I'll bet they put a hit on the clown at the kid's birthday party, too
Thomas Keister
October 15, 2007
With growing public discord over the veto by President Bush of proposed expansion of the SCHIP program, I found it particularly classless, but typical of the wholesale apathy by the GOP and their right-wing media machine, going after a 12-yr kid. The kid, Graeme Frost, suffered severe brain injuries in a 2004 auto accident, and is a textbook example of why programs such as SCHIP are so vital for the increasing number of Americans teetering on the edge of health coverage.
Soon after Frost appeared in a radio address, calling out Bush, more or less, for his appalling lack of prioritization in regards to the nation's children, the right-wing grind took a step back, picked up their wrenches, and tightened the wheels. Not just the corners of the right blogosphere, but the heavy hitters of the brass knuckle crowd, including Michelle Malkin, questionable Nobel "nominee" Rush Limbaugh, and Senate minority leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY). By now, I'm surprised Ann Coulter hasn't called the kid a homosexual with a bad haircut.
You have to admire the people involved, in some weird fashion, for having the big hairy ones to jump into this mess and start winging punches. As for Malkin, can't say much about her. Don't read her blog. Don't read National Review.I'll chalk her up to misguided is as misguided does. Limbaugh? With his recent gum bumping about "appealing" the Nobel Peace Prize being awarded to Al Gore, I figured this is just his pill-induced delusion of peace. I still can't figure out what the environment has to do with peace- war is an all-weather atrocity. I would, however, still be more willing to buy an environmentalist for the Nobel Prize than a drug-addled yes-hole whose idea of peace is (EXPLETIVE) the children.
Most amusing to me is the angle of the right's attack on Frost, his sister, who also received severe injuries in the crash, and sick children in general, is the key points in their argument. The right assail the Frost family because their children attend private school, the family lives in a sort-of-affluent neighborhood, and the family owns a business. These are facts, and legitimate ones at that, which you really kind of have to give the right-wing credit for. Where they lose style points, however, is the freshness and entirety of the facts involved.
The Frost children have a scholarship for their private school, the neighborhood was considered dangerous when the Frosts moved in, and the business does not even exist anymore, dissolved eight years ago. The Frost themselves come over $10,000 shy of the income limit for a family of four, so why exactly are they being jumped on, again? I suppose the GOP and their minions have grown accustomed to staggering into battle with a limited, at best, grasp of the facts (or even the concept) at hand.
Most interestingly to me is the about-face some politicians are pulling in the wake of public dissatisfaction. Notably, Rep. Baron Hill (D-IN), my U.S. congressman, who voted against the original SCHIP expansion, now seems to be aiming the other way. While I am not overly enthusiastic about former congressman Mike Sodrel's chances in 2008 (lost in 2002, won in 2004, lost in 2006), Hill's sudden change of heart is telling, to say the least. You can be anti-war all day long and twice on Sunday, we have gotten used to the lack of difference that has made in the Democratic majority, but you simply can't be anti-children. Maybe at National Review or Mitch McConnell's house, but not on the campaign trail.
Soon after Frost appeared in a radio address, calling out Bush, more or less, for his appalling lack of prioritization in regards to the nation's children, the right-wing grind took a step back, picked up their wrenches, and tightened the wheels. Not just the corners of the right blogosphere, but the heavy hitters of the brass knuckle crowd, including Michelle Malkin, questionable Nobel "nominee" Rush Limbaugh, and Senate minority leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY). By now, I'm surprised Ann Coulter hasn't called the kid a homosexual with a bad haircut.
You have to admire the people involved, in some weird fashion, for having the big hairy ones to jump into this mess and start winging punches. As for Malkin, can't say much about her. Don't read her blog. Don't read National Review.I'll chalk her up to misguided is as misguided does. Limbaugh? With his recent gum bumping about "appealing" the Nobel Peace Prize being awarded to Al Gore, I figured this is just his pill-induced delusion of peace. I still can't figure out what the environment has to do with peace- war is an all-weather atrocity. I would, however, still be more willing to buy an environmentalist for the Nobel Prize than a drug-addled yes-hole whose idea of peace is (EXPLETIVE) the children.
Most amusing to me is the angle of the right's attack on Frost, his sister, who also received severe injuries in the crash, and sick children in general, is the key points in their argument. The right assail the Frost family because their children attend private school, the family lives in a sort-of-affluent neighborhood, and the family owns a business. These are facts, and legitimate ones at that, which you really kind of have to give the right-wing credit for. Where they lose style points, however, is the freshness and entirety of the facts involved.
The Frost children have a scholarship for their private school, the neighborhood was considered dangerous when the Frosts moved in, and the business does not even exist anymore, dissolved eight years ago. The Frost themselves come over $10,000 shy of the income limit for a family of four, so why exactly are they being jumped on, again? I suppose the GOP and their minions have grown accustomed to staggering into battle with a limited, at best, grasp of the facts (or even the concept) at hand.
Most interestingly to me is the about-face some politicians are pulling in the wake of public dissatisfaction. Notably, Rep. Baron Hill (D-IN), my U.S. congressman, who voted against the original SCHIP expansion, now seems to be aiming the other way. While I am not overly enthusiastic about former congressman Mike Sodrel's chances in 2008 (lost in 2002, won in 2004, lost in 2006), Hill's sudden change of heart is telling, to say the least. You can be anti-war all day long and twice on Sunday, we have gotten used to the lack of difference that has made in the Democratic majority, but you simply can't be anti-children. Maybe at National Review or Mitch McConnell's house, but not on the campaign trail.