Rick Moran at American Thinker gets the SCHIP expansion debate right, but reveals a silly typo on Michelle Malkin’s part.
McQ at Q&O gets it right, too.
Fausta summarizes what a lot of the commenters here were saying yesterday:
Let’s make clear that every issue – be it on entitlements or whatever else – that is debated “for the children” should be debated fully and clearly. The moment anyone presents a “for the children” argument, you know that a full and clear debate is exactly what they are trying to avoid.
“And Tiny Tim did get better, thanks to SCHIP expansion. And people said that if ever a woman kept the spirit of Christmas, without all the religious baggage, it was Nancy Pelosi, for whom Christmas was every day of the year.”
AJ Strata, champion of political expediency, gets it wrong, I think, by believing that lots of people are affected by the blogospheric fireworks. On the contrary, I believe that it is necessary to fight the left’s attempts to impose their taboos in this fashion.
I think McQ should get top billing here.
That pretty much gets it right there.
Bingo. On all counts.
AJ gives me a headache here. What a drama queen, and he apparently thinks politically exploiting brain-damaged children is fair game. It’s not. It’s tacky.
Well said, hf. But my point was that Malkin must really hate peas.
The posts by Rick Moran & McQ really rang a bell: it really is all about the handouts. Du-uh!
Two of the most reliable Democrats I know are in it for handouts. Both are at least middle class; one is definitely upper. Steady jobs, well-paid. Both may have made some dumb (but not catastrophic) financial decisions. One has 100% equity in a suburban house.
Both, however, have long-term medical “crosses to bear”. I believe that both would fully expect a Democrat administration & congress to start the sending checks ultimo January, 2009. Both think Republicans – or really, not-Democrats – are pretty much evil unless they know one or two personally, then those ones are deluded.
I never really fathomed the depths to which so many of my fellow citizens expect Other People’s Money to cover for their bad decisions, bad results, or just bad luck.
AJ is evidently more concerned with how a narrative plays. Further, he is buying an agrument set forrth by the left that the left flatly rejects when used against them – that hurtful comments lifted from the discussion sections of blogs can not be used againt the blog and its idealogical brethren. Also, like Coulter, alot of people on this side really hate Malkin, and anytime they can lash out, well…
AJ might have a slight Sully/Cole infection. (The one where their rhetorical presense drives off a large portion of those who they thought were sympathetic to pet causes walked away. They find in incomprehensible that another could grasp, analyse, then reject their argument – even when its presented with petulant protestations, foot-stomping tantrums, and irrational invective – imagine that.)
In the Frost’s case, the parents are still not insured. I understand the need to have their children insured, but if something happens to one of the parents, the whole family will be traumatically affected. I don’t want to be accused of criticizing them, but someone needs to talk some sense into those people.
You don’t have to take many steps past AJ’s argument to realize that it involves COMPLETE surrender to anyone who waves an injured child at you.
Sorry, this administration does not negotiate with people who use children cynically to avoid having to defend their beliefs.
I understand why people want to wait, or negotiate, or give in to “hostage holders,” but it’s wrong. It seems right when there’s a sympathetic moppet in the grips of evil, but you’re just placing more moppets at risk.
It’s like when you let your kid stay over at a friend’s house for the first time, and you then have to spend six months retraining them that temper tantrums don’t work because the other kids’ parents were surrender monkeys.
Merovign: What the fuck are you on about? This is why I don’t take righties seriously. They drift into these juvie-abuse fantasies.
“This is why I don’t take righties seriously.”
Oh, the irony
Cynn: Let me spell it out.
You want to persuade someone to do something they ordinarily do not want to do.
You decide to frame your “persuasion” in terms of helping someone who is unquestionably sympathetic and beyond criticism so that any objection your target has can be rebutted in terms of “you don’t care about this helpless someone, you heartless bastage!”
This is known as “emotional blackmail.” It’s like when a child hits up his mom for cash when both of them know good and well that it’s for drugs, but the kid says, “oh, so you don’t care if I get enough to eat,” thus cynically twisting her heartstrings and extracting said cash.
Blackmail is a type of symbolic hostage-taking, where you don’t imprison an actual person but you do hold something over that person’s head to coerce them into doing what you want.
The bit about the sleepover? Well, you’re on your own there. I don’t get it either.
Strata’s Generalissimo-ismo is refreshing.
I don’t think “the body politic” has been spoken of unironically since Mussolini — and even the Duce didn’t really believe in it. And if there’s anything Republicans need more than fascist rhetoric, it’s some media-aping down-the-nose digust at the noisy rabble that elects them (which, perhaps notably, is something other than, opposed to, and to be corrected by this “body” (…just saying)).
It’s all so Rudy.
AJ: This is why the GOP is going to lose.
Why, yes. Yes you are.
Or if not that, this:
I just finished watching a PBS documentary about advertising, produced in 2004. Of course, halfway through, it became a retarded screed against you vile Republicans. It is, after all, a television program.
What’s odd about it is its showstopper example of right-wing perfidy: the Gingrichian plot to trick us all into disbelieving in global warming by shifting the media-preferred terminology to “climate change.”
…
Yeah.
Republicans expressing concern with projecting a more media-acceptable image of the Party, in hope of a media echo of that image, might be wasting their time. Maybe.
Or maybe they don’t really mean what they’re saying.
Maybe.
He is pointing out how appeasement never works, no matter whether it is a people held hostage to the threat of exploding pizzerias or a child beiong used by cynical ass-helmets trying to score cheap political points by playing the “for the children” card when there aren’t any real arguments in favor.
I realize that English is a second language for you, but you could get someone to help you sound out the multisyllabic words for you.
Of course, the fact that AGW is bullshit on so many levels had nothing to do with anyone “disbelieving” it, it’s all a secret plot by those nasty ol’ Rethugs.
Thanks for making your personal opinions so clear so quickly. It is so much easier to just skim past the nonsense when I know who is likely to be spewing it – and you have just joined the list.
{Exeunt Omnes, laughing}
Cynn is not so offbase on the most of it, I think it’s the inflection of Merovign’s comment more than the sentiment she is objecting to – cause last night she said…
It was a beautiful moment really.
No we are not going to lose because I am going to vote really really hard and also Hillary.
cynn, Drumwaster is of course correct, but really it’s much simpler than that.
There’s a cynical adage: When somebody tells you it’s not about the money, it’s about the money.
This is like that. When somebody tells you it’s for the children, it’s for the power. The number of instances where that is not the case can be counted on the fingers of one hand. By a quadruplegic.
Regards,
Ric
Dems doing anything “for the children” is a crock of shit. These same people that want to be able to “crush the children’s skulls and suck them out of the birth canal” in the third trimester in the name of reproductive choice. Only the party that can claim “pro-choice lesbian couples” can stretch their logic to be the party of the “pro-choice, child advocate.”
I don’t think you can underestimate how Republican resolve on the not expanding SCHIP thing is helped by Hillary’s baby bond pandering.
also, Clarice is cogent as ever in AJ’s comments:
But see Rob, by reducing the number of children they’re making them more precious. it’s all about supply and demand.
Let’s be fair. It’s not just when a Democrat says it’s “for the children.” When ANY politician says his motive is for ANYTHING other than the power, or at least the improved shot at getting (re)elected, they are lying.
The leftards are incredulous we would make their assumptions of Republicans universal to all politicians. How dare we notice that Democrats have something to gain by political machinations, and that such gain might be their true driving force. And then to be indignant of their dishonesty, well, that’s just RUDE.
dicentra
The bit about the sleepover? Well, you’re on your own there. I don’t get it either.
Almost every parent goes though the “But Billy’s parents let him [fill in blank]!” scenario, several variations on the theme.
It’s the good parent that listens to their child scream “I HATE YOU” without dissolving into a puddle of quivering goo.
This latest puerile attempt by Dems to scream “you big meanies!” at anyone that opposes their whims again proves the Dems have become the party OF children (of all ages)
It’s a party filled with Veruca Salts
– “It’s a party filled with Veruca Salts”
– …and emotional moppets posing as adults…
1) I hope cynn gets another few bottles of the good stuff soon – when she’s on the cheap stuff, she ain’t bright. “Juvie-abuse fantasies?” What the fuck are YOU on about?
2) I’m sorry it wasn’t clear to everyone, but at least some people (thanks Darleen) seem to understand what I was on about.
Spend enough time around kids and you’ll see how quickly they learn bad behavior from others, and how long it takes to undo that “training.”
If you fold once, you’ll have to be firm a hundred times or more to stop the tantrums.
Cynn’s previously stated disgust at her political brethren using tricky emotional appeals must burn deeply as this has been the Democratic party’s modus operandi for years. Be prepared to see much, much more of it in the next 12 months and stock up on Dramamine.
The Progressive Church of the Misery Pimpage™ (as always h/t to nishizono) sends out its acolytes seeking the the lost and the least. These are vetted purely for the abject misery of their position and the clear help they would receive by a particular
handoutproposed program. Their sighs and tears become the face of the justification of the largesse. One of the previous commentators (andy?) made a snark about looking at numbers rather than the Frost kid.Why, yes, I’d much rather look at the numbers than pimped child victims. That would be called legislating and due diligence.
Spend some time listening to Democratic Townhall type meetings (drink if you must) and you might be struck by the number of people who step up to the microphone asking “what are you going to do about…” which is easily translated into “What are you going to do for me??” Misery pimpage appeals to both the better and worse sides of humanity. It pulls at the heart strings of those who care, suspending critical thinking and hard eyed analysis. Come on, now, there are people suffering out there. We need to do something. At the same time the poverty and medical crisis review reinforces some of the darker, more self centered desires of those looking for largesse like penny candy. They’ve made the jump to expectation and see opportunity to feed at the trough. Either way, Democrats insure a new wave of myth building like “working poor” and “tax cuts for the rich” while growing the legislative power necessary to insure reelection through both fine, MSM public relations and generous regional entitlements.
And so we wander around the ‘tubes and enjoy the “Thugs don’t care about children, what’s wrong with them” rants while the truly cynical and power hungry laugh and laugh.
I think the dems are missing an opportunity to capture the dog-people vote by not having a sick puppy testify before congress. Puppies are so cute.
I thought the reason why the GOP was going to lose was because of all those ‘racists, nativists, bigots’ screaming for legal immigration and border security in a time of war?
Now the reason the GOP will lose is because of all those calling for an end to ‘politically manipulated’ child abuse?
I have to wonder if the middle-of-the-roader is a tad confused in what they’re saying.
The ironic part here is that this situation seems to have arisen because the Frosts come from families of affluence. They likely never had to learn all the unpleasant truths about responsibility and sacrifice and saving for a rainy day because they grew up taking comfort and money for granted. Their children, in turn, are growing up seeing first-hand what happens when a parent selfishly decides to pursue self-actualization over responsibility to family.
I’ve little doubt that the Frost kids, knowing what happens when the grownups refuse to grow up, are going to be the very model of personal responsibility and self-reliance.
Unless, of course, the Dems successfully turn them into wards of the State. In that case, it will be the children’s children who become models of self-reliance, having grown up seeing first-hand what it’s like to be wards of the Democratic State (and probably also experiencing what it’s like when the State can’t afford to pay its bills any more).
POO!!!
Hah. I love riddles.
People were asking how we would know when the war in Iraq was won.
I think we now know….
Good one, Tom.
– How long before we start hearing the Hilldebeast and the rest of the Dem pres. candidates yammering about “…How great it is that the Bush administration finally listened to the Democratic leadership and got tough in Iraq abd we can now see a victory on the horizon…” (Can you say Moroons and use it in a sentence kids?)
– The more you watch the cognitive dissonance, and Ghey Porn cock of lies of the Left, the more you’re reminded of the analogy of the Left as Willey coyote, and the right as the Road runner.
– I can picture the Left strapping on the “Acme Bat-wings of Rethugs are such damn meanies” in the Frost scam.
– Ok props department…..ready the cliff wall and obligatory falling boulder… MEEP MEEP!!1!1!!!one!!
“I never really fathomed the depths to which so many of my fellow citizens expect Other People’s Money to cover for their bad decisions, bad results, or just bad luck.”
So, obviously, you don’t participate in any public or private health insurance, right? Because what is that other than using Other People’s Money (the others in your insurance pool) to cover your own bad luck?
Look up the prices of health care procedures and common prescriptions. You will find it easily exceeds your contributions to your health care plan. Thus, anyone who participates in any group health plan is using other people’s money (namely, the companies’ stockholders) to pay for their own bad luck.
Republicans can’t win on merit, so they resort to lying about sick kids to win votes. A more despicable group of humans I can scarcely imagine.
“So, obviously, you don’t participate in any public or private health insurance, right? Because what is that other than using Other People’s Money (the others in your insurance pool) to cover your own bad luck?”
Look up the difference between “voluntary participation” and “mandated confiscation”, Michael. Then go wash behind your ears and get to bed, tomorrow is a school day.