebrating the 50th anniversary of Ayn Rands’ screed. A group role play.
edgyspice said,
October 16, 2007 at 22:27
Anyone have the link to that John Derbyshire column where he was complaining about the sudden spike in the cost of his health insurance premium? God, I wish I could remember where I saw that a few months back. I’m pretty sure it was at the NRO.
cowalker said,
October 16, 2007 at 22:59
Hemingway is merely familiar with the parable of the Republican Samaritan. However tough it is to live up to ideals of the Republican Samaritan, it’s worth it because you are rewarded with life everlasting!
The Story of the Republican Samaritan
Northern Observer said,
October 16, 2007 at 23:00
Love to work over that fat fuck with my fists of fury.
Maybe he’ll think twice about attacking women and children next time.
SamFromUtah said,
October 16, 2007 at 23:00
Anyone have the link to that John Derbyshire column where he was complaining about the sudden spike in the cost of his health insurance premium? God, I wish I could remember where I saw that a few months back. I’m pretty sure it was at the NRO.
I found this tiny whine, really just a little squeak of rage … is that it?
Righteous Bubba said,
October 16, 2007 at 23:09
Heh.
That’s an increase of 81 percent. ***E*I*G*H*T*Y*-*O*N*E* *P*E*R*C*E*N*T*** Can they do that?
What might prevent them?
GOVERNMENT REGULATIONS?!?!?!?!?!?!
Luther said,
October 16, 2007 at 23:12
Gotta start fixing dinner, but I wanted to post a brief comment. I have noticed that some of the smaller right wing blogs are starting the “hey, Republicans saw the benefit of SCHIP in 1997, so that’s why they passed it. The GOP just doesn’t want it expanded.”
Well, SCHIP was created via The Balanced Budget Act of 1997 (P.L. 105-33) and was authored by Senator Kennedy with the guiding hand of First Lady Clinton. The Republicans accepted it with reforms to Medicaid and Medicare (see Title XXI of the Social Security Act).
There’s a lot of BS flying about regarding SCHIP, and I wanted to learn more. Found a study by BYU that demonstrates how costs increase for states when children leave SCHIP (primary care given in ERs, which is very costly).
HTH anyone needing a start on research.
Rightwingsnarkle said,
October 16, 2007 at 23:19
Nice catch, Sam from Utah. It’s already come in handy. (scroll)
edgyspice said,
October 16, 2007 at 23:19
Thank you, SamFromUtah! I could have sworn there was a whole column about it, though. I’ll try searching around that date.
Anne Laurie said,
October 16, 2007 at 23:20
Somebody gave Mr. Potato-Head-with-A-Famous-Name a degree in journalism? And they had the unmitigated nerve to use the word “science” in the awarding of this degree?
As a sop to my own blood pressure, I’m going to have to assume that the B.S. in Hemingway’s curriculum non-vitae stands for what he produces in this column. After all, this miserable suckwad demonstrates far more experience with ass-kissing than he does with either “facts” or “writing skills”. If it weren’t for Wingnut Welfare, he couldn’t keep a job lettering sales signs at the local grocery store.
freddy said,
October 16, 2007 at 23:23
Derbyshire is more of a Libertarian, so he can’t really be lumped in here.
Note Debyshire in this followup to the original post.
Righteous Bubba said,
October 16, 2007 at 23:54
Derbyshire is more of a Libertarian, so he can’t really be lumped in here.
Why not?
Rightwingsnarkle said,
October 17, 2007 at 0:03
” it strongly discourages individuality & enterprise.”
No, this price increase (does it hurt now, motherfucker?) is the perfect example of the markets at work. The market lets Derbyshire’s insurance company do whatever they want with the price, and leaves him free, as a consumer and ultimate decision maker, to make his own choices.
It’s a beautiful thing.
Dana said,
October 17, 2007 at 0:23
Not only are we held hostage by employee benefits, I would be willing to lay money there are married women out there who might have given Mr. Not-Quite-Right a miss had he not dangled health coverage in front of their faces. I know I’ve been tempted and had it not been for certain factors which totally rule him out and ohmygodi’dbeamonsterifisaidyes, my daughter’s happiness and sanity are on the line, kind of thing? I’d probably be married right now. Wondering if sacrificing my self-respect balances out in the end with being able to go to the doctor almost at will without going bankrupt for it or “using up social services” in going to the free clinic.
And here’s the thing, marriage shouldn’t be forced. By necessity or for any OTHER reason.
Dana said,
October 17, 2007 at 0:25
Rightwingsnarkle: Having to have an employer to get healthcare coverage, or having to buy your own insurance at all, DOES discourage individual enterprise because it’s one of the major reasons people don’t strike out to start businesses on their own.
If you think that’s a beautiful thing, hey, knock yourself out.
J— said,
October 17, 2007 at 0:31
Rightwingsnarkle.
freddy said,
October 17, 2007 at 1:20
Derbyshire is more of a Libertarian, so he can’t really be lumped in here.
Why not?
Because he doesn’t fit into the way edgyspice is using him. edgyspice is simply searching for contrary quotes on NRO. Derbyshire would not agree that a person should remain a slave to a job just to get health care. Please read this.
Righteous Bubba said,
October 17, 2007 at 1:30
Because he doesn’t fit into the way edgyspice is using him. edgyspice is simply searching for contrary quotes on NRO. Derbyshire would not agree that a person should remain a slave to a job just to get health care. Please read this.
I read it when I asked “why not”. Edgyspice mentions a complaint by Derbyshire about health-care premiums being nutty. One exists. Edgyspice says thanks. Thus ends the Edgyspice contribution.
As far as I can tell it’s amusing that Derbyshire is whining about what private business is doing and that his co-worker’s an ass who should by rights should be investigating Derbyshire for doing so. (I hear Derb likes young girls.)
In other words I still don’t understand what your point is.
freddy said,
October 17, 2007 at 1:32
oops. I may be confusing edgyspice with Rightwingsnarlke. My point is that Derbyshire at least understands the point about being tied down to a job just for the sake of health care as being a bad thing. That alone separates him, but I do agree that his market force approach puts him in another class of nut all by himself.
Righteous Bubba said,
October 17, 2007 at 1:35
My point is that Derbyshire at least understands the point about being tied down to a job just for the sake of health care as being a bad thing. That alone separates him, but I do agree that his market force approach puts him in another class of nut all by himself.
Yeah, I don’t get what solution he might offer in the second bit. It sounds like he wants his rates to remain the same no matter what which suggests…some kind of giant one-size-fits-all insurance system. Does he understand that?
Chuckles said,
October 17, 2007 at 1:36
Checking out that list of fellowships, I am certain that I have seen more than a couple of those women in various annoying bars in DC. I have seen approximately 470,003 clones of all of those dudes. I need to carry some sort of Field Guide to Recognizing Wingnut Welfare Women so I can avoid wasting any mojo on them. They should be the ones buying the drinks.
freddy said,
October 17, 2007 at 1:48
RB,
It is going to be interesting watching Republicans like Boener ( sp… I usually simplify and just do Boner ) come up with a coherant policy answer. If it’s more tax cuts they are screwed. That bird ain’t gonna fly. Romney won’t even endorse his own plan from MA. They really are in a box.
Righteous Bubba said,
October 17, 2007 at 1:56
It is going to be interesting watching Republicans like Boener ( sp… I usually simplify and just do Boner ) come up with a coherant policy answer.
Yup. It might actually be easy to sell to cranky types if you use Derb’s “crazy private health-care impedes your liberty to do what you like” line. No fucking way it’d happen, but dreaming’s free. Republicans could look both humane and like fierce protectors of your right to be a fighter pilot one week and a rodeo cowboy the next.
freddy said,
October 17, 2007 at 2:04
Hah! “Be all that you can be!” Only at heart they really do fear that we’ll lose our will to make money.
Jimmmm said,
October 17, 2007 at 2:31
No, Hemingway has a point: Kids sometimes need to be made to suffer. And nobody’s better at making people suffer than the Republican Party and their enablers.
Your Modern GOP In Action « Beware The Man said,
October 17, 2007 at 2:55
[...] all our elected officials have goverment subsidized health care), but on a two year old. And the post right above it details some support of this position. Nice people, for [...]
Rightwingsnarkle said,
October 17, 2007 at 4:46
My point about Derby is simply that he’s a whining pisser who wants it both ways - “Let the free markets reign supreme - hey, what’re you doing to my health insurance premiums?!? Don’t raise ‘em. Can they raise em? No fair!”
JF_Lovely said,
October 17, 2007 at 4:47
He looks like that sleazy lawyer from “The Wire”.