# Conservatives Overwhelmingly Oppose Healthcare for 9/11 Workers **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [August 1, 2010, 8:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-overwhelmingly-oppose-healthcare-for-9-11-workers/548816 "2010-08-01T20:05:01Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 11
**Author:** ![cosmosdan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a6a055/32.png) [@cosmosdan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cosmosdan)\ **Post date:** [August 4, 2010, 3:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-overwhelmingly-oppose-healthcare-for-9-11-workers/548816/201 "2010-08-04T03:09:38Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > Its a wonder we don’t invade Canada to protect them from bears! That’s what Steven Colbert recommends. Once Cananda falls the bears will target us. It’s the ursine domino thoery. > [@](#): > > I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just." - Thomas Jefferson Amen brother Thomas. ---
**Author:** ![crowmanyclouds](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/crowmanyclouds/32/19884_2.png) [@crowmanyclouds](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/crowmanyclouds)\ **Post date:** [August 4, 2010, 3:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-overwhelmingly-oppose-healthcare-for-9-11-workers/548816/202 "2010-08-04T03:54:57Z")
> [@crowmanyclouds](#): > > > [@Bricker](#): > > > > So what if a congressman’s position is: “I want to give this care to everyone covered by the bill except illegal aliens, who had no business being there in the first place?” > > > > What should he do? > > > [@Starving\_Artist](#): > > > > … Representative King hit the nail on the head when he said, prior to Weiner’s showboating little snit: > > > > _“The reason HR-847 is not being brought up under regular order is that the majority party is petrified of having its members face a potential vote on illegal immigration, but the reality is, you could pass this bill. This bill should be more important than a campaign talking point. **You could have passed it any time during the past three and a half years but you want political cover**. Thank God for our country that the first responders of 9/11 didn’t look for cover before they did what they had to do and lived up to their oath.”_ > > > > [bolding mine] > > > > This place makes my ass twitch sometimes. > > Like, say, the above mentioned Rep. King? > > Maybe, he could have not been a [cosponsor](http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h111-847) of a bill that didn’t already address those concerns? > > CMC fnord! > SA that twitch in your ass, it’s King’s peter. So, uh, I guess no one actually wants to address (or defend) the [perfidy](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perfidy) of Peter King (and his party)? [del]Bricker?.. [/del]Bueller?.. Bueller?..Bueller? CMC fnord! ---
**Author:** ![lawoot](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/35a633/32.png) [@lawoot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lawoot)\ **Post date:** [August 4, 2010, 11:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-overwhelmingly-oppose-healthcare-for-9-11-workers/548816/203 "2010-08-04T11:06:49Z")
[Rep Weiner, on this subject, in an Op-Ed in today’s New York Times](http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/04/opinion/04weiner.html?_r=1&th&emc=th) > [@](#): > > _from the link_ > Still, what upset me most last week were comments voiced by Republicans who claimed to be supporters of the bill, yet who used their time on the House floor not to persuade skeptical Republican colleagues to vote yes but to excoriate Democrats for using the suspension calendar. > > \>snip\< > > This wasn’t the first time obstructionism has come to us cloaked in procedure. Recall that after months of negotiations, Republicans voted unanimously against the health care reform bill. And then they complained about process. Similarly in January, after Senate Republicans introduced a bill calling for a deficit commission, they refused to support the legislation when the president took them up on the idea. And, of course, they used technical objections as an excuse. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [August 4, 2010, 12:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-overwhelmingly-oppose-healthcare-for-9-11-workers/548816/204 "2010-08-04T12:32:31Z")
> [@cosmosdan](#): > > So we invaded Iraq because they violated UN resolutions, even though the UN disapporved of our invasion. Well yeah, since you put it that way it all makes sense. So apparently this liberal outrage against statements that aren’t true is a sort of on-again, off-again sort of thing? You don’t have a cite for the statement that the UN disapproved of our invasion, by chance? (I know the Secretary-General did, personally, but the Secretary-General is not the United Nations, and has no power whatsoever to express the sense of the United Nations.) The UN speaks through its resolutions. Security Council Resolution 678 gives all UN Member States the authority to apply “…all necessary means to uphold and implement Resolution 660 and all subsequent relevant resolutions and to restore international peace and security in the area.” The charter for the United Nations, in Articles 39-42 et seq., gives the Security Council the jurisdiction to find the war was illegal. They have not done so. So when you said the UN disapproves of the invasion – you were, what, just joking? Or perhaps you were serious, and I just posted too soon to let the liberal commentators on this board rise up in one voice to declare their outrage at your “inaccurate” statement. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [August 4, 2010, 12:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-overwhelmingly-oppose-healthcare-for-9-11-workers/548816/205 "2010-08-04T12:34:10Z")
> [@crowmanyclouds](#): > > So, uh, I guess no one actually wants to address (or defend) the [perfidy](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perfidy) of Peter King (and his party)? > > [del]Bricker?.. [/del]Bueller?.. Bueller?..Bueller? What the hell are you talking about? Is there are argument hidden in this statement somewhere? Make it plainly, and I’ll answer. I have no clue what you’re talking about. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Tooth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/c67d28/32.png) [@The\_Tooth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Tooth)\ **Post date:** [August 4, 2010, 1:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-overwhelmingly-oppose-healthcare-for-9-11-workers/548816/206 "2010-08-04T13:09:53Z")
> [@](#): > > 1. Authorizes Member States co-operating with the Government of Kuwait, unless Iraq on or before 15 January 1991 fully implements, as set forth in paragraph 1 above, the above-mentioned resolutions, to use all necessary means to uphold and implement resolution 660 (1990) and all subsequent relevant resolutions and to restore international peace and security in the area; Wel, that’s nice. Let us examine Resolution 660 (it’s short): > [@](#): > > The Security Council, > > Alarmed by the invasion of Kuwait on 2 August 1990 by the military forces of Iraq, > > Determining that there exists a breach of international peace and security as regards the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait, > > Acting under Articles 39 and 40 of the Charter of the United Nations, > > 1. Condemns the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait; > > 2. Demands that Iraq withdraw immediately and unconditionally all s its forces to the positions in which they were located on 1 August 1990;r > > 3. Calls upon Iraq and Kuwait to begin immediately intensive negotiations for the resolution of their differences and supports all efforts in this regard, and especially those of the League of Arab States; > > 4. Decides to meet again as necessary to consider further steps with to ensure compliance with the present resolution. Since driving Iraq from Kuwait had nothing to do with this, and since the US did not invade to restore international peace or security, it doesn’t apply. Also, the measuring stick by which one determines if the UNSC approves of something or not is whether the UNSC votes to approve something or not. When did they vote to approve America’s conquest of Iraq? ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [August 4, 2010, 1:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-overwhelmingly-oppose-healthcare-for-9-11-workers/548816/207 "2010-08-04T13:46:44Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > The UN speaks through its resolutions. Security Council Resolution 678 gives all UN Member States the authority to apply “…all necessary means to uphold and implement Resolution 660 and all subsequent relevant resolutions and to restore international peace and security in the area.” > > The charter for the United Nations, in Articles 39-42 et seq., gives the Security Council the jurisdiction to find the war was illegal. They have not done so. That couldn’t possibly be because the two main actors in the Iraq War, the US and UK, are permanent members of the security council and have veto power? ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [August 4, 2010, 3:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-overwhelmingly-oppose-healthcare-for-9-11-workers/548816/208 "2010-08-04T15:02:08Z")
> [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#): > > > [@Bricker](#): > > > > The UN speaks through its resolutions. Security Council Resolution 678 gives all UN Member States the authority to apply “…all necessary means to uphold and implement Resolution 660 and all subsequent relevant resolutions and to restore international peace and security in the area.” > > > > The charter for the United Nations, in Articles 39-42 et seq., gives the Security Council the jurisdiction to find the war was illegal. They have not done so. > > That couldn’t possibly be because the two main actors in the Iraq War, the US and UK, are permanent members of the security council and have veto power? So then there was a Security Council resolution, but it failed on that basis? Even if that were true, **cosmodan** ’s statement is false. (“…even though the UN disapporved (sic) of our invasion.”) And of course, despite the seething hatred that the left has for false statements, it turns out that this particular false statement was made on an odd-numbered day of an even-numbered month during a time when the Santa Ana winds are quiescent, which means it’s exempt from criticism. Or something like that, I imagine. Probably it was rude of me to even mention it. Hey, **cosmodan** , sorry for pointing out your “inaccurate” statement, there, buddy. I didn’t remember the Santa Ana wind exemption in time. But guess what? The Security Council did NOT almost pass a resolution except for the vetoes of the US and UK. So the basis for saying the UN was opposed to the invasion is… is… um… Wait, wait, I’m sure it’ll come to you. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [August 4, 2010, 3:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-overwhelmingly-oppose-healthcare-for-9-11-workers/548816/209 "2010-08-04T15:06:08Z")
> [@The\_Tooth](#): > > Since driving Iraq from Kuwait had nothing to do with this, and since the US did not invade to restore international peace or security, it doesn’t apply. Sez you. In fact, that’s exactly what the United States did. > [@](#): > > Also, the measuring stick by which one determines if the UNSC approves of something or not is whether the UNSC votes to approve something or not. When did they vote to approve America’s conquest of Iraq? Who the fuck asked if they approved it? When was that asserted? The statement made was that they disapproved it. You, knowing that this is simply untrue, are subtly seeking to change the statement to, “Well, they may not have disapproved it, but they sure didn’t explicitly approve it, either!!” But rather than just forthrightly make that statement, you seek to hide your goalpost switch. But, olley-olley-oxen-free, I see you! ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [August 4, 2010, 3:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-overwhelmingly-oppose-healthcare-for-9-11-workers/548816/210 "2010-08-04T15:22:28Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > But guess what? The Security Council did NOT almost pass a resolution except for the vetoes of the US and UK. So the basis for saying the UN was opposed to the invasion is… is… um… > > Wait, wait, I’m sure it’ll come to you. The UN only keeps an archive of [resolutions which are adopted](http://www.un.org/Docs/scres/2002/sc2002.htm), as far as I can tell. In any case, why would anyone bother to introduce such a resolution, given that the UK and/or US could automatically veto it? ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [August 4, 2010, 3:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-overwhelmingly-oppose-healthcare-for-9-11-workers/548816/211 "2010-08-04T15:28:43Z")
> [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#): > > > [@Bricker](#): > > > > But guess what? The Security Council did NOT almost pass a resolution except for the vetoes of the US and UK. So the basis for saying the UN was opposed to the invasion is… is… um… > > > > Wait, wait, I’m sure it’ll come to you. > > The UN only keeps an archive of [resolutions which are adopted](http://www.un.org/Docs/scres/2002/sc2002.htm), as far as I can tell. In any case, why would anyone bother to introduce such a resolution, given that the UK and/or US could automatically veto it? Don’t know. Don’t care. **cosmodan** claims the UN disapproved the invasion. I point out that this is an untrue statement. You point out that the US and UK have veto power over the UNSC. Fine, I say, and did that happen? Uh, dunno, you say, but it COULD have, and even if it didn’t, they would have vetoed such a resolution anyway, so why bother? :rolleyes: Do you know what argument ad ignoratium is? Do you see how the effort has been to subtly (and not so subtly) shift the argument away from the false claim? No one has said, “Yeah, ok, that one’s just not true.” Instead, the dance begins, the Dance of the Sugar Plum Goalposts. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [August 4, 2010, 3:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-overwhelmingly-oppose-healthcare-for-9-11-workers/548816/212 "2010-08-04T15:49:57Z")
Looking at his actual quote, it doesn’t appear to say anything about the Security Council. Kofi Annan certainly disapproved of the invasion, and was the de jure spokesman for the UN at the time. It is certainly not true that the Security Council adopted a resolution condemning or otherwise opposing the invasion of Iraq. ---
**Author:** ![Digital\_Stimulus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/aeb1de/32.png) [@Digital\_Stimulus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Digital_Stimulus)\ **Post date:** [August 4, 2010, 4:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-overwhelmingly-oppose-healthcare-for-9-11-workers/548816/213 "2010-08-04T16:28:00Z")
> [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#): > > It is certainly not true that the Security Council adopted a resolution condemning or otherwise opposing the invasion of Iraq. Is it not the case that a resolution was never introduced because it was well-known that it wouldn’t have passed? ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [August 4, 2010, 4:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-overwhelmingly-oppose-healthcare-for-9-11-workers/548816/214 "2010-08-04T16:33:50Z")
Well, it might be, but as **Bricker** rightly points out, it’s not fair to claim if we don’t know. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Tooth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/c67d28/32.png) [@The\_Tooth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Tooth)\ **Post date:** [August 4, 2010, 4:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-overwhelmingly-oppose-healthcare-for-9-11-workers/548816/215 "2010-08-04T16:49:00Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > > [@The\_Tooth](#): > > > > Since driving Iraq from Kuwait had nothing to do with this, and since the US did not invade to restore international peace or security, it doesn’t apply. > > Sez you. > > > [@](#): > > > > Sez everyone but Bush Administration apologists. > > > > In fact, that’s exactly what the United States did. > > No, terrorism increased in Iraq because of the US’s actions in Iraq. Claims that Iraq was a threat to international (the US counts) security have long been shown to be false. > > How are the negotiations between Kuwait and the Iraqi government (as stipulated in 330) going? > > > [@](#): > > > > Also, the measuring stick by which one determines if the UNSC approves of something or not is whether the UNSC votes to approve something or not. When did they vote to approve America’s conquest of Iraq? > > Who the fuck asked if they approved it? When was that asserted? You did with your bizarro logic that if they don’t declare something illegal, they approve of it. I countered with the fact that approval consisting of voting their approval. That didn’t happen. Therefore, they don’t approve. > [@](#): > > The statement made was that they disapproved it. You, knowing that this is simply untrue, are subtly seeking to change the statement to, “Well, they may not have disapproved it, but they sure didn’t explicitly approve it, either!!” Nonsense. They didn’t vote to approve it, so it wasn’t approved. You’re the one trying to dance. I’m the one aware that the head cheese of the UN said it was illegal as per the UN charter. A quick google search will reveal this to you as well. After that you’ll have to come up with a new way to defend the Republicans. > [@](#): > > But rather than just forthrightly make that statement, you seek to hide your goalpost switch. I’m not switching anything. The UNSC did not vote its approval of the US conquest of Iraq, so they didn’t approve of it. You’re the one trying to redefine approval as ‘not saying it’s illegal’. > [@](#): > > But, olley-olley-oxen-free, I see you! You see what you want to see. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [August 4, 2010, 4:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-overwhelmingly-oppose-healthcare-for-9-11-workers/548816/216 "2010-08-04T16:57:45Z")
> [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#): > > Looking at his actual quote, it doesn’t appear to say anything about the Security Council. Kofi Annan certainly disapproved of the invasion, and was the de jure spokesman for the UN at the time. > > It is certainly not true that the Security Council adopted a resolution condemning or otherwise opposing the invasion of Iraq. Then he should have said that Kofi Annan disapproved of it. But of course that would have taken the bite out of things. Kofi Annan doesn’t get to decide, unilaterally, what the UN disapproves of. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [August 4, 2010, 4:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-overwhelmingly-oppose-healthcare-for-9-11-workers/548816/217 "2010-08-04T16:59:40Z")
> [@Digital\_Stimulus](#): > > > [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#): > > > > It is certainly not true that the Security Council adopted a resolution condemning or otherwise opposing the invasion of Iraq. > > Is it not the case that a resolution was never introduced because it was well-known that it wouldn’t have passed? Maybe. I have no idea. What I do know is that you can’t say, “The UN disapproved of our invasion,” and then as proof offer the fact that they would have introduced a resolution against it, but knowing it wouldn’t pass, they didn’t. You… you DO see that, right? ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [August 4, 2010, 5:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-overwhelmingly-oppose-healthcare-for-9-11-workers/548816/218 "2010-08-04T17:01:11Z")
> [@The\_Tooth](#): > > You did with your bizarro logic that if they don’t declare something illegal, they approve of it. I countered with the fact that approval consisting of voting their approval. That didn’t happen. Therefore, they don’t approve. When did I say that? Quote the post, please. > [@](#): > > Nonsense. They didn’t vote to approve it, so it wasn’t approved. You’re the one trying to dance. I’m the one aware that the head cheese of the UN said it was illegal as per the UN charter. A quick google search will reveal this to you as well. After that you’ll have to come up with a new way to defend the Republicans. Again, quote the post. Where did I say it was approved? ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [August 4, 2010, 5:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-overwhelmingly-oppose-healthcare-for-9-11-workers/548816/219 "2010-08-04T17:03:45Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > > [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#): > > > > Looking at his actual quote, it doesn’t appear to say anything about the Security Council. Kofi Annan certainly disapproved of the invasion, and was the de jure spokesman for the UN at the time. > > > > It is certainly not true that the Security Council adopted a resolution condemning or otherwise opposing the invasion of Iraq. > > Then he should have said that Kofi Annan disapproved of it. But of course that would have taken the bite out of things. Kofi Annan doesn’t get to decide, unilaterally, what the UN disapproves of. Does the President get to decide unilaterally what the United States approves of? ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [August 4, 2010, 5:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-overwhelmingly-oppose-healthcare-for-9-11-workers/548816/220 "2010-08-04T17:12:30Z")
> [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#): > > > [@Bricker](#): > > > > Then he should have said that Kofi Annan disapproved of it. But of course that would have taken the bite out of things. Kofi Annan doesn’t get to decide, unilaterally, what the UN disapproves of. > > Does the President get to decide unilaterally what the United States approves of? No, but as the sole head of one of three co-equal branches of government, he has considerably more ability to do that than Kofi Annan does as Sec-Gen. The President is bound by law, and his personal pronouncements of what the country approves of are not binding in any way. He may say that the United States disapproves of a particular nation’s actions, but his ability to make that stick as a matter of policy is limited to what the law permits him to do. So even if the Sec-Gen had precisely identical powers to the US President, he couldn’t be said to express the disapproval of the United Nations without a resolution backing him up. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-overwhelmingly-oppose-healthcare-for-9-11-workers/548816.md?page=10) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/conservatives-overwhelmingly-oppose-healthcare-for-9-11-workers/548816.md?page=12)