Heh. Obama really stepped in it with this white cop.
 

This, our post-racial president.

Obama's mouth will be his undoing.

It will be fun to watch.

Obama should have stuck with what the teleprompter would have said.

Here he is trying to keep the focus entirely on the healthcare issue, and then he goes and starts a race controversy with a cop who wasn't going to back down.

I read the original news reports and it sounded to me like Gates had been extremely defensive and non-cooperative. Now that may or may not be true. But it wasn't clearly obvious to me like it apparently was to Gates, Obama, and the gov. of MA.

Racial profiling is real. I've been racially profiled.

I'd LOVE to see how you would react, Mike and IPU, if a cop showed up in your home investigating you breaking in. I'm sure you'd be all peaceful and cooperative, especially just after returning from a trip across the world.

I'm not sure what you're getting at here. You think Gates' behavior toward the officer is excusable because he was tired?

I've known a few cops (obviously not a statistically significant sample, but bear with me), and by and large, they are trained to remain calm and professional in the face of verbal abuse. They are told it is their responsibility to prevent an incident from escalating. Making needless and senseless arrests is not what they're about.

Obviously there are exceptions to this rule, but the public statements of this police officer, the other officers at the scene, and the official police report don't suggest that he is one of them. By all accounts, he is a model officer and--ironically--has taught a racial profiling class for five years. (That is, how NOT to racially profile.) Another officer at the scene--who is black, by the way--confirmed that Gates was behaving in a manner consistent with his arrest.

But IMO, the more interesting story here is not this man Gates, who I think is clearly a jerk, but Obama, who made a very ill-advised judgment of the situation without having the facts. He unnecessarily inflamed the situation by his response, and, amusingly, totally derailed any momentum he was hoping to build on health care.

Like I said before, there are some evil prick cops out there.

I have literally been tailed by the police for no reason in the past. Trying to intimidate me or something. This was when I was a teenager. I made a bunch of turns just to see if they guy was following me. I finally turned into the parking lot of the stake center, he followed. I parked by the front door, and not being very bright, I jumped out of my car and threw up my hands, like "what the hell." The cop suddenly threw his car into reverse (to avoid my attack?), and then after I am standing there with my arms in the air, drives off. I'm lucky I didn't get killed.

College Station cops are infamous.

You think this story derailed any momentum on health care? Well, you are the same who thought the "bitter" comment or the Rev. Wright story also ended his campaign, so I guess this is par for the course.

This was an unfortunate error by Obama, and one he quickly realized. He is friends with Gates, which I am sure contributed to his rush to judgment. That said, it won't do anything to health care reform. At all.

You can't do something like healthcare reform w/o national consensus. The blue dogs know this. The liberal democrats ignore this, and frankly don't care. They are safe no matter what.

Yes, the GOP lost its way and overreached. You knew the dems would do the same, but you don't necessarily expect them to commit political suicide in less than a year.

You cannot cram something this big down the throat of Americans w/o a national debate, discussion, and finally, consensus. Obama is trying to achieve reform with no debate, no discussion, and no consensus. Good luck with that.

They aren't shoving anything down anyone's throat, other than obstructionist Republicans. 75% of Americans WANT a public option. 75%! Health care reform of the type being discussed right now was one of the cornerstones of Obama's campaign. He ran on it, and people voted for him in overwhelming support. Republicans are trying to scare people now about costs (they don't have much more now that the AMA has signed on), but that won't work because their arguments are fundamentally incorrect. You will see major health care reform within 6 months, and even if you don't, it absolutely will have zero to do with the incident in Cambrige, despite Tex's claims.

Heh. I wonder if anyone even remembers what the Obama press conference was originally about.

Some fun Rasmussen numbers:
- Only 25% believe the "stimulus" package has helped the economy
- 53% of Americans oppose Congressional health care reform; 44% favor it
- Most income groups over $40K/year oppose reform
- 78% believe reform will lead to tax hikes
- 70% rate their own health care coverage as good or excellent
- 50% oppose a gov't-backed health care competitor in the market; 35% favor it

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/publ...th_care_reform

These statistics are far more relevant:

http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/

Going to the "I'd like to see how you would react" card, eh? That doesn't work.

Obama opened his mouth when he shouldn't have and his true self shone through.

2010 elections will be interesting if Obama is running trillions in deficit spending, has increased taxes, crammed an unpopular govt takeover of healthcare and mired us in a war with no economic rebound in sight. Everyone once in a while Americans need to be reminded of what liberals are all about.

Btw, I'm not uppity like Skip. I am yessir and nosir.

Via Drudge:

http://www.cnsnews.com/public/conten...51610&print=on

If members of congress have no idea what's in the bill, how the heck is the average American to know what's in the bill?

That's how they're going to shove socialism down our throats, Mike - discourage the masses to find out for themselves what the politicians are doing so Obama and his ilk can destroy the country with little to no opposition.

It is all part of Obama's dastardly plot to destroy America with no opposition. Doesn't anyone but Il Pad see it? It is brilliant. Obama is actually Canadian, and this is how their mounties will finally fulfill their dreams of crossing the border and enslaving us all!

I never said Obama is Canadian.

Take your condescension and shove it.

Obama is Alien-American. He's from a different planet, and his connection to the mothership is Mr. Teleprompter.

I am just trying to understand the diabolical plot you have uncovered for him to destroy this country. I apologize for suggesting something so crazy as the Canadians taking us over! Your diabolical plot is clearly more rational than that. Does it involve the Mexicans taking us over? Of COURSE! That's why you guys always want us to build a wall! Man- you have really thought ahead on this one. I feel like a monkey playing chess with Kasparov. You are at least 12 steps ahead. Curse you Obama!

You really are an asshole, aren't you?

Obama is a socialist. You smugly tell me that I don't know what socialism is, but I think it's because you're a socialist yourself and you can't admit it.

GM is now state owned.

Obamacare is socialized medicine. Did you miss the part that privatized insurance will become illegal or did you just ignore it? It's right there in the bill. Scroll down to Sec. 102 and read it for yourself under Limitation on New Enrollment:

http://www.opencongress.org/bill/111-h3200/text

And just how is he going to pay for it without skyrocketing tax increases for every citizen? Even you have to admit that he's lying about only taxing the wealthy to pay for socialized medicine. Unless, of course, you don't mind lying to yourself.

That's just a start. Open your eyes and stop being so damned condescending when you respond to my posts. Nobody but you is impressed by your snide remarks.

Just a suggestion, il Pad: don't feed the troll. Take it from a repeat troll-feeding offender.

I tell you that you don't know what socialism is because you don't.

Are you under the impression that the entire US economy is now socialistic because the US owns a controlling share of GM (which they are trying to unload, just as they have already unloaded large portions of ownership of several banks, such as US Bank)? Once again, proof you don't know what socialism means.

More proof you don't know what socialism means, and proof you don't know what the bill says (hint: it doesn't say private insurance is illegal- you actually can read Sec. 102 instead of just recommending other people read it, and you can also note that the bill hasn't been passed and no particular provision of that bill has been endorsed by Obama).

Well, according to the CBO, he very well can pay for it through a tax on the top 1% (which is what he said he would do all along). He could also pay for it by taxing health care benefits, which is what he said he wouldn't do all along. I prefer the latter to the former, but both produce revenue neutrality for the bill.

I hope that is also the end, because it was a miserable start.

Despite your protestations, I know what socialism is. It's obvious that you haven't a clue about it.

I read Section 102. Did you miss the part that said that if one decides to switch to another private insurance company or starts a new job after the 1st year of the program is implemented that they have no choice but to enroll in the government program? Or did you just ignore it and think I'm not capable of reading and understanding what is written?

I'll grant your wish that this is the end.

Fuck you. Fuck your wife and kids. Fuck your parents. Fuck your grandparents. Fuck your in-laws. Fuck your work associates. Fuck your neighbors. Fuck everyone that is in your life that you care about.

You are a condescending shit-for-brained Obama fellating asswipe who suffers from a superiority complex. You are everything that is wrong with the world today.

Ha! I feel like I just took a time machine back to first grade, except that in this time machine, a not-funny version of George Carlin is teaching the class. Grow up.

As for Section 102, there is absolutely nothing in the language that makes private health insurance illegal. Honestly- highlight the language that you think says it will be illegal. Alternatively, highlight language that says if you switch jobs you must purchase government insurance (which was your second argument- please note that even if this were the case, private insurance would STILL not be illegal as you initially claimed). When you can't locate that language, feel free to come back and apologize.

I wasn't playing any card at all, and I was speaking more literally than rhetorically. What I meant is that it seems Gates's reaction was understandable, and I would expect many in his situation to react with anger and frustration (as I understand the facts in this case). I can particularly imagine such a reaction from the more libertarian, gun(g)-ho 2nd amendment types. All of which I say in a nonjudgmental way anyway.

I wasn't commenting on Obama's remarks (which I realize are the subject of this thread) because I don't really care what he said. This topic is useful if we want to discuss race relations, but the political ramifications for Obama is a detour not relevant to that discussion.

Re the socialism points, I will say I have an in at CBO in the health division, and every time this topic comes up I hear about how current proposals are not socialism. I hear it explained like this (this is not my interpretation, but that of my CBO source):

No serious congressional proposal envisions anything close to socialized medicine. The senate and house proposals are quite similar; they would give subsidies to people with low incomes to purchase PRIVATE coverage (such as Aetna, United Health Plan, Cigna, Kaiser, etc.) of their own choosing. People who are offered health insurance through their employer would in most cases continue to get that insurance. No proposal has government-employed doctors.

There are several "live" proposals right now. All of them would retain the current employer-based system of health insurance but would create a health insurance "exchange" for people who are not offered insurance through their employer or who currently purchase insurance in the individual market. People with very low incomes would have access to Medicaid and people with incomes between 150% of the federal poverty level up to 400% would be eligible for subsidies to help them purchase coverage. People would be required to buy health insurance and would be subject to a financial penalty if they did not buy it. Some proposals would include a public plan that would compete alongside private plans. In CBO estimates based on the actual legislative language, they have not concluded that the public plan would be the lowest cost plan, although they believe it would be lower than the average cost plan, just not the lowest. They don't believe it would become the dominant plan but believe it could get significant enrollment because it would be well-known. But people would have choices other than the public plan and some would be lower cost than the public plan.

I know the discussion is not that active over here at the moment. I just thought I'd throw that out and act like I was an expert for a moment.

or to distill what you said in one word: socialism.

So doesn't Gates have to argue that the 911 caller was a racist, for his viewpoint to make any sense?

Gates has acted like an ass.

Look, honestly, it isn't socialism, and I assume you are just trolling.

Let's accept first of all that we are discussing "socialism" within the context of a particular industry and not with respect to the entire US government (i.e., even if the US government were to control the means of production for all health care, it could be described as socialistic with respect to health care, but it wouldn't be a socialistic government in the aggregate, assuming it doesn't control all means of production in all industries, or even most industries).

With health care, people are confusing terms when they refer to "socialized medicine." Nobody is talking about or proposing socialized medicine. That is, in essence, what England has as its model. The doctors themselves are employed by the government. The Congress is not planning to adopt, nor will it adopt, that model. As a result, "socialized medicine" is a complete misnomer.

If the government were to adopt a single payor system (which many advocate, but which isn't even under consideration right now), it could be described as "socialized health insurance" because the government would be the only entity offering insurance. That won't be the case, and isn't being contemplated.

Instead, the Congress is proposing a system where private insurance remains (i.e., it isn't, by definition, socialism) and where the government also provides insurance as a competitor to the private insurance companies. In reality, if people would bother to think about it, we already have the government as a competitor in some limited areas of health care insurance, such as Medicare and Medicaid, and nobody would properly describe our current system as "socialism." And before you get ahead of yourselves in saying the proposed plan will inevitably lead to elimination of all private insurance companies and the establishment of a single payor system, well, the CBO disagrees with you (per its report issued yesterday)..

Careful there, you may be accused of not knowing what socialism is.

In the which case I repeat my question: you think Gates' behavior toward the officer is excusable because he was tired?

a thoughtful response to my detailed post. . .

of course, you have to understand my perspective, which is that socialism is not a bad word. I like a big government. But if you wish to reduce it to terms you mean to be pejorative without any substantial discussion, by all means. . .

I guess I thought a response to this question was implied in my post earlier today. I'm saying it's certainly a factor (among others) that makes his response UNDERSTANDABLE. None of us will probably really, fully, objectively understand what happened. My larger point, however, is that any version of events could lend itself to an interesting discussion on racial profiling or police protocol or neighborhood watches or any number of topics. But instead we start bickering about what the facts really are until we're tired of it, and then we move on without much insight.

it will become progressively more communisitic.

Now they have a public "option." Then they undercut all the other private insurance folks. Then they force large groups to choose the public option--all govt. employees, including state employees, groups that contract with the govt., etc. Then they FORCE doctors to accept the public option. It will be illegal for doctors to decline to take the public option. And so on and so forth.

Well, I have news for some of you. Some of us doctors won't be taking ANY of your stinking insurance, public or not, because the pay is CRAP. "This is my fee. I will provide you with a receipt. You may seek to be reimbursed by whatever insurance you have, that is your business. No, I will not speak to your insurance company."

You will notice one thing that is missing from any of this discussion: incentive to live healthier. Fatty nation, led by a smoking president and a portly Surgeon General will magically administratively lower the cost of healthcare. It's going to be "magic."

One other thing: although the AMA may have endorsed Obamacare (whatever that is, because it's a moving target), the Texas Medical Association (the state wing of the AMA) has not, along with about 17 other state medical associations.

Of course it's a factor. I'm not sure I'd be thrilled to be accused of burglarizing my own home after a long trip either. But based on the available information, it sounds like Gates crossed the line.

Your larger point would be far more interesting if some racial profiling actually took place. One thing that really annoys me about this incident is that Gates and Obama have both tried to use it as a launching point for just that kind of discussion, when it really had nothing to do with it.

Incentive to live healthier is a huge part of this discussion. You haven't been listening. Preventive health care, for example, is one of the primary goals of the new plan.

And you pulled out the communist card? Why didn't you just go straight for the "it's the plan the Nazis would have loved" argument? Sheesh.

Is Texas still a state? I thought you guys took your ball and went home already. ;)

LOL.

http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmi...y_Shut_Up.html