Hurt Boy at Center of Political Firestorm

uscitizen

Villified User
Hurt Boy at Center of Political Firestorm
By DAVID M. HERSZENHORN,
The New York Times
Posted: 2007-10-10 12:06:37
WASHINGTON (Oct. 9) - There have been moments when the fight between Congressional Democrats and President Bush over the State Children’s Health Insurance Program seemed to devolve into a shouting match about who loves children more.

So when Democrats enlisted 12-year-old Graeme Frost, who along with a younger sister relied on the program for treatment of severe brain injuries suffered in a car crash, to give the response to Mr. Bush’s weekly radio address on Sept. 29, Republican opponents quickly accused them of exploiting the boy to score political points.

Then, they wasted little time in going after him to score their own.

In recent days, Graeme and his family have been attacked by conservative bloggers and other critics of the Democrats’ plan to expand the insurance program, known as S-chip. They scrutinized the family’s income and assets — even alleged the counters in their kitchen to be granite — and declared that the Frosts did not seem needy enough for government benefits.

But what on the surface appears to be yet another partisan feud, all the nastier because a child is at the center of it, actually cuts to the most substantive debate around S-chip. Democrats say it is crucially needed to help the working poor — Medicaid already helps the impoverished — but many Republicans say it now helps too many people with the means to help themselves.

The feud also illustrates what can happen when politicians showcase real people to make a point, a popular but often perilous technique. And in this case, the discourse has been anything but polite.

The critics accused Graeme’s father, Halsey, a self-employed woodworker, of choosing not to provide insurance for his family of six, even though he owned his own business. They pointed out that Graeme attends an expensive private school. And they asserted that the family’s home had undergone extensive remodeling, and that its market value could exceed $400,000.

One critic, in an e-mail message to Graeme’s mother, Bonnie, warned: “Lie down with dogs, and expect to get fleas.” As it turns out, the Frosts say, Graeme attends the private school on scholarship. The business that the critics said Mr. Frost owned was dissolved in 1999. The family’s home, in the modest Butchers Hill neighborhood of Baltimore, was bought for $55,000 in 1990 and is now worth about $260,000, according to public records. And, for the record, the Frosts say, their kitchen counters are concrete

http://news.aol.com/story/ar/_a/hurt-boy-at-center-of-political/20071010093209990001?ncid=NWS00010000000001
 
And this is from the party that shows the double amputee Vet that is pro Iraq war ?

I posted this on that health care thread this morning, because one of our conservative brethren posted this hit piece on this kid, last week.

Those right wing bloggers are literally out of their minds, seriously. And they just spit venom. There is no low too low. Doesn't exist.
 
Rightwing bloggers and pundits going after a 12 year old boy, and stalking the family at their house?


Color me "not suprised". Sorry.
 
And a sick boy at that....

but as long as it serves the republican party another body thrown under the wheels matters not.
 
I think its unfair of people to use homes as a measure in quantifying monies available for health care. I think Rob dawg was saying that his mom a few years back didn't qualify because they considered that in her assets. Unless its like a $1 million dollar home or something extravagant I consider it irrelevant.
 
If you read the article, the Republicans lied about several aspects of the families situation.

Shocker.

Although, this brings me back to Patient pricing for medical expenses. If they could be insured at a low cost under a universal umbrella this would have been avoided.
 
If you read the article, the Republicans lied about several aspects of the families situation.

Atrocious to be sure. But lets not forget the fact that the liklihood of this happening would have been about zero had the Dems not exploited the kid to begin with.
 
Atrocious to be sure. But lets not forget the fact that the liklihood of this happening would have been about zero had the Dems not exploited the kid to begin with.
They don't want to look at that. It is the 'they did it too' defense at play here.

First somebody takes advantage of a kid, then the other people do as well...

Then everybody is supposed to be only outraged at the second or the first group.

The kid shouldn't have been brought into this by either side.
 
They don't want to look at that. It is the 'they did it too' defense at play here.

First somebody takes advantage of a kid, then the other people do as well...

Then everybody is supposed to be only outraged at the second or the first group.

The kid shouldn't have been brought into this by either side.

I agree completely.
 
They don't want to look at that. It is the 'they did it too' defense at play here.

First somebody takes advantage of a kid, then the other people do as well...

Then everybody is supposed to be only outraged at the second or the first group.

The kid shouldn't have been brought into this by either side.


Bush used those snow flake babies to make a political point about stem cell research.

to my knowledge, nobody tried to stalk those kids or track them down.


Stalking and smearing seems to be primarily an habit of rightwing authoritarians. :pke:
 
They don't want to look at that. It is the 'they did it too' defense at play here.

First somebody takes advantage of a kid, then the other people do as well...

Then everybody is supposed to be only outraged at the second or the first group.

The kid shouldn't have been brought into this by either side.
So your argument is no one should put a human face on political issues. The supporters of expanding SCHIP should have just argued in theoritical instead of showing the Repubs that voted against expanding SCHIP the very real affects their votes have on very real children. And do you really equate showing a child that will suffer if the vote goes one way with a bunch of right wing bloggers who checked NO FACTS, insinuated this was a well off family whose kid goes to an expensive school but fail to mention it is on a scholarship, said dad owned a business when he didn't, said the fucking kitchen counters were granite when they were cement and suggested that the family should have to choose between selling their home or getting treatment for their kids? Not even a close call Damo. The right tried to smear instead of explain and this time it has bitten them in the ass. I would run the election campaign on how their smeared this family. Anyone know, did Rush pile on too?

Well the part where they said dad owns his own business is consistent with Republican politics. I mean he DID own a business in 1999. Everyone remember when in 2003 they kept saying that in 1998 intelligence sources said Saddam had WMD's? I mean so what if the information is old and not checked. Better to slime first and look stupid later.
 
So your argument is no one should put a human face on political issues. The supporters of expanding SCHIP should have just argued in theoritical instead of showing the Repubs that voted against expanding SCHIP the very real affects their votes have on very real children. And do you really equate showing a child that will suffer if the vote goes one way with a bunch of right wing bloggers who checked NO FACTS, insinuated this was a well off family whose kid goes to an expensive school but fail to mention it is on a scholarship, said dad owned a business when he didn't, said the fucking kitchen counters were granite when they were cement and suggested that the family should have to choose between selling their home or getting treatment for their kids? Not even a close call Damo. The right tried to smear instead of explain and this time it has bitten them in the ass. I would run the election campaign on how their smeared this family. Anyone know, did Rush pile on too?

Well the part where they said dad owns his own business is consistent with Republican politics. I mean he DID own a business in 1999. Everyone remember when in 2003 they kept saying that in 1998 intelligence sources said Saddam had WMD's? I mean so what if the information is old and not checked. Better to slime first and look stupid later.

Great post, and to answer your question about Rush:

"Malkin wrote that the Democrats' use of Graeme Frost to deliver the radio address was "poster child abuse"; Limbaugh told listeners that Democrats had "filled this kid's head with lies."

Here's something even nicer, this is what I mean when I say this came straight out of the right wing venom machine in the blogosphere, and those people are bug f*ck nuts:

"But while the Frosts were helping a bipartisan majority in Congress sell a plan to expand the program, they were not prepared for comments such as this one, posted over the weekend on the conservative Web site Redstate:

"If federal funds were required [they] could die for all I care. Let the parents get second jobs, let their state foot the bill or let them seek help from private charities. ... I would hire a team of PIs and find out exactly how much their parents made and where they spent every nickel. Then I'd do everything possible to destroy their lives with that info."

Now, I have seen people on the right find a poster on democratic underground or some shit, and make the claim that "they are saying this". A poster on my old board was famous for this, still is I'm sure, followed by her "People are furious" claim. So to be clear I am in no way claiming that this is what "they think".

But this is the sinkhole this "story" crawled its way out of.

http://weblogs.baltimoresun.com/news/politics/blog/2007/10/family_under_fire_rush_and_co.html
 
Atrocious to be sure. But lets not forget the fact that the liklihood of this happening would have been about zero had the Dems not exploited the kid to begin with.

Blame the victim.

Let me get this straight: The democrats are to blame for this kid getting stalked by your rightwing buddies, because he gave a one minute radio address?

Bush used snowflake children as political props on the stem cell debate, and I doubt it ever occured to anyone on the left to stalk those kids or their families.

This is the same excuse I remember frat boys giving me in college for rape: "well, if girls wouldn't dress so slutty, they wouldn't get raped".
 
Blame the victim.

Let me get this straight: The democrats are to blame for this kid getting stalked by your rightwing buddies, because he gave a one minute radio address?

Bush used snowflake children as political props on the stem cell debate, and I doubt it ever occured to anyone on the left to stalk those kids or their families.

This is the same excuse I remember frat boys giving me in college for rape: "well, if girls wouldn't dress so slutty, they wouldn't get raped".

SF and Damo don't think too clearly sometimes. They're like beefcake... I like to think of them as my little board ho's, as Cawacko might say.
 
So your argument is no one should put a human face on political issues. The supporters of expanding SCHIP should have just argued in theoritical instead of showing the Repubs that voted against expanding SCHIP the very real affects their votes have on very real children. And do you really equate showing a child that will suffer if the vote goes one way with a bunch of right wing bloggers who checked NO FACTS, insinuated this was a well off family whose kid goes to an expensive school but fail to mention it is on a scholarship, said dad owned a business when he didn't, said the fucking kitchen counters were granite when they were cement and suggested that the family should have to choose between selling their home or getting treatment for their kids? Not even a close call Damo. The right tried to smear instead of explain and this time it has bitten them in the ass. I would run the election campaign on how their smeared this family. Anyone know, did Rush pile on too?

Well the part where they said dad owns his own business is consistent with Republican politics. I mean he DID own a business in 1999. Everyone remember when in 2003 they kept saying that in 1998 intelligence sources said Saddam had WMD's? I mean so what if the information is old and not checked. Better to slime first and look stupid later.
My argument is that "human faces" are almost invariably emotive manipulation.
 
SF and Damo don't think too clearly sometimes. They're like beefcake... I like to think of them as my little board ho's, as Cawacko might say.
No, I think that people who bring children into a politics spotlight and do not assume that the other side may do anything at all are foolish.

As for "they didn't stalk them" etc, I recently saw a movie where the camera people stalked children of a Religious Right family in order to mock and bring "fear" of them onto people who do not agree with them politically. I have seen it on both sides and condemn it from either side.

I agree, the Rs should have given the kid immunity as the left expected they would.
 
Excellent thread.

While this board's "I'm-not-a-republican" republicans find ways to minimize this child-stalking incident (i.e., "Democrats do it too" - "Both sides are equally guilty"), :) an actual prominent self-declared Republican blogger is so disgusted by the brown-shirt behaviour of the modern republican party, he writes a profound and articulate blog declaring that he's leaving the party that he worked for for years



More reaction from around the web to the assholes who think stalking a 12-year-old and his brain-damaged sister is what "politics" is all about:

John Cole, of BalloonJuice.com is now a former Republican thanks to this incident:

If you look through this family’s dossier, it appears they are doing everything Republicans say they should be doing- hell, their story is almost what you would consider a checklist for good, red-blooded American Republican voters: they own their own business, they pay their taxes, they are still in a committed relationship and are raising their kids, they eschewed public education and are doing what they have to do to get them into Private schools, they are part of the American dream of home ownership that Republicans have been pointing to in the past two administrations as proof of the health of the economy, and so on.

In short, they are a white, lower-middle-class, committed family, who is doing EVERYTHING the GOP Kultur Kops would have you believe people should be doing. They aren’t gay. They aren’t divorced. They didn’t abort their children. They aren’t drug addicts or welfare queens. They are property owners, entrepeneurs, taxpayers, and hard-working Americans. I bet nine times out of ten in past elections, if you handed this resume to a pollster, they would think you were discussing the prototypical Republican voter. Hell, the only thing missing from this equation is membership to a church and an irrational fear of Muslims and you HAVE the prototypical Bush voter [...]

I simply can not believe this is what the Republican party has become. I just can’t. It just makes me sick to think all those years of supporting this party, and this is what it has become. Even if you don’t like the S-Chip expansion, it is hard to deny what Republicans are- a bunch of bitter, nasty, petty, snarling, sneering, vicious thugs, peering through people’s windows so they can make fun of their misfortune.

I’m registering Independent tomorrow.

http://www.balloon-juice.com/?p=8827


That's what you call principles over Party. :clink:
 
"it is hard to deny what Republicans are- a bunch of bitter, nasty, petty, snarling, sneering, vicious thugs, peering through people’s windows so they can make fun of their misfortune."

That's an excellent description of them on a national level (the machine), and of some of them who travel in packs on message boards and in the blogosphere.
 
Back
Top