George Bush

Sarah Palin
Image via Wikipedia

The St. Petersburg Times’ Pulitzer Prize-winning website, PolitiFact, this past Friday named Sarah Palin “death panel” allegation as the “Lie of the Year“. Palin’s lie was selected by the site’s editors after a poll of 5,000 readers demonstrated overwhelming support for the choice.

PolitiFact here recounts the lie which earned the site’s coveted “Pants on Fire” designation back when it was originally promulgated:

The former governor of Alaska had been out of the headlines since she announced her resignation on July 3; the Facebook message instantly brought her back to the political stage.

“As more Americans delve into the disturbing details of the nationalized health care plan that the current administration is rushing through Congress, our collective jaw is dropping, and we’re saying not just no, but hell no!” Palin wrote.

“The Democrats promise that a government health care system will reduce the cost of health care, but as the economist Thomas Sowell has pointed out, government health care will not reduce the cost; it will simply refuse to pay the cost. And who will suffer the most when they ration care? The sick, the elderly, and the disabled, of course. The America I know and love is not one in which my parents or my baby with Down Syndrome will have to stand in front of Obama’s ‘death panel’ so his bureaucrats can decide, based on a subjective judgment of their ‘level of productivity in society,’ whether they are worthy of health care. Such a system is downright evil.”

The claim that House legislation contained anything resembling a “death panel” is demonstrably false. It did cause much needless anxiety, particularly among senior citizens, including my own parents, and seriously compromised the quality of the national discussion on healthcare reform.

Palin never renounced her lie. Instead she defended it, as in an interview with the National Review in November:

“To me, while reading that section of the bill, it became so evident that there would be a panel of bureaucrats who would decide on levels of health care, decide on those who are worthy or not worthy of receiving some government-controlled coverage,” she said. “Since health care would have to be rationed if it were promised to everyone, it would therefore lead to harm for many individuals not able to receive the government care. That leads, of course, to death.”

“The term I used to describe the panel making these decisions should not be taken literally,” said Palin. The phrase is “a lot like when President Reagan used to refer to the Soviet Union as the ‘evil empire.’ He got his point across. He got people thinking and researching what he was talking about. It was quite effective. Same thing with the ‘death panels.’ I would characterize them like that again, in a heartbeat.”

Whenever the ex-governor of Alaska distinguishes herself in this way, it warms our heart to step back and listen to noted Palinite and 6th District Congressman Peter Roskam’s reflection on Sarah Palin’s “centeredness”:

So much for Congressman Roskam’s judgement.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]
Tagged with:
 

Thanks to Kitty Kurth for this news:

Peter Roskam, who is diametrically opposed to almost everything that Barack Obama stands for and is a member of the McCain leadership team, has been trying to peel off Obama voters. But, Obama supports Jill Morgenthaler for Congress in Illinois 6th District.

“While we’re pleased that Barack Obama continues to attract support from across party lines because of his long record of working with Republicans and independents to bring change, he believes Congressman Roskam would continue President Bush’s failed policies and is supporting Jill Morgenthaler for Congress.”

Justin DeJong, Illinois Director of Communications for Obama for America

Jill Morgenthaler’s press release is here.

It appears that Peter Roskam, a member of the McCain-Palin leadership team in Illinois has jumped shipped and that Roskam has hitched his campaign to that of Barack Obama. Roskam’s campaign committee has recently erected a web site entitled Obama Voters for Roskam, an apparent endorsement of Barack Obama’s radical socialist agenda for America.

This, of course, raises all kinds of new troubling questions about the ethically challenged Peter Roskam and his fitness for office:

Does Peter Roskam approve of  Barack Obama’s plan to take your money and redistribute it to poor black people? Is Peter Roskam a Communist? Why does he hate America?

Does Peter Roskam know Bill Ayers and did Ayers help Roskam with his campaign? Does Peter Roskam pal around with terrorists? What is the nature of Roskam’s association with Jeremiah Wright?

Is Peter Roskam a member of ACORN? Is Roskam involved in voter fraud?

Is Peter Roskam an Arab terrorist too? What’s HIS middle name?  Is he friendly with Osama Bin Laden?

How much do we really know about Peter Roskam?

Re-electing Roskam to Congress would be just too dangerous.  That’s why I’m voting for Jill Morgenthaler.

I haven’t found much time for blogging lately. I’m transitioning to a new role at work and when I haven’t been working I’ve been transfixed by the Presidential contest and our rapid descent into recession or worse. But when I saw this little ad on the Huffington Post today it shocked me into activity. Yes, Peter Roskam, desperate for your vote in what appears will be a Democratic landslide year, is attempting to ride Obama’s coat tails into a second term. And yes, this is the same Peter Roskam who is serves on John McCain’s Illinois leadership team. I nearly aspirated my Diet Pepsi when I saw this.

Apparently Roskam is not sure his nasty campaign of of character assaults against Jill Morgenthaler is going to fail in much the same way that John McCain’s nasty campaign against Obama is failing. Roskam would like you to believe that voting for both Barack Obama and himself would be a reasonable thing to do. It would not. Here’s my “voter guide” to explain why.

  1. Roskam is helping to lead John McCain’s campaign in Illinois. He wants John McCain to become President. He wants this because he and John want to do very different things than Barack Obama. They would like to see less rather than more regulation of the financial institutions that got us into such trouble during the “anything goes” Bush years. They want to privatize Social Security, turning what’s left of your retirement funds over to Wall Street, not because it’s good for you, but because its good for Wall Street. They want to abolish the minimum wage and regulations providing equal pay for equal work. They don’t like government regulation generally and would work against rules protecting workers from hazards in the workplace or protecting our environment for our children and our  children’s children. They want to continue the trend of redistribution of wealth that has taken place during the Bush years – taking more and more from the middle class and transferring it to the very wealthy. They will do this through regressive taxation – relieving large corporations and wealthy individuals of the obligation to pay their fair share, transferring that burden to the rest of us. They continue to embrace the failed “trickle down” theory of Ronald Reagan in spite of it’s obvious failure. They want to appoint extremist judges to the Supreme Court and take away every woman’s right to chose, banning abortion even when the life of the mother is at stake (you heard McCain say it in the last debate). They want to continue to undermine the religious freedom that we enjoy in this country by further eroding the wall of separation that has existed between Church and State since the foundation of our nation. They want to continue to allow big oil companies to grow richer at our expense by continuing our dependence on fossil fuels rather than implement strategies to conserve and develop alternative sources. And they would continue the Bush pattern of military aggression aimed at controlling the world’s scarce resources rather than engaging in cooperative action with other nations to solve the serious problems the world faces.
  2. Peter Roskam has not raised a single objection to all the many abuses of the Bush administration: the lies that were told to justify the ridiculous war against Iraq, the torture and illegal detention of prisoners, the illegal domestic spying, the outing of Valerie Plame, the politicization of the Justice Department, the Abramoff scandal, the looting by government contractors in Iraq, and on and on. By his silence, Roskam bears moral responsibility for all of them. Roskam is without a moral compass.
  3. Peter Roskam has done nothing in Congress except obstruct the efforts of the majority to tackle our problems. He has consistently used his vote to set up roadblocks to Democratic eforts to tackle problems such as the health insurance crisis, high energy prices, global warming, the shrinking middle class, and the plight of the poor. In order to succeed in office, President Obama will need legislator who will work cooperatively with him. Hyper-partisan Peter Roskam is not such a person.
  4. Roskam is insensitive to the needs of the poor and the middle class. He has consistently used his vote to aid the wealthiest americans and large corporations at the expense of the rest of us. On the basis of his voting record, Roskam was awarded the grade of F by themiddlelass.org and the grade of D by the Sargeant Shriver National Center on Poverty Law.
  5. Rather than use his vote to address the needs of his constituents, Roskam consitently votes for the benefit of large corporations. He has vote the U.S. Chamber of Commerce position 100% of the time. In return the the Chamber is running false adds, like the one below, claiming that Roskam is fighting for better health care. In fact, Roskam has voted multiple time against the expansion of the Children’s Healthcare Insurance Program and against parity in mental health benefits. Peter Roskam is an enemy of efforts to provide better healthcare to all Americans. He has demonstrated by his votes that he is only interested in protecting the pocketbooks of his corporate sponsors.

I urge Obama voters who might seriously consider voting to re-elect Roskam to take a close look at his voting record. There’s lots of links here that can help you do that.Even the solidly Republican Chicago Tribune has endorsed Roskam’s opponent. Roskam has used his office to serve special interests rather than to serve the majority of his constituents. He does not deserve to be returned to Washington.

Earlier this month, Peter Roskam voted to give a big gift to telephone companies: retroactive immunity from civil lawsuits for their role in George Bush’s illegal scheme to spy on Americans. Peter Roskam, would tell you, no doubt, that large campaign contributions from telephone companies and Roskam’s close personal ties to lobbyists for Verizon had absolutely no influence on his vote to obliterate the constitutional rights of his constituents. 

The vote came on 6/20. The bill was H.R. 6304, FISA Amendments Act of 2008. This so-called “compromise” on FISA allows the federal government to conduct mass untargeted surveillance of all communications coming into or going out of the country without any need to seek court approval, even if there is no evidence of wrongdoing. In those circumstances where court review is required, where there is a specific target, a prior court order is not required and the courts are not allowed to know who is being targeted. They may only review general procedures for establishing targets. When a court rules against the government it will be allowed to continue spying while it exhausts all appeals. The measure allows no effective check to the power of the government to spy on Americans and no effective oversight regarding the manner in which it applies that power.

The gift to the telephone companies contained in the bill is the assurance it provides that all lawsuits pending from the companies’ illegal activities in support of the Bush spying program will be dismissed. It does this by changing the standard so that the companies are not required to have received a legal order – any order is fine. ATT, one of Peter Roskam’s largest campaign contributors, and Verizon, who’s lobbyist’s Jason Roe and Kirsten Mork have close ties to Roskam, are no doubt pleased by this provision. Maplight.org, a campaign finance watchdog group , found that those lawmakers who voted for the bill received, on average, twice the amount in donations from large telephone companies.

Roskam’s vote is just one more example of his consistent pattern of giving a “rubber stamp” of approval to the worst abuses of the Bush administration and of placing corporate interests over the interests of his constituents. Voters who care about civil liberties should contact Roskam to protest his vote. Roskam can be reached at his Washington office at (202) 225-4561 or in Bloomingdale at (630) 893-9670.

Before the FISA amendment becomes a law, it faces a vote in the Senate. That vote has been delayed until next month. Concerned voters should also contact Senators Durbin and Obama to pressure them to do the right thing and protect our civil liberties and deny immunity to the telephone companies that have broken the law.

Peter Roskam has signed on as co-sponsor to H. CON. RES. 362, a resolution intended to dramatically escalate tensions between the United States and Iran and take another step toward George Bush’s and Dick Cheney’s dream of yet another war, this one against Iran.

This resolution, if passed, would express:

the sense of Congress regarding the threat posed to international peace, stability in the Middle East, and the vital national security interests of the United States by Iran’s pursuit of nuclear weapons and regional hegemony

Further provisions include:

  • Declaring that preventing Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon is vital to our national security interests and must be dealt with urgently
  • Urging the President to impose sanctions on banks and energy companies doing business with Iran
  • Demanding that the President initiate immediately and dramatically an international effort to increase pressure on Iran to verifiably suspend uranium enrichment activities by imposing a blockade
  • Urging the president to “lead a sustained, serious, and forceful effort at regional diplomacy to support the legitimate governments in the region against Iranian efforts to destabilize them, to reassure our friends and allies that the United States supports them in their resistance to Iranian efforts at hegemony, and to make clear to the Government of Iran that the United States will protect America’s vital national security interests in the Middle East.

All of this language, of course, is highly ironic, given that it is the United States that has disrupted peace in the Middle East through its unprovoked invasion and occupation of Iraq, and that the U.S. has been attempting to destabilize Iran for years, and that the U.S. Middle East policy is pretty much all about the U.S. maintaining hegemony in the region. The U.S. has been complicit in nuclear proliferation in the region and our “friend and ally” in the region, Israel, has been a nuclear power for years. If anybody poses a real nuclear threat of obliterating anyone else it is the threat that Israel poses to Iran. Israel has a right to defend itself. But does not Iran also have that same right? Iran has no history of aggressive war in the region. Both the U.S. and Israel do. Who is posing the real threat to peace and stability?

What this is all about mostly, is winning the U.S. election this fall, even if doing so has to mean armed confrontation with Iran, or at least threatening such confrontation.

Just as when Bush attacked Iraq, this build-up is all being based as an attempt to enforce United Nations resolutions. But the chief of the United Nations’ International Atomic Energy Agency denies that there is any urgent danger. Mohamad ElBaradei told Al Arabiya television in an interview:

“I don’t believe that what I see in Iran today is a current, grave and urgent danger. If a military strike is carried out against Iran at this time … it would make me unable to continue my work,”

“A military strike, in my opinion, would be worse than anything possible. It would turn the region into a fireball,” he said, emphasizing that any attack would only make the Islamic Republic more determined to obtain nuclear power.

“If you do a military strike, it will mean that Iran, if it is not already making nuclear weapons, will launch a crash course to build nuclear weapons with the blessing of all Iranians, even those in the West.”

Just as in the case of the war against Iraq, Bush & Roskam & company are basing their campaign for a new war on lies. Iran has renounced the use of nuclear weapons as contrary to Islamic law and the United States’ own intelligence estimate concluded that Iran halted its nuclear weapons program in 2003. Despite this the United States has continued feeding the IAEA incorrect reports of nuclear sites.

Bush’s war against Iraq has brought the U.S. economic misery, cost thousands of young lives, and is rapidly leading us to $5/gallon gasoline. Meanwhile it has cost Iraq a million excess deaths due to violence, almost a third of them at the hands of the U.S. War against Iran will bring more of the same, and worse.

If you live in the 6th district and want to stop this chain of agressive wars, please contact Peter Roskam and demand he renounce his support for Bush’s new war against Iran. Roskam can be reached at his Washington office at (202) 225-4561 or in Bloomingdale at (630) 893-9670.

Page 1 of 3123