Bil Browning

Most. Exciting. Debate. Ever.

Filed By Bil Browning | September 13, 2011 12:00 PM | comments

Filed in: Politics
Tags: CNN, GOP debate, GOP presidential candidates, presidential debates, Tea Party

Last night right before the CNN/Tea Party debate, I sent out a tweet that said, "I know I should care about tonight's GOP debate, but because @CNNLive partnered with Tea Party for it, I think I'll go practice my cursive." The Tea Party shouldn't be recognized enough to co-sponsor a debate with a supposedly impartial political party. It's like having the MSNBC/Obama Presidential Debates...

Little did I know that the debate was going to be a bloodbath! Watch some of the best clips of the snide put downs, bribery insinuations, and the night's most gasp-worthy moment - Ron Paul suggests that someone without insurance should be allowed to die if they can't afford medical care and the audience erupted into applause.

Is it just me or did Jon Huntsman look like a smirking teenager each time he got in a zinger? Sadly, he's the most sane out of all of them too...


Recent Entries Filed under Politics:

Leave a comment

We want to know your opinion on this issue! While arguing about an opinion or idea is encouraged, personal attacks will not be tolerated. Please be respectful of others.

The editorial team will delete a comment that is off-topic, abusive, exceptionally incoherent, includes a slur or is soliciting and/or advertising. Repeated violations of the policy will result in revocation of your user account. Please keep in mind that this is our online home; ill-mannered house guests will be shown the door.


Your comment about Ron Paul seems out of character. He was a physician. We'll see...

There is nothing about Ron Paul in this video. Do you have a direct quote, and a source for said quote?

I invite you to watch it for yourself. Here's what I said, "the night's most gasp-worthy moment - Ron Paul suggests that someone without insurance should be allowed to die if they can't afford medical care and the audience erupted into applause."

Here's the video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PepQF7G-It0&feature=player_embedded

Ron Paul said no such thing. You are lying. He said that when he was a physician in the 60's, people, charities, and the church took care of the vulnerable and that we don't need the government to solve our every problem. I'd really love to find an LGBT media source that is not overtly in bed with the Democratic Party, and especially one that doesn't stoop to lies about the GOP. All gay people aren't liberal.

Nigel,
You actually aren't truthful either. He never answered the question no matter how many times Wolf Blitzer asked it and he did not denounce those in the audience who shouted let him die. He did a vague well in the past but did not say how it should be handled now.

Apparently, we all just need to be completely dependent on our rich churches, which I'm sure Paul believes is a sustainable situation to solve the crushing healthcare problem in our country. Offering a non-solution to a question asking about life and death for real Americans is ludicrous. If you ever wanted a "let them eat cake" response, this is it.

His response to the question of "Should society let him die?" (amidst the enthusiastic cheers of "Yeah!") is to say "Well, he should take responsibility for his risks; that's what freedom is about." What does that imply to you? It certainly doesn't sound like a no. He only then shifts the idea that if this dying person can't afford the care they need to live, then they should turn to churches and charities and their neighbors (which, as already stated, is impractical, privileged, and about as foolproof as trying to hold water in a colander).

In the following statement "If this man didn't take the precautions to ensure that he'd be able to pay in case he gets sick and dies, he has to take responsibility for his his choices ..." the only thing that's missing is for him to literally spell out "...then he should die." "responsibility for risks" and "freedom to take risks" is just sugar-coated side-talk to basically say "yes" or, if you like, the person in question has "the freedom to die".

The audience's response, which he never rebuffs, is grisly and inhuman enough. But Paul's suggestion that a dying person should just "accept that they chose not to buy insurance and then die" otherwise they better have a rich church/family/neighbor/charity to bail them out is disgusting. If that's the best solution he can come up with, he doesn't deserve to be a member of civilized society, let alone the president of the US.

Rachel Bellum | September 13, 2011 9:14 PM

From My Last Weekend: A Health Care in America Story
Filed By Don Davis http://www.bilerico.com/2011/07/my_last_weekend_a_health_care_in_america_story.php

"Fun Fact: bankruptcy is now a big part of the American medical system. In 1981 8% of bankruptcies were related to medical costs, but by 2007 that number appears to have grown to 62%, all this according to the Journal of the American Medical Association. Three-quarters of that 62% had medical insurance.

The Department of Health reports that $591 million in charity care was provided in ‘07, and in the last year for which numbers are available, ‘09, the same cost had run up to $846 million; that’s a 43% jump in just two years. The odds are pretty good that the ‘10 and ‘11 numbers will also show an increase that’s well above the rate of inflation."

Bankruptcy because of health...been there, done that... Shortly afterward, however, my doctors finally figured out what was going on. It's very treatable, thanks to Nobel Prize winning (evil evolutionist?) scientists, though incurable, and most symptoms went away or got better. Still ADD, rather eccentric at times, and have low exercise stamina, though. But, that's much better than a slow, very horrible death fifteen years ago.

Nobody in this thread even mentioned Michelle Bachman's pea-under-the-shell trick on Rick Perry: she claimed as if under rick Perry's executive order, the Texas Vaccine Police would come to your daughter's school, forcibly hold her down and give her a Gardasil vaccine injection. Rick Perry clearly said that his executive order gave parents the right to opt-out for their daughters. Did the media catch Bachman's distort-the-facts tactic? I haven't heard anyone point it out in their coverage of the Gardasil sound bites on either NBC or PBS.

Rachel Bellum | September 13, 2011 10:12 PM

Come one AJ. Clearly this vaccine is an attack on the "innocence of young girls." [sarcasm I swear]

I found that suggestion through Bachman's coded language that somehow this vaccine sexualized young girls troubling. And a little ridiculous at the same time.

Perry claimed to be insulted by Bachmann's suggestion that he could be bought for a mere $5,000.00.

Left unsaid is what his going rate is for selling out the people of Texas.

Being governor of Texas has been very good for Perry, who became a millionaire in office. However, his personal fortune is chicken feed compared to the gazillions racked up by LBJ in the Senate and the White House.

Obama reported assets of $11.8 million in 2010, proving that the White House trumps the state house any day. The Bushes are descendents of a rum running pro-Nazi, as is the Kennedy clan. Nixon became very rich in office but he was beaten hands down by Bill Clintons. Clinton entered the WH with a declared income of $1,620 million (NY Times) and is now worth over $100 million.

They're all crooks. The higher the office the more crooked they become.

Bill, do you have a typo here? $1,620 million equals $1.62 billion.

If Bill Clinton turned $1.62 billion into $100 million ... gee, he must have bought an airline company.

Yep. $1.620 million. He didn't buy anything, he got bought.