kruker wrote:My roommate's response to the Wilson heckling was: "well, we really don't know what's true and what's not true".

Well, you don't, and that's because you don't read or keep up to date with the issue(s). It's a shame that being informed isn't a putative prerequisite to having an opinion.

I think yelling out "You Lie!' is just the type of thing most Americans have the ability to connect with on an intellectual level. Brilliant move by the congressman.

I don't think it's endemic to America.

Ideology seems to contribute to odd choices.

Boustany, who in addition to appearing awkward in front of the camera yesterday, is something of a nut. He's sponsored a grand total of 4 pieces of legislation in the current session, one of which names a post office after Conrad DeRouen, Jr.

I like Boustany. He was a client at the firm I worked for in 2006. Seemed like a good guy from all the footage I had to sit through and what the people I worked with said.

And my unscientifc sample of clicking on about 30 GOP congressman found them sponsoring anywhere from 0-19 bills this cycle, with the majority of congressman between 3-5. So four seems about right. There were 690 roll call votes last year, most bills get voted on at least twice with ordering the previous question and then the actual roll call. Then when you figure in amendments, probably 300-350 bills and resolutions got voted on last year. And a hell of a lot of them were naming post offices or congratulating people or teams for doing something noteworthy. There are 435 congressmen.

guy i work with was saying how obama couldn't prove him wrong and how its wrong for everyone making this guy apologize. i say to him that he shouldn't have to prove anything because he's not the accuser.

"he should prove him wrong if he's not lying"
"thats not how it works"
"what do you mean? if he's right prove himself right"
"when you accuse somebody of something you have something to accuse them with, not just YOU LIE"
"the 1300 page reform bill says he lies, but no one is going to read it so no one can prove him wrong"

..

me: "i don't care man, they all lie anyway. been that way for thousands of years"
him: "yea, you're right"

jerseyhoya wrote:I like Boustany. He was a client at the firm I worked for in 2006. Seemed like a good guy from all the footage I had to sit through and what the people I worked with said.

And my unscientifc sample of clicking on about 30 GOP congressman found them sponsoring anywhere from 0-19 bills this cycle, with the majority of congressman between 3-5. So four seems about right. There were 690 roll call votes last year, most bills get voted on at least twice with ordering the previous question and then the actual roll call. Then when you figure in amendments, probably 300-350 bills and resolutions got voted on last year. And a hell of a lot of them were naming post offices or congratulating people or teams for doing something noteworthy. There are 435 congressmen.

That's Lord Boustany to you...

Congressman Boustany, we should note, has been sued for malpractice three times. He is a "Birther" who believes there are questions about the President’s citizenship, and, as Rachel [Maddow] reported last night, he is a man recorded in court papers to have fallen for a scam in which he tried to buy the British royalty title of "Lord."

-Olbermann

I like the guy. I think he's a good congressman. The "lord" story is clearly blown out of proportion to make him look like an idiot. He paid money so he could get a royal title that would let him participate in cool events like a royal parade, and got scammed.

He is not a "birther" by any useful meaning of the word. He said in that first youtube that there were questions about Obama's citizenship and that it was being looked at. Asked in a radio interview shortly thereafter, he clarified and said he believes Obama is a US Citizen. He is not a cosponsor of that citizen/birth certificate bill.

As far as his medical malpractice suits go, as the original Politico report states: "A caveat: Three malpractice suits over 20 years performing high-risk cardiac surgery isn't out of the ordinary and Boustany maintains a medical license in Louisiana under no restrictions on his practice." Of course that information from the report isn't mentioned by Olbermann or the lefty blog Paul linked to.

Everyone in this thread loves to point out how Republicans and Glen Beck are ruining the discourse in this country, so let's quote that fucking buffoon Olbermann as if it has a damn thing to do with his speech.

jerseyhoya wrote:I like the guy. I think he's a good congressman.

I like Mike Huckabee. I think he was a good governor of Arkansas. (really--he's done better with fewer resources than say Patterson in NY or Arnold in CA and probably even Corzine) But he has some significant limitations.

Really, though, what I was getting at was he was an odd choice for the Republicans, and I think it was driven largely by ideology than his effectiveness as a Representative. The most damning thing about him of course, what no one has mentioned, is the fact that he has spent a career representing the interests of the health care industry, receive large campaign contributions from industry interest groups. So, what the Republicans are saying with the selection is "we care about what happens to insurance companies more than we care about what happens to you. It allows the Democrats to continue the contrast that Obama began to establish with the speech.

As far as sponsoring 4 pieces of legislations--yes, you and I know that many members of congress aren't out in front coming up with leglisation to sponsor--perhaps they focus more on constituent service or something like that. But again, these members rarely are considered national spokesmen for their party. If I were choosing a Republican to make that response, I'd choose a Republican who was sponsoring legislation on the issue at hand--one of those bills the mean socialist democrats are keeping botttled up in committee and won't give a hearing to.

Trying to buy a title of nobility is of course silly, and worthy of mockery. It's also, of course, unconstitutional. As stated in Article 1:

No title of nobility shall be granted by the United States: and no person holding any office of profit or trust under them, shall, without the consent of the Congress, accept of any present, emolument, office, or title, of any kind whatever, from any king, prince, or foreign state.

To be fair, Boustany has tried to stop the idiocy surrounding end of life provisions--showing a little more guts on that issue than other Republicans who once thought it was a good idea before the Palinites went crazy.

Last month, Boustany said the “death panel” scare-mongering had gotten “out of hand”:

Rep. Charles Boustany, R-La., a heart surgeon and a co-sponsor of the counseling bill, says the legislation is aimed at promoting important discussions between doctors and their patients about critical end-of-life issues, such as having a living will. He says those discussions are a “good medical practice,” and doctors who spend time counseling their patients about their wishes should be reimbursed through the Medicare system, as the legislation allows.

Now, Boustany says proponents may have to “back off” and reconsider the issue “at some point when the temperature had cooled down.”

“Frankly, this thing got really out of hand,” he says.

So, Democrats did try to work with Boustany…but overheated rhetoric by the GOP blocked any real progress.

It wasn't unconstitutional. It happened 15 years ago, a decade before he ran for office. But by all means its relevance to his ability to speak on health care issues remains as fresh as ever.

And I think he was picked because he has been a GOP spokesman on health issues, and because of his career as a doctor. This cycle the two bills that are about policy are related to issues with SCHIP and Medicare. Last Congress he sponsored 14 bills, and 4 or the 7 that were related to policy were about healthcare. One was on health savings accounts, one on expanding loans for nursing students, one establishing a demonstration program on interactive personal health records, and another bill relating to SCHIP.

jerseyhoya wrote:It wasn't unconstitutional. It happened 15 years ago, a decade before he ran for office. But by all means its relevance to his ability to speak on health care issues remains as fresh as ever.

And I think he was picked because he has been a GOP spokesman on health issues, and because of his career as a doctor. This cycle the two bills that are about policy are related to issues with SCHIP and Medicare. Last Congress he sponsored 14 bills, and 4 or the 7 that were related to policy were about healthcare. One was on health savings accounts, one on expanding loans for nursing students, one establishing a demonstration program on interactive personal health records, and another bill relating to SCHIP.

just to be clear, you're not objecting to TV's main points - that this guy may not be the best choice of spokesperson for the loyal opposition - you're just unraveling some embroidery (the Lord Nonesuch caper, etc)?

He's a freaking doctor who has shown a lot of interest in health care issues his entire life, including since he has come to Congress. I don't understand why this means he was chosen for reasons of ideology over his effectiveness as a representative.

jerseyhoya wrote:He's a freaking doctor who has shown a lot of interest in health care issues his entire life, including since he has come to Congress. I don't understand why this means he was chosen for reasons of ideology over his effectiveness as a representative.

ok, Jersey, don't burst an aorta here.

Looking at the GOP MDs in Congress, Boustany may well be the party's logical health care voice; it's not like Ron Paul's gonna get the nod. But some of his colleagues have more 'strategic' medical practice backgrounds:

John Boozman AR optometrist

Charles Boustany LA cardiovascular surgeon

Michael Burgess TX, OBGYN (Armey's district)

Paul Broun GA **this is the doctor you want talking health care reform - not some fancy pants specialist: "Dr. Broun has practiced general medicine and, in 2002, he went out on his own, establishing a unique practice of full-time house calls."

or maybe this other LA pol:

Bill Cassidy, LA, some kind of liver disease specialist: "Bill co-founded the Greater Baton Rouge Community Clinic, a clinic providing free health care to the working uninsured through an innovative virtual approach that partners needy patients with doctors who provide care free of charge. "

& this LA GOP MD (what's in that brackish LA water?) also has a preferable practice background:

John Fleming LA, family practice: "His family practice emphasizes the treatment of depression, attention span disorder, and the prevention of chronic disease."

Phil Gingrey GA, obstetrics

John Linder, GA, dentist

Tim Murphy, PA, psychologist

Ron Paul, Tx - not clear what sort of MD he was (bio says something about flight surgeon), BUT he was the PA state HS 220yd dash champ ("the Flyin' Rand-I-an"?)

Tom Price, GA, orthopedic surgeon

Phil Roe, TN, OBGYN

Mike Simpson, ID, dentist

Now they should decide amongst them who'll perform the brain transplant on Joe Wilson. I urge them to consider one of the dentists.

Paul Broun is bat shit crazy. Cassidy and Fleming are freshmen.

I think Tom Price is the guy who wrote the GOP bill, so maybe he should have given it. I don't know. I just don't get why Boustany was a weird choice.

jerseyhoya wrote:Paul Broun is bat $#@! crazy. Cassidy and Fleming are freshmen.

I think Tom Price is the guy who wrote the GOP bill, so maybe he should have given it. I don't know. I just don't get why Boustany was a weird choice.

Surgeons are the wrong choice. In terms of health care reform, they're agin' it. They're part of the problem - not individually, but systemically.

What makes Broun crazy, in a world where staunch family values Republicans give play-by-play on their sexual misadventures over legislative sound systems? Serious question.

drsmooth wrote:Now they should decide amongst them who'll perform the brain transplant on Joe Wilson. I urge them to consider one of the dentists.

Wait, what? No proctologists in da house? I must say, that's surprising on several levels...

jerseyhoya wrote:http://rawstory.com/08/news/2009/09/04/gop-congressman-fears-democratic-totalitarian-state/

I thought I was reading the Onion for a minute when I started that article.

jerseyhoya wrote:http://rawstory.com/08/news/2009/09/04/gop-congressman-fears-democratic-totalitarian-state/

heh, thank you. Nicely done.

as the doctor himself might say, there's a lot of that going around in Georgia.

Honestly, if Jindal hadn't shot his wad in January, he would really have been a good choice, even though he's now a governor. He's got real hands on experience in the issue, and could have presented more grass-roots GOP view rather than an inside the beltway view.

And you left out Tom Coburn, but I'm not sure if any other Senators are MDs.

I know this is a week old now and is a local level political event but the Joe Roberts - Donald Norcross thing in NJ really has my feathers ruffled. I have absolutely reached my limit with these hand-picked candidates and this sense of entitlement to public office. Shouldn't it be up to the voters of NJ, rather than Joe Roberts and the rest of the Democratic machine, who ends up on a ballot?