Hillarysworld

Members Login
Username 
 
Password 
    Remember Me  
Post Info
TOPIC: You Want Context? Drudge Will Give You Context. (8-4-09 Weekly Standard)


Moderator

Status: Offline
Posts: 135
Date:
You Want Context? Drudge Will Give You Context. (8-4-09 Weekly Standard)
Permalink  
 


You Want Context? Drudge Will Give You Context.
by Mary Katharine Ham

This morning, the White House pushed back on Drudge's promotion of this video:



Linda Douglass, formerly a totally objective reporter with ABC News, appears in the below video in an attempt to debunk the first video. She does this by saying, essentially, "Obama's critics are lying about the President by using words that came directly out of his mouth on video. Now, here are some other things that Obama has also said on video more recently that are different from the stuff in the first video."

No kidding. Obama has said entirely different things at different times to different audiences? "As I've consistently said...."



Despite copious coverage this morning, a top link on Drudge, and the Politico dubbing it a "viral campaign," Douglass' dreary video is up to only about 350 views. The original attack video is logging more than 400,000.

As the White House should have learned by now, picking a fight with a guy like Drudge can be counterproductive, just like picking a fight with say, Rush Limbaugh. Today, Drudge responds with the uncut version of this 2003 video of Obama advocating single-payer, government-controlled health care, but warning that it will be a gradual process:



That video has 22,000 views right about now. If I were the White House, I wouldn't have lashed out at a guy like Drudge unless I had something stronger than Douglass' weak refutation to combat all that fear-mongering coming straight from Obama's own mouth.

Phil Klein examines the charge that Obama was taken out of context in-depth, here. Bottom line:

Taken together, I think this highlights Democratic double-talk on health care. When speaking to liberal audiences who want a single-payer system, Democrats will argue to them that offering a government-run plan within a government-run exchange is the politically pragmatic way of getting to a single-payer system over time. But when addressing the general public, they talk about the government plan merely as something that will provide people with “choice” and foster “competition.” They don’t get to have it both ways.



__________________


Administrator

Status: Offline
Posts: 2818
Date:
Permalink  
 

LOL gotta love em

__________________

4459303562_3f593359a2_m.jpg



gold

Status: Offline
Posts: 95
Date:
Permalink  
 

Thanks BuffaloBoy for posting this!

Out of Context I don't think so! 

Bashing Insurance Industry Is Effective Message For Dems, Internal Poll Says

As you’ve heard, Nancy Pelosi has armed Democratic members of Congress with a stark message to use back at home selling constituents on health care reform during August: Opponents are nothing but stooges of the insurance industry.

There’s a reason Dems will stick to this script: An internal poll conducted for House Dem leaders, which I’ve obtained, tested a range of Dem and GOP messages and concluded that the anti-insurance industry line is the most convincing of all messages from either side.

As a result of the poll, the accompanying polling memo tells House Dems to relentlessly describe reform as something that will take power away from the insurance industry.

The survey — taken in 60 battleground districts — found that when people were asked whether they believed reform would shift “power from insurance companies to people,” 62% found it very or somewhat convincing, with 39% finding it “very convincing.” Asked if the “status quo means insurance companies are in charge,” 61% found it convincing.

The poll also lends some comfort to Republicans, testing GOP messages and finding them effective. The most persuasive GOP attacks: That reform will “further bankrupt the country with trillions more in deficit spending,” which 59% found convincing, and that reform means treatment will be “decided by politicians” and “bureaucrats,” which 58% found convincing.

The polling memo gives Dems their script: “Be clear” that reform will transfer “control from insurance companies to the people,” it says, instructing them to “build a narrative about taking power from the insurance companies and giving it to people.”

Ultimately, the poll shows that the leading Dem messages hold a small edge over the GOP ones, though the margin is small, suggesting that the August health care wars will be touch and go. When you hear this language coming from Dems, you’ll know why.



http://theplumline.whorunsgov.com/health-care/bashing-insurance-industry-is-effective-message-for-dems-internal-poll-says/





-- Edited by JamieKuuipo on Tuesday 4th of August 2009 10:08:35 PM

-- Edited by JamieKuuipo on Tuesday 4th of August 2009 10:09:07 PM

__________________


gold

Status: Offline
Posts: 95
Date:
Permalink  
 

Nancy Pelosi speaks to reporters.
Nancy Pelosi: 'The glory days are coming to an end for the health insurance industry in our country.' Photo: John Shinkle

Speaker Nancy Pelosi outlined a doubled-edged message for selling health care reform in August: one part pro-consumer and the second, attacking the health insurance industry with the same passion she took on George W. Bush’s Social Security privatization plans four years ago.

 

“The glory days are coming to an end for the health insurance industry in our country,” Pelosi told reporters Friday afternoon.

 

“This is about inoculating against misrepresentations and educating about what is in the bill,” she said. “We all want bipartisanship…but you’re either with the insurance companies or you’re for something new.”


Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0709/25679.html#ixzz4SDG2XAJC




__________________


Diamond

Status: Offline
Posts: 4567
Date:
Permalink  
 

I dont get it. Why have they not created the conditions necessary for the insurance companies to compete? Why is it necessary for the government to enter the market to "end the glory days for Insurance companies"?  Or, is it the intent of the government to enter the market and cream it?

I do not agree with that last statement.
“We all want bipartisanship…but you’re either with the insurance companies or you’re for something new.”

There is an assumption in that statement that those are the only two choices. I am on both sides of that choice, without abandoning the insurance companies. How presumptuous of a government to one fine day decide that one market sector is highly profitable... possibly because the government has failed to provide sufficient rules to keep the profitability in balance over service needs of the people.  The fault is squarely that of the government. There is no need to sneer at capitalism that has paid taxes for its lawful money motives and profitmaking.

Now if the government decides that all insurance of health should be considered non-profit because of the noble objective, I wold understand that a bit more. But I suppose that might take some of the revenue away from the government.  Ooops.. So much for looking down on Insurance companies.

Dont get me wrong here. I dont think Insurance companies have been minted with blood in their heart. But the minting and the feeding is definitely subject to SOME regulatory control. Once again, I blame the government for failure to set the stage correctly.

__________________
Democracy needs defending - SOS Hillary Clinton, Sept 8, 2010
Democracy is more than just elections - SOS Hillary Clinton, Oct 28, 2010

Madam Secretary Blog at ForeignPolicy.com
Project Vote Smart - Stay informed and engaged!


gold

Status: Offline
Posts: 95
Date:
Permalink  
 

Sanders wrote:

I dont get it. Why have they not created the conditions necessary for the insurance companies to compete? Why is it necessary for the government to enter the market to "end the glory days for Insurance companies"?  Or, is it the intent of the government to enter the market and cream it?

I do not agree with that last statement.
“We all want bipartisanship…but you’re either with the insurance companies or you’re for something new.”

There is an assumption in that statement that those are the only two choices. I am on both sides of that choice, without abandoning the insurance companies. How presumptuous of a government to one fine day decide that one market sector is highly profitable... possibly because the government has failed to provide sufficient rules to keep the profitability in balance over service needs of the people.  The fault is squarely that of the government. There is no need to sneer at capitalism that has paid taxes for its lawful money motives and profitmaking.

Now if the government decides that all insurance of health should be considered non-profit because of the noble objective, I wold understand that a bit more. But I suppose that might take some of the revenue away from the government.  Ooops.. So much for looking down on Insurance companies.

Dont get me wrong here. I dont think Insurance companies have been minted with blood in their heart. But the minting and the feeding is definitely subject to SOME regulatory control. Once again, I blame the government for failure to set the stage correctly.




Exactly



 

 

 

 

 

 

 



-- Edited by JamieKuuipo on Wednesday 5th of August 2009 06:50:02 PM

__________________


Diamond

Status: Offline
Posts: 521
Date:
Permalink  
 

So far, BHO, his campaign, and this administration has purported that we all have been victims of "big business"; of capitalism.

Not once, have I ever heard one good thing about America from these people--NOT ONCE! Just like ACORN, they take the weak, poor, and our youth and convince them our "old" American government has been taking advantage of them. That this "new world government" should be giving to them instead of the opposit.

This "movement" is getting smart. They're using the word "insurance" more and not reform for their health care. I certainly hope this doesn't get passed, but I think they will despite the fact Americans don't want it.

__________________


gold

Status: Offline
Posts: 26
Date:
Permalink  
 

Someone needs to tell Nancy that she is coming dangerously close to sounding like President George Bush.

__________________
Page 1 of 1  sorted by
Quick Reply

Please log in to post quick replies.

Tweet this page Post to Digg Post to Del.icio.us


Create your own FREE Forum
Report Abuse
Powered by ActiveBoard