Democrats & Liberals Archives

Lies, Damned Lies, And Stati... Actually, Not Even Statistics, Just More Lies

Sarah Palin is at it again. In an op-ed in today’s Wall St Journal (which should be ashamed of itself) she opines that it is no wonder that “…many of the sick and elderly are concerned that the Democrats’ proposals will ultimately lead to rationing of their healthcare by - dare I say it - death panels.”

Go ahead, Sarah. Dare. Dare to lie to the very sick and elderly you profess to care about. Dare to lie to the entire country, for that matter. Dare to lie to yourself, because I don't believe you can actually be as stupid as you sound, and so you must know that you're lying.

Palin is an ugly character. She is the ultimate fear-based politician, worse even than Dick Cheney perhaps. She has no ideas or creative streak of her own - her purpose is not to build policies that will improve her country, but to destroy the plans and strategies of others. She's essentially a black hole for hope, change and development.

Say what you like about Sarah Palin - and I like to say that she's a liar, an ethically-compromised cheat, and - dare I say it? Oh do! Do! - an idiot - but she certainly does galvanize the opposition. While a majority of Republicans think she's a qualified candidate for 2012 it's a fairly slim majority. Meanwhile you'd find it hard to find a Democrat in the country who wouldn't gouge out their own eyes rather than have Palin in the White House. Hillary Clinton was supposedly polarizing, and so the Democrats opted for another path; surely the Republicans, despite their sordid love affair with this nasty little person, will have to do the same.

I've said it before and I'll say it again: if Palin is the best the Republicans can come up with, I look forward with great anticipation to the next competitive presidential race in 2020.

Posted by Jon Rice at September 9, 2009 11:06 AM
Comments
Comment #287770

I don’t believe she has presidential aspirations. She wants to make money. This can be discerned from interviews with none other than Levi Johnston who comes across quite credible. She is saying the right things to make money.

As for her position on health care, since any rationing is abhorrent, and if you can afford it you can of course have what you want, she apparently wants unlimited free care for everyone. Is socialist the right word for that or is it something worse?

Posted by: Schwamp at September 9, 2009 11:57 AM
Comment #287771

Anyone who claims she has been unfairly criticized in any way is a partisan fool who won’t admit it!

Posted by: Mike Falino at September 9, 2009 12:05 PM
Comment #287774
Levi Johnston who comes across quite credible.

Um, not defending Palin here, but what makes you think that Levi is in the least bit ‘credible’? I don’t think I could trust a word he says…

Posted by: Rhinehold at September 9, 2009 12:28 PM
Comment #287775

Rhinehold / Schwamp: I have to agree with Rhinehold - even if what Johnston says seems not just possible but likely, you still have to question his motives and credibility.

Posted by: Jonathan Rice at September 9, 2009 12:44 PM
Comment #287776

The Republicans need Palin. They are fast becoming a regional party, the south. They hope to add Alaska as part of that regional party.
Just remember that you can tell when Sara Palin is lying, her lips are moving.

Posted by: C. T. Rich at September 9, 2009 12:50 PM
Comment #287777

Why do folks on the Right respect this woman? Is it the brazen way she confronts liberals? Brazen isn’t good enough. Brazen gets your party filled with a bunch of boldly spoken things that aren’t necessarily true. It walks your party out onto the plank of promises you can’t fulfill, and lies your people can’t back up.

Any good wrestler will tell you your footing has to be good, or you will easily lose balance. With folks like Palin considered leaders in the party, Republicans have no footing from which to effectively fight a Democratic Party when it chooses to get serious.

And they’ve helped make the healthcare fight serious.

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at September 9, 2009 1:00 PM
Comment #287778

Umm Rhinegold/Jonathan,
In case you guys don’t realize it, teenagers are good at lieing about what they did last night. Manipulative political backstabbing is a skill guys don’t learn till they’re 30. Girls learn at about 12.

Posted by: Schwamp at September 9, 2009 1:26 PM
Comment #287780

While I don’t support Palin as a presidential candidate and disagree with her on numerous issues, let’s at least give the woman some credit here.

She overcame almost every obstacle and disadvantage that not only a woman but a human being could face on her path to becoming a highly prominent political figure.

I see an enormous amount of pure and simple sexism in the contempt that’s being heaped on her for getting down and dirty and playing political hardball with the boys. Are male politicians thought of this way when they make arguments that the other side of the debate consider to be “lies” and “cheating?” Is it that you think Palin should get back into the kitchen, have another baby, and just shut her mouth? Why do we want to hold a woman to a different standard, than say, Howard Dean or Rahm Emanuel?

And what’s the difference between somebody like Palin and Hillary Clinton after all? One came from privilige, was able to attend Ivy League colleges, and then became a national candidate on the basis of who she was married to. The other was raised poor in an obscure backwater of the country and then pulled herself up by her bootstraps on the sheer virtue of her own grit and determination. You don’t have to love or admire the woman, but she deserves a lot more respect than her detractors are willing to acknowledge.

Posted by: Paul at September 9, 2009 2:10 PM
Comment #287782

Paul: it’s not sexism. She’s a liar. I have no respect for liars, whether male or female, privileged or otherwise, Democrat or Republican - and I have criticized plenty of Democrats who have lied to us in the past. Palin is simply the worst because she repeats her lies over and over in the face of the truth. They are repeated by right-wing talking heads and become an accepted truth by those who choose not to find out more. Her lies are, because of her influence, shaping a debate that is worthwhile and important, and distorting the playing field to fit her personal ideology: I realize that politics is about changing people’s minds, but do it with the truth, not with blatant, fearmongering, outrageous lies.

Posted by: Jonathan Rice at September 9, 2009 2:34 PM
Comment #287785

Hillary sprung from a middle class family…privilige may be a pretty strong word.

Posted by: Marysdude at September 9, 2009 2:44 PM
Comment #287786

I think Palin knows Coulter is failing as the spokesperson for the lunatic right, and is vieing for the position.

Posted by: Marysdude at September 9, 2009 2:47 PM
Comment #287787

Johathan, perhaps then people ought to read the entire article themselves in order to decide whether it contains “fearmongering, outrageous lies” instead of just a different point of view from yours, and perhaps one you don’t want to be heard.

Here it is.

As for “death panels,” of course supporters of publicly managed healthcare don’t like the use of such language, and it’s unthinkable that a phrase liked “death panel” would ever be put into a bill.

The fact is, however, that expensive medical treatments with low success rates that might be given to terminally ill patients and the elderly will have to be denied in many cases under a publicly financed system. And who will make these decisions? If the government runs healthcare, then it will be government officials.

You might say with perfect justification that we ALREADY have what amounts to “death panels” when private insurance denies payment for these treatements, which they do every single day. That is 100% true, and it’s not a pretty fact.

It’s not without justification, however, to be uncomfortable with the idea that even if somebody has to make these hard decisions sometimes, that we’d have government doing it. It’s also at least worth looking into whether or not there would be more instead of less of such expense-slashing under public rationing of care. I don’t know the answer to that, but I don’t blame the “sick and the elderly” for at least being worried about it and demanding answers, which is pretty much all that Palin said in that article.

Posted by: Paul at September 9, 2009 3:10 PM
Comment #287788


I think we are missing the point with Palin. She has great appeal with many Republican supporters because she is like them. She isn’t a big thinker. She has gut instincts and core values and as a result, she knows the truth when she hears it.

If Rush and Glen’s goose steppers took the time to examine some of the issues that the pundits rant about they would realize that they aren’t being very truthful but, they don’t do that do they. Their gut tells them what is true or not and they know the truth when they hear it.

Palin is like this. She can repeat lies while believing with all her heart that they are truths.

Posted by: jlw at September 9, 2009 3:10 PM
Comment #287789

Yep nothing like scaring those seniors some. At least Palin didn’t do it from Facebook this time.

Here’s another scare ad going around:

Factcheck.org

Posted by: George at September 9, 2009 3:30 PM
Comment #287790

not to go all biblical on everyone, but states men/women will surround themselves with what they want to hear, and instead of truth, will listen only to myth. i think palin is one to spread lies, and myth. will lie to justify her own deeds. when i think HOW a palin can come around and be taken serious (by the right), that passage sheds light.

does the right/wrong really look to her? this is where they want to send money (to her pac)? this is the horse they are backing in a race? is their cause so off track that they look to her. does their hope rest on a wink of an eye, or a crinkle of a nose?

i think not. the dire straights left by bush has us as a country looking for more than just a cosmetically pleasing figure. she may reach the few remaining wing nuts, but each time she opens her mouth facts shut her down. bad thing, doesn’t stop her from starting more lies. she is toxic, her speach is toxic, and quite frankly, in 3 more years she will be older. beauty fades, as she will too.

Posted by: bluebuss at September 9, 2009 4:02 PM
Comment #287791

Palin speaks the truth…..Goverment run health care will ration just like it does in every other country. When you ration someone is making that decision and he/she is on a panel. So I guess it speaks for itself.

Posted by: Kirk at September 9, 2009 4:27 PM
Comment #287792
She has great appeal with many Republican supporters because she is like them. She isn’t a big thinker.

This kind of thing is interesting, and I’ll be the first to admit that there’s a very similar thing that Republicans do.

With some Republicans, it’s all about their superior morality as they face down a bunch of corrupt and depraved moral retrobates. With some Democrats, it’s all about their giant brains and the awesome intellectual megawattage they shine into every dark corner of the world.

But of course, Republicans on the whole are not really any more or less moral than anybody else, and anyone can point to any number of examples to prove it. And Democrats, well, you can find any number of them who think that once they’ve learned to tie their own shoes and subscribe completely to left wing ideology, they’ve become the intellectual creme de la creme.

Posted by: Paul at September 9, 2009 4:59 PM
Comment #287794

Let’s assume for a moment that Sarah Palin is lying. It’s perfectly all right for those on the left to lie about a person or policy, but its not all right if it is a conservative does the same thing. Okay, I guess there is logic there somewhere?

Concerning lies about “death panels”. Obama promised he would cut the costs of healthcare. Where is he going to find these cuts? The main group of people who need healthcare is the elderly. Young people and most middle-aged people don’t need extended, expensive health care. Now, the question is, how is Obama going to cut the costs of healthcare to those who need it most? I’m sure, even those on the left, can understand the fear the elderly feel at being forsaken, and not receiving proper care.

Lastly, concerning scaring seniors. For as many years as I can remember, about 6 months before ALL elections, you can always count on liberals to start running the political ads warning of SS and Medicare cuts to the elderly by republicans. Nothing more needs to be said.


Posted by: propitiation at September 9, 2009 5:27 PM
Comment #287796

I think some people decided they liked the Johnstons better than the Palins when they were originally interviewed and showed Bullwinkle roaming freely around their house without any fear of hostile gunfire.

HRC’s former home at Rodham corner near here is pretty nice, and large by the standards of the 1950s. Factually, she was the chief wage earner in her family for most of her married life until WJC wrote his bio.

Posted by: ohrealy at September 9, 2009 6:28 PM
Comment #287798

propitiation - read the bill - it says nothing related to so called death panels. Factcheck.org says: “It falsely says that a comparative effectiveness research panel set up earlier this year could limit care based on a patient… Read More’s age, when in fact the law expressly prohibits the council from issuing such mandates. And the RNC implies, wrongly, that seniors who meet with their doctors to discuss end-of-life care could have their treatment cut off involuntarily. In fact, these discussions would be voluntary and any directives limiting treatment would have to come from the patient.”

So yes, talk of death panels is a crock of excrement. Palin knows this yet keeps on with her lying as do all that spout such nonsense.

I am sorry that the conservatives are so upset that we call Palin an idiot, a nit-wit, a liar, a fear monger, ill-informed, un-curious, stupid, or someone with more ego and ambition than intellect. It is because she is. If you don’t want these insults hurled at you candidates then your party should run some more qualified people. It’s not sexist to call her these things, am I sexist for calling George Bush the same? Or George Allen? Or Jim Bunning? There are plenty of idiots with a “D” next to their name too, my congressman Rick Boucher is one. It is being a little over sensitive to get all bent out of shape because we criticize some saying that the President is trying to pull the plug on your grandma.

Posted by: tcsned at September 9, 2009 6:40 PM
Comment #287802

paul & ohrealy,

I guess the whole thing comes down to the definition of the word ‘is’? I see privilege as those who have been given much without having to put forth the corresponding amount of work or energy…many of the Kennedy’s, Astor’s, Cobot’s Rockefeller’s, etc. It is hard for me to see Hillary in that catagory. If my ‘is’ is incorrect, mea culpa…

Posted by: Marysdude at September 9, 2009 7:26 PM
Comment #287804

Mdude, the standard in civilization is that it’s okay to criticize people who are better off than you are, and tacky to be critical of people who are worse off than you are. We’re told here that any criticism of BHO, and a number of other people, is “racist”. I’m critical of the POTUS because he’s been critical of people worse off than him, not critical of R Burris because he’s worked hard for his whole life, critical of T Stroger because he inherited his job, not critical of E Jones3 because he wants to work hard even though he inherited his job.

I met someone a few years back who has recently been appointed to the board of trustees for the U of I after deciding not to run for the senate. He runs a large company here that employs thousands, and was born on the 4th of July in the year that his uncle was assassinated, 5 years before his father was assassinated. I didn’t know who he was. When I met him in a group of people with his 2 daughters, postcards for Irish tourism, I said “You look like you should be a Kennedy”, and he introduced himself and shook my hand saying, “I’m Bobby’s son Chris”. That’s the way civilized people treat eachother in this country.

Posted by: ohrealy at September 9, 2009 8:05 PM
Comment #287806

Palin was finished for me when she gave up on the job in Alaska. Still, it is fun to have her out there because she makes liberals so spitting mad. You guys have Al Franken and Michael Moore.

I would be very surprised if she became a serious candidate. She is one of those sorts of people on an extreme who people purport to support until the real crunch comes. The late Edward Kennedy was like that for liberals as he learned when he faced off against the formidable Jimmy Carter. Some people are interesting and provocative but beyond the pale as real candidates.

Bash Palin all you want. I enjoy the way she can lead Democrats around like the matador with his red cape. You all get so mad at her and charge, but she just steps away.

Ohrealy

Very nice thought. It works for individual affairs in polite company. But certainly the boss has he duty to criticize a bad employee. We have the right and duty to criticize free loaders.

A lot of people who do nasty things end up worse off than others. It is sort of what they have coming and should not make them below criticism.

Posted by: Christine at September 9, 2009 8:42 PM
Comment #287807

Of course government healthcare means rationing. It’s either the market place doing the rationing (buying the health care you can afford), or the government making decisions on how to spread finite resourses.

Since the Elderly are the ones who use most of the the resourses of course they want as much control as they can hang on to.

Seniors have rightly figured out that as the major consumers of healthcare they have the most to loose. Polls cosistently show Seniors the most skeptical of Obama’s health care plans. I think they are right to be skeptical.

Posted by: Craig Holmes at September 9, 2009 8:47 PM
Comment #287809

Craig,

Seniors have the most to lose at the hands of a greedy, noncompetitive industry. They are right to be skeptical of cynics who offer nothing but innuendo and baseless scare tactics. The time for this gamesmanship is over.

Posted by: gergle at September 9, 2009 9:02 PM
Comment #287811

I am in no way mad at Palin, red in the face, or otherwise fired up about that woman. I just take offense at being called sexist for not thinking she is smart, informed, or honest. She is irrelevant, she was irrelevant as govorner, and as VP candidate. I lose no sleep over her nor do I conduct regular hand wringind sessions in her honor. I will call her out for her lies, deceptions, and public stupidity when it becomes a topic. Al Franken, on the other hand, while you obviously do not like him is smart, well informed, and honest. He graduated, with honors from Harvard with a degree in political science. He is funny, sarcastic, and very liberal which makes him hated by those he has insulted or made the butt of his jokes.

Just watching Obama’s speech and he has really hit a homerun. Hope it’s not too late.

Posted by: tcsned at September 9, 2009 9:09 PM
Comment #287814

President Obama gave a great speech. He always does. Speechifying is his primary skill set. If he is telling the truth and if his assumptions are correct, and if the Democrats in congress will go along, and if our luck holds, it would be wonderful.

If is the operative word. We trust all our presidents, but somebody has to count the costs and run the numbers.

Posted by: Christine at September 9, 2009 9:49 PM
Comment #287815

Christine: I may have said it before but it bears repeating - I enjoy your contributions because I see considered opinions and not dogma. I can be as guilty as anyone of holding onto outdated beliefs beyond their sell-by date, so I enjoy your clear preference for maintaining a political belief system but also being open to other ideas. Your comments are a credit to Watchblog.

Posted by: Jonathan Rice at September 9, 2009 10:05 PM
Comment #287818

I’m sorry to offend the believers, crushers, and fans, but when BHO speaks, he reminds me of Nixon. I kept saying to Bonnie, that’s a lie, that’s a lie. It was nice to see Boehner and Kantor sitting there glumly. The Dmcrts are in power because their opposition is even more useless.

Posted by: ohrealy at September 9, 2009 10:29 PM
Comment #287823

tcsned:

I see you have not lost your mastery of the king’s english.

Posted by: propitiation at September 9, 2009 10:53 PM
Comment #287827

Christine:

“President Obama gave a great speech. He always does. Speechifying is his primary skill set.”

I don’t ever find much to disagree about with you, but this time I must. It was not Obama’s speech; it was the teleprompter’s speech. Remember how the dummy sat on the knee of the ventriloquist and he would move the mouth of the dummy as he spoke the words. Well, Obama is the dummy and the teleprompter is the ventrioquist.

Posted by: propitiation at September 9, 2009 11:08 PM
Comment #287833

propitation,

Mortimer?

Posted by: gergle at September 10, 2009 1:23 AM
Comment #287838

Hopefully Obama has finally taken this debate from the two-year olds who have been in control of it up to now. Joe Wilson (R-SC) should be made to stand in the corner and miss snack time for his childish outburst, even my two-year old knows better. Obama rightfully put the GOP in their place by telling them if they have something constructive to say he will listen but he is done listening to crazy talk and people whose only agenda is to stop any reform because some health industry lobbyist has paid them to do so.

Posted by: tcsned at September 10, 2009 7:12 AM
Comment #287847

tcsned - you speak my language. joe wilson is an embarrassment to the republicans. his outburst was completely disrespectful. repubs should be ashamed, but will not be. they will glorify him, and call him a hero. he is a zero. his scream was nothing more than ignorance. i have never seen such a hateful, cowardly, and unfounded yell. can you imagine what would have happened if a democrat would have yelled like that at bush? s/he would have been tarred and feathered and sent out on a rail. and a part of me wants that to happen to him.

back to palin - just another ignorant ill informed repub - they are popping up everywhere. i guess bush closing all the mental hospitals show that there are real consequences. they are now representing the repub party.

Posted by: bluebuss at September 10, 2009 11:18 AM
Comment #287853

I’m more surprised that the readers and writers on this forum actually believe that she was the primary author of that article. Nothing that I have seen of her leads me to believe that those words originated from her mind.

Posted by: bandman at September 10, 2009 1:31 PM
Comment #287854

The problem with Palin is that she’s one of those people who is good at the social end of politics, but can’t run much or think about much worth a damn. Since Republicans, as a party, have decided government is evil and bad and should merely be diminished, they’ve developed a deficit of those who can actually run things well, improve government and reduce waste. In it’s place, they have penny-wise, pound-foolish ideologues, whose industry influenced legislation all too often makes deficits worse.

People say Obama sucks without a teleprompter. I would say he does worse, but only relative to his extraordinary speaking skills on script. If you actually listen to what he says, you’ll find he still clearly presents his ideas. He’s not lost without a teleprompter, just not as graceful.

Palin was worse. Look at her debate performance. She left people reacting like that duck from the Yogi Berra AFLAC Commercial. It doesn’t help that when she does speak fluently, it’s the old standby rhetoric of her party, or her own brand of partisan vitriol.

It really doesn’t help Palin that she combines her Rush Limbaugh Raw with Minnesota Nice. She ends up coming off like an evil Marge Gunderson (the Lady Sheriff from Fargo). The tone of her voice drives people up the wall. It feels nastier for its pleasant chipper tone.

She was supposed to be An Obama in age and a Hillary in gender, but she lacks the best qualities of both.

I don’t think Republicans should worry about Obama’s less fluent off-script talking until they can get Palin to speak in coherent arguments and not tick people off as a matter of habit.

Propitiation-
Your argument is zombie powder for a lie that should rest in peace, shot dead from a helicopter with a high powered rifle.

The original argument is utterly debunked. This argument you offer is a fallback rationalization that pretends to represent the original logic or the actual claim, but doesn’t really do much besides wallpaper over the glaring contradiction of the facts of whats in the bill, and what she claims is there.

Why is this done? To bring a dead argument back to life. To keep on going with a demonstrably false argument by lying about what the argument was about, and worse yet, doing it with an overreaching argument about what might happen as a consequence- consequences that in fact may be just a figment of the person’s imagination.

All too often, this seems to be the way conservatives argue, so as to not lose their applause lines, their supporter stirring BS.

The trouble is, there’s a limit to people’s credulity, and nothing disquiets people more about folks in power than those who lie and lie and lie remorsely, even as they are called on their dishonesty over and over again.

Posted by: Stephen Daugherty at September 10, 2009 1:42 PM
Comment #287855

You Betcha’

Posted by: gergle at September 10, 2009 1:57 PM
Comment #287857

Gosh! I swear I saw a response that compared Sarah with Hilary. No comparison. Hilary is smart, sophisticated and positive.
Oh, and shes got brains.
thanks

Posted by: john at September 10, 2009 2:17 PM
Comment #287861


Propitiation:

I wasn’t overly impressed with Obama’s speech but, your ventriloquist act is a day late and a dollar short. Bush isn’t president anymore.

Posted by: jlw at September 10, 2009 2:42 PM
Comment #287870

winking is just blinking w/crow’s feet.

Posted by: bluebuss at September 10, 2009 4:02 PM
Comment #287900

Sarah Palin is a pin-up girl for the Geezer Overtly Perveted [GOP],party! She is a sad figure,and an idiot!! HEY REPUBLICANS!,please convince her to run for national office. She is the best representative of the political right,stupid,shallow,and OUT OF OFFICE!!

Posted by: Bill M. at September 11, 2009 12:47 AM
Comment #287942

It looks as if all LIBERALS are scared of Palin.

Posted by: chuck at September 11, 2009 4:40 PM
Comment #287968

Chuck we are scared, no really we are, please do your best, make sure she gets top billing on the repubs ticket in the 2012 election. We will be shaking in our boots, promise.

Posted by: j2t2 at September 12, 2009 9:10 AM
Comment #287998

A though occurs to me in Plain’s defense. If indeed she has no aspirations to political positions at this point, and yet is still devoting her life to what she clearly (if, in my opinion, erroneously) believes in, perhaps she is that rare breed of politician who sees the world one way and wants others to do the same. Perhaps she seeks not power, but merely influence. I will continue to call her on her awful tactics, but if this is indeed her motivation then perhaps she deserves a little more respect. I will watch for that in future.

Posted by: Jon Rice at September 13, 2009 12:12 AM
Comment #288007

Jon:

Either way she’s much too acerbic for me.

Posted by: womanmarine at September 13, 2009 10:11 AM
Comment #288020

>It looks as if all LIBERALS are scared of Palin.
Posted by: chuck at September 11, 2009 04:40 PM

chuck,

Most liberals that I know are merely disgusted with Palin, and the folks who hang onto her words.

Fear? Perhaps we fear that the ‘ignorance farm’ (present day GOP), will find a way to place her, once again, in a position of power, but we don’t fear HER as much as we fear the ‘ignorance farm’ (barnyard rednecks and separatist bark-shooters)…

Posted by: Marysdude at September 13, 2009 12:40 PM
Post a comment