Gods Help Us
These things sometimes don’t come off, but I may be discussing the Frost / S-chip issue on CNN tonight.
It would be nice if the good folks at CNN decided to ask Dan why he felt the need to call the Frosts “spoiled brats” because they both have careers that Dan does not personally approve of.
Furthermore, you may want to ask him why he felt the need to call Mr. Frost “a simpering wimp” because he didn’t rely upon his wealthy father to pay for his son’s medical expenses.
And finally, you might want to ask him whether his favorite role was as the zombie police chief in Plan 9 from Outer Space or as the radioactive monster in the Beast of Yucca Flats.
El Cid provides an update from Dan:
Update: While the CNN show is being bumped due to a school shooting in Ohio, I’ve been asked to debate on Alan Colmes’ radio show tonight at 11 PM.
We can’t imagine why CNN didn’t keep Dan booked — he’s an expert on school shootings too.
Please break the camel’s back.
What is so wrong about the guy seeing something that could pay for his family expenses and… taking it! It’s not like he lied or defrauded the state.
Plus, Dan Riehl doesn’t know the relationship this guy has with his dad (I know people with rich grandparents who are stingy MFers and give their grandkids nothing).
This story still makes me ill.
Wait, judging by that picture, Dan Riehl is not some 21 year-old college republican ass-hole. So I guess that leaves “fucking moron” as the only explanation for him.
Ah, yes, CNN’s view of journamalism. We ran that puff piece noting that yesterday was the first day of Kwanzaa; now we need to get David Duke in here for some balance.
or as the radioactive monster in the Beast of Yucca Flats.
TOR WANT TO MAKE IT WITH YOU!
That’s about all I got.
Am I correct in that this Frost thing is actually being referred to as an “issue?”
Why the hell aren’t these idiots going after Matthew Lesko? That dude does nothing but tell people how to use government sponsored programs! He’s like the pusher.
What about The Unearthly?
For Dan Riehl and Bat Girl Malkin, it is way past, “Time for go to bed.”
I got a few other things that “don’t come off” for ya, Dan.
CNN sees asking Dan Riehl questions about topics he doesn’t understand, and/or entirely likely to lie about, as providing “balance” to the story.
I’m perfectly happy with idiots going on TV to expose their idiocy. If the increasingly irrelevant wingnuts want to take to the airwaves foaming at the mouth about their hatred of the middle class that’s fine with me.
Oh, I hope this is a set-up. Ambushing him with facts and reality would be beautiful.
Ain’t holdin my breath for it, tho.
From Riehl’s site:
Great, Glenn Beck will interview Dan Riehl about the Frosts. And in the next segment, Glenn will pull out a .45 and shoot some Muslims, because hey, how could he tell whether or not they were terrorists?
Your liberal media at work.
I’m perfectly happy with idiots going on TV to expose their idiocy.
Its not that simple. A lot of people believe almost anything someone says on TV. Depending how nasty he seems, he might turn people away from him, or he might make new converts.
By the way, I hope none of those punk ass kids in Ohio injured in a shooter dared get any kind of government assistance with their health care and treatment, otherwise the Malacodakin Flying Monkey Brigades are gonna have to practice a litte, whadya call it, “citizen journalism” on their a**es.
Should read “injured in the shooting”, sorry.
Yeah, i’m sure CNN would have found another excuse to bump coverage of the Frost’s scamming taxpayers.
Do you know that 44% of all SCHIP money is spent on adults?
Do you know that 44% of all SCHIP money is spent on adults?
Did you know that 78% of all statistics are made up on the spot?
A lot of people believe almost anything someone says on TV.
Absolutely right. Which is why I devote all day every day to making sure that the 100 or so students I have every quarter don’t fall for that shit. Over 20 years of teaching (so far) that’s, like, 6,000 people.
Oh. Wish I hadn’t done the math. Now I’m depressed.
Its not that simple. A lot of people believe almost anything someone says on TV. Depending how nasty he seems, he might turn people away from him, or he might make new converts.
This is where I differ from a lot of fellow liberals, I guess. I’m just not afraid of these people or their ideas. I think they’re goofballs. When they’re losing on an issue, I’m happy to let them keep losing.
“Do you know that 44% of all SCHIP money is spent on adults?”
I don’t suppose you could be bothered to provide any objective evidence to establish that you are not 100% full of shit.
I don’t suppose you could be bothered to provide any objective evidence to establish that you are not 100% full of shit.
I’d be surprised if Gary was 100% full of shit. Packing it in there is probably leaves air gaps, to say nothing of the gas pockets found in the actual shit that could separate from the overall feces matrix. Then there’s the gas produced by decay, which would also create some non-shit-filled spaces within the overall Gary.
Maybe it’d be more accurate to say that Gary is 100% full of shit, shit-by-products, and inert fillers.
Just got finished listening to “In Rainbows.” Best record of the year.
I dunno. I like “injured in a shooter”, Cid.
For some reason I pictured the shooter wearing two wet suits…
mikey
Yeah, but Jake, that’s my point. You don’t know that he actually IS losing. We only know that to us, he sounds like a moron hypocrite. We don’t know how he sounds to others.
We don’t know that Gary is lying about his SCHIP statistics. He could be telling the truth. He could be an expert on this subject.
So until we get some evidence either way, we should take Gary’s figure at face value and repeat it over and over and not look for any other evidence and start stalking and harrassing the people who we suspect migh be looking for other evidence.
Liberals. Hmf.
(Got your back, Gary!)
If you took a sample of 64 % of the U.S. population, as a group, they would together represent a far larger percentage of the U.S. population than 11% would
Man talk about chutzpah! Like this:
“…This story is about the parents, Bonnie and F. Halsey Frost who grew up with all the advantages and, despite what I might assume is a liberal view on abortion, not only most likely support that free choice; if someone wants to have kids, they apparently believe it’s cool to play with wood, or hold low-paying, fun, or perhaps lower stress jobs without having to worry about providing for whatever number of moppets one might feel like dropping into the world…”
In other words, liberals are bad people for supporting abortion rights but they are also bad people for having children and not having had abortions when it turns out that their children happen to need medical care? Yeeesh!
As to the issue of SCHIP money spent on adults:
Our Fearless Leader raised this complaint in his Saturday address and the NYT properly jumped his ass this morning…..since it was HIS administration that ENCOURAGED states to spend any excess money not used on kids on eligible adults in the state. Now he is slamming them for the very practice his own HHS people urged on them:
From their editorial 10/10:
“In his radio address on Saturday, Mr. Bush complained that six states — Minnesota, Illinois, New Jersey, Michigan, Rhode Island and New Mexico — “will spend more S-chip money on adults than they do on children” in this fiscal year. That might sound outrageous at first hearing, but there are often good child-centered reasons for covering certain categories of adults.
Surely it is sensible to enroll pregnant women, to make sure the prospective mother and her fetus get good prenatal care even before the child is born and becomes eligible. And in some cases it may even be reasonable to offer coverage to low-income parents, if only as bait to get their children enrolled.
New Jersey hardly deserves presidential criticism for what look like enlightened policies.
The state currently enrolls some 83,000 adults and 124,000 children in its S-chip program. The adults account for more than 60 percent of the program’s costs because it is a lot more expensive to cover adults than children. A small number of the adults are pregnant women. A small number are childless adults supported solely by state funds, under a program that is being phased out. The overwhelming majority are poor parents, with family incomes no higher than 133 percent of poverty — or $27,500 for a family of four.
To imply that this is an abuse of the S-chip program reflects an ideological determination to disparage public insurance no matter how much it helps poor families and their children.
Mr. Bush failed to acknowledge that all of the states that extended coverage to adults did so under waivers granted by the federal government, mostly by his own administration. In its first term, his administration actively encouraged states to use any unspent S-chip funds to cover adults.
That was back when Mr. Bush was espousing “compassionate conservatism” and the administration was looking for efficient ways to reduce the number of uninsured Americans. Now Mr. Bush calls any expansion of S-chip a step toward “government-run health care for every American.”
The president claims he wants to “put poor children first,” but so do all members of Congress who voted for the bill that he vetoed. Bizarrely, Mr. Bush also urges both parties in Congress to support a new bill that “moves adults off this children’s program.”
Exactly, joannegm. Gary’s mouthing misleading bit of propaganda put out by the shrub’ites.
You can google it up (schip, 44%, adults), but I won’t link to a press release put out by the odious Joe Barton with the same lying points.
Sadly, no. 83.694% of all statistics are made up on the spot. You see? It’s far more convincing if you use decimal points. 🙂
Does the Colmes show take calls from viewers? Anybody want to see if they can get Rieh to agree that the Frosts should have put their badly injured kids up for adoption (“private charity”) if they couldn’t afford their medical bills?
How about seeing if he’ll agree that the more seriously damaged daughter should have been broken up and sold for parts (she probably had at least one undamaged kidney, a young healthy heart & lungs, many square inches of undamaged skin) to cover her brother’s repair bills?
Hey, if Riehl believes in precognitive preventative abortion, I’m sure he’d agree that the Frosts should have cut their losses and been satisfied that they still had two other undamaged back-up kids. Because he’s already stated that wanting to keep all four of their offspring brands the Frosts as greedy.
Hell, I’d be happy to debate this guy as long as I can come armed with 30 banana cream pies.
Can someone explain to me how these idiots can, on the one hand, nickel and dime some poor family to death over health insurance, and on the other not question the billions being wasted in Iraq? Are they selectively miserly? What?
Thank goodness for you guys.
I couldn’t debate these assclowns for two minutes.
They don’t seem to be FOR anything. Just against any spending that actually helps people.
Oh. They do seem to be FOR spending that results in the violent death of muslims many thousands of miles away from them.
They cause me to feel that violence just might be a solution…
While the CNN show is being bumped due to a school shooting in Ohio,
There is irony there that I can’t begin to describe.
Mikey,
I’m a lawyer. You give me five minutes with Michelle Malkin on camera, no moderator, and I will have her in tears. No violence, just me tearing her a new one, metaphorically speaking. In the real world, we call this cross-examination. I generally try to stop before they cry, but sometimes I make an exception. This would be one of those times.
Malkin’s pathetic, and I’m pissed off. Bad combination.
In response to Dan’s “Compassionate Conservatism” I have a relevant quote from Tor’s own Plan 9 from outer Space:
“Your stupid minds! Stupid! Stupid! Stupid!”
Feh! I hope the real Tor comes down from heaven or wherever and body slams Riel into a thin paste for besmirching his reputation, and just on general principal. I think he may outperform Steyn in the “asshole pundit” department.
It’s a little encouraging to see the depth of Dan’s zombie brain trust, to wit;
Dan quotes Ezra;
I will debate Michelle Malkin anytime, anywhere, in any forum (save HotAir TV, which she controls), on the particulars of S-CHIP.
and one of his minions responds;
I also note that Mr Klein in his challenged so restricted the areas he is willing to debate that non of the issues involved in the current discussion are allowed to be addressed.
That really lowers the chances of a useful outcome.
Can we just give these guys their own state or island or something?
Thanks joannegm for that dissonant counterpoint to the Wurlitzer. I was reading the 44% BS on malkin’s site, and how it came from the House energy and commerce committee republicans, so you know it’s got to be true, and was wishing I had the drive to respond intelligently, and through carefully applied procrastination and sloth, you did it first and better. Goodonya.
How many people watch all of the cable news networks combined? 5 million? Even that many?
And I think most of those are bloggers from both sides monitoring the networks for bias.
Just got finished listening to “In Rainbows.” Best record of the year.
It’s good, but it’s still not as good as Simple Kid’s new album “2”. Stream it here.
bemused said, I’m a lawyer. You give me five minutes with Michelle Malkin on camera, no moderator, and I will have her in tears. No violence, just me tearing her a new one
Evidently you’ve never cross-examined a psychopath. When they cry they fake it, batting wet eyelashes at the jury. You come off looking like a meanie.
The best strategy is to bring out the intense inappropriate rage that lies just below the surface. That way you look good and they look batshit crazy evil (which is what you want the jury to see).
Lesley,
Good point. I have cross-examined her type, and you are right. The best thing you can do is let them rant and rave for a while, looking amused, and then arch your eyebrows with a smile at the jury, i.e., “see, folks, what’d I tell you? She really is that bad. And by the way, you can’t believe a single word she said.”
OTOH, in my first post, I wasn’t really thinking about cross. I’ve been interviewed a time or two, and there is a big difference between TV and courtroom cross-examination. The subtle approach you suggest, which can work very well in the courtroom if done right, does not work at all on television. With someone like Malkin, you really have to Cliff Schecter her, just jump right in her face from the get go and pummel her severely, not letting her get a word in edgewise if you can help it. Point out all of her insanity and hypocrisy, then tell her what a horrible jerk she is and how representative she is of the right-wing nutjobs, and only then let her respond. She’ll spend the whole time on the defensive — all you have to do after the first whack with the 2×4 is keep repeating the desired conclusion. “See? There she goes again. What a nut.” The raised eyebrow, needless to say, doesn’t work on TV — you have to say it and say it and say it again.
I have no experience with television so thanks for that information. From what I’ve seen of Michelle she never stops yapping long enough to listen to a question and when she’s cornered she goes off on a tangent to avoid answering.
She’s a classic sociopath. Everything about her is artificial, including her outrage.
The best set up would be to have a debate situation: two people on opposing sides with a moderator who enforces rules of behaviour. That way she couldn’t yap out of turn and she’d be accountable for her answers.
I wouldn’t mind seeing a little more mirroring. For example… she circumvents a question and the moderator could respond with “You didn’t answer the question. You’ve been asked five times, you haven’t answered…moving on” ”
Something like that to reinforce for the dumbasses watching what’s transpired.
These things sometimes don’t come off, but
Last time I heard that, it was from my doctor.
In reference to Dan the (Stupid) Man’s earlier comment about the Frosts’ “pro-abortion” stance:
I was very surprised to discover that although Dan Riehl is obviously the type of person who enjoys spending his weekends on his knees sucking cock in disreputabe bath houses, there is no actual evidence that he has ever engaged in any homosexual activity. As a responsible “citizen journalist”, I can only ask: how long before said evidence inevitably surfaces?