I know nothing of Joe Wilson, and it’s not my goal to defend his outburst on the floor during President Obama’s speech before the Joint Session of Congress.  I also am uninterested in the type of “If it had been Bush, wait they did do that sort of thing to Bush” condemnations of hypocrisy and the media’s bias towards Leftist dissent.  I happen to think a little verbal rowdiness is a good thing, and vigorous, passionate debate is a sign of a healthy democracy.  Any perusal of YouTube will show parliaments that get a lot more rowdy and disruptive, such as this clip.

I’m kind of bothered by this view of the Imperial Presidency, which has been steadily growing since Nixon, that demands deference.  It was bad enough when it was just deference to the office, something I do agree with as long as the deference is to the Constitutional office and not the office as a particular President shapes and molds it.  Reasonable dissent and flippancy can be a healthy corrective to this tendency.  I was really bothered with Bob Dole recently told Neil Cavuto this:

When Ronald Reagan is president, or — or Bush or — well, any president, they would send their bill up to the leadership.

In my case, Reagan would send it to me, and I would introduce it for the president. It was the president’s bill, the president’s language. He is the top dog.

And this is probably about the most important domestic legislation that Obama will deal with in the first four years. He is hoping for four more, but in the first four. And he ought to be proud of it. And it ought to be the Obama bill.

And I believe it would really be beneficial to him. I didn’t write this to be critical. I think it’s just a matter of fact we should not be debating some congressman’s bill, in accord with a congressman, but he is not the president.

“Not debating some congressman’s bill?”  “The President’s bill.”  I know this is established practice, but it just goes to show how much our only national office has taken over the political process.  And, it’s infinitely worse when that president has a cult of personality and celebrity attached to him.  It makes it all the more likely that he will remold the office in such a way that it has even more expanded power.  So, while I do think Wilson’s comments were not appropriate at that moment, the passion that prompted them is welcome, all the more so if taken in context.

First, what Wilson said, obviously, is “You lie.”  This has become, more often than not, “You liar.”  Just type ‘Wilson “you liar”‘ into Google and see.  So, the first context is getting the words right, and there is a big difference in calling someone’s comments a lie and characterizing that person as a liar.

But, more importantly, Wilson’s comments have to be taken in the context of Obama’s speech itself.  Prior to Wilson’s outburst Obama had been highly partisan, flinging unjust, inaccurate criticisms at his opponents.  Here are a few:

But what we have also seen in these last months is the same partisan spectacle that only hardens the disdain many Americans have toward their own government.  Instead of honest debate, we have seen scare tactics.  Some have dug into unyielding ideological camps that offer no hope of compromise. Too many have used this as an opportunity to score short-term political points, even if it robs the country of our opportunity to solve a long-term challenge. And out of this blizzard of charges and countercharges, confusion has reigned.

Then, a little later:

Some of people’s concerns have grown out of bogus claims spread by those whose only agenda is to kill reform at any cost. The best example is the claim, made not just by radio and cable talk show hosts, but prominent politicians, that we plan to set up panels of bureaucrats with the power to kill off senior citizens.  Such a charge would be laughable if it weren’t so cynical and irresponsible. It is a lie, plain and simple.

Here Obama forces all concerns of rationing–what else are we to conclude when he does not address rationing due to shortages of doctors and his proposals to cut costs–into a “kill seniors” mold, and calls it, what?  Yep, “a lie, plain and simple.”  And he says that this is being promoted by “prominent politicians,” meaning many of the Republicans members of the House and Senate sitting before him.  At its most simple, it is a lie, but it’s Obama’s lie because it is a mischaracterization of all rationing concerns.

If you watch a video of that section of the speech you see that Obama said the word “lie” 43 seconds into the clip.  There is then 26 seconds of clapping accompanied by a standing ovation.  Obama then continued with:

There are also those who claim that our reform effort will insure illegal immigrants.  This, too, is false – the reforms I’m proposing would not apply to those who are here illegally. And one more misunderstanding I want to clear up – under our plan, no federal dollars will be used to fund abortions, and federal conscience laws will remain in place.

“This too is false,” he says.  Not as strong a “a lie” but it’s not unreasonable to assume he thinks it is one as well.  No good speaker uses the same wording so soon.  He then tones it down even more to a “misunderstanding” about abortion.  Keep in mind that not only is there no final bill yet to compare it to, but the Republicans had tried to put an amendment into the bill to prevent taxpayer funding of abortion, and the Democrats defeated it in committee.  If there is a “misunderstanding” then why not pass it and clear it up?

In the above clip, Wilson’s outburst occurs at one minute twenty-four seconds.  Subtracting the 26 seconds of clapping, that’s just 15 seconds after Obama said his opponents, including “prominent politicians,” lie, and just moments after Obama spoke about the exclusion of illegals and abortions, neither of which were at that time banned in any legislation before our legislative body.  Are we to believe that if health care reform is passed, an illegal who walks into an ER will not be treated?

I don’t think we will ever pass legislation to that effect.  Doctors would refuse.  It would be like Hawkeye, in M*A*S*H, refusing to treat a North Korean.  There are some who think that access to ER amount to health care for all right now.  I don’t think so.  ERs won’t give you chemotherapy for cancer, treat chronic illness, like Lupus,  or do routine screenings like colonoscopies.  To be fair, Obama said “insure illegal immigrants,” but doesn’t access to ERs amount to insurance against traumatic accidents and acute illness?

Now, I believe ERs should never turn away someone in an accident, someone who is having a heart attack or stroke or someone who is suffering from an acute illness (which may well have public health consequences), but that is a kind of insurance, and Obama should say so and defend it.  It is a lie of omission not to be forthright and direct about that.

Obama gave a highly partisan speech, and attacked his opponents as liars.  Lindsey Graham said he believed that Obama “behaved in a manner beneath the dignity of the office,” and he fears “his speech tonight has made it more difficult –– not less –– to find common ground.”  I agree, and in that context Wilson was merely replying in kind.

We may hope for better, but it’s not likely, especially when Obama’s allies immediately retaliate will cries of racism, a far worse accusation–and a characterization of character–than the accusation that someone is lying, which merely characterized the remark.

Similar Stories: Does He Lie, Charles Krauthammer, “The Washington Post”