Joy-less Behar’s health care analysis
There was an infantile, pea-flinging discussion of the Graeme Frost case on the Real Time with Bill Maher show last night. Blogger Ms. Underestimated sent word that the classy Joy Behar–a comedian or something–offered her penetrating analysis of why I’m focusing more on opposing middle-class entitlement expansion than stopping the Iraq war.
If you can’t stand the blather, just forward to 2:53 into the segment of the video here. Behar’s side-splitting punchline about me:
“Because she’s a selfish bitch, probably.”
***
Allahpundit: “The one nice thing about leftist-approved attacks like this is that they reset the bar for what constitutes civilized political discourse. File “selfish bitch” away somewhere safe for future use.”
More here.
See what others have said
Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.
Trackbacks
- Hot Air » Blog Archive » Joy Behar: Michelle’s “a selfish bitch, probably”
- MsUnderestimated
- THE SPADE
- Michelle Malkin » S-CHIP and the Democrats’ human shield campaign
- sports car club
- Michelle Malkin » My best friend, Joy Behar
- Michelle Malkin and Joy Behar Must Be Friends! : The American Pundit
- The Liberal (Black) Heart « The Garnet Spy
- Hawaii Ending Universal Child Health Care After 7 Months Because Mamilies Were Dropping Private Coverage So Their Children Would Be Eligible For The Subsidized Plan | Right Voices
Comments
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Categories: Graeme Frost
JustOneMinute
» David Gregory To Host Meet The Press (While Hiding From It)
Belmont Club
» A self-made hellRiehl World View
» Georgia Run-offNewsBusters.org
» Four Years Later, Kerry Admits He's a LiberalHotline On Call
» Obama Records Radio Ad For LA House HopefulPoliPundit.com
» US Capitol Visitor Center OpensPower Line
» Newly-Discovered Ballots Boost FrankenHotline On Call
» The Fix: Martinez To Retire
When you have reduced them to name calling it’s because they have no factual or logical argument.
You’ve won.
Name calling aside….if we can band together and defend our country, why can’t be band together and defend the health of our citizens? Why is sharing sooooo bad? Why are people left to fend for themselves with just a thought of “tough for them - glad it’s not me and I’m not spending a dime of MY money to help”? I am solidly middle class and solidly in debt because I have two sick kids. Is that just my bad luck? Why should I or any American have to play for health care? Are you just basically screwed when you get sick? Why does sharing work up until you’re an adult, then suddenly it’s called socialism?
Perfectly put eaglehaslanded. The word “Socialism” is used to basically scare people by the far right into thinking providing a universal health care system is WORSE than the current mess.
Margret Thatcher in the UK, as strong as a conservative you could get, funded the National Health Service - and every conservative politician has too.
France has a conservative leader and is still supportive of their national health care system - although he has promised to cut some of it into shape.
A national health care system is NEVER perfect and will always run at a loss. But that’s the point - it’s health care for all.. the sick, the poor, the middle class in debt from the huge deductibles…
Which is socialized medicine.
Why should people have to pay for their own car insurance? Everyone really has to have a car these days to make a living, even the high risk drivers, so why shouldn’t that same argument apply to any kind of insurance?
And as long as the government is taking care of the insurance, why not provide people with cars?
People too often confuse rights with priviledges in this Country. The left likes to label social causes as a “right” when they are not rights at all.
You have a right to free speech. A right to practice your religion of choice. A right to equal protection. And those other rights spelled out in the Constitution.
You do not have a right to health care. With the other rights and freedoms you have, you are expected to take personal responsibility for your own life and lifestyle. Your personal choices, which cannot and should not be dictated by the government.
Why should the government be involved in social security? Why do we have a government run postal service? Why do we have government funded public libraries? Museums? What the freak - schools too??!
Close them all down.
Me, Me, Me, Me!
/Welcome to our so-called Christian nation.
the woman is a banchee with absolutely no real argument skills, research and/or truth behind her. Of course she is a bitter hag who has to result to 10th grade insults.
MM. If that was the best insult she could come up with to insult you, you know you are on the right track.
Keep it up, thanks for doing what you do and taking so many “hits for the team”.
She is a moron.
Hey mark your calendars, Behar will have to up against someone with a brain on November 12th when Laura Ingraham co-hosts The View in place of Elizabeth Hasselbeck.
I think I saw it on HotAir first, I hope its still the plan.
There’s the level of hysteria we are used to seeing.
I have not seen anyone here oppose the SCHIP program in its present form. There is a recognition that people do need help at certain times in their lives, and that help includes health care for people even at twice the official poverty level.
What people ARE opposed to it the huge expansion of that program which would create de facto socialized medicine. People need to be responsible for their own lives, and frankly should not be rewarded for irresponsibility. Now if you don’t mind giving up some of your freedoms there is another way to have the government provide for you.
This is available in all 50 states and will be funded by people who choose to maintain their freedoms and work in the private sector.
Have yourself made a ward of the state. You can do this in one of two ways - commit a felony that gets you life in prison or have yourself declared legally incompetent and have the state appointed as your ward and guardian.
You will get free health care, but someone else will make the decision who treats you and how much treatment you deserve. You will be fed 3 meals a day, but someone else will decide how much you need to eat and what you should be eating. You will be provided with lodging, but someone else will decide where you will live and how many other people will share your accommodations. It will not be your decision as to when, if ever, you are permitted to leave those accommodations. And, if you live in Florida, someone you don’t know nor never met will have the authority to tell you when you no longer meet their standards for remaining among the living.
What you are really saying here is that people below a certain income level are legally incompetent when it comes to health care decisions. Just remember there are some pretty big tradeoffs - your choices and degree of treatment will be out of your control.
Nothing in this world is free, and often those things that are seen as “free” come at a heavy price in terms of off your freedoms. If the government is to provide all of your needs, they will control all of your needs. Now, in regard to that statement, you are right in saying that is not socialism. It is not; THAT is communism.
Keep it up Michelle; you know your getting to them when they start calling you names. I think being slandered by those moon-bats is a badge of honor.
eaglehaslanded said:
Name calling aside….if we can band together and defend our country, why can’t be band together and defend the health of our citizens?
Because, kind sir, we band together to defend our country Voluntarily and not at the point of law. That’s the difference.
Engage people’s enthusiasm to donate to charities, and you’ll find folks lining up to help.
Stick a gun in my back, don’t be surprised what my reaction is.
Poor uninformed Joy Behar “a comedian or something”. But what do you expect when this is the context that the Dems and the MSM are trying to frame the debate in? Its just insane.
I actually watched the entire video, and Bill Maher was getting pretty nasty towards Christians at the end. It was rather disgusting and offensive. I hate to say it, but I think he may be harder for me to watch then Keith Olbermann (D).
Exit Question: If Bill Maher had said his offensive comments about Muslims instead of Christians, would there have been a public outrage???
Seem to be late in getting into this. Sorry…gotta love those cool fall days with the fam.
Anyway, what has alsways boggled my grape is why people in this country give such credence to actors and commedians. i mean, the Left’s answer to the Right-Wing dominated AM radio talk shows was an entire network helmed by failed and past-their-prime commedians and disc jockeys. The Liberal’s biggest voices are actors and music stars who have to be told where to stand, what to say and how to say it for a living.
Not only that, but once someone becomes “famous”, they automatically think that anything they have to say on any subject is the most important thing in the world and they are instant experts, be it world conflicts, hunger, homelessness or what-have-you. They mock those that are truly experts and have been educated and become leaders in their fields, and declare themselves the true Masters of All Knowledge, mocking those with degrees on these said subjects.
This show with Bill Maher is no different than the one he had previously. He trots out these “celebrities” and whatever they say on his show is LAW. Forget facts, the very nature of their careers in show biz trumps those, and the vast majority of Americans listen to and believe them. Not really sure what this says for your basic American, but it is not good.
Until such time as this country treats these people for what they are…trrained monkeys who are paid to do nothing more than entertain us…then we will not ever have reasonable discourse done by educated and intelligent people. Instead, we will have such sageful statements like those from Goldberg and Behar when speaking of the Leader of the Free World etc., and the Jerry Springer mind-set will reign supreme.
It reminds you of being in school when the stupid kids in class mocked and threatened the smart kids for making them look bad.
Yeah, government run schools are so much better than private.
HEY! I had cancer and (because I am already considered a bigoted Christian, I will just tell you like it is!
I went to the Social Security office because people with cancer are considered “disabled”. Did I get benefits? Nope. I could not even get in for an interview. Why? I have the wrong colored skin. I am a white southern boy. I watched while Mexicans and African Americans went behind door number one time and time again. I was denied the opportunity to go behind door number one. I had two options:
1. Hire an attorney
2. Sell my boat and car and deal with it.
I sold my boat and truck and bought a 1972 ragged out VW bug and dealt with it. DO NOT give me this CRAP you have to have the government bail you out. You do what you have to do or you take the side of – yes, socialized medicine – and take your chances.
My wife just had emergency appendectomy surgery in Haiti. She was taken to the hospital there and they treated her like a queen. The whole thing cost us less than $3000. Try that here and you will pay over $15,000. Why? Tort law and government involvement. Why does it cost $800 a night for a room here and $69 per night there? Greed.
Oh, yes, we need the government to run things like they run congress whose approval rating is in the toilet!
We will take our chances in Haiti – thank you.
eaglehaslanded #102. That’s so nice. Now that you’ve decided how I’m supposed to spend my money (share it with you)…now let me decide how you are supposed to spend yours. Or maybe I get to decide what kind of house you should live in. How about what groceries you get to eat. You can’t be a little bit pregnant any more than you can decide to be socialized just in this area. Sharing - such a nice word. When it’s mandated, it’s not sharing, it’s taking.
Jim M #104 ….and to further your argument. Am I supposed to fund those who choose to live unhealthy lifestyles? Maybe only the ones who don’t exercise, but don’t over-eat. I’m NOT saying that exercise and diet alone make for better outcomes - but statistically they do.
So, in their infinite wisdom, our government run schools took out exercising because being chased by someone might harm someone’s psyche! So, now, if they get hurt, we have to pay for it.
Funny though, these rich Dimocraps do not want to “share” their wealth say – with me. Most of them could give me a million bucks and never miss it. Do you think they will? Nope but, they want us middle class folk to
share”.
Dimocraps do not play nice.
Come on! You are a big girl,Michelle.
Any remarks from the left,is a compliment.I suspect if Joyless wanted to keep her coush gig ,on the view,she had to tow the commie/puke,al-Qeada line,or loose her gig.When she tried stand up comedy,she had enough produce thrown at her,to open a salad bar.Branson was full up,so the view was all that was left.
I hope Tucker got vaccinated before going on there.
So, I go to school, work very hard, sacrifice, suffer, eat Ramen until noodles come out my ears until I am educated and trained enough to go out into the world, fight for a good job, starting at the bottom and working very hard, not calling in sick, staying late if need be, coming in on my days off until I finally get that good paying job I wanted and fought for with the bennies and such in order to be a responsible human being and member of my community…only to go and give so much of a percentage of my paycheck out to the government in order to ay for someone else who has decided that they do not need to do all those things because the government will take care of them? that “screw those rich people, they can afford to cover me. What right do they have to keep all the money they worked for when I need insurance but don’t want to put forth the effort to get it myself?” people? Where would the incentive be for people to exceed in life once the government starts providing things?
they tried this out once on a grand scale. It was called The Soviet Union. I guess that 17 years is a very long time in people’s memories. It seems people in this country have forgotten all about the lines upon lines of people waiting for all those “government services” that are being fought for here. People have forgotten that the physicians that were there, had no incentive to become greater at their craft since greater knowledge DID NOT equal greater pay and thus, they could not prctice medic ine anywhere else BUT the USSR because they couldn’t qualify as physicians anywhere else. I guess people have forgotten how many Soviet children would have to be treated here on special Humanitarian Missions because they were unable to be treated for their afflictions in the greatest Socialist experiment of all time.
You know, I am really sorry that some people do not carry health insurance. It is available for all people out there if they want it. Everyone pays for their own, including those with jobs. If you are so concerned and caring and loving of your families as you claim, then you would be doing everything you can to protect them, instead of all this whining about wanting other people to spend their hard earned and fought for pay to cover you.
Like I said, I have been a Paramedic for quite a few years, and if you people think that the Emergency Rooms are over crouded now, just wait until people do not have to pay for it anymore and start using them like a clinic because it takes 3-4 months to get a doctors appointment.
Just wait until the physicians here no longer get paid what they deserve for all the extra schooling and knowledge they acquire. Wait and see what happens to the care of patients in this country when people only learn the minimums of what they need to get by because it is not worth the expese and effort to learn more.
It is very easy to want someone else to take care of you. The hard part is doing it on your own, but that is what it means to be an adult, and it is far past time for all these Liberals to grow up.
Jim M #7.
Up until fairly recent times, the left controlled the flow of information.
I’d like to know your justification for this statement. How exactly did the left control the flow of information. What are the facts that lead you to what conclusion? Can you site specifics?
You HAVE to be kidding!!!!
#121 Jim M. NO I AM NOT KIDDING. You make a very serious accusation, so what are the facts that lead you to that conclusion? FACTS, not a conspiracy theory about the left controlling all of the main stream media. Can you tell us when did it start, when did it end, can you site any specific instances? If one makes such a accusation, they should be able to substantiate it. So, what are your facts? An adult dialogue on your thoughts would be appreciated.
Does Bill Mahr still have a t.v. show?I thought he disappeared long ago.
Don’t do it Jim. Facts? And the media is not biased in the left direction.
No win Jim. Don’t bother.
It is not possible to have an adult dialogue with someone either exceedingly naive, in perpetual denial or one that poses the question for the purpose of baiting another person.
It is pretty obvious that your agenda here is to disrupt and shift the focus from the topic at hand. The way the question was asked, and certainly the follow-up, are strong indications that the question you asked was posed for purposes other than getting an answer. A reaction, yes, but an answer, no.
I should ask what proof you have to offer as to why the conclusion is wrong. But I won’t waste the bandwidth, because there is no such proof.
On my soap box #124. I was raised to be responsible for both my actions and my words. We can damm the Frosts for being irresponsible for their inactions regarding not buying health insurance, and we can damm celebrities for their irresponsible words. Jim M makes a very serious accusation, so I am asking him to be responsible for his words. If he can’t substantiate his statement, then maybe next time he should phrase his comments more in the context that “it is my opinion that the left controlled the flow of information”.
Jim M. Good try at trying to evade an answer. I am not naive, in denial (of what I may ask), don’t have an agenda, am not trying to disrupt anything or shift the topic of conversation. I am trying to have an inteligent discussion. You made the initial comment and all I am asking you to do is substantiate what you have said. You write very long detailed comments and are often quoted by other writers on this site. Therefore it would appear to me that you are someone that carries some credence with the audience. So you make a very broad, serious accusation. All I am asking you is what FACTS do you have to back it up. I take your evasion of the question to mean you in fact were expressing your opinion rather than an actual fact.
Jim M. #125 - I should ask what proof you have to offer as to why the conclusion is wrong. But I won’t waste the bandwidth, because there is no such proof.
PS, I didn’t make the initial asertion. You show me your’s and I’ll show you mine.
You can take my comments any way you want. What you refer to as an “accusation” I call a statement of fact. There is more than ample information available to anyone who wants to make a minimal effort to look into the issue for themselves.
You are the one attacking the statement I made claiming it to be nothing more than an accusation. You have an issue with it, rebut it and back it up. You cannot put forth any proof to the contrary, because there is none.
So why not stop tossing that red herring around - makes your motives here seem a bit “fishy”.
I will give you one thing - you are pretty good at baiting people. Keep working at it, and you will achieve “master” status.
Jim, Thanks for the “master” compliment. I’ll throw one back at you, you are a “master” at evading a question. Have you undertaken the “minimal effort to look into the issue”? I would suspect the answer is no. I think you’ve provided all the “facts” on this topic that are needed. Thanks for expression your OPINION.
Ah, you have achieved the next level.
Les (aka “MasterB”), it is not an opinion it is a fact. And I have certainly expended more than minimal effort on the topic. You do not believe it is true, then it is incumbent on you to refute it.
I’ll start you off: “Jim, I don’t agree with your statement that the left controlled the information flow. My research from 1960 to present day, indicates…”
It is not evasive on my part to ask you to support your claims here. Frankly, that is the way adults converse.
All you have to do is to look up the contributions towards which party was made by thesse organizations. You will see that it is by far and above in the Lib/Dem corner. The statement of “until recently…” is in referrence to people being able to get their information from other sources now via the internet and not just through the Left leaning MSM.
It is a well known fact that for years and years, since at least the 60’s, the MSM has been leaning and reporting with Left-Wing and Liberal slants. The reporting on the current war itself is proof of their Liberal slant, as they have repeatedly refused to report anything good that has happened there every single day, have spread lies and disinformation, National Secrets, and generally have nothing good to say about a single REpublican. There is virtually no reporting on the Republican candidates at all while we are assaulted daily with the latest times that the three Dem front runners go to the bathroom.
For you to even feign indignation and ignorance as to the Leftward leaning press just speaks volumes of your own predjudices and where you stand. Since it all speaks what you want it to do, you think it is just honky-dory. Thus, when one station out of the many doesn’t lean Left, it is attacked, ridiculed and called a “Propaganda machine for Bush”. Sorry you guys can’t handle the competition and having the mirror held up to your face.
Jim M, let’s go back to square one. You initially made the assertion; in fact you said that you have said it before. I simply asked you to substantiate your position. For some reason you are unwilling or unable to do that. If you make such harsh accusations and you don’t want to be challenged, you should state your comments as opinion, not fact. In the real world, not the anonymity of the internet, one needs to be willing to back up what they say with facts. You are unwilling to do that, and I won’t take your bait of trying to turn it around for me to verify (some would call that a typical liberal avoidance tactic). Again I say, when you provide me your proof, I’ll provide you mine. I’ll end my discussion with you on this topic here.
And RetFireman, thank you for the factoid. According to opensecrets.org, which tracks PAC money, you are correct in stating that the media gives more money to Democrats than to Republicans (media: ‘02 - R23%, D77%; ‘04 - R30%, D69%; ‘06 - R36%, D64%). That said, I’m not sure that this proves that “Up until fairly recent times, the left controlled the flow of information”. One can hope that the media’s higher contributions to Democrats has as minimal an impact on the flow of information as does the tobacco, insurance and pharmaceutical industries higher contributions to Republicans has on the current health care debate (tobacco: ‘02 - R79%, D21%; ‘04 - R74%, D26%; ‘06 R74%, D26%; pharmaceuticals: ‘02 - R74%,D26%; ‘04 - R66%, D34%; ‘06 - R67%, D31% and insurance: ‘02 - R69%, D31%; ‘04 - R68%, D32%; ‘06 - R64%, D34%). I provide this information at the risk of being called off topic, but I believe they are valid points to bring up in contrast to RetFiremans information. I may be naive, but I hope that our politicians be they Republican or Democrat, are looking out for our best interest, not for the interest of the industries that are giving them the big bucks. Thanks again RetFireman for stepping up with some facts and engaging in some intelligent discussion.
Les,
There you go again. You just provided information that supports and not disproves the original statement. While you were at it, you managed to toss another scarlet fish into the mix.
Your persistent flailing reminds me of a knight of old:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2eMkth8FWno
You made the challenge - back it up. That’s not turning anything around on you. It is asking you to apply some rational and cogent thought and support to your position rather than crying “liar, liar”. Say, you’re not related to Joy Behar, are you?
Jim M, so now you have resorted to name calling. How old are you? I will end it here. I left childhood games long ago and I will not stoop to your level.
As they say, put up or shut up. Let’s see how you twist that one around.
Isn’t it past your bed time? What time do you have to be at school tomorrow morning?
sausage #103. Let’s review. Socialism is getting the public (ie. everybody else) to pay for something that you don’t or won’t pay for. It is totally irrelevant whether or not any other country has it. Your argument is like a kid who says to their parents “well everybody else is doing it”. Just because everybody else is doing it does NOT make it right. A bad idea is still a bad idea.
Joyraldo Behrvira.
les….I don’t want to really enter the middle of your squabble, but you might try looking at the reporting by the anchors of the three major television networks over the past 40 years. What stories do they report, what don’t they report? How do they report them? You also might try looking at the candidate endorsements of the major newspapers around the country.
I will openly admit I am biased toward less government, personal responsibility, absolutes,and many other things considered conservative. If I were a reporter, it would be impossible for me not to have my personal worldview affect my reporting. Even if I didn’t purposely slant my reporting, my bias would still exist even in what I chose as newsworthy. Let me give you an example: I could report that the Peterson’s cat was up the tree, I could report how the Peterson’s didn’t keep their cat locked in their house, I could report how they didn’t de-claw their cat, I could report how they didn’t follow the leash laws, I could report how the fire dept. came to get the cat, I could report how much it cost for the fire dept to come get the cat. Don’t tell me there isn’t bias in the news.
Jim M’s statement is well documented. The MSM is indeed left leaning and their reporting is left leaning.
LOL,
The left would have gone after the person who planted the tree.
oh but look at the carbon offsets. That presents some major kind of dilemma.
Les
For proof of the left wing bias of the MSM I would suggest you go to the OpEd page of The New York Times, LA Times or practicaly any large city newspaper. It should be obvious to any intelligent reader that their opinions do influence their reporting. I’ll give you one example, which, years later still galls me. The Atlanta Journal Constitution, a very left wing paper, close to Christmas several years had several days before Christams its main headline: CLINTON GIFT TO HOMELESS: $500 MILLION. The story went on to gush about the generosity of Bill Clinton and how badly needed the money was.
In reality, the gift was not from Bill Clinton but from the American people. Congress (at the time Republican) had to approve this gift. Nowhere was there any analysis whatsoever of the need for the money, or how it was to be spent.
Sure , this is just one example. And surely by itself is not proof of left wing bias. But this happens all the time. I could list thousands of such stories if I took the time to document them.
As seen by Ms. Behar, the IQ of the Left is a constant. The population keeps increasing.
The what? Is this one of those community access things?
My laugh of the day so far.
It’s only called socialism when the government enforces sharing at gunpoint. More to the point, we can band together and defend our country (by which you mean raise an army and fight a war) because the Constitution expressly enumerates that power with respect to the federal government. Show me where the Constitution enumerates a specific power to the federal government to provide medical care to anyone indpendent at someone else’s expense.
If you can’t do that, perhaps you would tell me why you think there is a written Constitution in the first place, and under what circumstances it should change.
Where on Earth did you get “name calling” from my last post? There seems to be a serious issue with reading comprehension here.
Nice of you to finally show your true colors with the holier than thou posturing and the weak age retort.
The information is not difficult to find. Do your own research. Since I truly doubt you would believe any information I posted, your only purpose in continuing to whine has noting to do with getting an answer, and everything to do with hearing yourself talk.
Grow up and post your own thoughts with support rather than continuing your now ridiculous attack on a statement of fact that even most on the left would not question.