'Un-American' attacks can't derail health care debate

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

PapaG

Banned User
BANNED
Joined
Sep 23, 2008
Messages
32,870
Likes
291
Points
0
Support our bill. If you don't, you're "un-American"! :sigh:

http://blogs.usatoday.com/oped/2009/08/unamerican-attacks-cant-derail-health-care-debate-.html#more

By Nancy Pelosi and Steny Hoyer


Americans have been waiting for nearly a century for quality, affordable health care.


Health coverage for all was on the national agenda as early as 1912, thanks to Teddy Roosevelt's Bull Moose presidential run. Months after World War II came to an end in 1945, President Harry Truman called on Congress to guarantee all Americans the "right to adequate medical care and protection from the economic fears of sickness." From President Lyndon Johnson to President Bill Clinton, to President Obama's winning campaign on the promise of reform, there hasn't been a more debated domestic issue than the promise of affordable health care for all.


We believe it is healthy for such a historic effort to be subject to so much scrutiny and debate. The failure of past attempts is a reminder that health insurance reform is a defining moment in our nation's history — it is well worth the time it takes to get it right. We are confident that we will get this right.

Already, three House committees have passed this critical legislation and over August, the two of us will work closely with those three committees to produce one strong piece of legislation that the House will approve in September.

In the meantime, as members of Congress spend time at home during August, they are talking with their constituents about reform. The dialogue between elected representatives and constituents is at the heart of our democracy and plays an integral role in assuring that the legislation we write reflects the genuine needs and concerns of the people we represent.

However, it is now evident that an ugly campaign is underway not merely to misrepresent the health insurance reform legislation, but to disrupt public meetings and prevent members of Congress and constituents from conducting a civil dialogue. These tactics have included hanging in effigy one Democratic member of Congress in Maryland and protesters holding a sign displaying a tombstone with the name of another congressman in Texas, where protesters also shouted "Just say no!" drowning out those who wanted to hold a substantive discussion.

Let the facts be heard

These disruptions are occurring because opponents are afraid not just of differing views — but of the facts themselves. Drowning out opposing views is simply un-American. Drowning out the facts is how we failed at this task for decades.

Health care is complex. It touches every American life. It drives our economy. People must be allowed to learn the facts.

The first fact is that health insurance reform will mean more patient choice. It will allow every American who likes his or her current plan to keep it. And it will free doctors and patients to make the health decisions that make the most sense, not the most profits for insurance companies.

Reform will mean stability and peace of mind for the middle class. Never again will medical bills drive Americans into bankruptcy; never again will Americans be in danger of losing coverage if they lose their jobs or if they become sick; never again will insurance companies be allowed to deny patients coverage because of pre-existing conditions.

Lower costs, better care

Reform will mean affordable coverage for all Americans. Our plan's cost-lowering measures include a public health insurance option to bring competitive pressure to bear on rapidly consolidating private insurers, research on health outcomes to better inform the decisions of patients and doctors, and electronic medical records to help doctors save money by working together. For seniors, the plan closes the notorious Medicare Part D "doughnut hole" that denies drug coverage to those with between $2,700 and $6,100 per year in prescriptions.

Reform will also mean higher-quality care by promoting preventive care so health problems can be addressed before they become crises. This, too, will save money. We'll be a much healthier country if all patients can receive regular checkups and tests, such as mammograms and diabetes exams, without paying a dime out-of-pocket.

This month, despite the disruptions, members of Congress will listen to their constituents back home and explain reform legislation. We are confident that our principles of affordable, quality health care will stand up to any and all critics.

Now — with Americans strongly supporting health insurance reform, with Congress reaching consensus on a plan, and with a president who ran and won on this specific promise of change — America is closer than ever to this century-deferred goal.

This fall, at long last, we must reach it.


Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., is speaker of the House and

Steny Hoyer, D-Md., is House majority leader
 
The comments after the USA Today op/ed are worth reading. Apparently, there are a lot of "un-Americans" who disagree with the Democratic House leadership.
 
In the meantime, as members of Congress spend time at home during August, they are talking with their constituents about reform. The dialogue between elected representatives and constituents is at the heart of our democracy and plays an integral role in assuring that the legislation we write reflects the genuine needs and concerns of the people we represent.

However, it is now evident that an ugly campaign is underway not merely to misrepresent the health insurance reform legislation, but to disrupt public meetings and prevent members of Congress and constituents from conducting a civil dialogue. These tactics have included hanging in effigy one Democratic member of Congress in Maryland and protesters holding a sign displaying a tombstone with the name of another congressman in Texas, where protesters also shouted "Just say no!" drowning out those who wanted to hold a substantive discussion.

I can see that she was referring to specific points when she made the "un-American" comment. I would not have used those words, because they're far too loaded.

Also, I don't know if it's really evident that there is an organized campaign of drowning out civil discussion. However, if there was, I would say that is indeed, un-American.
 
I can see that she was referring to specific points when she made the "un-American" comment. I would not have used those words, because they're far too loaded.

Also, I don't know if it's really evident that there is an organized campaign of drowning out civil discussion. However, if there was, I would say that is indeed, un-American.

So, when Obama was organizing street protests in Chicago to drown out opponents, was that "un-American".

Pelosi is 3rd in line to the Presidency, and she labels people opposing her flawed plan "un-American". Unreal that this is the level of discourse coming from our "leaders".
 
So, when Obama was organizing street protests in Chicago to drown out opponents, was that "un-American".

Anything that attempts to stifle civil discourse is, I think, against core American values. So, if he did, then it was an un-American action.


Pelosi is 3rd in line to the Presidency, and she labels people opposing her flawed plan "un-American". Unreal that this is the level of discourse coming from our "leaders".

I'm pretty sure that she labeled the actions that she described as un-American, not people who oppose the health care reform.
 
So, when Obama was organizing street protests in Chicago to drown out opponents, was that "un-American".

Pelosi is 3rd in line to the Presidency, and she labels people opposing her flawed plan "un-American". Unreal that this is the level of discourse coming from our "leaders".

No, she doesn't label people opposing her flawed plan as un-American. She labels the tactic of drowning out opponents without the ability to enter discourse un-American.

Perhaps taking the blinders off for a second would help. Especially you who posted earlier about people getting ramped up about their own opinion without entering real discourse. People from both side of the aisle should be ASHAMED if their constituents resort to these tactics. There shouldn't even be an attempt made to soften or mediate the situation. The leaders if they had balls at all should just come out and say "They (the citizens) were wrong to do that."
 
No, she doesn't label people opposing her flawed plan as un-American. She labels the tactic of drowning out opponents without the ability to enter discourse un-American.

Perhaps taking the blinders off for a second would help.
Especially you who posted earlier about people getting ramped up about their own opinion without entering real discourse. People from both side of the aisle should be ASHAMED if their constituents resort to these tactics. There shouldn't even be an attempt made to soften or mediate the situation. The leaders if they had balls at all should just come out and say "They (the citizens) were wrong to do that."

Perhaps you shoud read the comments to her article. Since when is free speech "un-American"? People are frustrated that they are not being heard. They are making themselves heard, and some are being put in the hospital by "your side" for doing so. You do know how this Republic was formed, right?

I'm not surprised that you condone this loaded comment by Pelosi, however. You seem as partisan as anybody on this board.

Edit - you're tied with barfo and Shooter.
 
Last edited:
Anything that attempts to stifle civil discourse is, I think, against core American values. So, if he did, then it was an un-American action.

I'm glad that's what you think. Meanwhile, the first amendment begs to differ with your opinion.

I'm pretty sure that she labeled the actions that she described as un-American, not people who oppose the health care reform.

Correct. Pelosi labeled people exercising free speech as "un-American". I get that.
 
Last edited:
13.jpg
 
I'm glad that's what you think. Meanwhile, the first amendment begs to differ with your opinion.



Correct. Pelosi labeled people exercising free speech as "un-American". I get that.


Oh, I see. You're being difficult on purpose. Great.
 
Oh, I see. You're being difficult on purpose. Great.

I'm not being difficult. I'm not the one trying to spin Pelosi's loaded insult, and it appears a lot of people are insulted by it.

Me not agreeing with you = me being difficult. :devilwink:
 
!=



You're the one spinning.

No, I'm not spinning. "Drowning out the opposition", as far as I can tell, is protected under the 1st Amendment, and in turn, is most definitely "American". "People" are supposedly drowning out the opposition. What am I spinning?

A stupid comment by Pelosi, and probably the final nail in the health care coffin. You know the Dems are desperate when their leadership has to pull the "un-American" card.
 
Last edited:
You seem as partisan as anybody on this board.

Edit - you're tied with barfo and Shooter.

Don't be modest, PapaG. You are right up there with us.

barfo
 
Perhaps you shoud read the comments to her article. Since when is free speech "un-American"?

Free speech is not un-American. But prohibiting free speech and not engaging in rationale discourse by drowning out opposing points of views by shouting is un-American. Can you please cite at least ten examples of the framers drowning out each other's points of views when writing the Constitution? No, of course you can't.


People are frustrated that they are not being heard. They are making themselves heard, and some are being put in the hospital by "your side" for doing so. You do know how this Republic was formed, right?

Those people can be heard but they choose not to engage in discourse. They instead attempt to engage in shouting. I do know how this nation was formed. So are you saying you support and encourage the violent overthrow of our present government?

I'm not surprised that you condone this loaded comment by Pelosi, however. You seem as partisan as anybody on this board.

Pelosi is right, so it's hard to defame her. As I stated earlier, people on both sides who attempt those tactics should be ashamed. Again, why are you being hypocritical to your earlier posts?
 
I'm more anti-big government. I'm not pro-GOP. :dunno:

Sure sure...and everything you espouse, regardless of whether it deals with "big government" or not, is pro-GOP point of view..interesting.
 
No, I'm not spinning. "Drowning out the opposition", as far as I can tell, it protected under the 1st Amendment, and in turn, is most definitely "American". "People" are supposedly drowning out the opposition. What am I spinning?

She didn't say "unconstitutional," she said, "un-American." There's a big difference.


A stupid comment by Pelosi, and probably the final nail in the health care coffin. You know the Dems are desperate when their leadership has to pull the "un-American" card.

It seemed to work for the Republicans just fine.
 
Free speech is not un-American. But prohibiting free speech and not engaging in rationale discourse by drowning out opposing points of views by shouting is un-American. Can you please cite at least ten examples of the framers drowning out each other's points of views when writing the Constitution? No, of course you can't.

It is? Where does doing that violate the Constitution? Also, the "framers" were a part of a group who literally killed their opponents in order to advance their agenda.


Those people can be heard but they choose not to engage in discourse. They instead attempt to engage in shouting. I do know how this nation was formed. So are you saying you support and encourage the violent overthrow of our present government?

I'm not surprised that you missed the point I was making about how "America" was created. Apparently, the founders acted "un-American".


Pelosi is right, so it's hard to defame her. As I stated earlier, people on both sides who attempt those tactics should be ashamed. Again, why are you being hypocritical to your earlier posts?

You believe Pelosi is correct in labeling people exercising their 1st amendment right as "un-American". I don't believe she is correct. So here we are...
 
Sure sure...and everything you espouse, regardless of whether it deals with "big government" or not, is pro-GOP point of view..interesting.

Taking issue with Pelosi labeling people exercising their 1st Amendment rights "un-American" is a pro-GOP position? Should I then infer that the pro-Democratic position is to smear people as being "un-American" when they are acting within the confines of the law? :dunno:
 
She didn't say "unconstitutional," she said, "un-American." There's a big difference.

Um, not really. Is Pelosi now the arbiter on what defines "un-American" behavior, even when that behavior is protected by the U.S. constitution?



It seemed to work for the Republicans just fine.

Really? When did Tom DeLay call Americans exercising their 1st Amendment right "un-American"? Find me a quote and I'll believe you.
 
It is? Where does doing that violate the Constitution?

I'm sorry, I must have mis-typed something. Can you point out where in my post I claimed it violated the first amendment?

Also, the "framers" were a part of a group who literally killed their opponents in order to advance their agenda.
So, again, you are advocating the violent overthrow of our present government? The framers went through a series of lengthy discourse. Even the Civil War started out with many years of discourse before turning violent when they felt they had no other option. Both of those started, if you'll remember, not upon a single issue either but upon a group claiming independence from a nation. So, until these groups of nuts from both sides declare independence you are comparing apples to oranges.

I'm not surprised that you missed the point I was making about how "America" was created. Apparently, the founders acted "un-American".
They could neither act American or un-American as America hadn't officially existed until after the fact.

You believe Pelosi is correct in labeling people exercising their 1st amendment right as "un-American". I don't believe she is correct. So here we are...
You can be un-American while exercising your 1st amendment rights as GOP advocates so often remind us when people are burning flags. So, here we are...
 
Taking issue with Pelosi labeling people exercising their 1st Amendment rights "un-American" is a pro-GOP position? Should I then infer that the pro-Democratic position is to smear people as being "un-American" when they are acting within the confines of the law? :dunno:

I'm talking about a body of work. And labeling Pelosi is another pro-GOP issue, whether it is right or wrong is beside the point - you agree with it. As for your inference of the pro-Democrat position, I wouldn't know because I'm not one of them either.

I find it interesting that you're willing to smear Pelosi for her exercising her 1st Amendment rights.
 
Um, not really. Is Pelosi now the arbiter on what defines "un-American" behavior, even when that behavior is protected by the U.S. constitution?

You see America and see only the constitution, apparently. I see a vast and complex culture, one where shouting people down in order to suppress civil discourse is considered not part of the accepted norm.



Really? When did Tom DeLay call Americans exercising their 1st Amendment right "un-American"? Find me a quote and I'll believe you.

How about you find me a quote where Gandhi expressed his love for hookers and blow?

I make a general statement and you demand a specific quote that you know doesn't exist.
 
I do think it's a tad odd to hear people shout down their congressperson and anyone at a town hall who wants to speak with cries of "This is America!"
 
I do think it's a tad odd to hear people shout down their congressperson and anyone at a town hall who wants to speak with cries of "This is America!"

This is America. Shouting down political leaders in a "town hall" would be considered more "un-Cuban" or "un-Venzuelan" than "un-American" IMO. :dunno:
 
That is because all the people that are doing the protesting in the manner that they are would just as soon turn this country into a faschist nation ruled by fear.

One of my buddies sent me this interesting read:

http://www.truthout.org/080909A

Even if you don't agree with it, it definitly gives you pause to think about it.
 
I'm talking about a body of work. And labeling Pelosi is another pro-GOP issue, whether it is right or wrong is beside the point - you agree with it. As for your inference of the pro-Democrat position, I wouldn't know because I'm not one of them either.

I find it interesting that you're willing to smear Pelosi for her exercising her 1st Amendment rights.

I'm not labeling or smearing Pelosi. She's saying protestors are "carrying swastikas" and that others are "un-American". How is me disagreeing with her comments a "smear"?
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top