This was one of your worst interviews ever, Brian, allowing the guest to spout lies and Republican talking points and go unchallenged. There is no government takeover of healthcare proposed, these bills were not made 'in secret', in fact everyone knows EVERYTHING that's in it which allows people to take their position on it (for or against) otherwise there would be no OBJECTION to it. The only confsuion has arisen as a result of the lies and spin the Republicans have interjected into the conversation, such as death panels, to scare people.
Seems your listeners are way ahead of you Brian and know all this already, so you gave this guy free air time to continue to spout his lies. You've joined the rest of the media in complicitly allowing these guys a voice.
God help us if he gets elected.
get up, stand up, bryan! we rely on you to ask the tough questions, not let ideologues spout off without challenge!
if you aren't going to ask the questions, you should at least openthe show up for callers to do so. it is really infuriating as a listener to not hear such blatant bs be challenged by someone!
It was hard getting through the disappointment yesterday and now this segment. We need to stand up and challenge these people who lie. The "Party of No" lies and when unchallenegd their lies become truths for so many misinformed individuals. I am so disappointed that Democrats are letting this happen-we are missing real opportunities to make lasting change.
Brian, I know you don't want to scare republicans from coming on your show. But you HAVE to follow up on "government take over of health care." Just ask him to clarify that point; I'm one of the 30 million who doesn't have Health Insurance and definitely won't now because fear has dominated this debate.
Good news, this guy has the personality of a moth. He won't get elected.
Brian-Love you, but I must add my amens to the last 10-15 commenters. The major part of the failure of journalism these days (separate and apart from the devastation this is wreaking on the Dems.) is the refusal to call politicians--mainly Republicans--on their facts. It's as if statements like "government takeover of health care" is treated like mere rhetoric, an opinion to which the speaker is entitled, instead of a gross distortion of fact, or out and out lie.We can and we MUST do better in what's left of responsible (if not progressive) journalism.
Rob Simmons accuses the Democrats of doing exactly what we KNOW the Republicans did when they had an iron grip under Bush... the lack of transparency, the exclusionary tactics... where was he to criticize that in his party when they overwhelmingly did that at every turn for those 8 disastrous years? He is simply whining because his party's tactics are supposedly being used against them. What a hypocrite! I don't really support those tactics, but when we have a lockstep opposition that will do (and has SAID they will do) anything to derail any chance of success for our current president, is it any surprise that would happen?
He must be rubbing his hands together in glee that he might have a chance to have unfettered corporate money backing him in his rush to election. How can Republicans be such blatant supporters of corporations then turn around and say they are populist? I hope the average voter is not so gullible that they believe that Republicans actually do support 'the people'... They are corporatists, NOT populists. Wake up!
If a guest were to refer to the president as President Yomama the host would correct the speaker. When Republicans come on your shows and refer to the Democratic Party as the Democrat Party they are using this word as an epithet. Please correct these speakers. There is no difference between these two examples. Both are slurs and should not be tolerated. When the hosts ignore this manipulative speech they are furthering it. Thank you.
In all seriousness, I too would like to hear people challenged when they use talking points like "government takeover of healthcare."
I would really like to know exactly how the proposed plan is a "government takeover." As someone who would love such a takeover, I don't see it.
This guy's rhetoric is off the charts, just like all the other Republicans. He's trying to rouse the rabble that don't actually know what's going on.
The current health care bill is not a "government takeover." (I wish it was.) It's health insurance reform that mandates we buy _private_ health insurance.
He also said that the the Republicans should be in power so there would be negotiations about health care. Unfortunately, pretty much all they've been doing during the health care debate has been stone walling, not negotiating.
I hope Mr Simmons goes down in flames.
My husband is just about old enough to get Medicare. He's not the least bit scared of a public option because our 10 year old son and I will need health insurance and I'm not yet old enough for Medicare. Since my husband and I are both self-employed we currently pay $20,000 a year for health insurance and it is NOT gold plated or Cadillac by any means. This is because we subsidize all the big corporations that can strike deals with the insurance companies and the hospitals that are providing extremely expensive care for those who are not old enough to have access to Medicare. The Republicans, with their insistence that others cannot have what the elderly have -- is what scares us. I wish the Republicans would stop talking to Joe and talk to some legitimate small business owners who actually pay taxes like my husband and myself.
If Brian Leher won't challenge a candidate running for office when they make such an egregiously deceitful statement as "let the Republicans in" on the health care discussions, as though they didn't to a person commit themselves to voting against any reform that wasn't exactly in line with the already failed policies they were pushing, simply in order to defeat Obama, despite many direct attempts by Obama to involve them and huge compromise -- if Leher won't say something when candidates make these kinds a statements, then how can we possible hold them accountable for what they say?
No one does.
Another republican softball interview for Brian. He's batting a 1000!
Brian, why are you not even vaguely countering or criticizing all of your guests' false remarks? The idea that the Democrats have been functioning secretively from the Republicans and America is ludicrous. Obama and the Democrats continuously tried to involve and make concessions for Republicans on healthcare, but stubborn republicans refused to budge an inch and have offered no alternative. If he genuinely thinks "bringing Republicans to the table" to create healthcare is a reality, he's been drinking the Glenn Beck kool-aid a little too long. Come on Brian, don't take all these lies at face value!
I can remember a time when Brian would not have let a politician, Rep or Dem, openly lie like this hack Simmons. Union political spending is unrestricted? Really? Does he seriously expect anyone to believe that Senate Republicans have been acting in a spirit of Bi-partisanship? Didn't we used to call people out on this kind of thing?It's just sad.
Simmons speaks with forked tongue.When have the Repubs EVER been transparent?
Rob Simmons... what drugs are you taking. You keep using buzzwords, transparency among them and I believe that you believe what you are saying, but you are not to be believed.
Mr. Simmons - The banks needed saved in 2008 for the sake of our underlying economy (even if the terms were not often the best) AND now the banks need savaged.
Also, Simmons is giving Republican talking points on health care cost reductions that help only on the margins. Real cost controls have to address inefficiencies Medicare/Medicaid, end of life care, more information sharing, bringing down fee-for-service, etc. Let's talk about REAL reform.
I'm very tired of the Republican party telling us what we are thinking. They have been very successful in steering the national mood in their direction, which happens to be a retreat to the trickle down theory. We’re told to trust big corporations and wealthy people to be benevolent. Is that what happened in 2007 and 2008?
I don't understand why it's in my interest to have a publicly traded insurance company interject itself in the interaction between my doctor and myself. I think it's immoral that a stock holder can make a profit off of my health issues.
You disappoint me. You have let Rob Simmons repeat Republican talking point after talking point without challenging.
Govt takeover of health care? Public option has been dead for quite a while, yet you let him repeat this unchallenged.
Read Daniel Gross' latest on Slate about how the recent spate of Republican's have railed against the bailouts and stimulus and deficit without ever proposing a solution that actually solves the problem.
If you keep this up, Jon Stewart is going to add you to his list of media types who swallow "facts" from politicians without checking them, then signing off with "we've run out time so we'll have to leave it there..."
Why let his repetition of the phrase "government takeover of healthcare" go unchallenged. I don't see anything of the sort in the bill. Private doctors, private insurers.
The congressman keeps characterizing the proposed health care overhaul as a "government takeover"; it's hard to see a plan that relies on private insurers as a government takeover. Why isn't Brian contradicting him on this point? The press's failure to keep covering Republican statements like as the perversion of the truth that they are accounts for much of the public's misunderstanding of the health bill.
please don't let him get away with comments like "government take over of health care". He's just stringing together talking points. This is not a real conversation.
forget bringing the republians in..
their goal is to kill healthcare reform. they've stated that publicly..
so why bring in the trojan horse? your this man is a disingenuous at best.
Please ask the candidate how he interprets the fact that a huge percent of those questioned in exit polls in MA favor the public option.
How can this guy be such a hypocrite? Is he against the bailout? Less government involvement? Or only for his interests? I would like to see less government introusion in my life, for sure. But for things like ending prohibition of drugs, "illegal" immigration, free speech, and ending the police state. Please. lets be more real about this...
If this guy really believes in free-enterprise then all the banks and all the car companies should have been allowed to fail. But he doesn't believe that. He is a hypocritical fool just like the rest.
How does Rob Simmons account for the UNIVERSALLY lower cost of health care in countries with national health care? How does he account for the NEAR-UNIVERSALLY greater longevity and satisfaction in those countries?
He doesn't, of course. He -- like ALL Republicans today -- is a pathological liar.
As usual, Brian asking the really tough (cough) questions.
Man, you are really nailing him on the typical Republican rhetoric like "government takeover of healthcare".
Is there any doubt about Simmons supporting corporate financed political campaigns......
Listening to this guy, I just can't believe the mentality of so many people in this country. We're pretty much doomed.
The CT AG will have to watch out for Ms. McMahon. The best tactic would be to go for her hair; show the crowd that just bc he's a democrat doesn't mean he's a gentleman. She might try to reverse the hold and then hit him with a pile driver. But he can get the drop on her by creating an offstage distraction, then taking her out with a folding chair to the back of the head. It might not be pretty, but it's how you win elections these days.
This guy is from planet Michael Steele. It just highlights the divide.
So Rob Simmons is for "free enterprise".
I take it then he would have OPPOSED the bailout.
BL, the Washington Post blurb is a bit clearer on the SCT opinion than the AP blurb you read. The previous prohibition was on corporations donating INDIRECTLY, i.e. doing an ad without the permission of the candidate. This is the part that was struck down. The WP blurb says the DIRECT corporate restrictions to candidates are still in place.
Rob Simmons is just lying about "leveling the playing field".
There is simply no pretending that corparations -- with assets 100 or 1000 TIMES what unions and public interest groups have -- will now have a monstrous advantage.
This effectively makes the American electoral system like Bloomberg versus Thompson. We will see corporations spending billions while unions and public interest groups (like MoveOn) will have a few millions to spend.
Hope that the candidate mentions in his speaches that legalizing the illegals would create never ending waves of them creatingnever ending demand for public assistance. Maybe the illegals come here not only for work? (some of US taxpayers dare to think that way even in New York)
Register for your own account so you can vote on comments, save your favorites, and more.
Please stay on topic, be civil, and be brief.
Email addresses are never displayed, but they are required to confirm
your comments. Names are displayed with all comments. We reserve the
right to edit any comments posted on this site. Please read the
Comment Guidelines before
By leaving a comment, you agree to New York Public Radio's
It's your neighborhood, your city, your country, your world, and now your website. Brian Lehrer delves into the issues and links them to real life.