Think carefully for a minute: those who call others liars are usually deceivers themselves.
      Do you think I am talking about the recent flap with SCCongress member, Joe Wilson? My fault, I forgot to say who or what was the object or cause of my opening aphorism--and that's my point: no matter who or what I say now, the damage is done. You probably thought I meant Joe Wilson, and nothing I write will un-associate that connection, or change that conclusion.

      Lawyers and middle school students know this well. Outbursts in the courtroom and classroom are admonished by teachers and judges, but the words, once said, stay; the belligent, bellicouse remark destroys the discipline and order needed for proper debate or for a judgment asssessing the issues at stake. It switches the discourse to the ad hominem. It's a brutal, joker-like challenge to power. And to common sense.

      Many think Joe Wilson was right, but the issue of true or dare really begs the point. Rude behavior and disruptive outbursts in the hallowed halls of Congress by experienced elected officials are no different than flag burning. It is disrespect, pure and simple. It tramples on America's most valued traditions. It tears democracy apart. It does not enhance free speech. Instead, it uses that right of freedom to strike tyranny. It's a mockery.

      And where did Joe Wilson's sudden found passion come from? What propelled this "spontaneous" outburst? From here, it looks like Joe Wilson was a staged event. He has had plenty of opportunities to explain his positions on health care, to cite his differences with the President's conclusions, even to put forth his own ideas for reform. C-SPAN offers an unfiltered platform to House members each evening when the House is in session. Talks shows look for new faces. Why was this the first time we have heard of Joe Wilson's passion in this verbal ambush on the Commander-in-Chief? The sum expression of his televisioned position seems to rest on two words, whose notoriety and million dollars in contributions have a marginal association with health care.

      In fact, what is Wilson's plan as a representative from a state that out of fifty, ranks first in infant morality, 3rd in life expectancy, has the nation's highest unemployment rate (how will families pay for private plans?), and ranks high in heart disease, high blood pressure, diabetes, AIDS, obesity, and tobacco related morality? What's his plan to improve the health of citizens in a state, which, despite conservative representation that proclaims the vaulted virtues of free enterprise, government is the state's second largest employer?

      There is another old adage: when you don't have a case, try your opponent's.

      So here's Joe Wilson's case. If Joe Wilson really does think, as an elected member of Congress, that his peers have written and plan to enact reform legislation that will create death panels and institutionalize murder by a review of professionally appointed peers--if his staff supports this view and his party's leadership is solidly behind this interpretation, then he needs to carefully, plainly state, point-by-point the latent dangers others don't see. If Wilson sees this outcome on his own, against the views and judgments of his own party and staff, than he needs to be reviewed by a different panel, a panel of voters. And ousted from office, for ludicrousness.

       If Joe Wilson does not see the idea of death panels in the details of HR 3200, than his outburst is even more egregious. So which is it? Does Joe Wilson see death panels coming to Columbia, to review the lives of his elderly or sick constituents to determine a schedule for their deaths? And if they miss the appointment, will we send local police, national guard, or a newly created force to round them up? Like death row inmates convicted of a capital crime, will the sweet, hard working elderly, pillars of the church and their family, the heart and core of their communities, be eligible for last minute stays, new reviews? And which doctors will face malpractice for pulling the panel-ordered plug? And what happens if we take grandma on a long trip? Will we be fleeing fugitives? Will there be a grandma underground? Anyone can see the absurdity of these notions! It's enough to make me scream.

      And if ol' Joe doesn't see “panels” so clearly in the fine print, a task now decided in absentia by insurance providers through their approval and “permission” for your doctor's treatment protocols (see http://bit.ly/sLo3b), than ol' Joe was following Lee Atwater's lead when Atwater said during a governor's race, of a Democratic candidate who had been treating for depression by electric shook, “we don't need a governor who's been hooked up to jumper cables.”

Walter Rhett writes and publishes Southern Perlo, from Kudu Coffee in downtown Charleston, SC. His new book, "Carolina Gold," will be out soon.