This is a tough one. They’re both batshit crazy and make a mockery of the democratic process by going to town halls and screaming their heads off.
But I have to give an edge to the “death panel” people. For one thing, a health care reform bill hasn’t even been officially drafted yet. And much of what they’re accusing Obama of can be said of the private insurance industry - rationing care, telling you where you can go to the doctor, turning you down based on pre-existing conditions (not exactly a death panel, but something that has the potential to cut your life short).
The question assumes there is not a large cross population of both groups.
As mentioned above, they are the same group and they are fucking morons. I wish there were death panels just to put them down.
I’d just settle for them all to have to prove their American citizenship in the same way that they want Obama to prove his in order to vote.
Seriously, they’re the same people. Are you asking which of their claims is more ridiculous? The birther lunacy.
Well, I’d have to say that the birthers are bigger idiots. The “death panel” people are at least skewing some rather pertinent facts of life. The birthers are people who want to invade the privacy of a citizen of the United States. Nearly every single one would be highly upset if a random person they’d never met from several states away demanded to see a particular version of their birth certificate. Something about a right to privacy?
Difficult choice.
Birthers vs. Death Panelers.
Well, on the pro-DP side, the person who put that provision in the bill is a pro-life Republican. And they have to be associated with this moron:
On the pro-birthers side is the very existence of O Rly? Taitz.
In a split decision, because I’m personally torn, I’m going with the birthers. I think the only people who top them are the Holocaust deniers.
On the contrary, going to a town hall meeting and loudly voicing ones’ opinion is inherent to the democratic process. What, you think only left-wingers are allowed to demonstrate?
Tort reform and the concept of medicine as a profit center has to be deconstructed before any of this public option nonsense can even be honestly debated.
Tough choice but I’d have to go with the birthers. The pretzel logic used to support this conspiracy theory when the evidence clearly states otherwise is far more tortuous and complicated. It takes a special kind of paranoia, delusion, and right-wing crackpottery not seen since the “black helicopter”/anti-government nuts during the 90’s.
I don’t understand why conservatives say they’re against “death panels” in the first place. They are pro-death penalty, pro-torture, and in favor of sending your children (but not their children) off to war in a faraway land where they will fight and die for some bullshit cause. Conservatives are clearly pro-death, so why do they draw the line at Granny?
I think both sides are idiotic. But can I name a specific individual who should be the “Joe the Plumber” of the deathers?
Kenneth Gladney was part of the mob protesting a Town Hall forum. A scuffle broke out and Gladney claims he was injured.
The precious part of it, Gladney is accepting donations toward his medical expenses. Gladney told reporters he was recently laid off and has no health insurance.
http://www.kansascity.com/news/politics/story/1373035.html?storylink=pd
The birthers are far stupider. At least the death panelists are extrapolating from the reality of insurance company death panels that already exist. It is somewhat logical to conclude that for those on the government program that some sort of equivalent will need to be used. No rational form of government would keep the Strom Thurmonds and Terri Schiavos alive indefinitely just to make a political point.
Wait, I thought Town Halls were supposed to reduce the corruption in your city and increase Happiness by 10%.
On the other hand the protesters do have something right. They do increase your health by 5%.
And to think we worried what the Daily Show would do for comedy. These morons are giving them plenty of material.
I’ll go against the trend here and say the death panelers. The birthers have to rely on secondary sources, and have to be dumb enough to fall for hoaxed Kenyan birth certificates and to be dumb enough to believe that the Commie with a correspondence school law degree is more trustworthy than the governor of Hawaii. Pretty dumb, but not as dumb as those who could read the bill themselves and see that what they claim is in there isn’t! That does assume they are literate, which is a stretch. Though the bill is 1,000 pages, just about as long as a Harry Potter book. No one can be expected to read that!
In such situations, I always revert to despotism, slavery and state religion to kick some ass. :eek:
Disrupting a town hall meeting is not democratic, no matter who does it. And neither is supposedly holding one banning anyone who disagrees with you and planting questions in the audience.
Does your lack of response mean you think both these groups are rocket scientists?
1000 pages of legislation is like 150 real pages. Between all the headings, indents, spacing, and large type, there’s actually not that much there.
Hey, how about shipping off all these people to fenced in “First Amendment Zones” two miles away like the Bushies did during the last decade? Making people who want to come into meetings sign loyalty oaths? This isn’t the America I remember.
Roberts Rules of Order has planned for this scenario. A person for speaks, and then a person against. They take turns. And there can be time limits. People who are in flagrant violation can be removed legally for disorderly conduct.
Just so you know:
For sheer stupidity, it’s the birthers. The whole “theory” depends on a pregnant American woman of limited means flying thousands of miles to give birth in Kenya, then engaging in a conspiracy to make it look like her baby was born in the United States. Not only is there no evidence of that occurring, it’s absurd on the face of it. The easiest way to make it look like he was born in the United States would have been to give birth in the United States. People who claim that’s not what happened are being stupid, crazy, dishonest, or some combination thereof.
Health care, however, is a complicated issue about which reasonable people can legitimately disagree. In behavioral terms, of course people who disrupt democratic proceedings and drown out legitimate discussion using canned talking points are being jerks, but that doesn’t necessarily make them idiots.