Historic health care legislation moves forward for debate in the Senate.
Historic health care legislation moves forward for debate in the Senate.
The Senate voted along party lines tonight to avoid a GOP filibuster and move forward with debate on historic health care legislation. The final vote was 60-39, with Ohio Republican George Voinovich not voting. The AP reports that the “spectator galleries were full for the unusual Saturday night showdown, and applause broke out briefly when the vote was announced. In a measure of the significance of the moment, senators sat quietly in their seats, standing only when they were called upon to vote.” Full debate will begin after Thanksgiving.
Immediately after the vote, the White House put out a statement saying, “The President is gratified that the Senate has acted to begin consideration of health insurance reform legislation.” RNC Chairman Michael Steele complained that “a number of moderate Democrats sacrificed their principles to give Harry Reid a victory that brings America dangerously closer to having a government-run health care system.” Igor Volsky has been following tonight’s debate over on the Wonk Room.
If the first procedural vote is delayed until Saturday, Voinovich won't be around Washington to participate. He's got an anniversary to observe -- his 30th since being elected Cleveland's mayor in 1979 -- and he's going to spend it with his old team. It's not that Voinovich's vote won't matter, but he's in the "no" column already, and Reid needs 60 "yes" votes just to move to the next procedure.
- Comments
- 130
Sen. Lamar Alexander Repeatedly Calls Medicaid A ‘Medical Ghetto’
Sen. Lamar Alexander Repeatedly Calls Medicaid A ‘Medical Ghetto’
Today on the Senate floor, Sen. Lamar Alexander (R-TN) railed against Medicaid, the health insurance program funded by both the federal and state governments for low-income Americans, by calling it a “medical ghetto” and blasting Democrats for proposing to expand the program:
– “We’ve heard eloquent statements about how moving 15 million low-income Americans into a program called Medicaid, which is a medical ghetto, is not health care reform.”
– “The governor of Tennessee, who is a Democratic governor, has estimated that the cost to our state of this bill — of moving 15 million Americans into this medical ghetto — is about $800 million over five years.”
– “Or arrogant in its dumping of 15 million low-income Americans into a medical ghetto called Medicaid that none of us, or any of our families, would ever want to be a part of for our health care.”
Watch it:
Conservatives frequently rail against this program, which currently covers around 60 million Americans, including people who are often rejected by private plans. Rep. Virginia Foxx (R-NC) has suggested that people are better off uninsured than insured under Medicaid.
While Alexander may think he is too good for Medicaid coverage, a 2005 Kaiser Family Foundation poll found that 74 percent of Americans consider Medicaid very important and most would oppose cuts to the program. Families USA has pointed out that, despite its flaws, Medicaid is cost-effective and provides a solid foundation on which to expand coverage:
Medicaid is cost-effective compared to private health insurance. After controlling for health status (since Medicaid enrollees tend to have greater health care needs), it costs more than 20 percent less to cover low-income people in Medicaid than it does to cover them in private health insurance.
The program protects low-income Americans from uncontrollable out-of-pocket costs charged by private insurers and also “covers services not usually covered in private health insurance.” Under the Senate health bill, “most nonelderly people with income below 133 percent of the [federal poverty line] would be made eligible for Medicaid” starting in 2014. Additionally, the legislation would “increase federal Medicaid funding for states that cover recommended preventive services and immunizations at no extra cost.”
Cafe Press Bans All ‘Pray For Obama: Psalm 109:8′ Merchandise
Cafe Press Bans All ‘Pray For Obama: Psalm 109:8′ Merchandise
This week, both the websites of CafePress.com and Zazzle.com decided to stop selling merchandise that featured the latest right-wing craze: the slogan “Pray for Obama: Psalm 109:8.” However, Cafe Press then changed its mind and told ThinkProgress that it was reinstating the merchandise, which fell within “fair political commentary.”
Whether it’s “fair political commentary” was quickly questioned. While 109:8 reads, “Let his days be few; and let another take his office,” the next line is, “Let his children be fatherless, and his wife a widow,” suggesting far more violent rhetoric than simple criticism. Diana Butler Bass at Beliefnet has explained that Psalm 109 is “considered one of the most difficult of all the psalms — full of violent images of vengeance and death.”
Yesterday, Cafe Press announced that it was again reversing itself and removing all the merchandise in response to strong public pressure:
The public debate started with questioning if the design was simply intended to be criticism of the President or something much worse. The discourse was surprisingly civil online, given the heated nature of the topic. Given that, and the positions of groups like the ACLU and the Anti-Defamation League, we decided to let the dialogue play out publicly before making a final decision.
Last night we posted a poll on our blog, read through the emails we’ve received and weighed the nature of the calls we’ve received on the topic. In the process we also learned that many of the original designers of the Psalm 109:8 designs had already decided to remove them on their own.
General consensus has proven that the design does point to a broader interpretation of the Psalm and thus has been deemed inappropriate for sale at CafePress.
The results of the Cafe Press poll were 76 percent calling the slogan “overly inflammatory and inappropriate” and 22 percent saying it was fair.
(HT: TP commenter Marie)
PBS’s Bill Moyers to retire from weekly television in April 2010.
PBS’s Bill Moyers to retire from weekly television in April 2010.
Veteran PBS journalist Bill Moyers has announced that he will be ending his Friday night public affairs show “Bill Moyers Journal” as well as “Now on PBS” on April 30, 2010:
Mr. Moyers said he had been planning for some time to retire the program on Dec. 25, but was asked by PBS to raise the funds to continue through April, which he did.
“I am 75 years old,” he said of the decision to end the series, which began in April 2007. The program has recently been having a “good run of it,” he added in a telephone interview on Friday, “so I feel it’s time.” He said he was not quitting television work, although he has no new projects planned.
“Bill Moyers Journal” originally aired in 1972, and after a few breaks, returned on-air in its current form in 2007, with the critically acclaimed documentary “Buying the War.” The film highlighted how, “in the rage that followed the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, the media abandoned their role as watchdog and became a lapdog instead.”
Angry supporters boo Palin for leaving in the middle of her book signing: ‘Quittin’ on the job!’
Angry supporters boo Palin for leaving in the middle of her book signing: ‘Quittin’ on the job!’
Former Alaska governor Sarah Palin was in Indiana yesterday for a book-signing at a Borders store. One thousand lucky fans with wristbands to meet Palin stood in the rain all day waiting for her to arrive. However, Palin quit the event before she had the chance to sign all the books, leaving 100 supporters out in the cold:
“I’m very disappointed. I think it was very rude. She could have at least apologized, and she didn’t even do that,” said Teresa Hedrick. [...]
“We bought two books from Borders to have our receipt and our wristband to get it signed tonight,” said one woman. “My books are going back to Borders tomorrow.”
“We gave up our entire workday, stayed in the cold. My kids were crying,” said one man. “They went home with my wife. She was out here in the freezing cold all day. I feel like I don’t want to support Sarah.“
People who didn’t get to meet Palin “went home only with a piece of paper with Palin’s signature.” Video from the event shows angry wristband-holders loudly booing Palin and yelling, “Sign our books!” and “Quittin’ on the job!” Watch it:
(HT: Ben Smith)
New Missouri billboard tells Americans to ‘prepare for war’ against the government.
New Missouri billboard tells Americans to ‘prepare for war’ against the government.
Fired Up! Missouri points out that the Lafayette County Republican Central Committee is highlighting a new billboard in the state with steps for a “citizens guide to revolution of a corrupt government“:
This billboard replaces one that warned that the socialist “Obama-Nation” is “coming for you.” It’s unclear who the owner of the billboard is, but the first one was the work of a “Missouri businessman.” (HT: Oliver Willis)
Barbour refuses to say Palin’s qualified to be president, pauses and stumbles when questioned about it.
Barbour refuses to say Palin’s qualified to be president, pauses and stumbles when questioned about it.
Mississippi Gov. and Repulican Governors Association (RGA) President Haley Barbour (R) attracted attention on Wednesday for praising former Alaska governor Sarah Palin, saying that she’s “a heck of a lot smarter than she gets credit for.” But that doesn’t necessarily mean Barbour thinks she’s ready to run for president. Today on MSNBC, Chris Matthews repeatedly asked Barbour if he thought Palin was qualified to be president. In response, Barbour would stop, stumble, and muster out weak statements like, “Constitutionally, she sure is” or “I don’t know anything that disqualifies her from being president” (perhaps subtle winks to the birther community that believes Obama is unconstitutionally unqualified?). Watch it:
While governor, Palin was not accepted into the inner circle of the RGA’s leadership, and Barbour never seemed very impressed with her self-proclaimed foreign policy expertise.
New Right-Wing Craze Prays That Obama’s ‘Days Be Few’
New Right-Wing Craze Prays That Obama’s ‘Days Be Few’
The newest far-right craze is an anti-Obama slogan that is making its way onto t-shirts, bumper stickers, mugs, and even teddy bears: “Pray for Obama: Psalm 109:8,” which reads, “Let his days be few; and let another take his office.” The meme is also taking off on Twitter, with conservatives calling it “hilarious.” Commentators have noted that it’s unclear whether the intent is to hope for an end to Obama’s time in office — or an end to his life. But a look at the lines in the rest of the psalm hint at the latter:
Let his days be few; and let another take his office.
Let his children be fatherless, and his wife a widow.
Let his children be continually vagabonds, and beg: let them seek their bread also out of their desolate places.
Let the extortioner catch all that he hath; and let the strangers spoil his labor.
Let there be none to extend mercy unto him: neither let there be any to favor his fatherless children.
Let his posterity be cut off; and in the generation following let their name be blotted out.
Let the iniquity of his fathers be remembered with the LORD; and let not the sin of his mother be blotted out.
Let them be before the LORD continually, that he may cut off the memory of them from the earth.
Diana Butler Bass at Beliefnet explains that Psalm 109 is one of the “imprecatory” prayers, “a lament in the form of petition to destroy one’s enemies.” While perhaps intended to be a joke, she notes that the psalm actually “entreats God to destroy the president”:
It is the personal prayer of an individual, someone who has been dealt an injustice by another–and usually more powerful–person. The words of Psalm 109 are those of deep agony, the longings of a victim for retribution and justice. This psalm is considered one of the most difficult of all the psalms–full of violent images of vengeance and death.
Quite a few of the “Pray for Obama” items are being sold at CafePress.com, although many of them have been taken off of the site (here’s a cached version of some of them). Cafe Press representative Margene H. told ThinkProgress that while the site took down some of the “Pray for Obama” items today, it is now in the process of reinstating them:
We initially pulled the Psalm 109:8 content from our products today because broader media dialog indicated that these designs potentially suggested violence towards the president. Based on current public discourse and further review of the actual content, we have determined that it is fair political commentary and we are in the process of reinstating this merchandise. As with all of our content, these designs will continue to be reviewed and if at any time their meaning is construed as advocating violence we will revisit our decision.
On Tuesday, MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow spoke with “Patience With God” author Frank Schaeffer, who said that while the psalm was “frightening” in a secular context, it’s even “more threatening” in a biblical context.
Senate health bill restores abstinence-only education funding.
Senate health bill restores abstinence-only education funding.
President Obama’s FY2010 budget eliminated funding for abstinence-only education and school districts are increasingly moving away from such programs because they have proven to be ineffective at reducing teen pregnancy. However, Newsweek reports that the recently released Senate health care bill restores some funding for abstinence-only programs, inserted by Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-UT), which seems to be “a slight concession to the Senate’s social conservatives”:
Their provision would restore a program called Title V, which, since the Welfare Reform Act of 1996, has allocated a yearly $50 million in grants to abstinence-only education programs. Obama let the program lapse in June, leaving some abstinence-only groups in dire straits. So in September, Sen. Orrin Hatch offered an amendment to restore Title V via heath-care reform, which (much to the outrage of liberal groups) just squeaked through the Senate Finance Committee with a 12–11 vote. A similar amendment, offered in the House by Rep. Terry Lee from Nebraska, died in committee.
If the Senate language survives reconciliation, the Title V program will be extended through 2014. This will not, however, bring abstinence funding back to the levels of the past decade. In 2008, Title V grants accounted for just under 25 percent of the federal abstinence budget (the rest of the budget came from other abstinence-only funding sources not restored in the Senate bill, including Community Based Abstinence Education Grants and the Adolescent Family Life Act).
Funding for comprehensive sex education is also in the bill. Sec. 2953 also provides “$75 million per year through FY2014 for Personal Responsibility Education grants to States for programs to educate adolescents on both abstinence and contraception for prevention of teenage pregnancy and sexually transmitted infections, including HIV/AIDS.”
Palin-Beck 2012?
Palin-Beck 2012?
In a new interview with Newsmax, former Alaska governor Sarah Palin hinted that a “dream ticket” of Palin and Fox News host Glenn Beck is not out of the question:
“I can envision a couple of different combinations, if ever I were to be in a position to really even seriously consider running for anything in the future, and I’m not there yet,” Palin tells Newsmax. “But Glenn Beck I have great respect for. He’s a hoot. He gets his message across in such a clever way. And he’s so bold – I have to respect that. He calls it like he sees it, and he’s very, very, very effective.”
Palin is a big Beck fan. In August, she wrote on her Facebook page, “FOX News’ Glenn Beck is doing an extraordinary job this week walking America behind the scenes of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue and outlining who is actually running the White House. Monday night he asked us to invite one friend to watch; tonight I invite all my friends to watch.” Maybe they could go up against Michele Bachmann and Steve King? (HT: Ben Smith)
Right-Wing American Family Association Misfires In The War On Christmas
Right-Wing American Family Association Misfires In The War On Christmas
It’s not even Thanksgiving, but the American Family Association (AFA) has already taken up arms in the War on Christmas. On Nov. 11, the right-wing organization announced that it was urging its followers to boycott Gap Inc. (Gap, Banana Republic, and Old Navy) from now until Christmas Day because the company refuses to say the word “Christmas”:
For years, Gap has refused to use the word Christmas in its television commercials, newspaper ads and in-store promotions, despite tens of thousands of consumer requests to recognize Christmas and in spite of repeated requests from AFA to do the same.
Last year, Gap issued this politically-correct statement to Christmas shoppers: “Gap recognizes that many traditions are celebrated throughout this season and we feel it is important to display holiday signage that is inclusive to everyone.”
Christmas is special because of Jesus. It’s not just a “winter holiday.” For millions of Americans the giving and receiving of gifts is in honor of the One who gave Himself. For the Gap to pretend that isn’t the foundation of the Christmas season is political correctness at best and religious bigotry at worst. The Gap is censoring the word Christmas, pure and simple.
AFA’s first shot in the war is a misfire, as Dan Neil of the LA Times points out today. In one of the first lines of Gap’s new holiday ad, the actors yell, “Go Christmas!” (as well as “Go Hanukkah! Go Kwanzaa! Go Solstice!”) Watch it:
ThinkProgress also checked out the websites of Gap, Banana Republic, and Old Navy and quickly found several items that feature Christmas items including several Christmas books, a pair of boxer shorts that says “Christmas” in several languages and pajama pants that also have “Christmas” written on them.
“The big loser here is the AFA,” writes Neil. “The annual War-on-Christmas drumbeat is absolutely not about defending the sacredness of Christmas. It is instead — transparently — marketing, a ratings gambit for Bill O’Reilly and Sean Hannity, and for the AFA, the centerpiece of its annual fundraising. This year, thanks to Gap, the AFA fumbled its boycott ball and in the process managed to look both intolerant and out of touch.”
Mukasey: Rep. Moran Has ‘Lost Touch With Reality’ And Should ‘Get Professional Help’ From Major Nidal Hasan
Mukasey: Rep. Moran Has ‘Lost Touch With Reality’ And Should ‘Get Professional Help’ From Major Nidal Hasan
Last week, Rep. Jim Moran (D-VA) came out in strong support of Attorney General Eric Holder’s decision to prosecute the five 9/11 defendants in U.S. federal court and sharply criticized Republicans who were attacking the decision. “They will seize on any opportunity to [demagogue], and that means they’ll even take a stand that’s un-American. It’s un-American to hold anyone indefinitely without trial. It’s against our principles as a nation.”
Former Bush attorney general Michael Mukasey is one of the Republicans who has been speaking out against Holder. Last week at a Federalist Society conference, Mukasey said that holding the trial in Manhattan increased the risk of a terrorist attack on the city.
In an interview with Washington Times radio this morning, the hosts asked Mukasey about Moran’s comments. Mukasey responded by suggesting that the congressman “get professional help” from Maj. Nidal Hasan:
Q: Congressman Jim Moran of Virginia says anybody that questions KSM coming to New York City for a civilian trial — that they’re un-American. What is your reaction to that?
MUKASEY: I think he’s lost touch with reality. He ought to get professional help, perhaps from Maj. Nidal.
The segment then ends with the hosts laughing over Mukasey’s “joke.” Listen here:
Nidal, of course, is the Army psychiatrist suspected of going on a brutal rampage at Fort Hood and killing 13 people.
Asked for a response to Mukasey’s comments, Moran’s spokesperson Emily Blout said, “Leading conservative activists and scholars agree with Mr. Moran’s position, which is based on this nation’s long history of upholding its most fundamental values- even in the face of horrific crimes.”
Hoffman un-unconcedes the NY-23 special election.
Hoffman un-unconcedes the NY-23 special election.
Yesterday, ThinkProgress reported that Conservative Party candidate Doug Hoffman had rescinded his concession to Democrat Bill Owens in the special congressional election in New York’s 23rd district. Hoffman went on Glenn Beck’s radio show and said he was feeling “hopeful” about the fact that Owens’ lead over him was narrowing with the counting of the district’s absentee ballots. “[I]f I knew this information at the election night, I would not have conceded,” said Hoffman. When Beck asked, “So are you un-conceding?” Hoffman replied, “If that’s possible, yes.” However, today Hoffman’s spokesman told the Syracuse Post-Standard that he is un-unconceding:
Hoffman is not “un-conceding” the race, contrary to what he said Monday when pressed by Glenn Beck on his national talk radio show.
“What really matters is the count that is taking place today,” Rob Ryan, Hoffman’s spokesman told The Post-Standard. “When we see the direction that is taking, we will make the decision.”
Ryan added, “There has been no formal action to contest the vote, and depending on how the absentee count turns out we will decide how to proceed.”
As Gawker’s Alex Pareene wrote yesterday, it looks like upstate New York may have its own Norm Coleman.
Hoffman ‘Un-Concedes’ The NY-23 Election After Prodding From His ‘Mentor’ Glenn Beck
Hoffman ‘Un-Concedes’ The NY-23 Election After Prodding From His ‘Mentor’ Glenn Beck
On Nov. 3, Conservative Party candidate Doug Hoffman conceded the special election in New York’s 23rd district after finding out that he was losing considerably to Democrat Bill Owens, who has already been sworn in and cast an important vote for health care reform. However, “a standard process of correcting human errors in election night spreadsheets” has narrowed Owens’ lead over Hoffman from more than 5,000 votes to about 3,000, and the New York Board of Elections is counting around 10,000 absentee ballots.
A Hoffman win is still a longshot, but on Glenn Beck’s radio show today, he said he was feeling hopeful. He even told Beck that he was un-conceding the race:
BECK: Alright, so let me ask you two questions. Are you currently bowing to me at the waist? (LAUGHTER) Have you bowed, or will you bow, to anyone, at the waist? No? Okay, good. Second question for you, are you officially un-conceding at this moment?
HOFFMAN: Yes, if I knew this information at the election night, I would not have conceded.
BECK: So are you un-conceding?
HOFFMAN: If that’s possible, yes.
BECK: If the President can bow to an emperor and nobody says anything, yeah, I think you can unconcede.
Listen here:
If anyone could get Hoffman to unconcede the race, it would be Beck, whom Hoffman has called his “mentor.” Hoffman has signed a pledge to uphold Beck’s 9/12 Project principles in Congress and lurched to the right to curry favor with the right-wing host.
After ‘getting a lot of flack,’ Tea Party protesters rethink burning Periello and Pelosi in effigy.
After ‘getting a lot of flack,’ Tea Party protesters rethink burning Periello and Pelosi in effigy.
On Saturday, the Danville Tea Party in Virginia plans on holding a “Fired Up for Freedom” rally. The group originally boasted that it would be “burning Rep. Tom Perriello and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi in effigy in response to the passage of landmark healthcare legislation.” Even after significant media attention and criticism, Tea Party organizer Nigel Coleman vowed on Friday to move forward with their plans. Yesterday, however, Coleman said that those plans are now “up in the air” because the group is afraid of counter-protesters:
But Coleman said Sunday that some members of his group were “uneasy” with the idea of counter-protesters and that people might mistake the TEA Party Patriots for being violent. Coleman compared the event to similar acts of protest in the nation’s history, such as opposition to the Stamp Act of 1765. [...]
“I still would like to do it,” Coleman said, “but it’s still up in the air at this point. We’ve already started stacking firewood and building the effigy …we will have a bonfire. Burning someone in effigy was just gonna be part of it.” [...]
“We were using it as a symbol of how things are similar to that (colonial) period in history,” he said. “Things have gotten out of hand … the more real we get, the more unreal it gets.”
Coleman added that the public reaction to the group’s plans has been “kinda strange.”
"We will not be going forward with the plan,” a crestfallen Coleman told me by phone moments ago. “We had to cancel it. The property owner won’t allow us to do it. The media attention was something that he didn’t want.”Coleman said he was upset that people had gotten the wrong idea about his plan. “I'm disappointed that the story got out of hand and people misinterpreted something we thought would be a little historical lesson,” he said. “They made people believe that we were committing an act of violence,” in a reference to the “liberal blogs.”
Interloper tricks anti-immigration Tea Party audience, begins chants of ‘Columbus go home!’ (UPDATED)
Interloper tricks anti-immigration Tea Party audience, begins chants of ‘Columbus go home!’ (UPDATED)
UPDATE: In another video of the event showing a different angle, it shows that the people joining in Erickson’s chant weren’t the Tea Party protesters, but pro-reform protesters. The Tea Party protesters seemed to have caught onto Erickson’s stunt by this time.
On Saturday, a few dozen anti-immigration activists gathered on the steps of the Minnesota State Capitol for a Tea Party, part of the nationwide effort by Americans for Legal Immigration PAC (ALIPAC). But somehow, one of the counter-protesters, a “concerned citizen from Minneapolis” named “Robert Erickson,” manged to get on the speaking list. His address started with the standard anti-immigrant rhetoric, but then revealed that he was talking about European immigrants. By this time, however, the crowd was in a frenzy and joined him in his chants of “Columbus go home!” and “Europeans out!”:
Let’s send these European immigrants back where they came from! I don’t care if they are Polish, Irish, English, Italian, or Norwegian! European immigrants are responsible for the most violent and heinous crimes in the history of the world, including genocide and slavery! Its time to restore the sovereignty of people native to this land! I want more workplace raids, starting with the big banks downtown.
Christopher Day at DailyKos notes, “The Tea-Baggers seem pretty clueless, and for the most part don’t even seem to realize they have been punk’d.”
Anti-immigration Tea Party activists attempt to distance themselves from neo-Nazis.
Anti-immigration Tea Party activists attempt to distance themselves from neo-Nazis.
On Saturday, approximately 200 people showed up to the anti-immigration “No Amnesty” tea party rally organized by American Citizens United in Phoenix. Many people were holding signs that had phrases such as “America not Amexico.” At one point there was a “tussle” when neo-Nazis showed up and tried to join the event, holding a Hitler banner and waving a Confederate flag with the “Don’t Tread on Me” Tea Party symbol. When a Tea Party activist confronted the group, one of the neo-Nazis pushed him to the ground. “If you assault me, you get assaulted back,” he said as police intervened. Watch it:
The Phoenix rally appeared to be part of a larger nationwide effort by Americans for Legal Immigration PAC (ALIPAC), which organized anti-immigration Tea Parties on Saturday to stop the effort to “destroy America through mass illegal immigration and amnesty.” As Andrea Nill explains in today’s Progress Report, “Right-wing nativists continue to confuse sensible immigration reform with ‘amnesty’ and anti-immigrant groups are exploiting the anger of the right-wing Tea Party movement in an effort to recruit more supporters to join their hateful cause.” Despite American Citizens United’s attempts to distance itself from the neo-Nazis, the Phoenix New Times’ Stephen Lemons says “there’s plenty of overlap between the two groups, whether it be in rhetoric or, occasionally, membership.” (HT: Dawn Teo)
CNN paid Lou Dobbs $8 million to quit.
CNN paid Lou Dobbs $8 million to quit.
Although Lou Dobbs has been saying that his departure from CNN was an “amicable parting on the best of terms,” the New York Post reports that CNN wanted him gone so badly that it gave him an $8 million severance package. Dobbs “had a year and a half to go on his $12 million contract.” He’ll be appearing on Fox News tonight to talk with Bill O’Reilly, who has called the former CNN host a “stand-up guy.”
Palin Calls Decision To Try 9/11 Defendants In Federal Court ‘Atrocious,’ Wants To ‘Hang ‘Em High’
Palin Calls Decision To Try 9/11 Defendants In Federal Court ‘Atrocious,’ Wants To ‘Hang ‘Em High’
Yesterday, Attorney General Eric Holder announced that the five individuals accused of conspiring to commit the 9/11 attacks — including alleged mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed — will be prosecuted in U.S. federal court. “I am confident in the ability of our courts to provide these defendants a fair trial, just as they have for over 200 years,” said Holder. “The alleged 9/11 conspirators will stand trial in our justice system before an impartial jury under long-established rules and procedures.”
But the U.S. justice system apparently isn’t good enough for former Alaska governor Sarah Palin (who believes that the White House has a “Department of Law“). Last night she went on Facebook and posted a message calling the Obama administration’s decision “atrocious”:
Horrible decision, absolutely horrible. It is devastating for so many of us to hear that the Obama Administration decided that the 9/11 terrorist mastermind, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, will be given a criminal trial in New York. This is an atrocious decision. [...]
Criminal defense attorneys will now enter into delaying tactics and other methods in the hope of securing some kind of win for their “clients.” The trial will afford Mohammed the opportunity to grandstand and make use of his time in front of the world media to rally his disgusting terrorist cohorts. It will also be an insult to the victims of 9/11, as Mohammed will no doubt use the opportunity to spew his hateful rhetoric in the same neighborhood in which he ruthlessly cut down the lives of so many Americans. [...]
If we are stuck with this terrible Obama Administration decision, I, like most Americans, hope that Mohammed and his co-conspirators are convicted. Hang ‘em high.
Palin further insulted the U.S. legal system by lamenting that a “hung jury” or “court room technicalities” may allow the defendants to walk away from this trial without receiving just punishment.” But the decision to make terrorists face the U.S. court system isn’t just an idea dreamed up by the Obama administration; there’s a strong precedent for it in this country. The U.S. has already successfully prosecuted 145 terrorism cases in federal court,including shoe bomber Richard Reid and Zacarias Moussaoui.
In fact, former New York City mayor Rudy Giuliani praised the prosecution of the 1993 World Trade Center bombers:
-– “‘It should show that our legal system is the most mature legal system in the history of the world,’ he [Giuliani] said, ‘that it works well, that that is the place to seek vindication if you feel your rights have been violated.’” [The New York Times, 3/5/94]
-– “[M]any who were bruised by the traumatic event were certain that no verdict by a jury or punishment by a judge will exorcise the pain and terror that remain. … Mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani declared that the verdict ‘demonstrates that New Yorkers won’t meet violence with violence, but with a far greater weapon — the law.’” [The New York Times, 3/5/94]
-– “I think it shows you put terrorism on one side, you put our legal system on the other, and our legal system comes out ahead,” said Giuliani. [CBS Evening News, 3/5/94]
Even in the weeks after Sept. 11, Giuliani “framed the attacks in the language of crime, describing the hijackers as ‘insane murderers’ and calling for restoration of the ‘rule of law.’” As CAP’s Ken Gude explains, Holder’s decision is a “victory for the rule of law and the American system of justice.”
‘Death Panels’ Hypocrisy: RNC Health Insurance Provider Promotes End-Of-Life Counseling
‘Death Panels’ Hypocrisy: RNC Health Insurance Provider Promotes End-Of-Life Counseling
Over the summer, one of the GOP’s loudest complaints against health care legislation was a provision offering senior citizens Medicare reimbursement for end-of-life counseling. Republicans claimed it would create so-called “death panels” or urge seniors citizens to die. RNC Chairman Michael Steele “endorsed this type of rhetoric, and on July 28, the RNC put out research document claiming that the government would “dictate” Americans’ “end-of-life care.”
But ThinkProgress has noticed that Cigna, the RNC’s health insurance provider, also urges beneficiaries to think about end-of-life services. Cigna’s website has a page called “Care at the End of Life,” which covers topics such as how to talk with “loved ones” about “end-of-life choices” and whether to stop life-prolonging treatment:
It’s unclear whether the RNC’s insurance plan covers these end-of-life consultations, and neither Cigna nor the RNC replied to inquiries from ThinkProgress. But nevertheless, the RNC’s insurance provider has posted information on its website advising beneficiaries about the complicated questions that accompany decisions at the end of someone’s life.
There is nothing objectionable about this planning, which has been endorsed by Democrats, Republicans like Sen. Johnny Isakson (R-GA), and the AARP. But this type of advice is exactly what the GOP fear-mongered about this summer. As FactCheck.org explained:
What the bill actually provides for is voluntary Medicare-funded end-of-life counseling. In other words, if seniors choose to make advance decisions about the type of care and treatments they wish to receive at the end of their lives, Medicare will pay for them to sit down with their doctor and discuss their preferences. There is no requirement to attend regular sessions, and there is absolutely no provision encouraging euthanasia.
Recently, the RNC has been urging lawmakers to support the anti-choice Stupak amendment, which would not only ban women on the federal exchange from using federal funds for abortion, but could bar employer-sponsored plans from offering the coverage. However, Politico reported this week that the RNC health care plan under Cigna has coverage for elective abortion services. Upon hearing the news, the RNC quickly opted-out of the abortion coverage, although its money is still indirectly subsidizing other women’s abortions.
If end-of-life counseling is so scary, will the RNC also call up Cigna and object? Or will it admit that there’s nothing wrong with these services and all the protests this summer were nothing more than political posturing?
(HT: TP reader Jason S.)
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll