AP fact-checks Obama speech; Update: Reason does better

posted at 12:17 pm on September 10, 2009 by Ed Morrissey

Yesterday, Barack Obama told the nation that he was tired of dishonest debate and “scare tactics,” but how honest was Obama himself in last night’s speech?  The Associated Press fact-checks Obama and finds him … wanting.  For a man eager to paint his opposition as liars, Obama told a couple of whoppers himself in front of the joint session of Congress:

OBAMA: “I will not sign a plan that adds one dime to our deficits either now or in the future. Period.”

THE FACTS: Though there’s no final plan yet, the White House and congressional Democrats already have shown they’re ready to skirt the no-new-deficits pledge.

House Democrats offered a bill that the Congressional Budget Office said would add $220 billion to the deficit over 10 years. But Democrats and Obama administration officials claimed the bill actually was deficit-neutral. They said they simply didn’t have to count $245 billion of it — the cost of adjusting Medicare reimbursement rates so physicians don’t face big annual pay cuts. …

CBO Director Douglas Elmendorf had this to say in July: “We do not see the sort of fundamental changes that would be necessary to reduce the trajectory of federal health spending by a significant amount.”

In fact, none of the proposals that have come from Congress thus far have been scored deficit neutral by any credible analytical group.  Obama tried arguing again last night that preventive medicine would save the system money, and therefore would render the system deficit neutral or even cost-effective in the long run.  Obama has yet to explain the scope of the “long run” argument, and in any event, the AP notes that the CBO has already blown the whistle on this argument, too:

THE FACTS: Studies have shown that much preventive care — particularly tests like the ones Obama mentions — actually costs money instead of saving it. That’s because detecting acute diseases like breast cancer in their early stages involves testing many people who would never end up developing the disease. The costs of a large number of tests, even if they’re relatively cheap, will outweigh the costs of caring for the minority of people who would have ended up getting sick without the testing.

The Congressional Budget Office wrote in August: “The evidence suggests that for most preventive services, expanded utilization leads to higher, not lower, medical spending overall.”

I wrote a column regarding this finding a month ago today.  This has been known for several weeks, explained thoroughly by the CBO in its letter, based on well-known, peer-reviewed studies.  Cost savings from a massive application of preventive medicine is a myth — or in Obama’s parlance, a lie.  Yet Obama insists on telling it over and over again to get people to believe that he can save money by spending more of it.

The AP misses a couple of whoppers, too.  For instance, while they scold Obama for reversing himself on individual mandates, they let this pass without challenge in their article:

“To force people to get health insurance, you’ve got to have a very harsh penalty,” he said in a February 2008 debate.

Now, he says, “individuals will be required to carry basic health insurance — just as most states require you to carry auto insurance.”

This analogy is false for a few reasons.  States only require people to carry auto insurance if they drive on public roads.  It is a prerequisite of accessing a state-run system, not a mandate disconnected from any government-provided service.  Also, the mandate for auto insurance in most states is for liability insurance — insurance that pays for the damage done to other people, not to one’s self.  It’s to make sure that people who suffer damages from auto accidents not their fault can recover compensation for them.

They really miss the boat on illegal immigration, though:

OBAMA: “The reforms I’m proposing would not apply to those who are here illegally.” One congressman, South Carolina Republican Joe Wilson, shouted “You lie!” from his seat in the House chamber when Obama made this assertion. Wilson later apologized.

THE FACTS: The facts back up Obama. The House version of the health care bill explicitly prohibits spending any federal money to help illegal immigrants get health care coverage. Illegal immigrants could buy private health insurance, as many do now, but wouldn’t get tax subsidies to help them. Still, Republicans say there are not sufficient citizenship verification requirements to ensure illegal immigrants are excluded from benefits they are not due.

Actually, the facts do not back up Obama, as the Congressional Research Service noted in its analysis of HR3200.  The CRS is not run by Republicans, but is the nonpartisan research office that reports to Congress.  Illegal aliens in the US who meet the “substantial presence” test would be required to participate in the health-care “exchanges” and would have access therefore to the subsidies and the public option, if it exists in the final form of the bill (page 4):

Under H.R. 3200, all legal permanent residents (LPRs),23 nonimmigrants, and unauthorized aliens who meet the substantial presence test (defined above) would be required to obtain health insurance. Noncitizens meeting the definition of nonresident aliens (e.g., temporary visitors, temporary workers in the United States for less than 183 days in the year) would not be required to obtain health insurance. Notably, the IRC does not contain special rules for individuals who are in the United States without authorization (i.e., illegal or unauthorized aliens). Instead, the IRC treats these individuals in the same manner as other foreign nationals—an unauthorized individual who has been in the United States long enough to qualify under the substantial presence test is classified as a resident alien; otherwise, the individual is classified as a nonresident alien. Thus, it would appear that unauthorized aliens who meet the substantial presence test would be required under H.R. 3200 to have health insurance.

Since the CRS analysis has been public for almost two weeks, the AP reporters should have familiarized themselves with it. The bill offered by the House, which Obama seems to have re-embraced last night, would require illegal aliens in the country for more than six months to obtain health insurance through the exchanges, and make them eligible for the public option. Furthermore, when Republicans attempted to close that loophole with an amendment, Democrats shot it down.

If Obama really wants to make a reputation for himself as a mythbuster, he should start with himself.

Update: I don’t think the AP did a bad job here, but Reason’s Matt Welch does much better — and focuses on the man doing the proposing and the disposing:

It is telling that so many people who claim to be speaking on the side of Truth, Justice, and the American Way of Journalism have consistently focused their outrage-o-meters at individual townhall attendees, political broadcast entertainers, and the lesser lights of a lame (if resurgent-by-default) opposition party, while letting walk nearly fact-check-free the non-irrelevant occupant of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. If calling out lies and misrepresentations about a significant policy proposal is such pressing journalistic business—and it should be!—you’d think the watchdogs might start with the guy doing the proposing.

The lies last night began in Obama’s opening paragraph. “When I spoke here last winter,” he began, “credit was frozen. And our financial system was on the verge of collapse.” In fact, Obama spoke on Feb. 24, at least six weeks after credit markets began to thaw, and one week after he proclaimed that the passage of his $787 billion stimulus marked “the beginning of the end, the beginning of what we need to do to create jobs for Americans.” Obama’s speech that day wasn’t about staving off a collapse, it was about cleaning up the mess and tackling long-ignored issues. Such as health care.

It’s never encouraging when a politician who desperately needs to convince skeptical Americans of his fiscal sobriety starts off by slurring his words. As you might then infer, Obama was just warming up. “Insurance companies,” the president announced, “will be required to cover, with no extra charge, routine checkups and preventive care, like mammograms and colonoscopies,” in part because such prevention “saves money.” Looks like someone forgot to tell the Congressional Budget Office, or other non-White House sources that have analyzed the cost-benefit of prevention.

Again and again last night, the president’s numbers didn’t add up. “There may be those—particularly the young and healthy—who still want to take the risk and go without coverage,” he warned, in a passage defending compulsory insurance. “The problem is, such irresponsible behavior costs all the rest of us money. If there are affordable options and people still don’t sign up for health insurance, it means we pay for those people’s expensive emergency room visits.” No, it means that, on balance, the healthy young don’t pay for the unhealthy old. The whole point of forcing vigorous youth to buy insurance is using their cash and good actuarials to bring down the costs of covering the less fortunate.

Be sure to read it all.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3

I think all Presidents should be required to give speeches under oath, so when they are caught lying we can throw them out.

Wolftech on September 10, 2009 at 12:21 PM

It’s a sad day for the Office of President. The man has taken it to a new low….

250 years of debate and struggle, then we end up with this.

Oil Can on September 10, 2009 at 12:21 PM

Osama Obama lied. So what’s new?

Someone has to say that. Weasel words don’t cut it.

MrScribbler on September 10, 2009 at 12:22 PM

Frankly, AP is wrong. So is Obama. Why?

There IS no final bill to discuss.

AnninCA on September 10, 2009 at 12:22 PM

You Lie Obama. You lie.
Everything from illegals getting coverage ,to cutting medicare to keeping private insurance.
This manchild is a disgrace to the office of the presidency.

cubachi on September 10, 2009 at 12:22 PM

Why is AP suddenly reporting the truth about Obama?

Outlander on September 10, 2009 at 12:22 PM

If Obama really wants to make a reputation for himself as a mythbuster, he should start with himself.

Not gonna happen. He is, in his own mind, the man who would be myth.

ProfessorMiao on September 10, 2009 at 12:23 PM

Someone needs to fact check Obama’s assertion that we are the only democracy that allows hardships on our citizens becuase I heard India laughing from 3,000 miles away.

myrenovations on September 10, 2009 at 12:23 PM

Thanks for arming us Ed.

shick on September 10, 2009 at 12:23 PM

Obama = Liar

print up the bumper stickers

jp on September 10, 2009 at 12:23 PM

Wilson spoke truth to power, and the AP bears him out. What is so wrong with an accurate observation?

The GOP has got to stop apologizing. When did Reid apologize for calling Bush a liar?

Screw Democrats.

drjohn on September 10, 2009 at 12:24 PM

Along with the illegal immigration, is that fact that there is no funding to enforce the “no illegal immigrants”, therefore they could obtain benefits, and no one would stop them.
Several times there has been action to fund that part of the bill, but it was struck down by the dems.

right2bright on September 10, 2009 at 12:24 PM

Now, he says, “individuals will be required to carry basic health insurance — just as most states require you to carry auto insurance.”

Liberals, in general, and Obama, in particular, are simply incapable of reasoning by analogy.

BuckeyeSam on September 10, 2009 at 12:24 PM

and he lied again about the supposed “Death Panels” being a lie

jp on September 10, 2009 at 12:25 PM

Now if there wasnt a bill…what was Obama talking about last night? How did he defend his bill if there wasnt one? How can he say illegals wont be covered if there isnt a bill?

oh…Obama was lying. Thats right!

becki51758 on September 10, 2009 at 12:25 PM

So much BS, so few shovels…

innominatus on September 10, 2009 at 12:25 PM

But he’s so darn pretty.

*swoon*

Abby Adams on September 10, 2009 at 12:26 PM

I just attempted to send Rep Joe Wilson an email to thank him for having the courage to say the emperor has no clothes.

Unfortunately:

Due to exceptionally high traffic, this site is temporarily unavailable.

Please come back shortly.

I’ll try again late tonight..

If you’d like to communicate with his office here’s the link.

R Square on September 10, 2009 at 12:26 PM

“you lie!” – True. True.

drocity on September 10, 2009 at 12:26 PM

Another evening…another Obama media appearance. Has this guys been president for 8 years already or is it just me? I am hereby dropping my auto insurance and will only repurchase should I have an accident and need body work – I figure this is ok now that preexisting conditions ar en vogue.

Huckabye-Romney on September 10, 2009 at 12:27 PM

The issues brough up with this bill are, apparently, profound.

I personally think it has to do with fear that we’re offering health insurance for low-lifes.

I don’t think that’s the real case. I think we’re offering, or at least should be offering, portable insurance that is honest and affordable.

AnninCA on September 10, 2009 at 12:27 PM

“Lying Lies and the Big Fat Liars Who Lie Them” now flying off the shelves.

Akzed on September 10, 2009 at 12:28 PM

“individuals will be required to carry basic health insurance —

If you can’t demand an ID, how is one going to enforce this?

drjohn on September 10, 2009 at 12:28 PM

It is the Alinsky way…a man without a soul sits in the White House.

d1carter on September 10, 2009 at 12:28 PM

I think credibility is strained a bit when you accept only the parts of the analysis you like and reject everything you disagree with. Either the AP analysis is reliable or it is not, you can’t have it both ways.

Bleeds Blue on September 10, 2009 at 12:28 PM

What I like about Joe Wilson’s, “You lie,” is that it’s in the perfect indicative. In other words, it describes an ongoing situation.

Akzed on September 10, 2009 at 12:29 PM

And Pee Wee replied, I know you are but what am I

bluegrass on September 10, 2009 at 12:29 PM

In poor taste, perhaps, but on analogy to the Got Milk? ad campaign, someone needs to come up with bumperstickers, posters, and T-Shirts with a Spanish version of Got Obamacare?

BuckeyeSam on September 10, 2009 at 12:30 PM

States only require people to carry auto insurance if they drive on public roads.

I heard the best comeback to this:
Yes, I they mandate I carry Auto Insurance to drive, but they don’t require my 3 year old to cary Auto Insurance. They also don’t require my cousin in Manhattan without a drivers license (loser) to carry Auto insurance.

barnone on September 10, 2009 at 12:30 PM

So many lies, too little congressmen pointing them out.

Fletch54 on September 10, 2009 at 12:30 PM

I smell 2 trolls in this thread.

Ignore the idiots. Please don’t feed them.

Knucklehead on September 10, 2009 at 12:31 PM

joe wilson is a true american hero, he entirely derailed the “script” of obama’s “game changer”.

weewilly on September 10, 2009 at 12:31 PM

Anyone listening to Rush? He is on a roll. He is defending Joe Wilson and lambasting the GOP for throwing Joe Wilson under the bus. Terrific radio.

cubachi on September 10, 2009 at 12:32 PM

Ithink credibility is strained a bit when you accept only the parts of the analysis you like and reject everything you disagree with. Either the AP analysis is reliable or it is not, you can’t have it both ways.
Bleeds Blue on September 10, 2009 at 12:28 PM

so the ap’s analysis couldn’t be half-correct? when did this happen? we must either accept all of it or none of it?

weewilly on September 10, 2009 at 12:33 PM

Obama Lied. And Lied. And Lied.

faraway on September 10, 2009 at 12:33 PM

ObamLIaR

New bumper sticker, if I did this right. Two colors. Red and blue. Maybe Green and white, since it involves Obama.

bradley11 on September 10, 2009 at 12:33 PM

Either the AP analysis is reliable or it is not, you can’t have it both ways.

Bleeds Blue on September 10, 2009 at 12:28 PM

Nominated for Silliest Comment Ever Submitted to Hot Air.

RushBaby on September 10, 2009 at 12:33 PM

The biggest crisis pimp in history is tired of “scare tactics”? Puhleeze!

SKYFOX on September 10, 2009 at 12:33 PM

The AP analysis is half right, which is a 100% improvement on the norm.

bradley11 on September 10, 2009 at 12:34 PM

This should be criminal! All facts should be put on the table when such a large portion of our economy is involved, yet this guy keeps twisting and spinning.

Sarah needs to kick his butt some more!!!

joedoe on September 10, 2009 at 12:34 PM

Would someone quickly notify McCain and Graham that Obama told a lie? On second thought, don’t notify them because that might not be the correct decorum as Obama is wrecking our entire country.

mobydutch on September 10, 2009 at 12:34 PM

He lied and granny died…..

joedoe on September 10, 2009 at 12:35 PM

I am Joe Wilson.

You weak-kneed Republicans better get out of the way in 2012 because we won’t be pussies any longer!

omnipotent on September 10, 2009 at 12:35 PM

I heard the best comeback to this:
Yes, I they mandate I carry Auto Insurance to drive, but they don’t require my 3 year old to cary Auto Insurance. They also don’t require my cousin in Manhattan without a drivers license (loser) to carry Auto insurance.

barnone on September 10, 2009 at 12:30 PM

Add to that: My auto insurance doesn’t cover gasoline, oil changes, or tire rotations.

Vashta.Nerada on September 10, 2009 at 12:35 PM

I personally think it has to do with fear that we’re offering health insurance for low-lifes.

AnninCA on September 10, 2009 at 12:27 PM

You’ve been here a long time. I can’t believe that’s all you’ve taken away from these comments here.

It has nothing to do with who’s getting it but rather who has to pay for it. And it has everything to do with liberty in not forcing someone to pay for something they don’t want, either literally, by forcing people to buy their own health insurance or more indirectly by taxing them to pay for other people’s health insurance.

And I’m saying this as an uninsured person.

Esthier on September 10, 2009 at 12:36 PM

The AP analysis is half right, which is a 100% improvement on the norm.

bradley11 on September 10, 2009 at 12:34 PM

you mean 1%

Right now I could care less if AP goes under. But we all know if they do the people working for AP will go else where and spread their 2 minutes of hate.

upinak on September 10, 2009 at 12:36 PM

Fact checking is racist, and I question the timing.

Hening on September 10, 2009 at 12:36 PM

Don’t facilitate Obama’s media propagandizing their “come back kid” fairy tale.–Fred Thompson

Since the CRS analysis has been public for almost two weeks, the AP reporters should have familiarized themselves with it.–Ed

They did familiarize themselves, Ed, in order to fabricate the necessary whole cloth to skew reporting in their Obama’s favor.

As Gadaffi said during the campaign (the campaign prior to the election, not this perpetual campaign since), EGYPTIAN SALE!

maverick muse on September 10, 2009 at 12:37 PM

Anyone listening to Rush? He is on a roll. He is defending Joe Wilson and lambasting the GOP for throwing Joe Wilson under the bus. Terrific radio.

cubachi on September 10, 2009 at 12:32 PM

Rush is right. As usual.

Fletch54 on September 10, 2009 at 12:38 PM

I personally think it has to do with fear that we’re offering health insurance for low-lifes.

AnninCA on September 10, 2009 at 12:27 PM

That is what someone like you would think.

But Esthier is right and you are wrong.

myrenovations on September 10, 2009 at 12:38 PM

Now, he says, “individuals will be required to carry basic health insurance — just as most states require you to carry auto insurance.”

But you don’t need to carry first party coverage unless the bank requires it for the term of the loan. Otherwise, you only need car insurance for the damage you do to others. Neither Uncle Sam nor the states requires that you insure your own car. So he’s no more logical at this point than he is at any other.

On that logic, Sheik Abu Barack al-Husseini al-Kenyi ibn Obooba had better carry a hefty general liability umbrella for the damages he’s inflicting on the USA.

Akzed on September 10, 2009 at 12:38 PM

The whole thing falls apart without the individual mandate. I think that’s where we should start focusing our fire. It’s unconstitutional and totalitarian. And it will be horribly expensive.

Imagine if auto insurance had to cover collisions, oil changes, annual service, tire rotation, brake jobs, broken headlights, etc. And then insurers were told they could not charge higher premiums for people with older cars and bad driving records, or increase premiums when people have moving violations. Auto insurance would be astronomically expensive and the public would not tolerate a mandate to purchase it. As it is now, you can pay a minimal amount for a basic policy, you can choose your level of collision coverage, and if you stop driving a car you can drop your insurance. None of that will be available under ObamaCare.

Also, car insurance premiums are going up dramatically in states with a lot of illegal aliens because they don’t buy it. Nearly everyone in California has a story about being hit by an illegal with no insurance. We will still pay higher health insurance premiums as long as illegals get free care in our hospitals. We will still see hospitals closing because of these uncovered costs.

rockmom on September 10, 2009 at 12:39 PM

Either the AP analysis is reliable or it is not, you can’t have it both ways.

Bleeds Blue on September 10, 2009 at 12:28 PM

so you agree with everything ever written? You read an analysis and say, “why yes, all of this is exactly what I think! Isn’t that amazing?”

You must be continuously suckered by people who put on a pretty show.

mjk on September 10, 2009 at 12:40 PM

Neither Uncle Sam nor the states requires that you insure your own car.

Akzed on September 10, 2009 at 12:38 PM

Exactly. All you’re required to do is to prove you can pay for whatever harm you cause in your vehicle, which is powerful for the destruction it can cause.

But even then, you don’t have to have insurance. All you need is proof that you can pay.

Esthier on September 10, 2009 at 12:40 PM

There are people in every state that drive without auto insurance. And if you think there aren’t, why do auto insurance companies offer, and it is required coverage in some state, “Uninsured Motorist” coverage.

Will Obama require those who do have Health Insurance coverage carry “Uninsured Health Insurance” coverage to subsidies those who don’t buy Health Insurance coverage?

PappaMac on September 10, 2009 at 12:40 PM

I understand that the Republican leadership told Cong. Wilson to contact the W.H. and apologize. Could someone please tell me, who are the Republican leaders??????

mobydutch on September 10, 2009 at 12:40 PM

cubachi on September 10, 2009 at 12:32 PM

I just located the Fred Thompson radio show, AT LAST. Great dialogue between Fred and Jerry, and great callers.

maverick muse on September 10, 2009 at 12:41 PM

OT: Second victory for Beck?

That is how HuffPo is reporting the resignation of the NEA comm. director in light of the controversy surrounding that conference call awhile back.

Joe Caps on September 10, 2009 at 12:42 PM

He’s on TV again can this man say anything w/o distoring or lying about facts? Oh wait NO!

xler8bmw on September 10, 2009 at 12:42 PM

rockmom on September 10, 2009 at 12:39 PM

I agree. If the government can fine it’s citizens for not buying health insurance what’s next?

d1carter on September 10, 2009 at 12:43 PM

Also, abortion is still very much an open issue that is up for the sprited debate. Bart Stupak, and others, are trying to drive a change in language still but have not yet been successful. So it is dishonest to say as a matter of fact that they won’t be covered. They aren’t honest about gov’t role in rationing. The distort the profits of health insurers (about 3% profit margin). The “If you like it, you can keep it” line is deceiving. They are less than honest about the impact a public option has on private insurers. The line “there are some that want to do nothing” is a myth. They lie about who it is that is lined up against the bill. They claim it is only rightwingers and then likens us to nazi’s – that’s a lie on 2 counts. He says in the same speech that he wants to take ideas from all sides, and then minutes later says he wants some people to get out of the way and stop talking. One of those statements has to be a lie since they don’t reconcile. Pelosi and Reid lie regularly about how many votes they have lined up.

stldave on September 10, 2009 at 12:44 PM

He’s on TV again can this man say anything w/o distoring or lying about facts? Oh wait NO!

xler8bmw on September 10, 2009 at 12:42 PM

And he’s bashing those that are “too loud and shrill”.

I will show you what loud and shrill is on Saturday, Barry. Hope you’ll be home to hear me.

Knucklehead on September 10, 2009 at 12:44 PM

Cuda – keep kickin ‘em while they’re down!

Akzed on September 10, 2009 at 12:44 PM

rockmom on September 10, 2009 at 12:39 PM

So what you’re saying is under that plan for auto insurance it would undoubtly be nationalized by the government? Oh yes that’s what your saying and what the intention is under HC plan he will eventually aggreagt EVERYONE under the government and own the insurance companies.

There is no other way to do it because insurance companies are state controlled not federal so to mandate them under federal rules they would have to nationalize them!

xler8bmw on September 10, 2009 at 12:45 PM

“But know this,” President Barack Obama said in one of several such satisfying passages in his health care speech last night. “I will not stand by while the special interests use the same old tactics to keep things exactly the way they are. If you misrepresent what’s in the plan, we will call you out.

Same goes for you, you cretinous buffoon.

MadisonConservative on September 10, 2009 at 12:45 PM

OT: Any legal eagles here, what happens if a person has a statement notarized as having been sworn but doesn’t ever present it to a legal authority? Would it still be perjury?

justincase on September 10, 2009 at 12:45 PM

Isn’t it true that you can like a person without necessarily having trust in that person?–Fred Thompson

It isn’t necessarily hate for Obama that drives his opposition, but the distrust in his gimmicks.

maverick muse on September 10, 2009 at 12:45 PM

Ithink credibility is strained a bit when you accept only the parts of the analysis you like and reject everything you disagree with. Either the AP analysis is reliable or it is not, you can’t have it both ways.
Bleeds Blue on September 10, 2009 at 12:28 PM

so the ap’s analysis couldn’t be half-correct? when did this happen? we must either accept all of it or none of it?

weewilly on September 10, 2009 at 12:33 PM

You’re trying to use the AP to bolster your credibility by citing it as a reliable second opinion. Then you’re saying it’s really not reliable at all. If they’re too stupid to get one half right, there’s no real reason to believe they got the other half right.

Look at it this way — if you were presenting an expert witness in a court case, would you get one whose credibility could be attacked by showing that he was wrong and a huge number of major issues? I think not.

Bleeds Blue on September 10, 2009 at 12:45 PM

Barry claimed the reforms he is proposing would not APPLY to those here illegally.

APPLY…as in APPLICATION of the reforms in practice, not the reforms themselves.

Everyone knows that’s a lie.

Christien on September 10, 2009 at 12:45 PM

That is, if it wasn’t true, would it still be perjury?

justincase on September 10, 2009 at 12:45 PM

Either the AP analysis is reliable or it is not, you can’t have it both ways.

Bleeds Blue on September 10, 2009 at 12:28 PM

What an interesting world you must live in.

lorien1973 on September 10, 2009 at 12:45 PM

Could someone please tell me, who are the Republican leaders??????

mobydutch on September 10, 2009 at 12:40 PM

Bleedsblue told me that Joe Wilson is the leader of the Republican party.

myrenovations on September 10, 2009 at 12:46 PM

Knucklehead on September 10, 2009 at 12:44 PM

From what I understand he has scheduled a townhall and will be out of town. He must be under the mystical impression that if you don’t see/hear it it doesn’t exist!

xler8bmw on September 10, 2009 at 12:46 PM

If Obama told me that grass is green, I would have to check for myself. I think everyone who signs up for this POS healthplan should have to show their birth certificate, starting with Obama……

TXMomof3 on September 10, 2009 at 12:46 PM

If you misrepresent what’s in the plan, we will call you out.“–Obama

Same goes for you, you cretinous buffoon.

MadisonConservative on September 10, 2009 at 12:45 PM

What’s good for the goose is good for the gander. /Or the gooser in Obama’s case.

maverick muse on September 10, 2009 at 12:47 PM

I am Joe Wilson.

omnipotent on September 10, 2009 at 12:35 PM

I like that!! Sounds like a good shout for 9/12 on the Mall!

JellyToast on September 10, 2009 at 12:47 PM

Bleeds Blue on September 10, 2009 at 12:45 PM

You’re trying to use the AP to bolster your credibility by citing it as a reliable second opinion.

That’s not what is going on.

Then you’re saying it’s really not reliable at all

Nor is this.

You are beset upon by windmills.

lorien1973 on September 10, 2009 at 12:47 PM

starting with Obama……

TXMomof3 on September 10, 2009 at 12:46 PM

starting with George Washington…

maverick muse on September 10, 2009 at 12:47 PM

The AP analysis can be right in part and wrong in part.

One doesn’t have to accept all of the analysis.

Just as an expert witness or expert in general can be right in part and incorrect in part.

We all learned about this type of thinking – called critical judgement or analysis – in second grade. Perhaps you were sick that day.

SteveMG on September 10, 2009 at 12:48 PM

Geez, I’m butchering this. Must be the hypoglycemia.

Suppose a person went to a notary public and made a sworn statement, which the notary public signed and sealed as having been sworn, but then takes that paper and puts it in a file somewhere but never tries using it for a legal purpose.

If it is found out later that the statement is false, could that document be used for a perjury case? Or does somebody have to try to use it for legal purposes in order for it to be considered perjury?

justincase on September 10, 2009 at 12:48 PM

Ed, in most states, you are required to have liability insurance if you operate a car or apply for a license. It doesn’t matter if you drive your car on your private property; you still need to have the insurance or equivalent protection.

“A person may not operate a motor vehicle in this state unless financial responsibility is established for that vehicle…..”

You’re required to have liability insurance because you could impose costs on others because of your actions. So how is that different from requiring everyone to have health insurance? To the extent you don’t have health insurance and are treated for free in an emergency room, you’re imposing costs on others.

Jimbo3 on September 10, 2009 at 12:49 PM

OUTSTANDING column.

Lourdes on September 10, 2009 at 12:49 PM

I am Joe Wilson.

omnipotent on September 10, 2009 at 12:35 PM

I like that!! Sounds like a good shout for 9/12 on the Mall!

JellyToast on September 10, 2009 at 12:47 PM

Rep. Wilson walks the walk.

maverick muse on September 10, 2009 at 12:49 PM

Either the AP analysis is reliable or it is not, you can’t have it both ways.

Bleeds Blue on September 10, 2009 at 12:28 PM

Do you really believe this? Do you even understand what you’re saying?

Either you accept a story is 100% true or it’s 100% false? Really?

If the AP analysis is wrong at all, then it’s not reliable, but that doesn’t mean it can’t make a good point or two.

Esthier on September 10, 2009 at 12:50 PM

so what exactly are you saying? that oboobi’s a liar,dis honest or does not tell the truth…snicker.

SHARPTOOTH on September 10, 2009 at 12:50 PM

You’re required to have liability insurance because you could impose costs on others because of your actions. So how is that different from requiring everyone to have health insurance? To the extent you don’t have health insurance and are treated for free in an emergency room, you’re imposing costs on others.

Jimbo3 on September 10, 2009 at 12:49 PM

Does my seven year old need auto liability insurance?

TXMomof3 on September 10, 2009 at 12:50 PM

Justin, it has to be something that would have affected the outcome of a case to be perjury.

Jimbo3 on September 10, 2009 at 12:51 PM

Best response to Obama’s speech last night: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v4KR1zVqizo

cadams on September 10, 2009 at 12:51 PM

Now, in all fairness, HE said he would not add O-N-E DIME to the deficit. But he obviously has no problem adding 3 or 4 or 8 or 9 TRILLION DOLLARS to it!

Why stop at ONE measly little dime ?

stenwin77 on September 10, 2009 at 12:51 PM

I think we’re offering, or at least should be offering, portable insurance that is honest and affordable.

AnninCA on September 10, 2009 at 12:27 PM

Unfortunately, the bills being crafted, and the people hawking them, are neither. Obama and the rest of the liberal Dems are clearly either mis-informed and/or misleading, take your pick. And there are too many credible sources, like the CBO and the CATO Institute, that have studied these plans indepth, and state very clearly that none are affordable.

Don’t forget, liberals in government have choked down the insurance companies for DECADES with regulations to get us where we are today. And now, they want to ride in on a white horse to show us the way out. The true, honest, and most affordable way out is to get the government out of healthcare, not deeper into it.

Phil-351 on September 10, 2009 at 12:51 PM

Why is AP suddenly reporting the truth about Obama?

Outlander on September 10, 2009 at 12:22 PM

Can’t keep it buried any longer?

Back in January, al-AP sampled 20% more Democrats than Republicans in their “polling”. But suddenly this week, it was reduced to a 6% gap. Curiouser and curiouser.

Del Dolemonte on September 10, 2009 at 12:51 PM

Obama’s (unintended consequence) plan for unemployment: new careers available in Fact Checking Obama Speeches. Need to know how to use Google. Endless jobs available but aparently not being filled in MSM,his staff,or liberal blogs. Currently MSM can’t do so has to accept anything Obama administration says as true.

conservativegrandma on September 10, 2009 at 12:52 PM

Does your 7 year old operate a car or motor vehicle, Mom? If he uses an emergency room as an indigent, (s)he’s imposing costs on others.

Jimbo3 on September 10, 2009 at 12:52 PM

To the extent you don’t have health insurance and are treated for free in an emergency room, you’re imposing costs on others.

Jimbo3 on September 10, 2009 at 12:49 PM

Only illegal aliens and those on welfare get hospital care paid for in full by tax payers. All the rest of us citizens get the bill, and must arrange for a payment plan, some through insurance policies and others on their own.

maverick muse on September 10, 2009 at 12:52 PM

the arc of truth bends with the arc of history, i suppose.

blatantblue on September 10, 2009 at 12:53 PM

All the rest of us citizens get the bill, and must arrange for a payment plan, some through insurance policies and others on their own.

–But to the extent they don’t follow through on their payment plan, the hospitals write it off, which increases the costs borne by others.

Jimbo3 on September 10, 2009 at 12:54 PM

TXMomof3 on September 10, 2009 at 12:46 PM

Canada Free Press has an article right now showing that Nancy Pelosi signed a document certifying that Obama was Constitutionally eligible to the presidency. It was notarized.

Then she signed ANOTHER copy with the Constitutional eligibility language excluded. Everything else was the same. The DNC sent only copies of this abbreviated document to the state DNC offices to be used for the official purpose of getting Obama on the ballots. The nominating documents in all 50 states lack the required certification that the pres and v-pres candidates meet the Constitutional requirements.

I don’t know how the documents sitting in the SOS offices in every state can be considered legal for putting him on the ballots, without the required certification of Constitutional eligibility.

http://www.canadafreepress.com/index.php/site/comments/the-theory-is-now-a-conspiracy-and-facts-dont-lie/

justincase on September 10, 2009 at 12:54 PM

Does your 7 year old operate a car or motor vehicle, Mom? If he uses an emergency room as an indigent, (s)he’s imposing costs on others.

Jimbo3 on September 10, 2009 at 12:52 PM

You just said that auto insurance requirement is the same as medical requirement. My three kids are not on my auto policy, they do not have licenses-how do you equate the two?

TXMomof3 on September 10, 2009 at 12:54 PM

“There may be those—particularly the young and healthy—who still want to take the risk and go without coverage,” he warned, in a passage defending compulsory insurance. “The problem is, such irresponsible behavior costs all the rest of us money. If there are affordable options and people still don’t sign up for health insurance, it means we pay for those people’s expensive emergency room visits.”

Wait a minute, is he saying that “the young and healthy” who end up in a hospital without insurance have NEVER paid their bills? Wow!!

Uhm, if we are paying their bills, then just who are all these people he keeps talking about who end up in bankruptcy and in financial ruin because of their health-care expenses then? If people are just walking away and not paying, how could they be going broke?

(Maybe some of it is those illegals – who, according to POTUS, apparently will not be covered by this “universal coverage” anyway, so their hospital bills will STILL BE PAID BY ALL OF US?! – WHAT THE HECK!!!!)

Something don’t smell right here and its not the skunks!

Fatal on September 10, 2009 at 12:54 PM

justincase on September 10, 2009 at 12:45 PM

Yes, because it was notarized and witnessed as to being truth! It’s like you can’t avoid something by saying you didn’t receive the certified copy because they send it reg mail. Ignorance is bliss is not valid defense in a court of law. Willful intent is what you did when you signed it!

xler8bmw on September 10, 2009 at 12:55 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3