Desperate Democrats deceptively use sick child in radio address to promote SCHIP expansion

Just when you think Democrats couldn’t get any more despicable comes the news that the family of the 12 year old boy they used on their radio address last weekend to promote the expansion of SCHIP – while chastizing the President, who vetoed it – are not as “needy” as they were made out to be, and probably could have afforded health insurance had they not chosen have their kids educated in private school to the tune of around $20,000 each per year, and chosen to live in a home that wasn’t over 3,000 sq ft in a neighborhood where one 2,000 sq ft home recently sold for $500,000. Mark Steyn has the details (h/t: Stop the ACLU).

A familiar tactic for Democrats? You bet. Using the Absolute Moral Authority Card in a deceptive attempt to shame enough conservatives in the House into switching their vote in order to override the President’s veto.

Bbbbbut so what if the story doesn’t exactly fit the liberal narrative, right? As long as they succeed in demagoguing the opposition …

25 Responses to "Desperate Democrats deceptively use sick child in radio address to promote SCHIP expansion"

Blue Crab Boulevard » Oh For Pete’s Sake says:

October 7, 2007 at 9:14 pm

[…] Sister Toldjah: "Bbbbbut so what if the story doesn’t exactly fit the liberal narrative, right? As long as they succeed in demagoguing the opposition … " […]
Private School and A Large House, But No Health Insurance? : The American Pundit says:

October 7, 2007 at 9:33 pm

[…] Even More: STACLU, Blue Crab Boulevard, The Examiner, Just Barking Mad, Sister Toldjah, Powerline, Gateway Pundit, Wake Up America, Democracy Project, The Shotgun, Western Standard, Five Feet of Fury, Protein Wisdom, Wizbang. […]
DaMav says:

October 8, 2007 at 1:19 am

Absolutely disgusting. We need a video of this family and their $ 500K+ house alongside some of the smokers being asked to pay for their kids health insurance.

This is tantamount to utter fraud by the Democrats pushing this program. Get the word out!
Leaning Straight Up says:

October 8, 2007 at 3:09 am

Democrat SCHIP ad uses not so poor kid as a tool, and some thoughts on SCHIP

STA via Sister Toldjah brings this story:

The lefties and the media piled on when Bush used his veto pen on this one. They tried to drop the absolute moral authority bomb on it big time. Looks like a little backfire is on the horizon.

…
sanity says:

October 8, 2007 at 3:42 am

It’s all about feelings, not facts.

The democrat party is the feelings party, it is run by emotion, they react emotional, but with very little facts.
Great White Rat says:

October 8, 2007 at 5:23 am

So this family sends two kids to private school at $20K a year each…and claims their combined income is only $45000? Something stinks here…reminds me of Norman Hsu’s mailman who claimed to make the same 45G a year but was able to regularly contribute six-figure donations to Democrat candidates.

If they really have been claiming only that low income, it’s time for an old-fashioned IRS audit…
Liberty Pundit says:

October 8, 2007 at 9:07 am

Pelosi Prays For Bush “All The Time”

Heaven only knows who she’s praying to, though:
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) said Sun…
…
Leslie says:

October 8, 2007 at 9:46 am

Well, look. You all can inveigh all you want against this shamelessness (which it is), but the fact is, the GOP loses on this issue. Even if the president is right on the facts, no pol can stand fast against the “It’s for the cheeeldrun” tide. It’s too emotional an issue.

As the guy who drives the Miller Beer Truck might put it, “mess with ‘it’s for the cheeeldrun’ and ‘it’s for the cheeeldrun’ is gonna mess with you.’ ”
alchemist says:

October 9, 2007 at 10:24 am

Yeah, actually, all these “facts”, they appear to be wrong. here’s an explanation, but I’m trying to find an actual newspaper report that covers the issue closer:

For example, the right hammered Graeme for attending an expensive private school. What his attackers neglected to mention is that the school only charges the Frosts $500 a year.

The right hammered Graeme’s sister, who suffered brain injuries in the family’s car accident, for also attending an expensive private school, without noting that the state covers her tuition.

The right blasted the Frost family for living in a neighborhood where some homes sell for nearly a half-million dollars. What their attackers neglected to mention is that the family bought their home 16 years ago for $55,000, in what was once a less-safe part of Baltimore.

By any reasonable measure, the Frost family is struggling. The parents’ combined income is $45,000. They have four kids, all of whom qualify for S-CHIP, and all of whom would have no insurance without the state benefits.
Severian says:

October 9, 2007 at 1:26 pm

Well, so you say alchemist, where are your links to real proof? Do you really expect anyone to just accept your word for it?
PCD says:

October 9, 2007 at 1:30 pm

alchemist,

Do you think cut and paste from Think Progress won’t be as recognizable as documents made on a laser printer that were supposedly created on a late 60’s early 70 vintage IBM Selectric?

Being a soft propagandist is as galling as the “seminar trolls” that Soros sends out.
alchemist says:

October 9, 2007 at 2:00 pm

Yeah, it’s from think progress, but I got it off a different blog (and so on). I guess i should have said “may not be correct”, but was writing quickly. Still looking for a newspaper article that validates either story.
alchemist says:

October 9, 2007 at 3:04 pm

So, I can’t find any information that’s not blog related. Since the posted story also originates from an unknown user online “icwatudo”, I’m guessing that parts of both stories are likely true, and parts are either false, or contain glossed over details.

A full newspaper report would be nice, but it’s probably not going to happen.

Things that complicate the issue

1) The father own his own business, Frostworks, which complicates his earnings quite a bit. It’s difficult to know what 45,000 really means in that case. (My in-laws own rental apartments and in the past have struggled to make the mortgage, now those rental properties are worth quite a bit)

2) According to “icwhatudo” In 1999, they purchased a 160,000$ woodworking studio, and own commercial land that they rent in baltimore. How does this affect their finances? It’s difficult to know what’s on mortgage (and what they actually own), and how this affects earnings.

3) Icwhatudo alledges that they appear to have a recent ‘kitchen reconstruction’, but as a woodworker that’s a peice of cake. My father did that recently, with fake marble in the kitchen, and it cost them almost nothing.

4) It’s difficult to know their longterm insurance history. Certainly, if they were using high-deductible insurance, a serious injury may have skyrocketed costs, perhaps making them unaffordable. If you’ve already invested 200,000$ into business mortgages, it’s hard to lose that investment and return to a job that provides insurance.

5) they appear to have owned a single house that has skyrocketed in value, also complicating finances. However, that doesn’t neccessarily mean they can afford to sell it (My father is stuck in that situation).

Several blogs have accussed the hasley’s of “gaming the system”. I think it’s difficult to know when things went badly, and what happened to their finances at that point in time. However, this ‘gray’ area is all I can find right now.
Great White Rat says:

October 10, 2007 at 8:43 am

Alchemist, the bottom line is that this family has chosen to sink their money into a big home and into a business instead of any kind of health insurance, and now they want people with far fewer assets to ante up for their health care.

The president was right to veto this bill. The focus should be on helping the poor, not buying votes with a handout to the middle and upper classes like the Dems wanted.

Yoiu have to wonder – what ever happened to the liberals’ oft-expressed concern for the poor? I think you can find it right next to their support for the troops.
alchemist says:

October 10, 2007 at 8:47 am

A new York Times article is up “Capital Feud: A 12-year old is the fodder” , which delves into the issue quite nicely, and actually interviews the family. (Even Michelle Malkin believes it is “fairer & more balanced than I believed it would be”.

When you get the whole picture, it becomes more complicated. The family has some assets, but not a good income or access to a medial plan. They sold the family business in 1999, and the father does both part-time woodworking and part-time welding. The mother’s job does not provide insurance.

Their assets appear to exist from smart investing (their also appears to be a rich architect in the family, although familial assistance was not addressed and may not exist)

The family claims they have tried to buy insurance, but with two children with brain-trauma, they can’t afford the premiums (much more expensive than the 500$ per month quoted on some blogs).

Should they be forced to sell their assets (which would only be a temporary stop-loss), Or should the goverment provide assistance? It’s a much more complicated question than just Frost =Good, or Frost=Bad, and does set up a more nuanced debate on the nature of goverment assistance… when and how much?
sanity says:

October 10, 2007 at 10:50 am

Should you be able to take the government hand outs (which are not free – it is paid for by others), if your assests are tied up in investments and you have little cash on hand?
PCD says:

October 10, 2007 at 11:17 am

alchemist,

When you file for Bankruptcy, you have to sell off such assets to pay your bills.

Again, you must think like John Edwards who expects donors to his campaign to fund his exorbanent luxuries like multi hundred dollar hair cuts and spa treatments while Edwards has millions of dollars in personal wealth.

If this family were really destitute, then yes, they should be helped by those who have more than they do. Tell me how much your rich Democrats like Soros, Buffet, Kennedy, Kerry, Kerry-Heinz, Feinstein, Kohl, Pelosi, Gore etc. have contributed to help from their personal funds.
alchemist says:

October 10, 2007 at 1:02 pm

Sure, I understand that PCD. My argument is that it would be better NOT to push the family into bankruptcy in the first place. I think it’s fairly common in these situations that families lose EVERYTHING after massive medical expenditures (most bankruptcies are caused by medical costs). So do we wait until the family declares bankruptcy, loses all their assets and has nothing? Or do we give them some help earlier on?
Baklava says:

October 10, 2007 at 1:48 pm

alchemist wrote, “My argument is that it would be better NOT to push the family into bankruptcy in the first place. ”

Then educate the family to use the public school system for at least 2 of their 4 children. That might take a phone call.

Point 2. They are ALREADY covered by SCHIP. They are being used as props for a massive expansion. Bush and Republicans are for increases to SCHIP but not the increases that Democrats (and we see you) are pushing for. It is a ridiculous stance to act like these people will be impacted negatively when they won’t be.

I sure wish I could have my two daughters in private school. I’ll do that and cancel my daughters insurance and use SCHIP… Hope you approve. I make under the 400% above poverty level..
Baklava says:

October 10, 2007 at 1:51 pm

Once again as in the 1995 Medicare battle, Americans are duped into thinking Republicans are for cuts and Democrats will save them.

Alchemist. You are duped. You can either be aware now or continue ignorance. This is less to do with the Frosts and more to do with the ‘actual’ positions each camp holds. The Frosts are being used as tools to spout a LIE. So are you.
alchemist says:

October 10, 2007 at 2:06 pm

I think the New York post article clearly illustrtes that neither side is lying (per se)… but both sides are conviently foretting facts that relate to individuals. Studies clearly show

… Illness and medical bills caused half of the 1,458,000 personal bankruptcies in 2001, according to a study published by the journal Health Affairs.

Surprisingly, most of those bankrupted by illness had health insurance. More than three-quarters were insured at the start of the bankrupting illness. However, 38 percent had lost coverage at least temporarily by the time they filed for bankruptcy.

Most of the medical bankruptcy filers were middle class; 56 percent owned a home and the same number had attended college. In many cases, illness forced breadwinners to take time off from work — losing income and job-based health insurance precisely when families needed it most.

Families in bankruptcy suffered many privations — 30 percent had a utility cut off and 61 percent went without needed medical care.

Baklava: I think the %400 level is strictly in Baltimore, where the cost of living is much more expensive than elsewhere (and expanding rapidly). If you live in a major metropolitan city, it’s probably higher. If not, you’re probably closer to the national average.

Depending on state laws, you may be elgible for private education. I have family that teaches in several states, if your child is interested in a particular program that is not offered at local public schools, they can apply for statewide grants/private school grants. The parents have one private and one public scholarship.

Yes, they already have SCHIP. They are being used to demonstrate how SCHIP helps families that are struggling. Without SCHIP, they would sell their house, and would still likely declare bankruptcy in 3-5 years due to medical expenses. (such as above)

The health insurance system is breaking for middle and lower class americans. It’s not broken, but it’s heading in that direction. SCHIP is one method of preventing at risk families from being devastated by the growing cost of healthcare. It’s perfectly ok to disagree with SCHIP on principle, but something has to change or else many more families are going to struggle.
PCD says:

October 10, 2007 at 2:25 pm

17, so alchemist, you think it is perfectly ok to tax the real working poor so that the Frosts do not have to make any lifestyle changes. Where is the fairness that the Frosts get to keep their 4 kids in private school and many of the taxpayers paying for the SCHIP benefits cannot afford to own commercial properties, put their kids in private schools, and putz at a hobby instead of getting a real job?

I’d like to quote David who commented at Right Voices, the 17th comment to this post.

” “I corrected the mistake that some of these bloggers made in overvaluing the house at $400,000-plus. It’s closer to $300,000.”

Actually, Zillow.com estimates the home’s value at $360,633â€“closer to $400,000 than $300,000.

And what’s that on the Maryland Department of Assessments and Taxation, BALTIMORE CITY Real Property Data Search? Says the house is NOT their “Principal Residence”! Could it be they own another residential property? Well, it could just be a mistake on the assessor’s formâ€¦

In any case, defining folks with $45,000 income (if that is truly the case), owners of commercial poroperty (who have income from renting it as well), business owners, etc., as “working poor” means I should have my “feddle gummint” and State checks coming in the mail Any Day Nowâ€¦

“Working poor” MHWAâ€¦

Poor folks surely need help. Well-off folks sometimes do, too, but well-off folks like the Frosts have many other means beyond sucking at the public teat. “
Baklava says:

October 10, 2007 at 2:41 pm

alchemist, You are not dumb. Therefore I can only conclude that you are choosing to deceive (lie).

You wrote, “Yes, they already have SCHIP.”

This is a glimpse that you DO understand. The PROPOSAL is to massively EXPAND SCHIP way past the Frost’s.

We highlight that the Frosts do get SCHIP and that expanding beyond the 300% to 400% above poverty level and including adults is NOT the direction that we should go.

The lie is that we conservatives don’t “care”. The lie is that we want to axe the program for the poor. The bill that Bush supports is an INCREASE and you can’t come to admit that and neither will the:
1) drive by legacy media
2) Lying democrats
3) You

If you do admit it then what is your point???? Get on with supporting Bush’s wish for an increase to strengthen health for poor children instead of socking it to responsible people to pay for irresponsible people.

Pulling irrelevant statistics does not strengthen your argument. See. Take a look and see what choices America’s “poor” are making. See that America’s “poor” have more square feet of living space than the “average” European. See that they have quite a few luxuries. Choices have repercussions. I choose not to have an LCD or plasma TV. I choose not to have a car payment. I choose to purchase my two daughter’s health insurance and one of them has a higher premium because of health issues. I choose.

You should not choose to raid my pocket because of your politics that seem to want to use irrelevant arguments such as health care being expensive. You don’t fix that problem with leftist ideas. It is leftism that has caused the cost problem.

Stick to the argument. Stop deceiving.
alchemist says:

October 15, 2007 at 9:50 am

Baklava, you have decent arguments in your post, unfortunately, I have been unable to find good time to respond adequately. 1st things first, I think calling me a liar is a bit over the top. I’ll freely admit that I blog to push myself to read up on controversial topics. Honestly, I am less aware of the details of SCHIP than I would like to be, and they may have led me to make my posts less direct than they should be.

What I was trying to demonstrate in my previous posts is that health care costs are rising dramatically, and even people middle class families that are responsible, well-funded and insured face massive problems. I understand that Bush has made many speeches about helping the poor through SCHIP (although some democrats have argued that the presidents plan doesn’t keep up with inflation). I’m curious to hear more about what those plans are, and how republicans would deal with the health care crisis that will soon face the middle class as well?

A friend of mine made an interesting point this weekend, that people waiting to get health insurance when they are sick is unfair to the corporations that run them. With that thought, I’m curious how you see Massachusetts plan that requires everyone be covered by some health insurance plan?

As for me, I’m going to have to back off blogging until my current project finishes in december. I’m currently working 7 days a week, and I don’t have time to get fired up about everyday non-sequitors. (I think I’m dropping football too). Right now, I just don’t have the full time to inform myself on all the issues.

I’ll drop by again in december.
PCD says:

October 15, 2007 at 11:18 am

alchemist, We’ll be waiting to debunk you in December. Don’t think we’ll forget this crap you try to peddle as a “reasonable” lefty. Do us a favor, get your basic facts down, and don’t come with any type of Bush stole the 2000 election. That disqualifies you right out of the box as a NON-THINKING Dem-bot.

Comments are closed.