March 31, 2010

Shocking...GOP Already Starting To Go Wobbly On Repealing Health Care Reform Monstrosity
— DrewM

10 days! The GOP can't even muster courage for two whole weeks before they start thinking that maybe, just maybe they are being too strident about the whole health care repeal thing.

Somewhere, but not the offices of AEI, David Frum is smiling.

Sen. John Cornyn of Texas, who chairs the committee responsible for electing GOP senators this fall, said in an interview, "The focus really should be on the misplaced priorities of the administration" and Congress' Democratic leaders.

"The No. 1 concern of the public is jobs and people losing their homes," he said. "The administration has been obsessing on this health care bill."

Asked if he advises Republican Senate candidates to call for repealing the law, Cornyn said: "Candidates are going to test the winds in their own states. ... In some places, the health care bill is more popular than others."

On Tuesday, Cornyn issued a 1,280-word campaign memo that mentioned "repeal" only once. It did not advocate repeal but noted that in a recent poll, "46 percent of respondents support a full repeal" of the health law.

Three weeks ago, Cornyn told reporters he thought GOP Senate candidates would and should run on a platform of repealing the legislation.

Cornyn and others increasingly are focused on several corporations' claims that a provision of the new law that cancels a tax benefit will hurt profits and hiring. This approach places a greater premium on pivoting to the economy instead of dwelling on the legalistic process of trying to repeal the complex law.

"The health care debate provides a natural segue into talking about the economy and jobs," said Nicklaus Simpson, spokesman for the Senate Republican Conference, a policy group.

Now part of this is AP spin to protect their guy in the White House but let's not pretend there isn't a go along-get along reflex embedded in just about every politician. If the path of least resistance is to nibble at the edges of this law, that's what most Republicans will do. It's our job to keep them focused on the task and more afraid of what happens if they go wobbly than not.

That's not to say every Republican campaign this fall should be one word long, to the exclusion of every other issue. As I said last week, talk about whatever you want but always bring it back to the fact that health care and its impact on the economy are the issues that frame everything else. And at the bottom of that issue is one word, repeal. Sure the GOP will put something else in place (I wish we didn't have to, unfortunately that's not in the cards) but first and foremost we will repeal this nation killing health care law.

It might not be a winning formula for every election. That's ok, we don't need to win every election. We need to win enough on a clear mandate to start taking steps in 2011-2012 to repeal this law and build moment going into 2012 for the final push.

Repeal is going to be hard and it's going to be a long process. Look how long it took to get the damn thing in place. We have 3-4 years, not 100 so we need focus and determination because if we don't succeed, nothing else matters.

Man up GOP.

Added: The Club For Growth has a "Repeal It" pledge website. See if your candidate has taken it and if they haven't, ask them why.

Posted by: DrewM at 06:32 AM | Comments (456)
Post contains 603 words, total size 4 kb.

1 I say repeal and replace some GOP pols.

Posted by: EC at March 31, 2010 06:34 AM (mAhn3)

2

uh, oh

Posted by: MDr VB1.0 CS1st at March 31, 2010 06:34 AM (ucq49)

3 This is exactly why repeal probably won't ever happen....and exactly why no one has any faith in the GOP. What a waste of a party.

Posted by: Alex at March 31, 2010 06:34 AM (Tr7vq)

4 Crazies to the left, wimps to the right.

So true.

Posted by: shibumi at March 31, 2010 06:35 AM (OKZrE)

5 This makes me mad. What is wrong with these guys? Do they NOT hear that people DO NOT want this? And if They aren't listening, then pray tell just who in D.C. is? The people DO NOT want this health care take over. This isn't reform, it's a take over. Period. Why are the Republicans doing this?

Argh!

Posted by: mistress overdone at March 31, 2010 06:36 AM (2/oBD)

6 To quote Homer Simpson, "Well boy, you tried and failed. You know the moral to the story? Stop trying." Never mind that we elected a Republican to Ted Kennedys seat largely because of healthcare. The Senate is truly worthless.

Posted by: jjshaka at March 31, 2010 06:37 AM (Vh6z+)

7 Needed:  Steely-eyed realism.

This political class does not have it in sufficient quantity, only in isolated pockets.

We are much, much closer to a catastrophic fiscal crisis than our leadership is acknowledging.  No day in the Cold War frightened me like I am currently.

Posted by: Circa (Insert Year Here) at March 31, 2010 06:37 AM (nC+4h)

8 Cornyn's Republic of Texas visa has just been revoked.

Posted by: John Galt at March 31, 2010 06:37 AM (F/4zf)

9 Yes! They are finally listening to the TREES!

Posted by: Drippi the Hippie at March 31, 2010 06:38 AM (D0gRE)

10

Repeal is going to be hard and it's going to be a long process. Look how long it took to get the damn thing in place. We have 3-4 years, not 100 so we need focus and determination because if we don't succeed, nothing else matters.

Not surprising.  People are going to have to ride the assess of the squishes from here on until it's actually "repealed".  I'm not hopeful, but I lost all that hope when I stabbed myself with the Blade of Olympus.  Maybe some of you got those swirly blue orby thingies of 'hope".

Posted by: Kratos (missing from the side of Olympus) at March 31, 2010 06:38 AM (9hSKh)

11 The people want socialism, the only questions are "how much, how fast, and who is going to give it to them?"

Posted by: GOP Leadership at March 31, 2010 06:38 AM (W5NBA)

12 This is the reason why it's called THE STUPID PARTY.  There' a comfortable margin in the polls that would have the GOP cruising to an easy victory over OcommieCare, and what do they do?  Sound like pansy-arsed ijits.  If my local guy goes wobbly, I'll be looking for a GOOOH candidate or a Tea Party candidate.

Posted by: RushBabe at March 31, 2010 06:38 AM (LKkE8)

13 The Texans put this fucker in office?

Posted by: arhooley at March 31, 2010 06:39 AM (pd81g)

14

11 The people want socialism, the only questions are "how much, how fast, and who is going to give it to them?"

Steyn's actually been a bit depressing to read lately, as he's saying that we've hit that point where the Republicans (like the Tories) are going to deem Obamacare as "safe in their hands".  America isn't like Britian, but still one has to wonder...

Posted by: Kratos (missing from the side of Olympus) at March 31, 2010 06:40 AM (9hSKh)

15 And once again, the UTTER PUSSIFICATION of the Republican Leadership screws us again.

When you run for political office as a Republican, do the automatically surgically remove your balls?

Posted by: Bill Mitchell at March 31, 2010 06:40 AM (kEBiX)

16

13 The Texans put this fucker in office?

Not even Texans are perfect.

Posted by: Kratos (missing from the side of Olympus) at March 31, 2010 06:41 AM (9hSKh)

17

Sen. John Cornyn of Texas, who chairs the committee responsible for electing GOP senators this fall, said in an interview, "The focus really should be on the misplaced priorities of the administration" and Congress' Democratic leaders.

Ace call it last week.  Said Cornyn was lying when he was trying to walk back other stupid statements.

Posted by: rdbrewer at March 31, 2010 06:41 AM (x6Iaq)

18 Cornyn's been a douche ever since this fucking thing has passed; that squishy asshole needs to be gone as much as Michael Steele.

Posted by: Captain Hate at March 31, 2010 06:41 AM (EbYty)

19

You're comfortable campaigning on an outright repeal of the mandate for pre-existing conditions coverage?

I'm surely not.

Let's try to be smart about this.

Posted by: laceyunderalls at March 31, 2010 06:42 AM (pLTLS)

20

Man up GOP.

 

Or we will find man (men) enough for you, GOP!

Posted by: always right at March 31, 2010 06:42 AM (FcKXR)

21 Look, if I push for repeal, I am on the winning side of a really popular issue. We might pick up seats. We can't have that, for goodness sakes.

Posted by: Sen. John Cornyn at March 31, 2010 06:42 AM (8kq7+)

22 Dont you worry, we'll have his ass when he comes back here for town hall meetings. This wont fly here.

Posted by: Wizard of id at March 31, 2010 06:42 AM (eoYse)

23

Yes, lacy.

Repeal the whole thing. 

 

And have a complete do over.  OPENLY.

Posted by: always right at March 31, 2010 06:44 AM (FcKXR)

24 Seriously, this is why you lose elections.

Posted by: scumguy at March 31, 2010 06:44 AM (VDgKF)

25 Where the fuck is Tom Coburn to beat this asswipe like Blazer beats his sausage?

Posted by: Editor at March 31, 2010 06:45 AM (pUfK9)

26

Fucking stupind ass pussy cock sucking dickheads.

 

NOT A SINGLE FUCKING DIME.. I will ony contribute directly to candidates.

 

 

Posted by: TC at March 31, 2010 06:45 AM (DYJjQ)

27 So go to his website and flood him with emails with the basic theme to "Sack up!" GOP needs to be hammered with calls every day that say repeal this fucker.

Posted by: Solo4357 at March 31, 2010 06:45 AM (q4NLr)

28

Hey, Texas.  Our Senators can kick your Senators' asses. 

Posted by: Okie at March 31, 2010 06:45 AM (x6Iaq)

29 The GOP needs to pull its head out of its A**! This is a poison pill to the concept of limited governance and free economies. Get this thing repealed or switch parties, because if it isn't repealed we're headed for a one party co dependent abusive government. And that one party AIN'T going to be Republican.

Posted by: MikeTheMoose at March 31, 2010 06:46 AM (0q2P7)

30
yeah, no shit

dagny brings up the last 3 Republicans victories as proof the Democrats are losing favor with the people. Well, yeah, but that proves my point about the GOP giving away the 2010 midterms.

Let's take a look at the 3 victories and identify their common thread. All three candidates represented stark differences from their opponents. You could say all three were the anti-Obamas or anti-Democrats.

The Republicans need to show stark differences between themselves and the Democrats to get people to the polls in November. If they appear to be Democrat-lites, they won't win. And we can't let the Democrats tack right and co-opt our positions.

For instance, Mark Kirk is now balking on repeal. Did he increase or decrease his chances of winning?


Posted by: Tweet, a Joo, and a Mexican walk into a bar... at March 31, 2010 06:46 AM (X1Xo9)

31 The only alternatives the Repubs should offer are ones that reduce costs, not increase them. Is there a contact # for this clown?

Posted by: Dr. Spank at March 31, 2010 06:47 AM (I1/U/)

32 I think the GOP are foolish NOT to run on a repeal platform. These idiots need to get out of Washington more. Evidently my sense of losing America and my memory is longer than those who run as republicans.

Posted by: mare at March 31, 2010 06:47 AM (X1fsj)

33 Lacydrawers, repeal is the right and best plan. I won't vote for anyone who hedges on the question.

Posted by: SarahW at March 31, 2010 06:47 AM (Z4T49)

34 The rehab defense is going to work for me, maybe that would work for clowns in DC too.... first you get to f##k everybody, then you say it was because you were addicted to sex...and accept no responsibilty, you are a victim. Hey, wait a minute I think they already did this!

Posted by: Jesse James at March 31, 2010 06:47 AM (Ki7fm)

35

Lacey, I believe some of the more level-headed Repubs considered that issue and said "Repeal and Replace" was going to be the mantra.  Since there are some polls as high as 60-40 against CommieCare, and the majority of folks don't believe healthcare should be the province of the feds, I'd be happy with "repeal."  The only thing I want the pubbies to do is repeal the whole mess and make new guidelines for tort reform and allow insurance companies to sell across state lines. 

Making pre-existing conditions subject to automatic coverage is like calling an insurance company to buy collision insurance after you've wrecked your car.  These companies are in business to make money, not subsidize care that will drive rates sky high for the rest of the pool.  Yeah, that sounds harsh, but that's business, and that's capitalism.

Posted by: RushBabe at March 31, 2010 06:47 AM (LKkE8)

36

Yes, lacy.

Repeal the whole thing. 

 

And have a complete do over.  OPENLY.



We can have our own Demon Pass. We'll do over the process and deem the bill repealed when we get our own reform passed.

Posted by: MikeTheMoose at March 31, 2010 06:48 AM (0q2P7)

37 Look Tweet, we're just co-opting one of the democrat's favorite issues. I see a landslide come November.

Posted by: Dr. Spank at March 31, 2010 06:49 AM (I1/U/)

38 You're comfortable campaigning on an outright repeal of the mandate for pre-existing conditions coverage?
Posted by: laceyunderalls at March 31, 2010 11:42 AM (pLTLS)

Yes.

If you are going to do away with pre-existing conditions you have to do the individual mandate. Otherwise people won't buy insurance until they need it and that will bankrupt insurance companies and lead to single payer.

One thing I think we should legislate against is recisions. If a company takes premium money for 3 or 4 or 5 years they can't comeback and say, "Oh we should have never given you a policy in the first place. You're out." At some point there's an assumption or risk.

But the rest, yeah, undo it all.


Posted by: DrewM. at March 31, 2010 06:49 AM (9B5OK)

39 What is it with Texans? 90 percent of them are fucked in the head and seem to thrive on creating controversy. Fucking genetic defect I suspect.

Posted by: Barbarian at March 31, 2010 06:49 AM (EL+OC)

40

Would it be too Dixie Chicks to say I'm ashamed to be from Texas?

Posted by: Michael Rittenhouse at March 31, 2010 06:49 AM (2QFX4)

41

You're comfortable campaigning on an outright repeal of the mandate for pre-existing conditions coverage?

I'm surely not.

Let's try to be smart about this.

Posted by: laceyunderalls at March 31, 2010 11:42 AM (pLTLS)

Exhibit C entered into the record.

Posted by: End Women's Suffrage at March 31, 2010 06:50 AM (pUfK9)

42 ...but let's not pretend there isn't a go along-get along reflex embedded in just about every politician Republican.

There ya go. It's not necessarily true, but at this point, who cares?

Posted by: Blacque Jacques Shellacque at March 31, 2010 06:50 AM (Q75cY)

43 I agree with Steyn.  I think we're heading the way of Britain.  It seems like every Western democracy eventually heads in the way of socialism.  Actually, it seems like most nations in history reach a point where the people clamor for more and more from the treasury until they hit a breaking point.  But I'm just feeling "doom & gloom" lately.  I hope I'm wrong.

Posted by: brak at March 31, 2010 06:50 AM (W5NBA)

44 Kinda pitiful when the person with the biggest balls in the entire Republican party is Sarah Palin.

Posted by: Nighthawk at March 31, 2010 06:50 AM (OtQXp)

45

Man up GOP.

Posted by: DrewM. at 11:32 AM

Time to Woman Up. Freaking GOP is a mess.

Posted by: Ludicrous Speed at March 31, 2010 06:50 AM (zqzYV)

46

All we've seen so far are polls that show that people fear gov't intruision and deficit spending on this monstrosity.

The CBS poll that everyone here loves to tout didn't poll on and outright repeal. It addressed repealing some parts (although I don't believe it specified which).

Show me a few polls that indicate that an outright repeal is popular and I'll change my tune.

Posted by: laceyunderalls at March 31, 2010 06:51 AM (pLTLS)

47 Pull the fucking plug on ObamaCare!

Posted by: conscious and serious at March 31, 2010 06:51 AM (YVZlY)

48

Business as usual.  They are politicians after all.  If they become convinced that they will be guaranteed a job for the next 2 - 6 years and that they will have access to our money (which conveniently enough is inexhaustible) that's all that they care about.

That's exactly why we need to shame them at every opportunity.  Especially since they are politicians and essentially worthless f--king scum sucking corrupt bastards without any concept of honor or duty.  But I repeat myself.

Posted by: Hussein the Plumber at March 31, 2010 06:51 AM (RkRxq)

49 Cornyn, what a disgrace. Fucking RINO needs a custom hewn rail to tote his sorry ass out of public life, not just the GOP. I will vote against his ilk at every opportunity. Once again, squishes like Cornyn are the problem, not the solution.

Posted by: maddogg at March 31, 2010 06:52 AM (OlN4e)

50 I honestly don't see how the GOP thinks this could possibly be a winning strategy,it passed with no Republican support if they cozy up to the idea after the fact they are handing the Dems a giant club to beat them with.Good or bad they better stiffen their spines and stand firm.

Posted by: bulwark at March 31, 2010 06:52 AM (PO/9k)

51 Right on Tweet. Run hard and fast against the D's and healthcare plan,and people will stop what they are doing and come to the polls. Make a simple 3 point plan to replace it with... 1) sell across state line 2) insurance cannot drop a person who has insurance when they are sick. Some pre-exisitng change...a baby should not be denied coverage on a disease they are born with. 3) torte reform. make excuses for D's and they are staying home.

Posted by: ford at March 31, 2010 06:53 AM (Ki7fm)

52 Show me a few polls that indicate that an outright repeal is popular and I'll change my tune
Posted by: laceyunderalls at March 31, 2010 11:51 AM (pLTLS)

Don't care about polls (though I think there are some out there that show repeal is popular). There are some issues that are so important that you have to stake a claim, make your case and convince people you are right. This is one of those issues.

Posted by: DrewM. at March 31, 2010 06:53 AM (9B5OK)

53 Fuck you Barbarian. Texans voted for him because he's a conservative. He's peddling this compromise bullshit because some states apparently have a problem electing conservatives. Exactly how many senators do we have that are conservative? 30?

Posted by: Dr. Spank at March 31, 2010 06:54 AM (I1/U/)

54 Let me know how this works out morons... I off to the titty bar.

Posted by: michael steele at March 31, 2010 06:55 AM (Ki7fm)

55 well. we have "conservatives" not candidates but people that are mad that our governor joined the lawsuit against the federal gov these are the same conservatives that vote for anyone with an r behind their name thinking that these rinos are going to get behind the will of the gop voters ....

Posted by: phoenixgirl at March 31, 2010 06:55 AM (ucxC/)

56

Show me a few polls that indicate that an outright repeal is popular and I'll change my tune.

Posted by: laceyunderalls at March 31, 2010 11:51 AM (pLTLS)

My pole always indicates outright repeal, unless its a backroom deal.  IYKWIM.

Posted by: Dirk Digler at March 31, 2010 06:55 AM (pUfK9)

57

Well, we lost the issue of domestic oil production so we'd be best off if we just keep quiet for now.

Posted by: Ed Anger at March 31, 2010 06:55 AM (7+pP9)

58 55 Fuck you Barbarian. Texans voted for him because he's a conservative. He's peddling this compromise bullshit because some states apparently have a problem electing conservatives. Exactly how many senators do we have that are conservative? 30?

Go take a shit in your 10 gallon hat and shave your balls in that giant belt buckle assclown.

Posted by: Barbarian at March 31, 2010 06:56 AM (EL+OC)

59

Don't care about polls

Umm okay, but we kind have to. Don't hate the player, hate the game.

Posted by: Any candidate running for office at March 31, 2010 06:56 AM (pLTLS)

60

"Show me a few polls that indicate that an outright repeal is popular and I'll change my tune. "

To be more precise, polls on a state by state basis which shows outright repeal is popular.  Elections are by state and district afterall.

Posted by: MDr VB1.0 CS1st at March 31, 2010 06:56 AM (ucq49)

61 It's pretty sad when Michelle Bachman and Sarah Palin have more balls than most of the Republican "men" in Congress.  GROW A FUCKING PAIR!

Posted by: Hedgehog at March 31, 2010 06:57 AM (oQIfB)

62
You guys are simply astounding. What happened to AoS?

The same commenters who just attacked me for showing how the GOP was getting soft and on their way to defeat are in this thread bashing the GOP...for getting soft.

Let's try to be the smart and funny blog commenters were not too long ago.

Posted by: Tweet, a Joo, and a Mexican walk into a bar... at March 31, 2010 06:57 AM (X1Xo9)

63 But of course.

Posted by: unknown jane at March 31, 2010 06:58 AM (5/yRG)

64
Cornyn.  Wouldn't you just fucking know it, the flaccid turd.

Posted by: Dang Straights at March 31, 2010 06:58 AM (fx8sm)

65 Tenpenny is gonna get all y'all if you don't listen to ME ME ME.

Posted by: Sweet, CJ, and Cesar walk nto a San Andreas bar... at March 31, 2010 06:59 AM (D0gRE)

66 These GOP asses are really ticking me off.  They are scared to repeal "some of the good parts of tyhe bill" along with the mass of un-Constitutional crap that the bill is.  THese idiots need to run on REPEAL and nothing else.  If they don't have the guts to say that everything associated with this bill has to go, then they are just useless wastes of flesh (as if we didn't know this about most of them, anyway).

These gutless wonders in the GOP had better get their acts together, otherwise there will be no option left with but to split this nation up and start anew with a nation that truly respects the Constitution and the American creed.

Cornyn, of course, has long been a wavering piece of shit, but his disease infects many of the other cowards and idiots in the GOP.  Of course, this is the same GOP that thought the Town Hallers and Tea Partiers were being too strident, so, what confidence can one have in their assessment of anything of import.

REPEAL is the only call the GOP needs to think about.  The federal government has almost no business in dictating individual health care or health insurance, and these idiots had better remember that.  If a state wants to eliminate pre-existing conditions and force insurance companies out of business (or implicitly tax the rest of us to make up the costs of others) then that is up to the individual state, not the federal government. 

The GOP had better get some brains, soon, otherwise they are going to see a third party emerge ... or worse.

Posted by: progressoverpeace at March 31, 2010 06:59 AM (N49h9)

67

52
I honestly don't see how the GOP thinks this could possibly be a winning strategy,it passed with no Republican support if they cozy up to the idea after the fact they are handing the Dems a giant club to beat them with.Good or bad they better stiffen their spines and stand firm.

It is a winning strategy for them because they will have access to a whole new pipeline of money after Social Security, Medicare, Fannie and Freddie began drying up or at least inconvenient sources of free money for them.  They see this - the next several years of inflow of cash before the outflow begins - as a windfall that they, as well as the socialists on the left will be able to milk at their leisure.  Not only do they suck, they are betraying this country and every soul in it.

Posted by: Hussein the Plumber at March 31, 2010 06:59 AM (RkRxq)

68 Umm okay, but we kind have to. Don't hate the player, hate the game.

Lacey...so there's no issue worth running on principle? There's no point in trying to change minds? There's nothing more important than raw power? Why even have parties then? Just elect people who can read polls real well and vote accordingly.

Do you actually support a ban on pre-existing conditions or are you making a strictly utilitarian argument?

Posted by: DrewM. at March 31, 2010 07:00 AM (9B5OK)

69
Why are all of you mad at me for saying we should surrender all hope?

Posted by: A Tweet, a Joo, and a Troll walk into a bar... at March 31, 2010 07:00 AM (7+pP9)

70 Sigh.

Posted by: Guy Fawkes at March 31, 2010 07:00 AM (7VvJB)

71 Arrgh.

Posted by: toby928: without speech at March 31, 2010 07:00 AM (PD1tk)

72 So much for the "Tea Party Runs The GOP" meme, eh? Memo to the GOP - I am done with you assholes forever if you don't at least attempt to campaign on the repeal of this nightmare. Like was said above by Nighthawk, how pathetic that the GOP'er with the biggest set of balls is named Sarah Palin.

Posted by: DocJ at March 31, 2010 07:00 AM (AWzOz)

73 I'm curious...is there such a thing as "line item repeal"?  Maybe this thing can be dismantled piece by piece.

Posted by: frode at March 31, 2010 07:01 AM (TdgA9)

74

I'll bet they're calling themselves realists.

Posted by: FireHorse at March 31, 2010 07:02 AM (cQyWA)

75 Why are all of you mad at me for saying we should surrender all hope?
Posted by: A Tweet, a Joo, and a Troll walk into a bar... at March 31, 2010 12:00 PM

Nobody's mad at you.  We just think you are a dumbass.

Posted by: Guy Fawkes at March 31, 2010 07:02 AM (7VvJB)

76 Show me a few polls that indicate that an outright repeal is popular and I'll change my tune

Rasmussen
CBS


Posted by: Buzzsaw at March 31, 2010 07:02 AM (tf9Ne)

77 Cornyn is the reason we must send contributions to individual candidates. Fuck the squishes running the Dem/Socialist lite party. Starve their asses out.

Posted by: maddogg at March 31, 2010 07:02 AM (OlN4e)

78

Called Cornyn's DC office and got a tape saying the system doesn't allow for voicemail!  (Yeah, right)  Called his Houston office at 713-572-3337.  The woman who answered the phone sounded skeptical and wanted to know where I heard this. 

Before I checked Ace, I heard it on the car radio from Fox news service.  She said they do that to get people riled up.  She was furiously trying to defuse my info.  I was polite, though.

She wanted to know where I saw the news story, so could someone who calls please send her the linky (my screen had Cornyn's contact info up at the time)?  I asked if he was holding any town halls during the recess and she said "Not that I know of."  Have at it, Morons.

Posted by: RushBabe at March 31, 2010 07:02 AM (LKkE8)

79 #73 Dude seriously this blog ain't all about you,honestly get some help with the attention issues.

Posted by: bulwark at March 31, 2010 07:03 AM (PO/9k)

80 Amerikkkans only hate Obamacare cuz he lookkks diffrint

Can I haz Oscar???

Posted by: Tom Hanks at March 31, 2010 07:03 AM (BiCQw)

81

76 I'm curious...is there such a thing as "line item repeal"?  Maybe this thing can be dismantled piece by piece.

I think there is some sort of "defunding" mechanism that can be used for this purpose, IIRC.  *way out of my area - I just talk about GoW3 a lot*.

Posted by: Kratos (missing from the side of Olympus) at March 31, 2010 07:03 AM (9hSKh)

82

Idealogical purity.

The progressives have it, the GOP doesn't.

Posted by: BackwardsBoy at March 31, 2010 07:03 AM (i3AsK)

83 You're comfortable campaigning on an outright repeal of the mandate for pre-existing conditions coverage?

Posted by: laceyunderalls at March 31, 2010 11:42 AM (pLTLS)


Repeal the whole thing. It is not the federal government's job to increase my health insurance costs because of some sob stories.  If they can't deal with reality, then they need to be tossed out.

If a state wants to force insurance companies to cover kids with pre-existing conditions (which takes money away from everyone else and eimpacts everyone else's health insurance/care) then that state can do it.  It is not the federal government's business.  What's next, no physicals allowed by life insurance companies?  No consideration fo age for life insurance policies?  Because that is what you are talking about, essentially.

Posted by: progressoverpeace at March 31, 2010 07:03 AM (N49h9)

84
I guess there's some sort of disconnect with my old and new friends at AoS. Somehow my reasons for the GOP to go full-bore conservative and not be afraid to touch third-rail issues are being interpreted as stay home in November.


Posted by: Tweet, a Joo, and a Mexican walk into a bar... at March 31, 2010 07:04 AM (X1Xo9)

85

There are no Republicans in Congress, other than Paul Ryan, maybe.  The others are all members of the Media Party, and their biggest concern is whether or not the person interviewing them on television is smiling or scowling.  They want smiles, people, and don't care what they have to do to get them.

"Who do you hate more?" should be the slogan this fall.

Posted by: BeckoningChasm at March 31, 2010 07:04 AM (IEJ4J)

86 >>Go take a shit in your 10 gallon hat and shave your balls in that giant belt buckle assclown.

You're an idiot and a little bitch. By the way, who are your senators?

Posted by: Dr. Spank at March 31, 2010 07:05 AM (I1/U/)

87 Well, the replace has to have something. And that something has to include some strategy to deal with individuals who can not procure insurance due to a pre-existitng condition.
Posted by: Mallamutt at March 31, 2010 12:02 PM (V9SYy)

Paul Ryan always talks about 'high risk pools'. A number of states already have them. They are expensive but subsidizing them would be cheaper than this crap but the fact remains, if you have a pre-existing condition it's going to be hard and/or expensive to get insurance. Why would someone insure you against something you have?

We can talk a lot about our love for markets but sometimes markets have unpleasant outcomes. If our reaction as conservatives is to insulate people from those outcomes, what exactly makes us different from liberals?

Posted by: DrewM. at March 31, 2010 07:06 AM (9B5OK)

88

#79  Point taken.  I was thinking though that the "sell insurance across state lines" thing would take care of most of the pre-existing condition concern (and DrewM's earlier point).  Perhaps the public can be educated on that.

/I agree there must be great tact used in getting rid of this monster. 

Posted by: Kratos (missing from the side of Olympus) at March 31, 2010 07:06 AM (9hSKh)

89

Corn-hole!

 

Posted by: dananjcon at March 31, 2010 07:06 AM (pr+up)

90

Drew, the latter. I want the damn thing repealed. All of it.  What I want doesn't really matter though.

I'm listening to what my friends are saying (and not the conservatives--I know what they want). They're pretty ticked too, but they don't hate all of it. I would like to flip their vote. Others here will say, fuck their vote. That's fine. I don't quite understand that mentality but I realize I'm in on the minority on that particular point.

Again, I'm not saying it's not the approach to take. I'd just like a bit more evidence first. I don't think that's a wholly unreasonable requset.

Posted by: laceyunderalls at March 31, 2010 07:07 AM (pLTLS)

91 90 >>Go take a shit in your 10 gallon hat and shave your balls in that giant belt buckle assclown.

You're an idiot and a little bitch. By the way, who are your senators?

Drop it moron.

Posted by: Barbarian at March 31, 2010 07:07 AM (EL+OC)

92 89 beckoning i was just thinking that.....i hate the gop slightly less than the dems...but it is very close, probably a statistical tie

Posted by: phoenixgirl at March 31, 2010 07:07 AM (ucxC/)

93

GOP: Repeal!

MSM: So you hate children and the poor?

GOP: What? Of course not.

MSM: But if you repeal then children suffer! Meanie!

GOP: Umm uhh hominah...did we say repeal? We meant CLARIFY. Yeah, that's the ticket.

 

Posted by: You just know it'll go this way. at March 31, 2010 07:07 AM (RD7QR)

94

39  If I remember correctly I think I did quip some time back, when a lot of people were full of Kirk love, that the only thing that would give him an easy victory would be running against Gino...the Dems haul in somebody else, do some damage control (not hard considering who Gino is) and voila, they win.

Let's face it; both parties are brimming full of statist pukes; they have absolutely no problem with this government takeover of people's lives. Imho, there is no "party" to vote for.  Sorry if that offends, but I too believe I have good reason and thus good right to say what I do.

Posted by: unknown jane at March 31, 2010 07:08 AM (5/yRG)

95 Some little part of my brain says that campaigning on repeal only isn't a long term strategy.  I say campaign on a whole package of Obama fu's,  emphasizing replacement of health care as the long term goal.  Campaigning on repeal only is starting to stick as "NO" instead of "FIX" to the people around here anyway. 

Posted by: prettypinkfluffypanties at March 31, 2010 07:08 AM (Gg1ki)

96 Somewhere, but not the offices of AEI, David Frum is smiling.

"He is grace itself, one of nature's noblemen." --Tory Review, on Frum, today.

Today.

Posted by: oblig. at March 31, 2010 07:08 AM (x7Ao8)

97
She was furiously trying to defuse my info.

Same game they all play - socialist in the Beltway, 'credentialed conservative' to their constituency (see reid, harry).

Posted by: Dang Straights at March 31, 2010 07:09 AM (fx8sm)

98

Sorry, I'm quite comfortable with repealing the whole friggin mess, especially if it means wiping out our dear Congressmen's little porky "get re-elected" projects which were, I'm sure, snuck into this bill by the Dem staffers who actually wrote the damn thing.

The pre-existing conditions problem, which is a concern for some, can be reintroduced as separate legislation, examined, debated, etc., and passed into law if that is what the people want.

Ditto any other parts of this -- well, thing -- that the majority of the voters think is worth salvaging.

Time to start emailbombing Cornyn and remind him and the other magisterial mandarins in the Senate that they were not elected to hand over a major portion of our economy to Obama and that their mission is NOT to add a note of gentility to the conversion of our country into a  Socialist Republic.

Posted by: Minnie Rodent at March 31, 2010 07:09 AM (PZLW0)

99 With the Republicans, you get government-controlled health care. With the Democrats, you get even more government-controlled health care.

 You've got national socialism vs Marxism.

 That's your choice, America.

 Well, there is that whole Declaration of Independence thingy...

 

Posted by: Warren Bonesteel at March 31, 2010 07:10 AM (E5Er7)

100

frode @ #76: I'm curious...is there such a thing as "line item repeal"?  Maybe this thing can be dismantled piece by piece.

I think so, and that strikes me as the way to do it.

A total, flat-out repeal would be the best thing as far as the actual law is concerned, but there's more to it than that. Getting this law passed was our historic president's big historic win. I don't think the Republicans want to take that away from him.

For myself, I don't care. We can all say that Beethoven composed his third symphony for Obama for all I care. And if this law goes away without any headlines or fanfare, that'd be fine with me, too. He keeps his ego, his followers keep their god, and the rest of us keep our doctors, our current insurance providers, our money, our privacy, etc.

Posted by: FireHorse at March 31, 2010 07:10 AM (cQyWA)

101 Repeal ain't gonna happen. Even if they did when Congress, TOTUS would just veto it. And '12 offers no guarantees.

Posted by: changer1701 at March 31, 2010 07:10 AM (xktXL)

102 Who are your senators genius?

Posted by: Dr. Spank at March 31, 2010 07:10 AM (I1/U/)

103 If Cornyn thinks that we conservatives are not watching him over this kind of crap, he is a fucking idiot.

Posted by: TexasJew at March 31, 2010 07:11 AM (M+vso)

104
We can talk a lot about our love for markets but sometimes markets have unpleasant outcomes. If our reaction as conservatives is to insulate people from those outcomes, what exactly makes us different from liberals?

Posted by: DrewM. at March 31, 2010 12:06 PM (9B5OK)

Add "love for the Constitution" in there and I agree 100%.  The federal government is limited in what it can do, and that includes what it can do to eliminate every sob story that one can find in a nation of over 300 million.

Health care/insurance is essentially a state issue (aside from opening it to interstate commerce) and THAT IS THAT.  If a state wants to force everyone to throw the actuarial tables out for health insurance (and later for all sorts of insurance, if one follows the logic) then no one will have insurance, but that is the state's decision - as it will be the decision of people to leave that state and the state to handle its own finances.

Posted by: progressoverpeace at March 31, 2010 07:12 AM (N49h9)

105 So, wait--we're quoting Cornyn as one source, as well as relying on Senate Rs to overturn this thing? Was never going to happen in the 1st place. Let's focus on the House, the governors, & the AGs.

Posted by: Miss80sBaby at March 31, 2010 07:12 AM (yfJ6g)

106 Again, I'm not saying it's not the approach to take. I'd just like a bit more evidence first. I don't think that's a wholly unreasonable requset.
Posted by: laceyunderalls at March 31, 2010 12:07 PM (pLTLS)

I understand what you are saying and 99 times out of 100 I'd agree with you...in politics (and life ) you often do what's possible, not necessarily right. There are however times when you have to take a stand on principle. I think this is one of those fairly rare times.

This isn't a case where getting 10% of what you want is better than nothing. It's not even a case where 60 or 80% is better than nothing. This is a fundamental reorientation of the relationship between free citizens and their government. 

We need the GOP to make the case no matter what people say now. There's no upside in electing Republicans simply to become the mangers of Obama's health care system. That's what following the polls will lead to.

Posted by: DrewM. at March 31, 2010 07:13 AM (9B5OK)

107

DEFUND 2010!!

 

Posted by: dananjcon at March 31, 2010 07:14 AM (pr+up)

108 I think this is why Krauthammer said the GOP would pass the VAT in the next session of congress, as the only responsible thing to do to cover the cost of that crap.

Posted by: Paladin at March 31, 2010 07:14 AM (H7yeS)

109 i agree they can't run on repeal only, they damn well better have their ducks in a row with an air tight fix that actually benefits the producers in this country....i'm sick and tire of footing the bill of every namby pamby pos feel good legislation

Posted by: phoenixgirl at March 31, 2010 07:14 AM (ucxC/)

110 Sorta OT, Kay Bailey is supposed to announce today she will finish out her term.

Posted by: Dave in Texas at March 31, 2010 07:14 AM (WvXvd)

111

If the Republican party goes down this road, what a lost opportunity.  Obamacare is likely to self-destruct, and SOMEONE is going to have to have a way to pick up the pieces of our medical care delivery system. We know what the Dems have in mind.  Why oh why can't the Republicans be working on and pushing hard for a free-market solution? 

Posted by: kwh9 at March 31, 2010 07:15 AM (YBypo)

112

I worry about what will happen after this laughingstock of an administration.  Congress and both parties have utterly beclowned themselves; very few people trust them at all and that number will likely only grow.  The country is splintered into factions which daily become more divisive and the level of rancor on both sides is rising.  Our economy is beginning to tumble, and our foreign policy is a joke.

Why do visions of the Weimar Republic and republican Rome before the fall keep dancing through my head?  I act sarcastic, but that's a front -- I'm heartsick.

Posted by: unknown jane at March 31, 2010 07:16 AM (5/yRG)

113 @ 100 - Tory Review. Aye, the very same "conservatives" who argue that the UK VAT should be 17.5% and not 18%. Behold, your 2012 Republican Party.

Posted by: DocJ at March 31, 2010 07:16 AM (AWzOz)

114 3) torte reform.

I like my tortes just the way they are, thankyouverymuch

Posted by: a pastry chef at March 31, 2010 07:16 AM (Gk/wA)

115 Lots of good points being made all around here, but in the final analysis we have to look at what the Republicans will have to run against in November and how they need to run against it.

Repeal, Reform, Replace, those are just words.  The Democrats are going to run on "Little Timmy" and "Little Suzie" who, they will say, thanks to Obamacare can now go to the doctor and get their rickets cured.  And the evil Republicans want to take away Timmy and Suzie's rickets treatments.  Why do the Republicans want Timmy and Suzie to have rickets?

That's going to be the strategy.

The only way to counter it is to point out accurately and succinctly that BEFORE Obamacare Timmy and Suzie could get SUPERIOR treatment for their rickets and that the ONLY THINGS Obamacare has done for Timmy  and Suzie is insure that they get INFERIOR treatment AND also become debt slaves to the Chinese.  Why do the Democrats want Timmy and Suzie to get inferior treatment for their rickets and why do they want Timmy and Suzie to be slaves of the Chinese.

As ridiculous as it sounds THAT is how the battle will be fought and, hopefully, how the Republicans can win.

Posted by: Nighthawk at March 31, 2010 07:16 AM (OtQXp)

116 You don't start by only going for half of the enchilada. Don't be a pussy, go 100% or nothing. If you end up with a little less so be it, at least you tried. Just don't TRY from the halfway point and expect to get all.

Posted by: Bosk at March 31, 2010 07:16 AM (pUO5u)

117
the Republicans passing a national sales tax-hike after the midterms?

holy shit, that'll go over great in 2012

Posted by: Tweet, a Joo, and a Mexican walk into a bar... at March 31, 2010 07:17 AM (X1Xo9)

118 Slightly related, Kay Bailey announced this morning that she is NOT leaving the senate this year, as she said she would. She's retiring when her term is up in '12.

Posted by: stace at March 31, 2010 07:17 AM (g/wgk)

119 116  No, no our senators are definitely the best at being the worst -- hey, at least we're good at something...

Posted by: unknown jane at March 31, 2010 07:17 AM (5/yRG)

120

And I don't disagree with you on this point. I am just pointing out that you have to include some type of plan (whether free market, regulatory, whatever) to address the issue.

Not at all. Health insurance is a state issue, not a federal one. That is what the GOP needs to understand.

Repeal and Replace works only if you have something in the Replace box. And that something has to include some mechanism to address pre-existing conditions. I hate the sob story campaign but, as a tactical matter, you have to admit that it can be effective. And saying "tough shit----die" is not exactly a great campaign slogan (See, Goldwater, Barry, 1964 Presidential Campaign).

Posted by: Mallamutt at March 31, 2010 12:12 PM (V9SYy)

In many cases, "tough shit" is what the Constitution dictates. There is private charity and there are states.  People can lobby their states for the insane goodies they want. Having the federal government do these things is wrong, un-Constitutional and dangerous. If the GOP can't get that across, then they are totally useless.

Posted by: progressoverpeace at March 31, 2010 07:17 AM (N49h9)

121

To be more precise, polls on a state by state basis which shows outright repeal is popular.  Elections are by state and district afterall

 

We are back to the same debate that raged in 2008. Can we elect leaders at the state and national level that consistently support the values that we espouse?

Do we believe that ideological consistency, or 'purity' helps or hurts us? Please note that this was debated on both sides here and elsewhere? We were told that conservatives hurt us by not turning out, and those who are  pro-life and aganist gay mariage were gamechangers.

Do we believe that the inherent bias that the MSM showed and continues to show makes it more dificult to be a successful conservative than a liberal?

Do we think that the basic message 'repeal and replace (and reform)' will survive any length of time without being subverted into a repetition of the merciless conservatives? Please note that as we attack each other, anyone who dares question the beautiful poeple is branded a "racist, heartless jerl who wants people to die".

If we think that consistency yields such results, and that Sarah Palin is the pre-eminent example, please explain why most polls (not just the crap ones) show relatively high negatives and a poor showing against other likely Republican candidates?

 

Please note that I am not advocating anything here. I am guessing at what Republican leader and candidates are puzzling on right now.

Posted by: Blue Hen at March 31, 2010 07:17 AM (R2fpr)

122

#116  I have Dick "Dick" Durbin and Roland "Dick" Burris. No one can beat that combination. Well, except maybe Vermont.

Damn, you win.  Mine aren't much better. I got Arlen Sphincter and Robert (I'm nothing like my father) Casey Jr..

Posted by: Kratos (missing from the side of Olympus) at March 31, 2010 07:17 AM (9hSKh)

Posted by: Okie at March 31, 2010 07:18 AM (x6Iaq)

124 RushBabe, e-mail me, please. Bottom of my page.

Posted by: Michael Rittenhouse at March 31, 2010 07:18 AM (2QFX4)

125 This development is unexpected.  Or is it revised?  It certainly isn't unprecedented...

Posted by: Cautiously Pessimistic at March 31, 2010 07:18 AM (pZEar)

126

What do the poles say about inevitable government bancruptcy?

Posted by: Cincinnatus at March 31, 2010 07:19 AM (euuyg)

127 Posted by: Mallamutt at March 31, 2010 12:12 PM (V9SYy)

I suggest better communication then. We've ceded too much ground to liberals already.

I understand that liberalism is easy to embrace because it's vacuous and emotional. A lot of people will simply eat that crap up.

Conservatism is hard because it sometimes means bad things will happen. Conservatives, in government and out, need to stand up for up, to not just make it the ideology of no but to sell its benefits as well.

I understand electoral politics has it's own challenges in that regard but unless someone starts standing up and telling people, they can't have everything they want, the iron laws of economics will do it for them and that will be a lot uglier.

I'd rather go down fighting the good fight than just get swept away in the deluge.

Posted by: DrewM. at March 31, 2010 07:19 AM (9B5OK)

128
I think a lot of this is media spin.

Independents are leaving in droves. 
This unpopular bill is still unpopular.


Posted by: Lemon Kiten at March 31, 2010 07:20 AM (0fzsA)

129

Re: #105

Preemptive defeatism?

Posted by: Minnie Rodent at March 31, 2010 07:20 AM (PZLW0)

130 116

By the way, who are your senators?

Oh, if we are going to get into the worst Senator contest, I win.

I have Dick "Dick" Durbin and Roland "Dick" Burris. No one can beat that combination. Well, except maybe Vermont.

Posted by: Mallamutt at March 31, 2010 12:15 PM (V9SYy)

I'll see your Dicky Durbin and raise you Frank the Crypt Keeper Lautenburg and Robert should be mowing my lawn Menendez.

Posted by: dananjcon at March 31, 2010 07:20 AM (pr+up)

131

I have Dick "Dick" Durbin and Roland "Dick" Burris. No one can beat that combination.

Sorry, but California "wins" hands down.  Feinstein pales in comparison to Boxer, but she's still worthless.

Posted by: Damn Skippy at March 31, 2010 07:20 AM (VDgKF)

132

I'm not going to give Cornyn a pass on this, but I'm also not going to take the AP's word on his strategy. There's more wishin than fishin in that article. How many dozens of examples of the narrative have we seen since the votes "oh you Republicans, you better watch out".

I can recall him and KBH going squishy on the border, so we'll see.

I would like to know where we intend to fight this fucking mess, and how. How much legislatively, how much in the courts, and what options or modifications we're willing to push for.

And I think time is our friend. The more people find out about just had bad this bag of shit hurts us, the more they're gonna hate it. I fully believe we could stand some more hatin, there's room to turn it up.

Nothing, nothing in the way of a tangible benefit happens for years (good thinking O). So threats about taking something away are going to ring pretty fuckin hollow, with time.  I want to see this thing heat up again over the summer.

That's my .02

Posted by: Dave in Texas at March 31, 2010 07:21 AM (WvXvd)

133 And Hutchinson breaks her promise.

http://tinyurl.com/yemcyto

Posted by: toby928 at March 31, 2010 07:21 AM (PD1tk)

134

This isn't a case where getting 10% of what you want is better than nothing. It's not even a case where 60 or 80% is better than nothing. This is a fundamental reorientation of the relationship between free citizens and their government. 

See, I get what you're throwing down there. Does the average voter? Nope. Not a single word of it. We have voters that can't name their representatives or Senator so I'd prefer to not wax poetic on the fundamentals of our republic. I actually think you can fix stupid, just not overnight. And I'm not sure "scare tactics" (which these REPEAL!!!11!!! ads write themselves for the Dems, you have to see that) will get us too far.

Again, I *really* hope to be proven wrong on this point.

Posted by: laceyunderalls at March 31, 2010 07:21 AM (pLTLS)

135
Everyone's missing the obvious, so allow me to put you some fucking knowledge, here.

Repeal, just repeal, can indeed be a winner. Here's how: The lazy Republicans get off their thumbs and explain to the people what's in the 2700-page Big Fucking Deal.

Town hall meetings. Town hall meetings. Get the word out. Raise awareness. Educate people on how Obama and the Democrats just fucked them.

Posted by: Tweet, a Joo, and a Mexican walk into a bar... at March 31, 2010 07:21 AM (X1Xo9)

136 A lot of leg tingling goin' on for Republican Senators, and it ain't funny.  Remove the Tampons men and man the fuck up!

Posted by: Fish at March 31, 2010 07:22 AM (M5t+h)

137 132  Sweetheart (and I don't mean that as facetiously as it sounds) and fellow comrade, we are beyond "trifecta"; we are in the Daily Super 8 betting division.  Hell, even our dogcatchers are inept and corrupt; even our paperboys operate on pay to play.

Posted by: unknown jane at March 31, 2010 07:23 AM (5/yRG)

138
The GOP has in their hands a 2700-page, um, manual, if you will, on how to defeat the Democrats and Repeal the HCR.

a 2700-page guide to victory. Read it. Learn it. Explain how awful it is. It's all there, GOP, if you want it.

Posted by: Tweet, a Joo, and a Mexican walk into a bar... at March 31, 2010 07:23 AM (X1Xo9)

139 Why don't you guys get yourselves some real Senators?

Posted by: Okie at March 31, 2010 07:24 AM (x6Iaq)

140 Please send money to the GOP.  Hotels at expensive resorts , private jets, and other important stuff cost money.  Trust us, we are working with Obama...er...oops, we mean, we are working with you dumb fucking conservatives, to return our country to better days.  Who loves ya baby...the GOP!  Give us the loot, you get the boot.  God bless you dummys.

Posted by: GOP at March 31, 2010 07:26 AM (r0u40)

141

See, I get what you're throwing down there. Does the average voter? Nope. Not a single word of it. We have voters that can't name their representatives or Senator so I'd prefer to not wax poetic on the fundamentals of our republic.

If America chooses to destroy our Constitution and change this nation into a shithole, then that is their choice.  But the GOP needs to stand for the Constitution.  If America is truly too stupid or immature to be able to handle life and the difficulties that come with it, then let this nation be given the clear choice.  Winning on only destroying half of our Constitution in a pyrrhic victory that I want no part of.

I actually think you can fix stupid, just not overnight. And I'm not sure "scare tactics" (which these REPEAL!!!11!!! ads write themselves for the Dems, you have to see that) will get us too far.

Again, I *really* hope to be proven wrong on this point.

Posted by: laceyunderalls at March 31, 2010 12:21 PM (pLTLS)

I, for one, have confidence that the American creed still lives.  But, it has to be given a chance.  If America is to govern and legislate by EMPATHY (which is what this sob story crap is) then we are done and should be done.  That is how children think, not adults, who understand that there are risks in life and without assuming those risks, no true rewards are even possible.

And this is even aside from the fact that health insurance is a state issue, not a federal one.  That is the most important point, which seems to have been long lost in all this. 

The Founders are spinning in their graves over this.

Posted by: progressoverpeace at March 31, 2010 07:28 AM (N49h9)

142

138  Hahahah!  You jest -- Dick freaking Durbin...Baghdad Dick freaking Durbin....Dick "let's make vitamins a prescription drug" freaking Durbin....Dick "let's have the government oversee what textbooks colleges use" freaking Durbin...Dick "supporter of more powers to the EPA" freaking Durbin...Dick "national ID -- for everything, including Fluffy and Rover, and your little kiddies too -- is an idea whose time has come" freaking Durbin...

We win the "our senators suck" with one senator tied behind our backs.

Posted by: unknown jane at March 31, 2010 07:28 AM (5/yRG)

143

Yet another point: Please note that various polls have indicated substantial support for either starting over OR the status quo.

 

And yet, even we here have ceded ground by tacking on 'reform' and 'replace'. If a majority of peole like their healthcare as it is, then why in Satan's Unholy name would we change anything.

And yet, everyone has already accepted the narrative at some level that 'something' needs to be done. I've ben hearing that meaningless line of crap from people for months, who obviou8sly put no thought into the entire year long process. Some of these people vote.

If you are a Republican planner/candidate, and you see this universally (including at AoSHQ), you would be a fool to ignore it.

 

Posted by: Blue Hen at March 31, 2010 07:28 AM (R2fpr)

144 Drew has Charles "I Smell Excrement" Shumer and Kirstin "What Am I Doing Here?" Gillibrand.

Posted by: Okie at March 31, 2010 07:29 AM (x6Iaq)

145 I think a lot of this is media spin.

Independents are leaving in droves. 
This unpopular bill is still unpopular.


Posted by: Lemon Kiten at March 31, 2010 12:20 PM (0fzsA

I'm w/you kitty...the power of their spin is very strong, but we still need to keep up the pressure...God Bless the Tea Party!

Posted by: dananjcon at March 31, 2010 07:29 AM (pr+up)

146 Hey Senator Cornyn.  I'm one of your constituents.  Perhaps, come your re-election, I may direct my focus to YOUR misplaced priorities.

Posted by: reason at March 31, 2010 07:29 AM (5npD/)

147

What a dope.  The issue is the Constitution versus The Communist Manifesto. 

Period.  Anything else is just fluff.

Posted by: 57 States at March 31, 2010 07:29 AM (kbH+o)

148 And on top of this crap, the gop frontrunner, romney, continues to refuse to say that romneycare was a mistake.

Posted by: Guy Fawkes at March 31, 2010 07:30 AM (7VvJB)

149

And on top of this crap, the gop frontrunner, romney, continues to refuse to say that romneycare was a mistake.

Posted by: Guy Fawkes

 

Hi everyone. I managed to make a complete ass of myself, and by extension, the state of Mass (which I cannot spell)

I therefore refute what President Obama said.

 

And I want you to vote for me in 2012.    Hello?

Posted by: Mit Romney at March 31, 2010 07:32 AM (R2fpr)

150

No. Boxer is worthless but Durbin actually influences people and gets bad things passed. By far worst than ineffective, ass-clown Barbara "Call Me Senator" Boxer.

Are Durbin and Lindsey Graham related?

Posted by: Hussein the Plumber at March 31, 2010 07:32 AM (RkRxq)

151 158  Roland and the Sheriff have jam sessions there, or so I've heard.

Posted by: unknown jane at March 31, 2010 07:32 AM (5/yRG)

152 I think this is why Krauthammer said the GOP would pass the VAT in the next session of congress, as the only responsible thing to do to cover the cost of that crap. Posted by: Paladin at March 31, 2010 12:14 PM (H7yeS) If the Repubs are dumb enough to play that game we are doomed. Presuming the Repubs take at least the house, they need to slap Obama with PayGo hard and new taxes off the table. Sorry CPB, Obama spent your money on Porkulous road signs. Sorry HUD, Obama spent your money on 'green energy'. Etc If Obama shuts the government down, let him. And let the media run with all the f***ing sob stories they want. Most people won't be seriously affected, and we'll be cutting the deficit by giving all those "non-essential" federal bureaucrats unpaid time off. Two other specific things I would suggest. 1) An across the board cut of federal salaries to 2008 levels. 2) A windfall profits tax on the entertainment and legal industries. Let the Democrats defend the slimeballs that bankroll them while we are arguing about CPB and HUD.... Mr Obama

Posted by: 18-1 at March 31, 2010 07:33 AM (7BU4a)

153 Posted by: laceyunderalls at March 31, 2010 12:21 PM (pLTLS)

And, don't foget, these are the same GOP weenies who were worried that the Town Hallers were being too strident.  The GOP was 100% wrong on that and they are still wrong. They don't understand America and what this nation is about and what it really wants or is willing to do.

It is as if the GOP has come to the conclusion that there is no private charity (which is the intention of the dems - to have all charity coming straight from nanny government).  Of course, this is the same GOP that seemed perfectly happy seeing private property rights (from which all individual liberties flow) shit all over in order to ban smoking.  We smokers have seen this descent into the chasm coming for a long, long time.

Posted by: progressoverpeace at March 31, 2010 07:33 AM (N49h9)

154 When Texas secedes from the Union, I don't know what Oklahoma is going to do for football players. A once proud, northern Texas football program will be ruined.

Posted by: Dr. Spank at March 31, 2010 07:33 AM (I1/U/)

155  This was over ten days ago.  As many observed, repeal will not happen, cannot happen. The nation is stuck with a Frankenstein's monster of socialized medicine, and while the fight against it is the good fight, Krauthammer is likely correct and what happens next is not repeal or even a partial rollback but a heavy push for the VAT.

Posted by: George Orwell at March 31, 2010 07:33 AM (AZGON)

156

161  Lindsay Graham is a hero of the republic compared to Dick....

 

Really, he does a lot more evil than many are aware of.

Posted by: unknown jane at March 31, 2010 07:34 AM (5/yRG)

157 The GOP is as guilty as Dems when it come to class warfare.  These assclowns and their staff don't have to participate in this shit.  Further codification into law the establishment of classes.  Whether this is the result of malicious intent or simply utter stupidity doesn't matter, the result is the same and these haters of liberty must go.

Posted by: dogfish at March 31, 2010 07:34 AM (sGaoh)

158
Did Kay Bailout really promise to resign?

I mean promise-promise, or did she just say she'd consider it, or she'd probably resign?

Posted by: Tweet, a Joo, and a Mexican walk into a bar... at March 31, 2010 07:34 AM (X1Xo9)

159 Ithink this is why Krauthammer said the GOP would pass the VAT in the next session of congress, as the only responsible thing to do to cover the cost of that crap. Posted by: Paladin at March 31, 2010 12:14 PM (H7yeS)

 If the Repubs are dumb enough to play that game we are doomed.

Presuming the Repubs take at least the house, they need to slap Obama with PayGo hard with new taxes off the table.

Sorry CPB, Obama spent your money on Porkulous road signs.

Sorry HUD, Obama spent your money on 'green energy'. Etc

If Obama shuts the government down, let him. And let the media run with all the f***ing sob stories they want. Most people won't be seriously affected, and we'll be cutting the deficit by giving all those "non-essential" federal bureaucrats unpaid time off.

Two other specific things I would suggest.

1) An across the board cut of federal salaries to 2008 levels.

2) A windfall profits tax on the entertainment and legal industries. Let the Democrats defend the slimeballs that bankroll them while we are arguing about CPB and HUD.... Mr Obama

Posted by: 18-1 at March 31, 2010 07:34 AM (7BU4a)

160 The Republican party is the reason we're in this mess in the first place.

If they'd pushed genuine healthcare reform before Obama came along, we wouldn't be in this mess.  Paul Ryan's ideas pretty much sell themselves.  But instead, they squandered their majority under the leadership of Trent Lott and friends, acting like Democrat Lite.

More GOP incumbents need to go.  We need more primary upsets.  Stop donating to the RNC.  Etcetera.  Repeal and replace the GOP.

Posted by: sandy burger at March 31, 2010 07:35 AM (LG9iz)

161

"1) An across the board cut of federal salaries to 2008 levels. "

Don't forget benefits, specially pension.

Posted by: MDr VB1.0 CS1st at March 31, 2010 07:35 AM (ucq49)

162

Personally, I think repeal is impossible unless there is already something to replace it.  Repeal and Replace is a nice slogan, however the people are going to want to see what we replace it with before wanting the other gone.

It would have to be done in one motion, present legislations saying here's what we want to do, when it's voted on and wins, the repeal of the old is automatic.  It can be written into the bill that way, so nobody gets stiffed.

I think there are some good things in the bill, however how they went about it is wrong.  Pre-existing conditions should have been done differently.  Not by forcing insurance companies to cover them regardless.  Those people who aren't covered by employers where pre-existing conditions don't come in to play in group policies that much, can possibly be covered with some sort of plan by the Government, i.e. Medicaid/Medicare.  It has to be cheaper than changing the entire system for a relatively small percentage of the population who have pre-existing conditions or don't have insurance temporarily.

I'm just waiting for Obamacare to start denying coverage to people who don't live by Michelle Obama's rules, i.e. obese, smoking.  Of course engaging in risky homosexual activity wouldn't be one of those coverage deniers, I'm sure.  I am really worried that whatever clusterfuck of coverage that will be forced on me will be less than what I have now and cost money out of my pocket that I don't have.

Posted by: Jaimo at March 31, 2010 07:35 AM (9U1OG)

163 I just emailed him, I hope you will all do the same, email each and every one of them. Let them know we are watching, we are taking notes and we are sharing those notes. If the govt won't be transparent we will expose them. I'm done with these shits, I'm telling them  I want my fucking country back and they ARE going to do it.

Posted by: Mrs. Compton at March 31, 2010 07:36 AM (NaJ/S)

164
it's fiiting Kay will be flanked by Cabbage Pathc Kid face, McConnell.

Here's a guy who will stand by a promise-breaker but not Jim Bunning. Actually, the whole GOP left Bunning to hang out to dry when he was trying to make a legitimate point.

Posted by: Tweet, a Joo, and a Mexican walk into a bar... at March 31, 2010 07:36 AM (X1Xo9)

165 Spank, some Texans are simply using football as a way out of the sticks.

Posted by: Okie at March 31, 2010 07:37 AM (x6Iaq)

166 Geezus.  Man up is right.  I hope it's just that they are concerned with sounding shrill or whatever and not seriously considering caving on HCR. 

Posted by: Y-not at March 31, 2010 07:38 AM (Kn9r7)

167

"When Texas secedes from the Union, I don't know what Oklahoma is going to do for football players. "

Got a point there.  Maybe there'll be a green card type system put in place.

Posted by: MDr VB1.0 CS1st at March 31, 2010 07:38 AM (ucq49)

168

It is still possible for the monster to be toppled from both within and without.It drags more deadly baggage than Jacob Marley on a bad day. As the financial hits keep on coming, as job losses and subsequent revenues mount, this can and should be a constant supply of ammunition.Association to it can be a club (with nails). The repeal and rescinding of parts of the monster can be undertaken and be victories, instead of a set-piece battle.

Admittedly, that still requires courage to do more than getting along or tidying things up. The reconciliation bill was just that.

Posted by: Blue Hen at March 31, 2010 07:38 AM (R2fpr)

169

You don't start by only going for half of the enchilada. Don't be a pussy, go 100% or nothing. If you end up with a little less so be it, at least you tried. Just don't TRY from the halfway point and expect to get all.

Posted by: Bosk at March 31, 2010 12:16 PM (pUO5u)

In many cases, "tough shit" is what the Constitution dictates. There is private charity and there are states.  People can lobby their states for the insane goodies they want. Having the federal government do these things is wrong, un-Constitutional and dangerous. If the GOP can't get that across, then they are totally useless.

Posted by: progressoverpeace at March 31, 2010 12:17 PM (N49h9)

!!!Eleventy!!!  Either you agree with the Constitution or you don't.  Half measures don't cut it. Are we a country of laws or a country of (hand-out-lovin') men?

Posted by: RushBabe at March 31, 2010 07:38 AM (LKkE8)

170
The GOP needs to remind voters of the facts:

-The bill was passed in a corrupt manner ON PARTY-LINE VOTE.

-There was No-C-Span debate (as promised over and over again by Obama)

-HRC is not about health care - It's a TAX INCREASE.


Posted by: Lemon Kiten at March 31, 2010 07:39 AM (0fzsA)

171
The GOP could lose it it goes too soft.





Posted by: Lemon Kiten at March 31, 2010 07:40 AM (0fzsA)

172 175
it's fiiting Kay will be flanked by Cabbage Pathc Kid face, McConnell.

McConnell supported amnesty. Fuck him too.

Posted by: Barbarian at March 31, 2010 07:40 AM (EL+OC)

173 You should certainly be an expert on the sticks. Besides, they pay us Texans good money to come play up there and, I believe, your state pays us to impregnate your women to help the gene pool.

Posted by: Dr. Spank at March 31, 2010 07:42 AM (I1/U/)

174 We are still condemning the entire GOP based on words by John Cornyn why? My senator has no spine, & lost it some time ago. But he is just one Republican, & I hardly think he speaks for the party on this. The House is still sticking to repeal & reform, & I haven't seen any evidence that they are doing otherwise. Many of the GOP governors are also standing behind their Republicans AGs & saying the same thing.

Posted by: Miss80sBaby at March 31, 2010 07:42 AM (yfJ6g)

175 I think there are some good things in the bill, however how they went about it is wrong.  

Posted by: Jaimo at March 31, 2010 12:35 PM (9U1OG)

This is a fool's argument.  Yes, there are proper sentences in the 2700 page monstrosity, but so what?  It must be repealed (or attempted) in its whole - as DeMint's bill says in 41 simple words. 

There are "good things" in this bill?  Wrong.  There are attractive nanny-state, un-Constitutional giveaways in this bill.

America didn't care about health insurance reform.  THis was a manufactured crisis from the start, as was proven time and again by the polls showing that most people were happy with their insurance.  What people didn't like was that more and more burdens were being placed on healthy and wealthy individuals to cover unhealthy and poor ones - who still get better health care today than anyone on Earth did 30 years ago - thanks to the advancements in medical technology that the healthy and wealthy pay for in our system.

The way some of you people are speaking, it's amazing that anyone on Earth lived before the advent of the medical technology of the last 5 years.  A little perspective would be a nice thing, since the Constitution seems to be too passe for anyone to fight for.

Posted by: progressoverpeace at March 31, 2010 07:42 AM (N49h9)

176

Gee, it seems like he is taking about the NUMBER ONE priority of voters ...  jobs ...

 

Posted by: Jeff at March 31, 2010 07:42 AM (B7Wu9)

177 I noticed the squishy response earlier as well.
Pretty pathetic.
Toss them all out.

Posted by: 1idvet at March 31, 2010 07:43 AM (xUxh3)

178

The Republican party is the reason we're in this mess in the first place.

If they'd pushed genuine healthcare reform before Obama came along, we wouldn't be in this mess

 

Uh huh. And when George W. BUsh tried to reform Social Security, when there was a Republican majority, he was met with universal adulation.

 

Another example of where we:

 1. blame ourselves 

 2. cede the point that such action is even needed.

Posted by: Blue Hen at March 31, 2010 07:43 AM (R2fpr)

179

I was at the Fairfax County Republican Convention in VA.  Congressman Wolf gave a speech and did not mention healthcare.  Later, a candidate in the 11th Cong. district did advocate repeal, as well as other speakers spoke regarding the health care bill.  I urged repeal to Cong. Wolf and the other candidates in face-to-face conversations.

It is an uphill battle.  We have to constantly remind the politicians that we want this monstorsity repealed.

 

Posted by: Scoob at March 31, 2010 07:43 AM (T7+JL)

180  We can talk a lot about our love for markets but sometimes markets have unpleasant outcomes. If our reaction as conservatives is to insulate people from those outcomes, what exactly makes us different from liberals?

What DrewM wrote above bears long and careful thought.

Posted by: George Orwell at March 31, 2010 07:43 AM (AZGON)

181 Our Senators have the biggest balls.

Posted by: Okie at March 31, 2010 07:44 AM (x6Iaq)

182

I bet the Repubs are banking on these guys being better at running healthcare.

http://tinyurl.com/yz2rwvo

Yeah - that's it!

Posted by: Hussein the Plumber at March 31, 2010 07:44 AM (RkRxq)

183 157 And on top of this crap, the gop frontrunner, romney, continues to refuse to say that romneycare was a mistake.

Posted by: Guy Fawkes at March 31, 2010 12:30 PM (7VvJB)

Eeeesh...this issue alone is gonna sink Mitt in mouth Romney, which won't be so bad if he doesn't take the blue hair & soccer mom votes...He's a very nice boy and good looking too! ...trust me, I've heard these words uttered in my office.  

**shutter**

Posted by: dananjcon at March 31, 2010 07:44 AM (pr+up)

184
btw, how are those 14 state's AG's doing with their lawsuits?

Please please don't tell me they're getting cold feet, too?

Posted by: Tweet, a Joo, and a Mexican walk into a bar... at March 31, 2010 07:44 AM (X1Xo9)

185 These guys should be afraid of us, not the fucking press.  This is why they lost the last 2 elections. Great talk, no follow through. Where are the bold initiatives? Why hasn't one Republican leader say "We're going for 290 (veto proof) seats!" Who cares if it can't be done. Say it anyway! Put fear into our enemies and fire in our bellies. Momentum just doesn't appear. It has to be built. And then you've got to keep it up til November.
Going soft on this crap only kills momentum.

Posted by: Iblis at March 31, 2010 07:45 AM (9221z)

186 i should just stay of the internet today, getting too depressed by these asshats in the gop that want to play what they think the voters want to hear when any idiot can see the people are pissed and want somebody to stand up for us.  they have to give people a reason to vote for them, not just against the other guy.

Posted by: Guy Fawkes at March 31, 2010 07:45 AM (7VvJB)

187 173  It's already happening.  Four days ago we got a phone call from our insurance provider -- enroll in their "healthy lifestyle" program (complete with breathalyzers to monitor whether or not you are smoking, and there's also a method to monitor what food purchases you make and you have to have a healthcare provider monitor your weight, bp, etc. on a monthly or so basis -- I didn't get all of it down, as after a while my brain glazed over) or face a $150 a month increase in your premiums, which are already going up.  Of course, we have a family plan, so if we don't do it, then the kids suffer as well.

Posted by: unknown jane at March 31, 2010 07:46 AM (5/yRG)

188 Tweet, you and someguy should get married and run off to San Francisco, that's if you aren't the same person. If so, go f~ck yourself.

Posted by: Dr. Spank at March 31, 2010 07:47 AM (I1/U/)

189

This makes me angry.

Posted by: Ed Anger at March 31, 2010 07:47 AM (7+pP9)

190
Ace's post about Cornyn in 5, 4, 3...

Oh, and be prepared for another round of posts on why running 3rd party candidates is a bad idea.

Posted by: Tweet, a Joo, and a Mexican walk into a bar... at March 31, 2010 07:47 AM (X1Xo9)

191

186 I've yet to disagree with a thing you've said, but (a) you're preaching to the choir and (b) we still have elections. Do we not want indies? Because, hate them as many here will, we still need them.

There's no google translator for common sense so we have to work with what we've got.

Anyway, on to real men that matter. Mike Pence needs help today. Per his fb page:

Midnight tonight is the end of the financial reporting period. I KNOW that liberal Democrat operatives will be looking at my report with special interest. Please make your contribution today and send a clear message that the American people have had enough! After you have shown your support, please change your statu...s update and ask your friends to join us here on Facebook.

Posted by: laceyunderalls at March 31, 2010 07:47 AM (pLTLS)

192 I'm just waiting for Obamacare to start denying coverage to people who don't live by Michelle Obama's rules, i.e. obese, smoking.

In a beautiful piece of Barry's cunning political calculation, that sort of thing will happen but not until the end of the decade or 2016 at the soonest, when it will be far too late to expect any remedy.

Posted by: George Orwell at March 31, 2010 07:48 AM (AZGON)

193

In many cases, "tough shit" is what the Constitution dictates. There is private charity and there are states.  People can lobby their states for the insane goodies they want. Having the federal government do these things is wrong, un-Constitutional and dangerous. If the GOP can't get that across, then they are totally useless.

Posted by: progressoverpeace at March 31, 2010 12:17 PM (N49h9)

Also, there are precious few roadblocks to the left having handled Obamacare as a private health collective.

For the replace, how about we focus on that? In fact, a few gutsy Republican leaders could offer to help start it up, and invite the Dems to join.

We recognize that there are a small number of people out there who aren't well served by the current system, and for that we are suggesting the following steps to help make a private Health Collective that will meet their needs. As our Democrat colleagues have noted, this is something that we need now, not as they have proposed in 2014 (cue some sob stories). In fact, we are encouraging every member of congress to join this collective because we believe it is important to practice what we preach. And this proposal will not bankrupt the government and force people into a system they don't want. Etc Etc...


Posted by: 18-1 at March 31, 2010 07:48 AM (7BU4a)

194 Repeal would be easier if the GOP offered a coherent, compelling alternative.

Posted by: CJ at March 31, 2010 07:48 AM (9KqcB)

195

31 And that's the type we have to run. ANTI-OBAMA not these "get along" pussies. I hate them.

We have to punch up.

Posted by: dagny at March 31, 2010 07:48 AM (AGXlA)

196 And on top of this crap, the gop frontrunner, romney, continues to refuse to say that romneycare was a mistake.

Posted by: Guy Fawkes at March 31, 2010 12:30 PM (7VvJB)

I have no problem with Romney sticking up for his disaster in Massachusetts, since he maintains that it is the state's right to do it, and is entirely inappropriate for the federal government to do.  I agree with that view.  I still take issue with his claims that RomneyCare works, in any way (as it is sinking Massachusetts and makes health insurance the most expensive there), but states have the right to do whatever idiotic things they want with health insurance.  People can move to and from states.  The only key, for me, is that the federal government stays within the limits prescribed by the Constitution, and running health insurance is not part of that, outside of minimal regulations to enable interstate commerce.

Posted by: progressoverpeace at March 31, 2010 07:49 AM (N49h9)

197 cornhole has always been week on this.  Can't believe Texas puts up with this.  What should really scare everyone is that this douchebag is the head of RSCC.

Posted by: Dunkirk at March 31, 2010 07:49 AM (kbHJ6)

198 Go big or go home.

Posted by: That guy who says go big or go home at March 31, 2010 07:50 AM (TIGTh)

199

185  See the comments concerning some of our esteemed GOP representatives from IL...

If the GOP senators don't stand with the reps and governors, then the whole repeal idea is done; united they stand, divided they fall...and they are starting to divide.  Believe me, this does not make me happy.

Posted by: unknown jane at March 31, 2010 07:50 AM (5/yRG)

200 @207
+1

Posted by: Y-not at March 31, 2010 07:51 AM (Kn9r7)

201 "On Tuesday, Cornyn issued a 1,280-word campaign memo that mentioned "repeal" only once. It did not advocate repeal but noted that in a recent poll, "46 percent of respondents support a full repeal" of the health law."

Interestingly curious, wonder why he only mentioned repeal only once?

-Matt
http://www.tiepedia.com

Posted by: Tiepedia at March 31, 2010 07:52 AM (Rk6qq)

202 204 Repeal would be easier if the GOP offered a coherent, compelling alternative. Posted by: CJ at March 31, 2010 12:48 PM

Isn't that what Paul Ryan did weeks ago? 

Posted by: Y-not at March 31, 2010 07:52 AM (Kn9r7)

203 In the Left corner in the blue trunks, at 4 feet 9 inches, weighing in at 103 pounds, the reigning  Methamphetamine Psychosis champion, Democrat "The Mad Earchomper" Majority!

And trembling in the Right corner, at 6'7", weighing in at 452 pounds, in the urine stained trunks, Republican "Big Fat Bed Wetting Accommodationist Pussy" Minority!

Let's get ready to RUMMMMMMMM....

Sorry folks, we have a forfeit. This is an official decision, no ticket refunds.

 

Posted by: iowahawk at March 31, 2010 07:52 AM (veL4N)

204 SCOTUS is the only hope.

Posted by: alans at March 31, 2010 07:52 AM (frMli)

205 we got a phone call from our insurance provider -- enroll in their "healthy lifestyle" program (complete with breathalyzers to monitor whether or not you are smoking, and there's also a method to monitor what food purchases you make and you have to have a healthcare provider monitor your weight, bp, etc. on a monthly or so basis... or face a $150 a month increase in your premiums

Welcome to Ingsoc, comrade.  You will rise at 0600 promptly to engage in State Calisthenics as lead by your Block Leader.  Caloric intake reports are due by telescreen at 0645 forwarded directly to the Ministry of Love.  All Hail Big Brother.

Posted by: George Orwell at March 31, 2010 07:53 AM (AZGON)

206

31 And that's the type we have to run. ANTI-OBAMA not these "get along" pussies. I hate them.

We have to punch up.

Posted by: dagny at March 31, 2010 12:48 PM (AGXlA)

In 2008 McCain minimized his differences with Obama...and lost.

In 2004 Bush focused on how he differed from Kerry...and won.

We see a similar pattern of losses in 1996, 1992, 1976 and a similar pattern of wins in 1980, 1984, 1988, and 2004.

The pattern is pretty darn obvious. Stand up for something and win, or go along to get along and lose.

Posted by: 18-1 at March 31, 2010 07:53 AM (7BU4a)

Posted by: Okie at March 31, 2010 07:53 AM (x6Iaq)

208

This makes me angry.

Sorry, Ed Anger, but I don't take you seriously until you're pig-biting mad.

Posted by: FireHorse at March 31, 2010 07:54 AM (cQyWA)

209

214 LOL!  Exactly!

We have a winner here folks.

Posted by: unknown jane at March 31, 2010 07:54 AM (5/yRG)

210 lacey:
March 25th
The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey, conducted on the first two nights after the president signed the bill, shows that 55% favor repealing the legislation. Forty-two percent (42%) oppose repeal. Those figures include 46% who Strongly Favor repeal and 35% who Strongly Oppose it.

Posted by: Y-not at March 31, 2010 07:54 AM (Kn9r7)

211 People should not forget that the dems openly admitted that everyone in the US gets health care.  Their whole argument was that they get it through the emergency rooms, which we all pay for.  The funny part is that, in their illegal, un-Constitutional, idiotic health scare, there are no savings from not having to service these people in the emergency rooms, anymore.  Those expenses landed, in large part, in Medicaid, but there were no cuts in Medicaid in their health scare.  None.  The cuts were in Medicare (that people actually paid for, already) ... and then were moved INTO Medicaid.

The dems have not a leg to stand on in their arguments about health care, and now many of the GOP are looking to cut our legs off, too.  What a bunch of total imbeciles.  It is unreal.

Posted by: progressoverpeace at March 31, 2010 07:55 AM (N49h9)

212 Repeal would be easier if the GOP offered a coherent, compelling alternative.

Posted by: CJ at March 31, 2010 12:48 PM (9KqcB)

Ryan did.

The House is where the young turks are. Only the sell-outs seem to get press.

Posted by: Rat Patrol at March 31, 2010 07:55 AM (dQdrY)

213 To modify what Drew M. wrote: "...always bring it back to the fact that health care and its impact on the economy and your personal freedoms are the issues that frame everything else."

Posted by: Ed Wallis at March 31, 2010 07:56 AM (nHZ6W)

214 Is CJ Cahlres Jhonson? 

Posted by: Y-not at March 31, 2010 07:56 AM (Kn9r7)

215 RushBabe, e-mail me, please. Bottom of my page.

Posted by: Michael Rittenhouse at March 31, 2010 12:18 PM (2QFX4)

Done.

Posted by: RushBabe at March 31, 2010 07:56 AM (LKkE8)

216

Dear Senator RINO,

I was recently informed that you made comments that insinuated that the Republican party should not focus on repealing ObamaCare.  Allow me to make my personal position abundantly clear.  Repeal and replace or you will be replaced.

The only thing that will ignite the passions of the tea-partiers and others more than the Democrats forcing this horrible, unconstitutional legislation upon us is worthless, spinless politicians who claim to be Republicans but refuse to oppose this till their last dying breath.

I will not be donating to the republican party, I will be donating directly to specific candidates.  Those that run on repeal and replace will have my wholehearted support, financial and otherwise.

Those seeking some middle ground will be considered the most worthless vermin on earth and I will actively donate and campaign against them in the primaries, and make certain that everyone else I know of a similar mindset does the same.

Wise up.  There is no "middle ground".  We don't want socialist lite.  We want conservative values, conservative principles, and people who respect the constitution and our founding fathers to represent us.

What we don't want is a bunch of weak, blue blood liberal jerks who claim to represent us but really only concern themselves with staying in office.  Yes if you run on repeal and replace the main stream media is going to say horrible things about you.  Man up.  Their going to say horrible things about you anyway.

So if you have half a brain you'll stop seeking their approval and start seeking ours, because without us your going to have to go back to selling used cars or doing whatever it was you were doing before you got elected to office.  And I for one would much rather not vote than cast my vote for someone who will betray my ideals at the drop of a hat.  I think you'll find there are a lot of other folks who feel the same as I do, and that this is the reason you got your asses handed to you in the last election.

What  I think you fail to realize is that this is a historical turning point for the Republican party.  If you cannot or will not return to conservative roots and conservative principles then you will not win elections.  It is that simple. 

Most of us have lost faith in you for damn good reasons.  It's time for you to show that you can be trusted again, and that time is rapidly fading.  So make your position abundantly clear.  Repeal & Replace or be Replaced.  It's that simple.

 

Posted by: StuckOnStupid at March 31, 2010 07:57 AM (e8T35)

217 216  I wish I could declare my tobacco addiction as medicinal, kinda like marijuana -- it certainly keeps me a bit more pleasant and easy to deal with, not so dangerous to stupid people.

Posted by: unknown jane at March 31, 2010 07:57 AM (5/yRG)

218 Eh, All this proves is that repeal will probably be a two election process. 2010 - defeat every single Dim possible at every level - local, state, national 2012 - a)primary every single weak-kneed Rep and get rid of them, then b) defeat every single Dim possible at every level - local, state, national and c) defeat Obama/elect conservative President Unfortunately, guys like Cornyn basically follow the McCain Election Plan(TM) i.e. kick the legs out from under your supporters every time they get pumped up, win a victory, or gain wide-spread support. He needs to go....just not right now. Eyes on the prize, people.

Posted by: naturalfake at March 31, 2010 07:59 AM (+kzvp)

219 Isn't it time for a new post? This topic blows.

Posted by: Dr. Spank at March 31, 2010 07:59 AM (I1/U/)

220 Easy solution to the problem. First we repeal those elected GOP officials that dont have the balls to take up the good fight and replace them with people who do. Then we get Obamacare repealed and consign it to the dust bin of history where it belongs.

Posted by: Hellrider at March 31, 2010 08:00 AM (Pec3U)

221 210 Some of our senators are cowards, what can I say. But, again, don't think that everyone else is giving in just because Mitch McConnell & co. are wimps. If you think that, then you haven't been paying attention.  

Posted by: Miss80sBaby at March 31, 2010 08:00 AM (yfJ6g)

222

You silly Morons that advocate town halls where GOP critters can detail the slime in this bill are thinking logically.  That would be effective.  That's where you differ from our esteemed representatives.  I've been burning up the phone lines to Cornyn, Coburn, Boehner, Ryan and my local guys and NONE of them are planning town halls during the recess.

Posted by: RushBabe at March 31, 2010 08:00 AM (LKkE8)

223
btw, did you guys hear about the Minute Men border group dissolved? Surprising, but what's even more surprising was the reason given for group's dissolution. As I understand it, they said it was about liability; they didn't want to be responsible for any violence due to the fact "America was getting meaner."

Pretty disappointing to learn the Democrat's tricks work on so many people you think are principled.

Posted by: Tweet, a Joo, and a Mexican walk into a bar... at March 31, 2010 08:01 AM (X1Xo9)

224 There's definitely a lot of good comments here and we should give a lot of thought to all this.

It's a complex issue and there are no easy solutions.

Posted by: Dipshit with nothing to say and wanting to appear thougtful at March 31, 2010 08:01 AM (TIGTh)

225
New Thread!
New Thread!
New Thread!

Posted by: Ed Anger at March 31, 2010 08:01 AM (7+pP9)

226 shows that 55% favor repealing the legislation. Forty-two percent (42%) oppose repeal. Those figures include 46% who Strongly Favor repeal and 35% who Strongly Oppose it.

One other point to consider on polling.

There are a large number of Democrat districts and states that overwhelmingly vote D by lopsided margins. This tends to mean that for all practical purposes, well done polls will still overstate support for the Left.

Imagine there are three districts in the country. One normally goes D 80-20, One goes R 55-45. One is a toss up.

A well done national poll in a normal election year would find D support at 58-42. If the polls came back 50-50 you would expect the Republicans to win 2 of the 3 elections.

So in the terms of the healthcare debate, if 42% support Obamacare, their actual weight in the congress is likely to be in the mid 30s - all those hard core leftwing districts we are highly unlikely to win anyway.

I think this is part of the phenomenon where if the generic ballot is tied, the Republican generally take a healthy number of seats in congress.

Posted by: 18-1 at March 31, 2010 08:01 AM (7BU4a)

227 There is one thing folding faster that the supposed faltering of the squishes in the GOP, and that's the resolve here. What the fuck? This fight just started and people are wringing their hands. Fuck that. When the going gets tough.....get off your ass and do something about it. It's time to fight, not time to wring your hands, that time is past. The libtards depend on defeatism on out part to ram their bullshit through and make it stick. What are you prepared to do? Besides, bitch, that is. This won't be resolved quickly or easily, and you cannot expect your representatives to do all the fighting for you. You gotta pick up the rope and help them pull this off. Without steely eyed resolve on the part of the electorate, you will not get steely eyed representatives.

Posted by: maddogg at March 31, 2010 08:01 AM (OlN4e)

228 I have been saying to you that I see no difference between republicans and dems which is why I and many others are independents.  They wanted the bill too otherwise they would have done everything in their power not to let it get to the senate floor for the vote.  I think people are tired of the bills that no one reads that are filled with surprises.  No one understands, no one.

Posted by: curious at March 31, 2010 08:01 AM (p302b)

229

Posted by: Scoob at March 31, 2010 12:43 PM (T7+JL)

Wolf has a GOOOH candidate knocking at his door (and running against him in November).  Tea Party groups around here seem to have had enough of him.

Posted by: RushBabe at March 31, 2010 08:02 AM (LKkE8)

230 Vote libertarian.

Posted by: Ox-Eye Mike at March 31, 2010 08:02 AM (KUllR)

231

Cronyn is right about one thing: Republicans can't just run on the health care issue (whether Repeal and Replace or just repeal parts) they MUST run on rebuilding the economy.

The fact is the people don't know what they want other than 1) a good economy 2)getting rid of Obamacare and 3) stopping runaway government spending. The GOP should promise those 3 things. It doesn't matter whether they can do it or not because Obama is still in office.

 

Posted by: Ken at March 31, 2010 08:02 AM (4JpPD)

232

How did Cornyn get his position? Hasn't he only been in the senate since 2002?

Posted by: Rat Patrol at March 31, 2010 08:02 AM (dQdrY)

233 I wish I could declare my tobacco addiction as medicinal, kinda like marijuana -- it certainly keeps me a bit more pleasant and easy to deal with, not so dangerous to stupid people.

Posted by: unknown jane at March 31, 2010 12:57 PM (5/yRG)

Actually, smokers cost a lot less than non-smokers, in the aggregate, as smokers tend to die quick and fast.  This is one reason why you have never seen any actual studies on the health care costs of smokers versus non-smokers.  No one wants to publish the truth of the situation.  This is even aside from the fact that we already pay tons extra for health insurance through the insane taxes that are levied on us.  I pay more in cigarette taxes than most people pay for health insurance - and this is in addition to the $250 billion that the federal government and some states got in that insane lawsuit under Clinton.  Funny how all that money disappeared with nothing to show for it.

And, I'm still waiting for my social security to be adjusted for my smoking - as the federal government claims taht I'll likely not live to ever collect any of it.  But that never happens ...

Posted by: progressoverpeace at March 31, 2010 08:03 AM (N49h9)

234   Does anyone think, given the habits of the GOP, that they won't wither like week-old spring onions when the lamestream media howls "Republicans want to throw you out of the hospital!  They want to deny you medical coverage that took the nation a century to establish!"  November is a long way off and there is plenty of time for the GOP to become the doppelgänger of the Tories in Not So Great Britain, acting as the "responsible stewards of nationalized medicine."  In other words, Democrats with bad haircuts.

Posted by: George Orwell at March 31, 2010 08:03 AM (AZGON)

235 #246  Forgot about the Chinese jewlery, and the laptop batteries!

Posted by: Kratos (missing from the side of Olympus) at March 31, 2010 08:03 AM (9hSKh)

236 109

Mallamutt and laceyunderalls have this, but that comment right there nails it. We cannot do anything without a majority, and our guys still have to worry about getting elected first. Republicans have presented good plans that most voters have heard nothing about (until Democrats stupidly held that summit, and even then, that was only the people paying attention.) The reasons this healthcare bill is so unpopular are 1. people now know what's in it 2. People know there are better ideas out there.

I have full faith in GOP free market solutions to our undoubtedly broken healthcare system. Just as certainly, I know the Democrats have got in bed with the unions in a naked power grab that kills jobs, raises taxes and hurts the middle class. I want this bill repealed, but the way our system works, a majority of voters have to support that. Our current system is unsustainable.

PS Fuck Barbarian.

Posted by: Tattoo De Plane at March 31, 2010 08:04 AM (mHQ7T)

237 Gee, it seems like he is taking about the NUMBER ONE priority of voters ...  jobs ...

ObamaCare will cost millions of jobs.

Posted by: here you go ... You're welcome at March 31, 2010 08:04 AM (PD1tk)

238

Fuck this.

I'm gonna take a shower and go buy a bottle of liquor.

Posted by: Ed Anger at March 31, 2010 08:04 AM (7+pP9)

239 So, quit assuming Cornyn speaks for the entirety of the GOP.

Nobody here does, but the problem is the message that reaches the independents. The party needs to speak with a clear, consistent, unified message.

Posted by: Guy Fawkes at March 31, 2010 08:04 AM (7VvJB)

240 Repeal is a winner, based on the economics alone. Those companies taking charges against income aren't doing it to make a political statement. That's money that isn't going to be going to the shareholders or the employees. When that happens to my company, guess who gets to take unpaid days off if they are lucky, or look for another job if they are not. Somebody's got to pay, and it's the people with jobs who pay for all of it. In case you've not looked recently, there aren't as many of us as there used to be, and it's not getting better. When you're in a hole, stop digging. When you're broke, stop spending.

Posted by: MarkD at March 31, 2010 08:05 AM (YhZfg)

241 We need to put one person in charge...who is wise!

Posted by: Anakin Skywalker at March 31, 2010 08:06 AM (H7yeS)

242 The number one issue this election cycle needs to be jobs. Health care can be #2. First and foremost Americans care about their wallet.

Posted by: dkap at March 31, 2010 08:07 AM (9XyMW)

243 In other words, Democrats with bad haircuts.

Posted by: George Orwell at March 31, 2010 01:03 PM (AZGON)


We have some pretty hot-looking people in the GOP now, and even better- looking ones running for office.

Marcia Blackburn, Sarah Palin, Scott Brown... then Adam Kinzinger and Marco Rubio.

Posted by: Tattoo De Plane at March 31, 2010 08:08 AM (mHQ7T)

244

Cronyn is right about one thing: Republicans can't just run on the health care issue (whether Repeal and Replace or just repeal parts) they MUST run on rebuilding the economy.

Posted by: Ken at March 31, 2010 01:02 PM (4JpPD)

But, rebuilding the economy means having to tell people that the federal government shouldn't be in the business of bailing them out, as it is un-Constitutional and stupid - the same as the argument against national socialized health care.

I don't see where Cornyn is correct on either of these issues, as he adopts Dem-lite socialism for both.

Posted by: progressoverpeace at March 31, 2010 08:08 AM (N49h9)

245 253 So, quit assuming Cornyn speaks for the entirety of the GOP.

Nobody here does, but the problem is the message that reaches the independents.

He's also on the Natl Rep Senatorial Cmte, so he is presumably speaking about election strategies, not just as an individual senator.  That's the danger.

Posted by: Y-not at March 31, 2010 08:08 AM (Kn9r7)

246 But, hey, let's all jump on the lump everyone together band-wagon because you people are too lazy to read.

Posted by: Miss80sBaby at March 31, 2010 01:06 PM (yfJ6g)

Poor curious is just concerned.

Posted by: Rat Patrol at March 31, 2010 08:08 AM (dQdrY)

247

AGs, you say?  Check these lieutenant govs.  They're excited about a Constitutional Conventionhttp://tinyurl.com/ydvu3k5

Posted by: RushBabe at March 31, 2010 08:09 AM (LKkE8)

248 DrewM,

It's John Cornyn, not the GOP.

Cornyn has been an asshole on this issue, and by that I mean a wimp.

He'll do more harm than good. He's a menace.

Posted by: Christoph at March 31, 2010 08:09 AM (0fq7b)

249 245

How did Cornyn get his position? Hasn't he only been in the senate since 2002?


As I indicated earlier, Texan's are generally fucked in the head. He probably said something that got their inner tard all riled up and they voted for him in mass. Just to show the rest of us. This is what they do.



Posted by: Barbarian at March 31, 2010 08:10 AM (EL+OC)

250

253 Nobody here does, but the problem is the message that reaches the independents. The party needs to speak with a clear, consistent, unified message.

Nobody here does? I'm reading the comments, & seeing a lot of chatter devoted to painting the GOP with a broad-brush. I gave several examples of work from an AG, a governor, a House member, a senator, etc., but no one seems to care. No, because it's more fun to ignore the evidence & blame the blame game.

Cornyn is an idiot, & I say that as a Texan. Some of our senators our the weak ones, & we need to tune them out--they're spineless. Now go read about the people who actually care instead of complaining. Maybe you';ll find that some in power do have a plan RE this monstronsity. But don't complain until you are informed.

Posted by: Miss80sBaby at March 31, 2010 08:11 AM (yfJ6g)

251 telling you what, these asshole republicans blow this next election and don't get this crap repealed, I am going to go all out for every third party candidate that actually espouses the same principles I do.

Last chance for you republicans in the house and senate. Don't fuck it up.

Posted by: Unclefacts, Summoner of Meteors and Buckets of Scorn for the Left at March 31, 2010 08:11 AM (erIg9)

252

#255  But, hey, let's all jump on the lump everyone together band-wagon because you people are too lazy to read.

Quiet you, heh.

/Seriously, I read your links and get your point.  And the Republicans, for the most part, haven't been playing dead on this issue.

Posted by: Kratos (missing from the side of Olympus) at March 31, 2010 08:11 AM (9hSKh)

253 What state are you from barbarian? Maine?

Posted by: Dr. Spank at March 31, 2010 08:11 AM (I1/U/)

254 Let's not have a Polish firing squad here.  We're on the same side.  Nobody has less respect for the integrity of Republican politicians than I do (which is why, after thirty years, I became an independent)  but the alternative is too horrible to contemplate.  We need to provide ourselves and each other with clothes pin for our noses to help control the stench and we need to vote Republican.

Posted by: WalrusRex at March 31, 2010 08:11 AM (xxgag)

255 Texan's are generally fucked in the head

Making friends in one of the more red states, hey.

Posted by: Guy Fawkes at March 31, 2010 08:12 AM (7VvJB)

256 Was it over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor?

Posted by: That guy who works in this tired, worn out quote at every possible opportunity at March 31, 2010 08:12 AM (TIGTh)

257 The HCR law is a job-killer, a tax-hiking personal pocketbook issue, and a deficit-ballooner. 

There's no problem in including it front and center in campaigns as long as these connections are made clear. 

People also need to be educated about the myth of job-creation.  A lot of my naive lib friends talk about make-work jobs, mostly public sector, as if that's going to stimulate the economy and create more jobs.  We need to run against public sector expansion and villify it the way the Dems villified the banking and insurance industries. 

Posted by: Y-not at March 31, 2010 08:12 AM (Kn9r7)

258
The lying weasels who run the media and the democrat party want us to think this.

We must fight the liars.

All the GOP has to do is show video of Obama promising "No individual mandate".  over and over
All the C-Span promises.  over and over.
 The backroom deals behind closed dorrs.  over and over

The job-killing tax increase that is HRC bill  is going to kill what what left of our economy,.
& Lets not forget the "Stimulus" fiasco.  Billions of dollars spend to decrease private sector jobs and increase public union jobs.  tax-payer funded waste.




Posted by: Lemon Kiten at March 31, 2010 08:12 AM (0fzsA)

259 We only keep electing Cornyn because we aren't really offered another choice. But people here are sick of him, believe me. I would much rather have Inhoffe & Coburn.

Posted by: Miss80sBaby at March 31, 2010 08:13 AM (yfJ6g)

260

These guys should be afraid of us, not the fucking press.  This is why they lost the last 2 elections. Great talk, no follow through. Where are the bold initiatives?

They all invoke the holy name of Reagan as their idol but can't force themselves to govern like him once they get in.  As Rush always says, "The template's there.  All you have to do is follow it." 

Stuck on stupid.

Posted by: RushBabe at March 31, 2010 08:13 AM (LKkE8)

261 204 Repeal would be easier if the GOP offered a coherent, compelling alternative.

Posted by: CJ at March 31, 2010 12:48 PM (9KqcB)


Cahrles? Is that you? Did you get my email? You know, the one with all the state flags in it, with the explanations of which ones weren't Nazi flags?

Posted by: Unclefacts, Summoner of Meteors and Buckets of Scorn for the Left at March 31, 2010 08:14 AM (erIg9)

262 Posted by: Miss80sBaby at March 31, 2010 01:11 PM (yfJ6g)

Did you read Scott Brown's editorial, today?  He was talking about "keeping the good parts of the bill" [paraphrased] too.  And there have been more than a few others in the GOP who are too timid and scared to speak the truth.

There are stalwarts in the GOP, such as DeMint and a number of House members (though I don't include Ryan in that), but much of the GOP still don't seem to understand jackshit.

Posted by: progressoverpeace at March 31, 2010 08:14 AM (N49h9)

263 Is Barbarian really someguy?

Posted by: MDr VB1.0 CS1st at March 31, 2010 08:14 AM (ucq49)

264 It's almost like Drew M. is causing trouble just to cause site hits...

Posted by: Miss80sBaby is both ticked & miffed at March 31, 2010 08:15 AM (yfJ6g)

265 Let me ask you dumb motherfuckers a question. Do you understand what a fucking line break is?

Answer me, motherfuckers! Do you fucking understand that to FIGHT the left, you have to write comments that people will fucking READ?

I need to tell you this? It's blog commenting 101. Is there one blog operative on this fucking site who understands what's going on?

Posted by: Taking someguy to the next level at March 31, 2010 08:15 AM (TIGTh)

266

As I indicated earlier, Texan's are generally fucked in the head. He probably said something that got their inner tard all riled up and

I meant in the Senate. How does a junior senator wind up as head of NRSC?

Posted by: Rat Patrol at March 31, 2010 08:15 AM (dQdrY)

267

As I understand it, they said it was about liability; they didn't want to be responsible for any violence due to the fact "America was getting meaner."

Actually I'm kind of glad they did what they did and chose to stand down, at least for now.  This is a great bunch of folks who really shined a light on an issue that wasn't getting anywhere near as much attention as it should have been, and for that they should all be considered heros.

But the situation on the border has changed drastically in just the past few years.  I've heard of several incidents where violent mexican drug gangs are bribing portions of the mexican army to help gaurd their drug shipments as they smuggle them across the border.

The border has become a very, very dangerous place indeed.  Imagine these poor folks out there trying to observe and report illegals coming across the border stumbling on to something like this?  Odds are good the smugglers open fire, they are not big fans of witnesses after all.

So, if you don't return fire they'll probably never find your body and you'll be buried out there somewhere in a shallow unmarked grave.  If you do return fire odds are your so badly outgunned your going to die anyway, and if by some miricale you do survive the asshats at the Homeland Security Department will prosecute you and throw you under the jail while the lame stream media depicts the entire incident as a bunch of racist rednecks trying to massacre some poor "undocumented workers" no doubt in a fit of homophobic rage about the Obamacare bill.

Nope, I think they made the right choice.   Best to stand down, at least for now.  They've done as much good as they good do I think, at least for now.

Posted by: StuckOnStupid at March 31, 2010 08:16 AM (e8T35)

268 279 It's almost like Drew M. is causing trouble just to cause site hits...

Gee, I don't think that's fair.  As a member of the NRSC, Cornyn is part of the team deciding strategy to win Senate seats.  If he's projecting some wobbliness, it is a bigger concern than if some random junior senator was doing it. 

Posted by: Y-not at March 31, 2010 08:16 AM (Kn9r7)

269 I meant in the Senate. How does a junior senator wind up as head of NRSC?

Polishing someones croc boots ? Yee. Haw.


Posted by: Barbarian at March 31, 2010 08:17 AM (EL+OC)

270

Stuck on stupid.

Yes?  Oh.. ok.. nevermind.. lol

Posted by: StuckOnStupid at March 31, 2010 08:17 AM (e8T35)

271

277 Scott Brown? You mean the RINO Scott Brown? He's a Massachusetts Republican, for crying-out-loud (as was evidenced in the article). Offering him up as a stalwart conservative Republican is laughable, at the very least.

/Don't know why you don't include Ryan, either, unless you're still beating him up for the bailouts. He explained that--it was either vote for that, or end up with something much worse. Get over it.

Posted by: Miss80sBaby at March 31, 2010 08:18 AM (yfJ6g)

272

279 It's almost like Drew M. is causing trouble just to cause site hits...

It's genius!  Meanwhile...Ace is in LA "investigating" the strip-club allegations (or just "investigating" on his computer - I like that method). 

Posted by: Kratos (missing from the side of Olympus) at March 31, 2010 08:18 AM (9hSKh)

273 Are you starting to figure it out?  Are you still under the illusion that you are free?
Have you finally realized that "low fat" TV dinners aren't good for you?

Are you still paying $15 for a simple haircut from an untrained, unlicensed barber?

Do you now understand why roads are painted with yellow lines and not red ones?

Are you ready to do what needs to be done?

Posted by: Warren BunsofSteel at March 31, 2010 08:18 AM (TIGTh)

274 Isn't that what Paul Ryan did weeks ago? 

Posted by: Y-not at March 31, 2010 12:52 PM (Kn9r7)

The response around here is WE TRIED TO COMPROMISE BEFORE AND OFFERED AN ALTERNATIVE FROM PAUL RYAN BUT NOOOOOOOO FUCK THEM REPEAL IT OR GO DOWN IN FLAMES ON PRINCIPLE!!!

Posted by: Tattoo De Plane at March 31, 2010 08:19 AM (mHQ7T)

275 Posted by: Warren BunsofSteel at March 31, 2010 01:18 PM (TIGTh)

Nice.

Posted by: that guy that notes other posters obscure cultural references at March 31, 2010 08:20 AM (PD1tk)

276 We don't need to repeal it, we just need to make it suck less!!!

Posted by: John Cornhole at March 31, 2010 08:20 AM (DYJjQ)

277 It's almost like Drew M. is causing trouble just to cause site hits...

It works for Analpoundit. Wait... what?

Posted by: Tattoo De Plane at March 31, 2010 08:20 AM (mHQ7T)

278 We must activate the flippty floo and generate 424500 amps of farthing feathery fleep.


Posted by: Ok, now I'm just being fucking annoying at March 31, 2010 08:21 AM (TIGTh)

279 The response around here is WE TRIED TO COMPROMISE BEFORE AND OFFERED AN ALTERNATIVE FROM PAUL RYAN BUT NOOOOOOOO FUCK THEM REPEAL IT OR GO DOWN IN FLAMES ON PRINCIPLE!!!

Maybe I'm missing some point you're trying to make, but don't you have to repeal the HCR before you can replace it with Ryan's (or anyone's) plan? 

Did someone here or in the GOP say "nevermind, forget Ryan's ideas" and I missed it? 

And where is the "go down in flames" part coming from?  Although I'm sure there are individual races where HCR repeal would not be a great sell, it really looks like there are many races where it would be a great issue for a GOP candidate. 

Posted by: Y-not at March 31, 2010 08:23 AM (Kn9r7)

280 Is Barbarian really someguy?

Posted by: MDr VB1.0 CS1st at March 31, 2010 01:14 PM (ucq49)

Yes, but after he goes into a phone booth, takes off his glasses and does a line of meth.

Posted by: Tattoo De Plane at March 31, 2010 08:23 AM (mHQ7T)

281

283 279 Gee, I don't think that's fair.  As a member of the NRSC, Cornyn is part of the team deciding strategy to win Senate seats.  If he's projecting some wobbliness, it is a bigger concern than if some random junior senator was doing it. 

Then why isn't the GOP following his lead? Oh, yes, & this is the Senate we're talking about here, not the House, nor the governors, nor anyone else in the local govts. 1/2 of our senators are spineless squishes who would screw-over are reps without thinking about it. Therefore, we are counting Cornyn as speaking for everyone why? Let's keep the 3 branches of govt straight here.

Posted by: Miss80sBaby at March 31, 2010 08:23 AM (yfJ6g)

282 Scott Brown? You mean the RINO Scott Brown? He's a Massachusetts Republican, for crying-out-loud (as was evidenced in the article). Offering him up as a stalwart conservative Republican is laughable, at the very least.

I wasn't offering him as a stalwart conservative.  I just thought his editorial interesting - though I really liked most of it.

/Don't know why you don't include Ryan, either, unless you're still beating him up for the bailouts. He explained that--it was either vote for that, or end up with something much worse. Get over it.

Posted by: Miss80sBaby at March 31, 2010 01:18 PM (yfJ6g)

Ryan has never argued anything but economics with respect to the health scare.  He's not into federalism or anything.  He's good at a very narrow piece of arguing numbers (though he missed a lot of issues with that, too), but not someone who conveys any great respect for Constitutional limits on the federal government.  Ryan's a nice guy who does some things well, but people blow him up to something much larger, which I don't believe he is.

Posted by: progressoverpeace at March 31, 2010 08:23 AM (N49h9)

283

Let's not have a Polish firing squad here. 

Ahh crap.. now you say something.. might have been nice if you'd mentioned this before I ordered a brand new kielbasa gun.

We're on the same side.  Nobody has less respect for the integrity of Republican politicians than I do (which is why, after thirty years, I became an independent)  but the alternative is too horrible to contemplate.  We need to provide ourselves and each other with clothes pin for our noses to help control the stench and we need to vote Republican.

In this next election, yes, we do.  But we also need to send a strong message to the Republican party and let them know that if they want our continued support they'll straighten up their act, and that if they don't stand for conservative principles then they don't have our support.

Posted by: StuckOnStupid at March 31, 2010 08:23 AM (e8T35)

284 Let's agree to one thing: Michael Steele is MIA.
Between the titty bar thing and doing nothing to stop HCR, the man has simply used his position to promote his book.  I had high hopes for him, but let's face it, he was put in his position because the GOP wanted a black face in a position of prominence shortly after The One's victory.
Affirmative action doesn't work.
I was never a big fan of Palin becoming President, but this is really something she can excel at and what happens between now and November is probably going to be more important than what happens in 2012.

Posted by: RayJ at March 31, 2010 08:23 AM (//Bcg)

285 As a member of the NRSC, Cornyn is part of the team deciding strategy to win Senate seats. If he's projecting some wobbliness, it is a bigger concern than if some random junior senator was doing it. Nail, meet head of hammer. And just the other day Hugh Hewitt was lambasting the RNC for its obvious incompetence while pushing the NRSC. Unless the GOP leadership decides to... I dunno... fucking lead, they might as well spend there dimes at Voyeur, because they aren't going to get elected again.

Posted by: George Orwell at March 31, 2010 08:25 AM (AZGON)

286

Megyn Milf is on Fox News right now.

I like to watch with the sound turned down.

Posted by: Ed Anger at March 31, 2010 08:26 AM (7+pP9)

287 The real problem here is the fucking Texan cowboys with their stupid hats, stupid women who shouldn't be allowed to vote, dumbassed Sarah Palin groupies, butthole athiests who are going to hell, and goddamned coffee drinkers.

Posted by: I at March 31, 2010 08:27 AM (TIGTh)

288 I was never a big fan of Palin becoming President, but this is really something she can excel at and what happens between now and November is probably going to be more important than what happens in 2012.

By "this" do you mean promoting HCR repeal?  Or do you mean she should be head of the RNC? 

I like Palin and at one point thought she might be an RNC chair candidate, but I've concluded she wouldn't be effective with the cocktail party set that we (unfortunately) need for donations. 

Posted by: Y-not at March 31, 2010 08:27 AM (Kn9r7)

289 Cornyn might wanna pay attention to what is happening back here in Texas. I just got a tweet from a state senator who is in a hearing right now on the effect of the health care bill on Texas. He's saying that it will cost the state as much as $5 billion a year.

Posted by: Countrysquire at March 31, 2010 08:27 AM (Zzius)

290 Cornyn needs to have something shoved up his squeakhole, preferably a cattle prod.

Posted by: mpfs at March 31, 2010 08:27 AM (QuP9W)

291 Did someone here or in the GOP say "nevermind, forget Ryan's ideas" and I missed it? 

Posted by: Y-not at March 31, 2010 01:23 PM (Kn9r7)

Yes, the "fuck it, repeal it and replace it with jackshit" part. That seems to be the part you're missing as you call Cornyn a pussy for recognizing the current system is unsustainable and independents (who decide elections) want results.

And where is the "go down in flames" part coming from?

The part where Drew M. informs laceyunderalls  that principle means more than winning sometimes dammit!

Posted by: Tattoo De Plane at March 31, 2010 08:27 AM (mHQ7T)

292 Fuck!

Posted by: Sockpuppeter who accidentally posted before filling out sock puppet name at March 31, 2010 08:28 AM (TIGTh)

293 133 What do the poles say about inevitable government bancruptcy?

Don't drag me into this.

Posted by: Lech Walesa at March 31, 2010 08:28 AM (3K4hn)

294 305 ... preferably a cattle prod.

No shortage.

Posted by: Barbarian at March 31, 2010 08:29 AM (EL+OC)

295 I hope all you assholes who bought into the Fred Thompson has no fire in the belly meme are fucking happy.

Posted by: I blame everyone at March 31, 2010 08:30 AM (TIGTh)

296 Yes, the "fuck it, repeal it and replace it with jackshit" part. That seems to be the part you're missing as you call Cornyn a pussy for recognizing the current system is unsustainable and independents (who decide elections) want results.

I did not call Cornyn a pussy.   Or a RINO.   I merely argued that as a member of the NRSC his statements concerning the importance of HRC repeal carries greater weight than it would otherwise. 

Get a grip.

Posted by: Y-not at March 31, 2010 08:30 AM (Kn9r7)

297

297 See A Roadmap for America's Future.

No respect for the Constitution? Here is his speech for CPAC.

The man is also a fan of Ayn Rand, F.A. Hayek, & Jude Wanniski. But, please, continue under the delusion that he isn't for small government.

Posted by: Miss80sBaby at March 31, 2010 08:30 AM (yfJ6g)

298 It's our job to keep them focused on the task and more afraid of what happens if they go wobbly than not.

Hence a non-vote for a politician like McCain.

You rarely win by voting for a politician who cannot muster the courage to make a stand on principle. Certainly compromise has its place. But as has been frequently lamented, compromise in the modern era has meant, at the best of times, "agree with 80% of the Dem's plans in perpetuity, and temporarily get only 20% of the GOP's platform."

Unless the threat of losing their jobs is on the table, our "leaders" will never consider the consequences for compromising what should be non-negotiable principles.


Posted by: krakatoa at March 31, 2010 08:30 AM (XzlWQ)

299

 Does anyone think, given the habits of the GOP, that they won't wither like week-old spring onions when the lamestream media howls "Republicans want to throw you out of the hospital!  They want to deny you medical coverage that took the nation a century to establish!"

To which a worthy opponent would reply:  Tell me why a federal takeover of education was added to this bill.  Tell me why Baracky's personal army is mentioned in this bill.  Tell me why it will soon be illegal to see a doctor of my own choosing if I have the means to pay for it.  And finally, please explain to me why, if this is such a great bill, why other countries that have socialized medicine need to import foreign doctors since their own citizens elect to pursue different careers, etc., etc., etc. 

Posted by: RushBabe at March 31, 2010 08:30 AM (LKkE8)

300 @310

Fred was my guy, but he ran a terrible campaign. 

Posted by: Y-not at March 31, 2010 08:31 AM (Kn9r7)

301 Primary Cornyn.

Posted by: Christoph at March 31, 2010 08:31 AM (0fq7b)

302 What has morons so bloodthirsty is that for once, after the storm of Hellcare, the GOP (through little of their own doing) finally has the wind at their backs; now we have a high-profile Republican like Cornyn of Texas and the savior of the Kennedy seat scrambling to lower the sails. No one thought Scott Brown would be Jesse Helms, but it would be nice if he could refrain from referring to the "good parts of the bill" when no one fucking knows what is in it altogether. Furthermore, a comment like that from Brown sort of implies that perhaps his precious sixtieth vote will not be so different from a typical Kennedy vote.

Posted by: George Orwell at March 31, 2010 08:32 AM (AZGON)

303

Megyn Milf is on Fox News right now.

I like to watch with the sound turned down.

Yeah, I can't stand her contrived emotionality either.

Posted by: rdbrewer at March 31, 2010 08:32 AM (SoTG5)

304 I was never a big fan of Palin becoming President, but this is really something she can excel at and what happens between now and November is probably going to be more important than what happens in 2012.

I love when these supposedly tolerant types ("we love independent, strong women!") say Palin is better suited for women's work i.e. asking people for money and dragging losers across the finish line, be it John McCain or whatever other loser they want to nominate in 2012  (Mitt Romney, John Thune, etc. Hey, maybe she can get a cabinet appointment for her trouble!

Posted by: Tattoo De Plane at March 31, 2010 08:32 AM (mHQ7T)

305 We could have beaten this healthcare bill if all of you weren't such pussies.

Posted by: I blame everyone AND question their manhood at March 31, 2010 08:33 AM (TIGTh)

306 Cornyn voted for Geithner saying he was the most qualified person to get the country out it's financial mess. He endorsed Charlie Crist and Arlen Specter for Senate. Tells us all we need to know about John Cornyn.

Posted by: lonestar at March 31, 2010 08:33 AM (CYInL)

307

Yes, the "fuck it, repeal it and replace it with jackshit" part. That seems to be the part you're missing as you call Cornyn a pussy for recognizing the current system is unsustainable and independents (who decide elections) want results.

Posted by: Tattoo De Plane at March 31, 2010 01:27 PM (mHQ7T)

The only unsustainable parts of the current system are Medicare and Medicaid, which have nothing to do with individual health insurance.  The dems and The Precedent did a good job conflating the two - trying to claim that my private health insurance, that I pay for, is somehow contributing to the federal deficit.  Medicare and Medicaid need reform, but not normal health insurance. 

And where do you get the idea that anyone not on Medicaid/Medicare really cared about health insurance, at all?  There was no crisis.  There was a manufactured crisis built by The Precedent and the dems, abusing anecdotes to make it sound as if everyone in the US was dying outside of hospitals that refused to take them - save a few superwealthy people - even though the dems, in the same sentence, would say that everyone gets care through the emergency rooms.  Most people didn't want the federal government messing around with health insurance - and the Constitution agreed with them.

Posted by: progressoverpeace at March 31, 2010 08:34 AM (N49h9)

308 @320
heh

Posted by: Y-not is immune to the pussy label thanks to 2 X chromosomes at March 31, 2010 08:34 AM (Kn9r7)

309 The most effective way for ensuring (80-90%) of "pre-existing conditions" are covered is to make the health insurance policy portable. THIS FEATURE IS NOT IN THE CURRENT HCA

A person at age 22 getting his/her 1st job, signs up for health insurance through an employer plan. Every time that person changes jobs throughout his/her career, he/she retains the original insurance policy (which all new employers make contributions to) so if at age 42 for example, the employee finds he/she has cancer, that is not a 'preexisting condition' - because the policy in question has been in continuous effect for 20 years.

Posted by: alwyr at March 31, 2010 08:34 AM (w2++y)

310

Hey, I support Crist.  Rubio may be an outstanding candidate, but heck, I'll sink with the candidate I bought. 

And health care repeal?  Pffft.  Too much work.  And can't get invited to the good DC cocktail parties if I out up too much of a fuss.

Why?  Because I'm a member of the stupid party.  What do you want from me?

Posted by: Senator John Cornyn, RINO & Gutless Wonder at March 31, 2010 08:36 AM (hBRoa)

311 Not before I get mine in.

Senator Cornyn,
You cannot polish a turd.

GOP voter.




Posted by: Dave at March 31, 2010 08:36 AM (uLSuk)

312 I did not call Cornyn a pussy.   Or a RINO.   I merely argued that as a member of the NRSC his statements concerning the importance of HRC repeal carries greater weight than it would otherwise. 

Get a grip.

Posted by: Y-not at March 31, 2010 01:30 PM (Kn9r7)

Fine. All the comments about Cornyn needing balls and shoving a cattleprod up his squeakhole and all that other garbage just aren't here. 

You guys have got it right. Turning your guns on your own party is gonna carry the day in the end. Carry on.

Posted by: Tattoo De Plane at March 31, 2010 08:36 AM (mHQ7T)

313 To which a worthy opponent would reply: Tell me why a federal takeover of education was added to this bill. We long for worthy opponents. That's why Cornyn's statement is so alarming. Nota bene: The part where Drew M. informs laceyunderalls that principle means more than winning sometimes dammit! Of course winning is important. It's the whole point. But we're at the beginning of the fight, the negotiation. You never enter a negotiation by asking for less than you really want. You go in by asking for far, far more. One hopes that the GOP will demand full repeal and replacement, because if they go in merely expecting to rearrange the furniture and perhaps replacing a coffee table, they'll walk away with nothing but a house of cards.

Posted by: George Orwell at March 31, 2010 08:36 AM (AZGON)

314

You guys have got it right. Turning your guns on your own party is gonna carry the day in the end. Carry on.

Posted by: Tattoo De Plane at March 31, 2010 01:36 PM (mHQ7T)

They're shooting at us (and the Constitution).

Posted by: progressoverpeace at March 31, 2010 08:38 AM (N49h9)

Posted by: Miss80sBaby at March 31, 2010 08:38 AM (yfJ6g)

316

"Turning your guns on your own party is gonna carry the day in the end. Carry on."

Better.  The loudest complainers are from Blue or Purple states. 

Posted by: MDr VB1.0 CS1st at March 31, 2010 08:39 AM (ucq49)

317 306
That seems to be the part you're missing as you call Cornyn a pussy for recognizing the current system is unsustainable and independents (who decide elections) want results.

Do you even read your comments before you hit post? 

Or was you're supposed to be y'all and you supposed to be youse

Posted by: Y-not is immune to the pussy label thanks to 2 X chromosomes at March 31, 2010 08:40 AM (Kn9r7)

318

Hey, I support Crist.  Rubio may be an outstanding candidate, but heck, I'll sink with the candidate I bought. 

And health care repeal?  Pffft.  Too much work.  And can't get invited to the good DC cocktail parties if I out up too much of a fuss.

Why?  Because I'm a member of the stupid party.  What do you want from me?

Posted by: Senator John Cornyn, RINO & Gutless Wonder at March 31, 2010 01:36 PM (hBRoa)

Call his office, yell at his secretary and threaten his job. I'm fine with that. But drawing up enemies lists within the GOP (unless they have actually voted with Dems) and trash-talking the whole party because of Cornyn is unhelpful. I also think Republicans should be able to explain why their ideas are better than the Democrats and have a replacement strategy.

Posted by: Tattoo De Plane at March 31, 2010 08:41 AM (mHQ7T)

319

Show me a few polls that indicate that an outright repeal is popular and I'll change my tune.

This goes far beyond polls. It's about demonstrating to the American people that Republicans will fight for them and stand up to any and all attempts to crush their liberty. Gibson's William Wallace had it right: people follow courage.

Here's hoping the people's anger is sufficient to overcome the GOP leadership's glorious ability to snatch defeat.

 

 

Posted by: TiredWench at March 31, 2010 08:42 AM (ulSJI)

320 Megyn Milf is on Fox News right now.

I like to watch with the sound turned down.

Posted by: Ed Anger at March 31, 2010 01:26 PM (7+pP9)

Geez, Ed, is the liquor store next door or what? You're back already?

Posted by: RushBabe at March 31, 2010 08:44 AM (LKkE8)

321

Healthcare repeal is about jobs and people losing their homes, Cornyn.  So is cap and trade and amnesty.  Kindly oppose all of it.  It's what Texans want you to do, even if it makes your chums across the aisle unhappy.

Real leadership on this issue (and our overall strategy) needs to come from the House and from governmors.  It's no big surprise that the most wobbly Republicans come from that upscale gentleman's debating society the US Senate, where keeping your colleagues happy is more important than working for your constituents.

Posted by: Societyis2blame at March 31, 2010 08:44 AM (7ZyYf)

322 "Hello? Brooks? It's going beautifully. Yes... yes. They're finally learning the era of Reagan is over. That people want grand government projects. Well, you know what I mean... Yes, they would if they knew what was good for them. But not everyone can get into an ivy league school or come from Canada, you know? Heh... heh... that's a good one, Dave. Supplicants, not supermen. Can I use that? Thanks. Anyway, I just had to call someone who would understand, you know, all this nonsense about repeal. At least the elites in the Senate know better. See you at Maureen's tonight? Fab. Ciao, crease-man."

Posted by: David Frum at March 31, 2010 08:45 AM (AZGON)

323

Gibson's William Wallace had it right: people follow courage.

Ok.. seriously.. is this some sort of conspiracy already?  I'm reading the other thread and I come across someone quoting a story about how Nancy Pelosi has a "sexy" new look.

Natrually I cannot avoid vomiting and the mental images produced were so horrific that I seriously considered burning my eyes out in the vain attempt to banish them.

So I think, ok, I'll hit the other thread and see if maybe I can't get this queasy feeling in my stomach to settle down some, and I run across this.

Now I have a mental image of Charles Krauthammer in a kilt mooning a bunch of secret service guys outside the Obama administration White House and shouting taunts.

Yikes!

Posted by: StuckOnStupid at March 31, 2010 08:47 AM (e8T35)

324

300 Let's stay home, then, by all means. That turned out so well in '06 & '08, didn't it? It was essentially handing the House to Pelosi, the Senate to Reid, & (later) the presidency to Obama, saying, "You guys can't do much worse". But look what happened instead.

Thanks for that, btw. Now I have to spend the rest of my life paying for your "principled stand". Oh, but now we must add to that by letting the Dems control America & driving her into the ground so badly that none can save her. What a great idea! Why don't we all just throw a temper-tantrum & kill the country!  

Posted by: Miss80sBaby at March 31, 2010 08:48 AM (yfJ6g)

325 Does Cornyn really think "health""care""reform" is unrelated to jobs?

Posted by: FUBAR at March 31, 2010 08:49 AM (1fanL)

326 "255

241 I have been saying to you that I see no difference between republicans and dems which is why I and many others are independents. [...]

Did you even read just the few examples I provided? No, I bet you didn't. I'm guessing you weren't pay attention when amendments were brought forward in the Senate pertaining the ObamaCare bill. But, hey, let's all jump on the lump everyone together band-wagon because you people are too lazy to read.

Posted by: Miss80sBaby at March 31, 2010 01:06 PM (yfJ6g)"

I read everything from Paul Ryan and some of the others.  Maybe I should be a little clearer.  I wasn't really talking about the amendments or the way they tried to craft the bill, what I was talking about was their attitude.  They may start out with good intentions and then somehow they catch that "i'm a politician and I have power and I'm part of the 'chosen few' attitude and they forget where they came from and who they are representing.  Sure thaddeus mccotter and paul ryan haven't forgotten this but you can probably name the republicans who haven't forgotten this on one hand.  Plus they keep allowing themselves to get played....they should not have gone to the disciplining pow wow cause when you don't have the press on your side, win or lose, you lose.

I do my best "country temperature taking" at wally mart on line waiting to make my purchase.   I don't know how the dems could ignore the American people as they are doing.  It seems that everyone out there is on their way to the "I am wholly confused by what he's doing, he's spending way more money than he should how's he going to pay for this, we certainly can't mode" to those who have figured out that "he can't pay for all this and are angry".  The other day, some woman said "I want health insurance for me and my kids but not bad enough for it to hurt everyone else" and then some guy in a suit said right out "I would have bought it for you, if we could have avoided all this">

I give him absolute credit for two things..he absolutely owns this bill and his party too and he has Americans really talking to one another.  The woman without the insurance who lost her job and the guy in the suit offering to buy her insurance would not have happened before this time., they would have stood online quietly.  no one is doing that anymore, everyone is talking.

The real plus is that some gal had a list of who has the candy for Easter baskets on sale and she shared it with everyone on the line.  My gram was with me and she said "this is the way people used to be, years ago" 

Posted by: curious at March 31, 2010 08:49 AM (p302b)

327 334 Why don't you run for office & show them yourself?

Posted by: Miss80sBaby at March 31, 2010 08:50 AM (yfJ6g)

328 I like Palin and at one point thought she might be an RNC chair candidate, but I've concluded she wouldn't be effective with the cocktail party set that we (unfortunately) need for donations. 

Posted by: Y-not at March 31, 2010 01:27 PM (Kn9r7)

Is that why she's mobbed at those same high-level bipartisan dinners and the local GOP bigshots have private receptions/fundraisers for her at their homes when she's in town for speeches?

Posted by: RushBabe at March 31, 2010 08:51 AM (LKkE8)

329 Posted by: Miss80sBaby at March 31, 2010 01:48 PM (yfJ6g)

Damn, girl.  You've been very strident lately.  Is Kratos not paying you enough attention?  That's more teasing.  In for realzies, you make me happy.

Posted by: FUBAR at March 31, 2010 08:51 AM (1fanL)

330 Posted by: Miss80sBaby at March 31, 2010 01:48 PM (yfJ6g)

Who is throwing a temper tantrum or saying stay home?

I'm simply advocating we keep them honest. We got them to stand firm on this issue for a year in part because a lot of people were loud and angry.

We haven't won anything yet, in fact we've lost quite a bit, so I'm not sure why we should quit banging on them about what we want.

Posted by: DrewM. at March 31, 2010 08:51 AM (9B5OK)

331

Answers Don't Lie in Washington

Posted by: Miss80sBaby at March 31, 2010 01:38 PM (yfJ6g)

Just to take this as an example of what I was saying, Ryan (whom I generally like) does not say that "Washington is not allowed to muck around in individual health insurance, as the Constitution defines the limits of the federal govenrment" but he argues that it is inefficient for Washington to nationalize (though he mistakenly says "federalize") individual health insurance.  This is the exact point I was making about him - as I had seen all of this before and it's why I have the view of him that I do.  Ryan argues efficiency, not Constitutionality.  Tha's fine, but narrow and incorrect when you really get down to it, as it opens him up to accepting an un-Constitutinal power grab by the federal government, so long as he thinks it's efficient.

Do you understand my point?  The federal government isn't allowed to take over individual health insurance, even if it would make it cheaper for everyone and earn the federal government billions.  That is the point of the Constitution and why changes such as this would have to be done by amendment, not legislation. 

And Ryan has never happened on the simplest monetary reason for the Constitutional restrictions: states cannot create money.  They must live within their means and a state going bankrupt does not take the dollar and the United States with it.  The federal government, on the other hand, is where money is created.  A bankruptcy of the federal government spells the end of the nation.  Period.  Social issues are potentially bottomless pits of spending - as one can spend as much on health care as one wants.  You do not put bottomless pits of spending at the same level of government where money is created.  That is the real monetary argument, and one that Ryan never seems have even thought about.

Like I said, I like Ryan, and I like most of his minimalist ideas about federal involvment in interstate health insurance commerce, but he is not someone whose political thinking is in line with mine - not all that close, really.

Posted by: progressoverpeace at March 31, 2010 08:51 AM (N49h9)

332 Megyn Milf is on Fox News right now.

I like to watch with the sound turned down.

Posted by: Ed Anger at March 31, 2010 01:26 PM (7+pP9)

Her legs are scary skinny.  She needs to do some squats.  Or better yet, squat-thrusts.  On camera.

Posted by: FUBAR at March 31, 2010 08:52 AM (1fanL)

333

333.

"I also think Republicans should be able to explain why their ideas are better than the Democrats and have a replacement strategy."

I think that they SHOULD be able to explain.  But will they?

Cornyn's symbolic throwing in of the towel already or throwing up this trial balloon (whatever it is) makes him look like an idiot.  As does his continuing support for Crist. 

Olympia Snowe hearing history calling her makes her look like an idiot

Lindsey Graham supporting Cap and Trade makes him look like an idiot

Don't get me started on McCain's idiocy. 

What do these people have in common?

Posted by: Marybeth at March 31, 2010 08:53 AM (hBRoa)

334 @ la di da look at all my chromosomes!

Since you're arguing on behalf of y'all and youse (Did someone here or in the GOP say "nevermind, forget Ryan's ideas" and I missed it?) then I responded. Not that I have a problem with either salutation, being from the South and all.

Posted by: Tattoo De Plane at March 31, 2010 08:53 AM (mHQ7T)

335 We haven't won anything yet, in fact we've lost quite a bit, so I'm not sure why we should quit banging on them about what we want.

Posted by: DrewM. at March 31, 2010 01:51 PM (9B5OK)

Yep.  They've proven, time and again, that they'll be just like Dems if we let 'em.

Posted by: FUBAR at March 31, 2010 08:53 AM (1fanL)

336

Give 'em maximum support through 2013.  Hopefully by then we'll have the WH & Congress back in GOP hands.  If at that time they act like the Lott/Hastert numbnut types did, then the Republican party should hastily go the way of the Whigs, and should be replaced by the Tea Party.

Posted by: Reggie1971 at March 31, 2010 08:55 AM (b68Df)

337

341 255 241 Stuck on italics > Anyway:

My issue is, though, curious, that this post is lumping together a group of people who do not agree. The House, the governors, & others within the same states agree about repeal & replace. Then we have the Senate, where they are divided as to what to do. It is unfair (in my mind) to criticize & demonize as a whole when Cornyn is just speaking for senators (& some of them disagree with him, as well).  

If Drew had titled this post "Shocking...Senate GOP Already...", then I would be okay with that; but that's not what happened. It gives people the wrong idea about what's happening. I follow the movers-&-shakers via FB & Twitter & these people are truly committed to repeal & replace.

Posted by: Miss80sBaby at March 31, 2010 08:56 AM (yfJ6g)

338

The part where Drew M. informs laceyunderalls that principle means more than winning sometimes dammit!

I guess my question is fundamentally simple.  What's the point of "winning" and putting a bunch of Republicans in office if they will simply act like Democrats once they get there?

If thats the case, what have we truly gained?  Yes, I do want to see a sweeping change and I want to see the Democrats go back to being a minority party.

But if the Republicans we do elect just give us socialism lite instead of full blown socialism, whats the point?  All were doing then is slowing the process down, not stopping it. 

I want my damn country back, plain and simple.  If the Republican party isn't on board with this notion then the hell with them, I have no compunction about tossing them overboard whatsoever.

So yes, they will get my support in the 2010, and I'll be watching them like a hawk.  If they don't start cleaning house and stopping this BS as usual then something is going to have to give.

 

Posted by: StuckOnStupid at March 31, 2010 08:56 AM (e8T35)

339

Is that why she's mobbed at those same high-level bipartisan dinners and the local GOP bigshots have private receptions/fundraisers for her at their homes when she's in town for speeches?

Posted by: RushBabe at March 31, 2010 01:51 PM


Yes, she's very popular.  Deservedly so.  She is also continually targeted by GOP "insiders" and constantly painted as an ill-educated, unsophisticated (both intellectually and socially) populist. 

Do you consider her a party insider?  I don't.  That was my point. 

I think that it is too close to the elections to think that we will be able to shift the power base (or donor base) of the RNC to a group of people - who need to be really rich, let's face it - who admire and respect Palin.  The time may come, but it isn't there yet. 

We need someone in the RNC who is an effective manager, who is able to stay on message, and who is palatable to the current power base. 

I think Mitt Romney would be a good choice in the short term.

Posted by: Y-not at March 31, 2010 08:58 AM (Kn9r7)

340

If you think there is the remotest possibility that the GOP will go all out to repeal Obamacare, then its time to get this fact thru yer thick skull:  their preferred candidate for 2012 invented it.

Get w/ the Tea Party, or learn to sing L'Internationale before each ball game.

Posted by: Louis Tully at March 31, 2010 08:58 AM (jat5l)

341

But if the Republicans we do elect just give us socialism lite instead of full blown socialism, whats the point?  All were doing then is slowing the process down, not stopping it. 

I want my damn country back, plain and simple.  If the Republican party isn't on board with this notion then the hell with them, I have no compunction about tossing them overboard whatsoever.

Stuck, if you're not a Glenn Beck fan, you might want to consider it.  His goal is to get the Constitution back to where it started -- not with Ocommie, but with the Founders.

Posted by: RushBabe at March 31, 2010 08:58 AM (LKkE8)

342

"Let's stay home, then, by all means. "

I don't think anyone is advocating that.  Pickett's charge?  Yes.

Posted by: MDr VB1.0 CS1st at March 31, 2010 08:58 AM (ucq49)

343 We haven't won anything yet, in fact we've lost quite a bit, so I'm not sure why we should quit banging on them about what we want. What he said. This is the beginning of the negotiation, not the middle, not the end. If, ultimately all we get is a 10% rollback, we are still screwed but not as screwed if we get nothing. If you really think only a 10% rollback is realistic, go in demanding 100%. You won't get there by demanding ten.

Posted by: George Orwell at March 31, 2010 09:01 AM (AZGON)

344

Megyn Milf is on Fox News right now.

I like to watch with the sound turned down
.

 

Hotter than roof tar.  That's all I have to say.

Posted by: Reggie1971 at March 31, 2010 09:01 AM (b68Df)

345 I believe I heard Fred Barnes opine that Romney would be fine as an opponent of Hellcare despite his authorship of Romneycare: The Massachusett(e)s Disaster. I would love to know what Barnes drinks before he does interviews.

Posted by: George Orwell at March 31, 2010 09:03 AM (AZGON)

346

Hotter than roof tar.  That's all I have to say.

Posted by: Reggie1971 at March 31, 2010 02:01 PM (b68Df)

Megyn Kelly's hot, for sure, but Shannon Bream is absolutely smokin'!

Posted by: progressoverpeace at March 31, 2010 09:03 AM (N49h9)

347 Now I know why they call you "morons" . . .

Posted by: Adjoran at March 31, 2010 09:03 AM (3hg5M)

348

Posted by: Y-not at March 31, 2010 01:58 PM (Kn9r7)

How do you know that the really rich aren't contributing directly to her?  Her PAC is pretty impressive.  According to C4P, she gets a lot of private invites to major GOP movers and shakers during her criss-cross of America - and they're not just for meet 'n greets.

As for Mittens, his ego wouldn't fit through the RNC door.  He'd never lower himself to be Michael Steele's replacement; he thinks he's meant for bigger and better things.

Posted by: RushBabe at March 31, 2010 09:03 AM (LKkE8)

349 The time may come, but it isn't there yet. 

That's why Lynn de Rothschild threw a fundraiser for her during the election and stumped with her in NV. That's why a defense contractor won the bid to have dinner with her. That's why she was invited too give that address to the Asian investors group.

Posted by: Tattoo De Plane at March 31, 2010 09:03 AM (mHQ7T)

350 Wait ... I'm not shocked. This is why I don't vote GOP, btw. Not anymore. Why wait 10 days to get Democrat policies softly shuffled in the back door? The GOP cares even less for us than the Democrats do.

Posted by: Ella at March 31, 2010 09:04 AM (wUNmt)

351

Goddamn it, go in demanding a 100% rollback, universal blanket apologies, the stripping of citizenship from those who voted for it, their deportation, hanging, and putting their heads on pikes surrounding the Capitol building.  And I don't care if we actually get them to apologize. 


This nearly gave me a heart attack. You know when people say, "You nearly gave me a heart attack!"?  Well, now I fucking know what that means.  Goddamned pussies.

What.  The fuck. Happened. To. My. Fucking. Country?

Posted by: Truman North at March 31, 2010 09:04 AM (FjC5u)

352 "I guess my question is fundamentally simple.  What's the point of "winning" and putting a bunch of Republicans in office if they will simply act like Democrats once they get there?"

Posted by: StuckOnStupid at March 31, 2010 01:56 PM (e8T35)

That's the question really that we are all asking.  Oddly enough real Americans, the one's working and holding the country up are asking it too...

What is most frightening is that the republicans are in just as much hot water with the American people as the dems.  The problem is, the dems know they are in hot water, the republicans don't.  Unless the republicans start listening to the people who elected them, I think they will lose more seats in 2010 and it just may be to the dems cause the other candidates from the small parties will split the votes and the dem will be elected by default.  Regular people won't mean to do this but it will happen. 

Posted by: curious at March 31, 2010 09:05 AM (p302b)

353

There's too much in there that the American people like for the Republicans to even seriously consider trying to repeal all of it.  How many votes could you muster to re-open the “doughnut hole” and charge seniors more for prescription drugs? How many votes to re-allow insurers to rescind policies when they discover a pre-existing condition? How many votes to banish 25 year olds from their parents’ insurance coverage?

But I sure wish the Republicans would try.  So you right-wingers and teabaggers should definitely push the GOP to go for broke.  Oh, and be sure to have them campaign on repealling the whole bill.  That will work very well. 

Posted by: Sally Ann Cavanaugh at March 31, 2010 09:05 AM (FRErk)

354

Posted by: Truman North at March 31, 2010 02:04 PM (FjC5u)

cut, jib, newsletter 

Posted by: RushBabe at March 31, 2010 09:06 AM (LKkE8)

355 Mitt Romney should be doing Michael Steele's job right now. What has he been doing but figuring out how to explain Romneycare now that Obama is pointing out it's identical to his plan? Btw, there is no good answer to that question, which means Mitt Romney should just go the fuck away. But I'm looking forward to him losing this next primary and supporting the winner.

Posted by: Tattoo De Plane at March 31, 2010 09:06 AM (mHQ7T)

356 134 Posted by: Mallamutt at March 31, 2010 12:12 PM (V9SYy)

I suggest better communication then. We've ceded too much ground to liberals already.

I understand that liberalism is easy to embrace because it's vacuous and emotional. A lot of people will simply eat that crap up.

Conservatism is hard because it sometimes means bad things will happen. Conservatives, in government and out, need to stand up for up, to not just make it the ideology of no but to sell its benefits as well.

I understand electoral politics has it's own challenges in that regard but unless someone starts standing up and telling people, they can't have everything they want, the iron laws of economics will do it for them and that will be a lot uglier.

I'd rather go down fighting the good fight than just get swept away in the deluge.
Posted by: DrewM. at March 31, 2010
=====

 Funny, that's pretty much been my point all along...but when I say it, it's nuts, eh? I'm just another troll, offering nothing but negativity...in spite of the numerous references and resources I've provided or pointed out on this board.

 really, it's almost too late to resolve any of this peacefully. We may get a short break until after the mid-terms, but the only argument tyrants and oligarchs understand involves violence. Yes, pursue every avenue of peaceful resolution possible, but be fully aware that the Republican Party is not going to resolve this nation's present dilemma, not without a transformative change within the party, from the top to the bottom, from the individual voter to the highest level politician.

 Even IF we returned to a plain and simple reading of The Constitution, many of the things we all take for granted simply go away. IF we don't do that, many of the things we've all assumed about our present reality...simply go away. With the first, we regain our individual freedom and liberty, which, at present are only illusions, in any case. With the second, we end up living the worst of dystopian nightmares.

 Americans, as a nation and as individuals, have some very difficult choices to make in the coming months and years. There is no easy way out, and sooner or later, we will all have to pay the piper.

 Better to be a free man than to wear a collar, even if that collar is made of gold.

Posted by: Warren Bonesteel at March 31, 2010 09:06 AM (E5Er7)

357 Excuse me, I need to go smoke a pack of cigarettes and get a nice cheap bottle of single malt whiskey to chase them down with.  Because there's nothing left to live for here.

Posted by: Truman North at March 31, 2010 09:07 AM (FjC5u)

358 How do you know that the really rich aren't contributing directly to her?  Her PAC is pretty impressive.  According to C4P, she gets a lot of private invites to major GOP movers and shakers during her criss-cross of America - and they're not just for meet 'n greets.

OK, there's no point in getting in a pissing match over this.  It's all speculation.  But I still think that an 'insider' is needed in the short term at the RNC.  If the really rich Palin donors were powerful in the party, wouldn't she be RNC head by now?  Or at the very least, wouldn't it be someone more closely aligned to her views than Steele? 

All I'm saying is that the RNC is broken and needs fixing, but that the type of fix required right now is a structural/procedural because there is not time to do a philosophical one. 

I don't know where you're getting the thing about Romney's ego, but whatever. 

Posted by: Y-not at March 31, 2010 09:08 AM (Kn9r7)

359

346 The speech at CPAC is a better example of his views of Constitutionality. Anyway, what I'm seeing is that you're assigning a certain view to him because he is more focused on the economics of the issue than the Constitution. It is his job, however, to focus on things from a fiscal & monetary angle. However, if you look at his record in the House, he strongly supports limited government while standing up on social issues.

In other words, I feel you're isolating not only that clip from the others but also ignoring his record. 

Argument about legality here.

Posted by: Miss80sBaby at March 31, 2010 09:08 AM (yfJ6g)

360

 really, it's almost too late to resolve any of this peacefully. We may get a short break until after the mid-terms, but the only argument tyrants and oligarchs understand involves violence.

The fuck you say?  We joke about ammo... but this is nearly the time.

Posted by: Truman North at March 31, 2010 09:09 AM (FjC5u)

361 Posted by: Sally Ann Cavanaugh at March 31, 2010 02:05 PM (FRErk)

There is a proviso to that "26 and on the parent's health insurance".   You have to be living at home and presumably in school.  If you are out of their home, working on your own, the cost is your cost to shoulder.

Posted by: curious at March 31, 2010 09:09 AM (p302b)

362 "I guess my question is fundamentally simple.  What's the point of "winning" and putting a bunch of Republicans in office if they will simply act like Democrats once they get there?"

Posted by: StuckOnStupid at March 31, 2010 01:56 PM (e8T35)

John McCain might be a squish, but I doubt the payoffs and power grabs would be there with him as President.

Posted by: Tattoo De Plane at March 31, 2010 09:10 AM (mHQ7T)

363 Posted by: Miss80sBaby at March 31, 2010 02:08 PM (yfJ6g)

Andrew Napolitano wrote a good article about the legality of it, as well.

Posted by: Tattoo De Plane at March 31, 2010 09:11 AM (mHQ7T)

364 375 , 346

Here, progressoverpeace:

"This is history.  Today marks a major turning point.  Our Founders got it right when they wrote in the Declaration of Independence that our rights come from nature and nature's God, not from government.  Should we now subscribe to an ideology where government creates rights, is solely responsible for delivering these artificial rights, and then rations these rights?  Do we believe that the goal of government is to promote equal opportunity for all Americans to make the most of their lives, or do we now believe that government's role is to equalize the results of people's lives?  The philosophy advanced on this floor by this majority today is so paternalistic and so arrogant, it's condescending, and it tramples upon the principles that have made America so exceptional.  My friends, we are fast approaching a tipping point where more Americans depend upon the federal government than upon themselves for their livelihoods -- a point where we, the American people, trade in our commitment and our concern for our individual liberties in exchange for government benefits and dependencies."

~Rep. Paul Ryan, R-WI~

Posted by: Miss80sBaby at March 31, 2010 09:12 AM (yfJ6g)

365 @371

I'll just re-post p-o-p's comment:

207 And on top of this crap, the gop frontrunner, romney, continues to refuse to say that romneycare was a mistake.

Posted by: Guy Fawkes at March 31, 2010 12:30 PM (7VvJB)

I have no problem with Romney sticking up for his disaster in Massachusetts, since he maintains that it is the state's right to do it, and is entirely inappropriate for the federal government to do.  I agree with that view.  I still take issue with his claims that RomneyCare works, in any way (as it is sinking Massachusetts and makes health insurance the most expensive there), but states have the right to do whatever idiotic things they want with health insurance.  People can move to and from states.  The only key, for me, is that the federal government stays within the limits prescribed by the Constitution, and running health insurance is not part of that, outside of minimal regulations to enable interstate commerce.

Posted by: progressoverpeace at March 31, 2010 12:49 PM (N49h9)


Posted by: Y-not at March 31, 2010 09:12 AM (Kn9r7)

366

Okay, so somewhere up above unknown jane remarked that Mark Kirk, the republican US senate candidate for Obama's old seat, is going squishy on repealing ObamaCare if he wins the election.

I'm in his current district (IL-10) so I just called the district office & spoke with a staffer.  UNBELIEVABLE.  Kirk has no position on repealing ObamaCare, staff won't speculate on a position, they wanted my contact info to put me in their system but based on this phone call Kirk is a democrat in all but the name.  As the conversation wore on I made it clear I'm a constituent and I want it repealed, and the staffer kept giving me the non-position position. 

If communism is going to be imposed on us, I would rather be able to blame the democrats for the destruction to follow.  No more squishy republicans who give bi-partisan cover to the commies.

Posted by: Boots at March 31, 2010 09:13 AM (06JTY)

367 Argument about legality here.

Posted by: Miss80sBaby at March 31, 2010 02:08 PM (yfJ6g)

Assigning me more homework? 

Look, Ryan's talking about the legality and viability of the executive order in that clip, not the nationalization of health care.  And he talks about getting to "universal coverage", which pisses me off ten ways from Sunday.  Looking to get to "universal coverage" should be no part of any conservative's selling point.  NEVER.

As to his stance on the MONETARY issues (you'll note that Ryan says that he's attacking the fiscal side in that clip, not the monetary side) he misses the simplest, most direct, and most important argument that social issues need to stay in the states - away from the creation of money.

Posted by: progressoverpeace at March 31, 2010 09:16 AM (N49h9)

368 I sure hope the GOP calls for the repeal of a socialized medicine bill which a clear majority of the people intensely dislike. That'll show 'em. 'Cause when they say they hate it, it means they really want it. When they say it's too expensive that means it isn't big enough. When they say it will end up costing their families more it means they're happy about that. And be sure to repeal that line in the bill that makes it illegal for tonsil-stealing doctors to throw babies in neonatal and old people in the ICU out into the street. 'Cause that's in there too. It must be, there's 2700 pages. 'Cause I won.

Posted by: Concern Troll, Inc. at March 31, 2010 09:16 AM (AZGON)

369 Cornyn has a valid point, hanging everything on health care reform repeal is not a good idea.  It should be priority number 1 but we also have to be able to address the other important issues.  In addition it is unlikely that we will end up with veto-proof majorities in both houses so the GOP should be prepared for that and should not be guaranteeing something that they can't deliver.  All possible effort should be made to get this bill repealed but if they can't do so then ever effort should be made to lessen it's impact as much as possible while doing everything possible to encourage economic recovery.


Posted by: chad at March 31, 2010 09:16 AM (WNcvq)

370 Lacey,

Sure, let's give the dems the opportunity to drag us into a "you hate kids and old people" fight line by line through the fucking thing. If you run on anything less than full repeal you dilute the message. Hit them on the economy killing aspects of the thing and the corrupt high-handed way they passed it. The whole "you will take your medicine and like it" vibe the dems were putting out pissed people off and the pubs are fools if they don't tap into that.


Posted by: USS Enterprise CV-6 at March 31, 2010 09:16 AM (WOYJU)

371

But I still think that an 'insider' is needed in the short term at the RNC. 

It seems like all they've got are Beltway insiders at the RNC as is, and that's why they're in the shape they're in.  They LIKE the New England conservatives like Romney even if the base is screaming for Palin.  And if you listen to Rush, he confirms that.

If the really rich Palin donors were powerful in the party, wouldn't she be RNC head by now?  See above.  The insiders consider her a snowbilly who didn't go to an Ivy League school, therefore, unworthy.

Or at the very least, wouldn't it be someone more closely aligned to her views than Steele?  Beltway elites are just that -- democrap lite.  They thought Reagan was a rube, too. 

As for Mitt'e ego, did you ever notice those two dagger symbols in the NYT best seller list?  That's an indication of bulk purchases, which the list reflects to show an inside buyer.  His listing shows them consistently; hers never did.

Posted by: RushBabe at March 31, 2010 09:17 AM (LKkE8)

372 @382

So, boots, what will you do? 

I guess if I were in your shoes boots (har!) I'd still vote for him vs any Democrat or third-party candidate under the assumption that he would still be more likely to bow to party (GOP) pressure than any Dem would be likely to break ranks with the president. 

Posted by: Y-not at March 31, 2010 09:18 AM (Kn9r7)

373 Recall that Cornyn was one of the head authors of the Shamnesty Bill and worked across the aisle for months. He was only saved from grief when McCain parachuted in and forcefully took his spot during the latter days of process.

Cornyn is a politician above all else. He's always regarded as a lion for conservatism especially since he represents Texas. He isn't. He's better than some, but he is not to be followed blindly. He's to be watched and pushed but never left alone. That pretty much defines the GOP.

Hopefully the Tea Party will not allow itself to be absorbed by the Borg. The GOP will exploit it only long enough to reacquire seats and power. Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.

Posted by: AnonymousDrivel at March 31, 2010 09:18 AM (oJaPx)

374

357 "Let's stay home, then, by all means. "

I don't think anyone is advocating that.  Pickett's charge?  Yes.

Maybe I misinterpreted this:

300 Unless the GOP leadership decides to... I dunno... fucking lead, they might as well spend there dimes at Voyeur, because they aren't going to get elected again.

But staying home on Election Day to express displeasure is what happened last time. So, if we're talking about records & expectations, as well as repeated comments that "the Republicans are just as bad or even worse than the Democrats", then yes, I think some of you will stay home if they don't take a strong enough stance (see 366, for example).

Posted by: Miss80sBaby at March 31, 2010 09:19 AM (yfJ6g)

375

Posted by: Boots at March 31, 2010 02:13 PM (06JTY)

I haven't followed IL.  Was there a primary which Ryan won?  Did he have a position on the, as yet unpassed, HC bill?

Posted by: MDr VB1.0 CS1st at March 31, 2010 09:20 AM (ucq49)

376

FWIW I predicted the day this passed (not hardly alone I'm sure), that they would start to waffle and trim their sails on this. Time will not make them any more resolute, it will only make them more wobbly as they focus on other issues.

Good post, Drew.

And is it just me being cranky, but is anyone else getting sick and tired of hearing about "pivoting" or "making a pivot" to this issue or that? 

Posted by: RM at March 31, 2010 09:21 AM (GkYyh)

377 So, I keep seeing the argument that we might as well let the freight train run off the cliff, as you can read throughout the thread. That, in my mind, is equal to not voting. But, again, we are isolating one quote from Cornyn & proclaiming that this must be the opinion of the entire GOP. Doesn't work that way. Pay more attention to the people who are truely important, ideologically.

Posted by: Miss80sBaby at March 31, 2010 09:22 AM (yfJ6g)

378 Posted by: Miss80sBaby at March 31, 2010 02:12 PM (yfJ6g)

That's a decent quote.  Not exactly how I would frame it, good enough.

I don't dislike Ryan.  I like the guy.  I like most of his ideas of what the federal government can do about interstate commerce of health insurance.  I just differ with Ryan's emphases in the great bulk of his health insurance arguments and don't consider him a leader in bringing Constitutionality back.  He is good on some fiscal questions.  That is his bailiwick, not Constitutional issues, which he often glides over.

Posted by: progressoverpeace at March 31, 2010 09:22 AM (N49h9)

379 It seems like all they've got are Beltway insiders at the RNC as is, and that's why they're in the shape they're in.  They LIKE the New England conservatives like Romney even if the base is screaming for Palin.

Right.

But what I'm saying is that in the short term the RNC needs to be run competently.  The philosophical issues will have to wait until after the midterms.  We just need a competent manager who is also a good enough speaker to stay on message for the good of the party. 

Personally, my recollection of Steele's 'election' was that the other candidates were not that appealing.  They were either idealogues representing one wing of the party or they had some scandal or appearance of scandal associated with them. 

Mitt has the HCR 'problem,' but if he just approaches it as a Federalist and stays on that point, he can still be an effective champion of repealing nationalized socialist medicine. 

But I'm open to other candidates.  I just don't think that Palin is a good fit for the RNC chair right now because there would have to be a major turnover of staff and volunteers and donors which we can't do a few months before the elections. 

Posted by: Y-not at March 31, 2010 09:23 AM (Kn9r7)

380

343:

I like the idea of Palin as RNC chair.  She's a base-motivator without equal,  she's very popular with the non-golf-pants wing of the party, and she's shown the country club boys she'll play ball by stumping for McCain.  I understand why she felt she should support him even though I hope Arizonans won't. 

I'm not sold (or probably even sell-able) on her as a Presidential candidate in 2012 for a number of reasons but she could be the most successful chair of all time.

Even before the latest LA stuff, I've said Steele was a bad leader at a bad time.  Cutting him loose will inevitably provoke "racist" smack from the Left, but we'll get that anyway.

The only people who will cry over that idea are the Frums who say "now we'll be the Palin party waaah !"  My response is that to the media and the public we already are - why not use that to full advantage rather than acting like she's a guilty pleasure ?

Posted by: Societyis2blame at March 31, 2010 09:24 AM (7ZyYf)

381 Posted by: MDr VB1.0 CS1st at March 31, 2010 02:20 PM

Do you mean Kirk? 

Didn't he win the special election primary a couple of months ago? 

Posted by: Y-not at March 31, 2010 09:26 AM (Kn9r7)

382

But, rebuilding the economy means having to tell people that the federal government shouldn't be in the business of bailing them out, as it is un-Constitutional and stupid - the same as the argument against national socialized health care.

I don't see where Cornyn is correct on either of these issues, as he adopts Dem-lite socialism for both.

That may be the case but my comments were in the light of promoting free market reforms.

It shouldn't be too hard to make the case that massive goverment intervention in the private sector destroys jobs. Hell, even Obama campaigned on the fact that large deficits hurt the economy. How hard can it be to point out that the Democratic deficits are 5 times larger now and destroying the economy.

Regarding Obamacare, the Republicans should run on repeal an say that any reforms have to be acceptable to 80% of the Congress. I'm going on the theory that the main problem with the health care system is government intervention.

Posted by: Ken at March 31, 2010 09:26 AM (Bs34i)

383

What should we expect from the genius who endorsed Charlie Crist in the Florida Senate primary?

Cornyn is squishy by nature.

He acts like he is a DNC plant.

The RNC called me asking for money and I told them that Cornyn is one of the reasons that I won't contribute.

I also told them that Newt Gingrich was another reason I wouldn't give them a nickel.

Had I known that the money would be well spent supporting single moms (who work in strip joints), I may have reconsidered my instransigent position on the matter.

 

Posted by: molonlabe28 at March 31, 2010 09:27 AM (FEruT)

384

"I think some of you will stay home if they don't take a strong enough stance (see 366, for example). "

Not I, ie stay home.  I am in the camp of support the most conservative candidates in the primaries, then support whoever wins.  I am troubled by those that take an unrealistic approach that a DeMint could win in every state.  Pickett's charge was an absolute disaster.

BTW- I believe 366 is a troll, like Sally Ann.

Posted by: MDr VB1.0 CS1st at March 31, 2010 09:28 AM (ucq49)

385 where keeping your colleagues happy is more important than working for your constituents.

Posted by: Societyis2blame at March 31, 2010 01:44 PM (7ZyYf)

The House of Lords was ever thus.

Cornyn is a lawyer. Big surprise, huh?

Posted by: Rat Patrol at March 31, 2010 09:30 AM (dQdrY)

386 383, See 380 Here, progressoverpeace:    "This is history.  Today marks a major turning point.  Our Founders got it right when they wrote in the Declaration of Independence that our rights come from nature and nature's God, not from government.  Should we now subscribe to an ideology where government creates rights, is solely responsible for delivering these artificial rights, and then rations these rights?  Do we believe that the goal of government is to promote equal opportunity for all Americans to make the most of their lives, or do we now believe that government's role is to equalize the results of people's lives?  The philosophy advanced on this floor by this majority today is so paternalistic and so arrogant, it's condescending, and it tramples upon the principles that have made America so exceptional.  My friends, we are fast approaching a tipping point where more Americans depend upon the federal government than upon themselves for their livelihoods -- a point where we, the American people, trade in our commitment and our concern for our individual liberties in exchange for government benefits and dependencies."

~Rep. Paul Ryan, R-WI~

(1) Mr. Ryan never said anything about getting "universal coverage" for all Americans--I don't know where you're getting that.  

(2) Furthermore, he's a devout conservative Roman Catholic, so of course he's going to believe the federal govt should be involved in social issues. He frequently speaks of God & morality in govt. See here.  

(3) As for monetary issues, see here, in which he discusses he view about the Fed & the harm they have caused with regards the dollar.  

Posted by: Miss80sBaby at March 31, 2010 09:31 AM (yfJ6g)

387

"Do you mean Kirk?  "

Yes, Kirk.  So he ran against others?  Do you know what his position on HC was then?

Posted by: MDr VB1.0 CS1st at March 31, 2010 09:31 AM (ucq49)

388 Stuck, if you're not a Glenn Beck fan, you might want to consider it.  His goal is to get the Constitution back to where it started -- not with Ocommie, but with the Founders.

Been a Beck listener for a while now, I love the radio show.  Funny thing is when I first start listening to him I appreciated his sense of humor and shared some of his views but to be completely honest I thought he was a bit of a nut.  A lot of what he was predicting a year ago would come to pass struck me as being a bit over the top.

I never imagined that most of his predictions would come true, and sadly I'm afraid it looks like a lot more of the worst economic nightmare imaginable is being cued up even as we speak.

Posted by: StuckOnStupid at March 31, 2010 09:31 AM (e8T35)

389

As a Texan, I apologize for Cornyn. I just voted straight R. I give my word I will volunteer my time and money to defeat him in the next primary.

 

Posted by: Rat Patrol at March 31, 2010 09:32 AM (dQdrY)

390

Just called Scott Brown's office.  The flustered staffer I talked to told me he was "very interested in repealing the worst parts of Obamacare."  I thanked her and hung up. 

Jesus.  We sent him to stop this thing.

Posted by: Truman North at March 31, 2010 09:32 AM (FjC5u)

391

You're comfortable campaigning on an outright repeal of the mandate for pre-existing conditions coverage?

Run on a repeal of the whole thing. In toto.

Run on existing condition coverage with no mandage and you may as well run on a public option. Or else run on burning down all the hospitals.

You cannot have that.

At best, you're advocating for running on an outright lie.

Posted by: Entropy at March 31, 2010 09:32 AM (IsLT6)

392 Online Library of Liberty
Liberty Library of Constitutional Classics.

 The history of our legal system, the foundations of this nation's original documents, with tens of thousands of pages of their letters, papers and published articles and commentaries.

 Get some knowledge.

 Otherwise, all you're arguing about is which cannibal gets to eat you for lunch.

Posted by: Warren Bonesteel at March 31, 2010 09:33 AM (E5Er7)

393

"But we're at the beginning of the fight, the negotiation. You never enter a negotiation by asking for less than you really want. You go in by asking for far, far more. One hopes that the GOP will demand full repeal and replacement, because if they go in merely expecting to rearrange the furniture and perhaps replacing a coffee table, they'll walk away with nothing but a house of cards."

++

I'm not a politician, but as a businessperson I've been in a few or so negotiations over the decades. Before you even start serious discussions, you don't telegraph to the other party that you realize they hold many of the cards and that you really don't expect much, but that you do hope to get a few concessions from them. And if they have acted in a hostile, non-compromising manner leading up to the serious negotiations, that probably holds doubly true. 

I understand the dynamics are different but if Republicans are not motivated and feeling strong now with the current mood of the public and with the core principals involved here, for cripes' sakes, when will they feel strong? 

Posted by: RM at March 31, 2010 09:33 AM (GkYyh)

394 From Mark Kirk's campaign website:

"After listening to thousands of people across Illinois in dozens of live and telephone town hall meetings, I heard clearly what we need: lower health care costs, lower taxes and more jobs.

Congress can help by enacting modest, centrist, health care reforms. That is why I authored the Medical Rights and Reform Act to lower costs, cover pre-existing conditions and protect seniors on Medicare without raising taxes."


Posted by: Y-not at March 31, 2010 09:35 AM (Kn9r7)

395 I don't think Palin would take RNC chair.  That spot should go to Giuliani or Romney or Fred Thompson or maybe they should have a triumvirate, that would be covering all parts of the country.  This would get rid of all of them for the next presidential race and they would still have power.  Would hope Palin would be unwilling to take the RNC job as it is a place to get buried.

The worst part is that it seems that the system is wholly broken.   You are all talking about getting the "best money donors" which almost means that the dems/republicans have to cow tow and do favors for those donors.  And those donors give copious amounts of money to both parties.  Just so they have their shot at whomever gets elected.  The lobbyists have more power now in DC than ever before.   And don't think that this "you scratch my back i'll scratch your back" ideology isn't all over this country.  It's even in school boards and small town environs.   As this gets worse and worse, the poor have less and less of a chance at moving up the ladder of success.  What is truly taking a beating is "the American dream".  this is why I think people voted for BO.  They thought he saw this and the folly and corruption on every level and would stand up to them and do something about it.  People have now learned that you can say anything but it is what you do that matters.  I can't tell you how many people are saying "could he have lied to us" and they are having a damn hard time coming to terms with that fact.  Right now, they are still in "excuse mode"....the "oh I'm sure he has a good reason why he did this and we will see later". ....but, once they realize that they won't see later...if you think you are angry....wait...they will be profoundly furious, they will be like a bunch of ex smokers....they will not shut up.  But, you have to wait for them to get to this point....and it is a slow process.

Posted by: curious at March 31, 2010 09:35 AM (p302b)

396

What is there not to understand? I am not sick - I do not want health insurance.

Oh, I have broken my leg? Give me 1 month of health insurance to cover my pre-existing condition of a broken leg.

My leg is pinned and cast? Cancel my insurance.

With no mandate to purchase insurance, the end result will be -

Cost for 1 month of health insurance : $47,000.00

Posted by: Entropy at March 31, 2010 09:36 AM (IsLT6)

397

395:

We have the time to do it now - we won't in 3 months or so.  I have a hard time imagining donors, staff or anyone else being so committed to Steele's leadership that they would bolt rather than stay on.  And I don't understand how you could support someone else with the assumption that they wouldn't represent the same turnover risk - people would only leave over Palin but not someone else ?

If the concern is over competent management, that's not the chair's job.  Day to day gets run by people lower down the ladder.  The chair's a spokesperson and motivator above all.  If she can run a state in the face of partisan opposition, I suspect she can run a less fractious body like the Republican Party.

The GOP needs to keep momentum and energy behind its candidates over a long seven months, not just bean-counting and administration.  Palin would provide that.  Steele's shown me no reason to think he can.

It's a natural fit for her where she is right now on the political landscape - if not the RNC chair, where would she be best utilized ?  Punditry's fine but I'd rather have her more firmly "branded" with us in an official way.

Posted by: Societyis2blame at March 31, 2010 09:36 AM (7ZyYf)

398

>>>(1) Mr. Ryan never said anything about getting "universal coverage" for all Americans--I don't know where you're getting that. 

From that clip that I pasted back in the response.  Go watch it, again.  He said that his solutino will get us to "universal coverage".  His words, not mine.

>>>(2) Furthermore, he's a devout conservative Roman Catholic, so of course he's going to believe the federal govt should be involved in social issues. He frequently speaks of God & morality in govt. See here.  

If this is true, then he is far worse than I have said.  I never heard him say anything like this, but if he does, (big "if") then he would be in direct opposition to the Constitution.

Religion should lead people to think that they are responsible to help with social issues, but not that the federal government should have anything to do with them - which the Constitution proscribes.

>>>(3) As for monetary issues, see here, in which he discusses he view about the Fed & the harm they have caused with regards the dollar.  

Posted by: Miss80sBaby at March 31, 2010 02:31 PM (yfJ6g)

That's fine, but I was addressing the specific monetary issues and their relations to where bottomless pits of social spending should reside - and where the federal Constitution puts them.  The Fed is a whole other issue that has nothing to do with this point.

Posted by: progressoverpeace at March 31, 2010 09:36 AM (N49h9)

399 "Man up GOP."

Are there any men left (yes, Mitt Romney, I'm looking at your metrosexual self.)

If the Tea Party candidate supports repeal, and the GOP Party candidate only supports nibbling at the edges, then that's a pretty good indicator that you're dealing with a RINO Republican like John Cornyn, who would rather get elected than actually stand for a principle.

We don't need such candidates. Only the candidate benefits if that's the stance he's taking.

At that point, what you should do is write the Tea Party candidate a check, and send a copy of that donation to the GOP so they know how much they lost by backing the RINO.

The Republican Party is only going to come kicking and screaming, since it's filled currently with a lot of fucking liberal progressives who've sneaked in through the back door to campaign using our fucking money.

That trick is over.

The GOP can become conservative, or it can be crushed, defeated, eliminated and replaced.

Posted by: someguy at March 31, 2010 09:39 AM (VRJIW)

Posted by: Miss80sBaby at March 31, 2010 09:39 AM (yfJ6g)

401

"From Mark Kirk's campaign website:"

Not as strong as I would have preferred, but .......

I don't live in IL and have no feel for that's state's sentiments on HC.  Is Kirk's non-position now because of split sentiment, ie not a firm majority opposed?

Posted by: MDr VB1.0 CS1st at March 31, 2010 09:42 AM (ucq49)

402

394 He said that others were better than he on the Constitutional issues, so he would leave that to them.

Posted by: Miss80sBaby at March 31, 2010 02:39 PM (yfJ6g)

Which is what I said my view of Ryan was.  Constitutional issues are the most important ones, though.

I don't understand what you are trying to convince me of.

Posted by: progressoverpeace at March 31, 2010 09:43 AM (N49h9)

403 @413
If the concern is over competent management, that's not the chair's job. 

Tell all the folks wigged out about the Voyeur incident that!

Anyhoo, I think we've exhausted this topic... or maybe I'm just exhausted!  I do disagree with you about the management component.  I think that a good CEO manages, even if it's through delegation and leading by example, and many people (including Steele) who find themselves in the top position don't know how to manage.  The RNC management is broken.  Steele needs to go.  But I personally think he needs to go with little fanfare and fireworks.  One way to achieve that is to pick someone thought of as a manager first and an idealogue (I don't mean that in a bad way) second. 

Now I think Palin is a good manager, but I think she has received the label of being an idealogue.  (Personally, I think that's funny since so many of us who are attracted to her as a leader come from very different positions: social cons, populists, or Reaganites.)  I have come to accept that, even though I and many others think that Palin is a dynamic politician with a great story to tell, many people, powerful people and regular folks, are viscerally opposed to her.  They simply shut her off. 

It's not fair and it can change, but I don't think it can change in a few months.  I wouldn't risk winning elections for people with Rs next to their names by undertaking a major philosophical battle at the RNC right now. 

Posted by: Y-not at March 31, 2010 09:46 AM (Kn9r7)

404 I think I will be getting wobbly about who I send money to.

Posted by: Picric at March 31, 2010 09:47 AM (oKOn9)

405 I keep telling you guys that "the campaign" never disbanded.  BO has "the campaign" running 24/7...this accomplishes two things, it assures his reelection to a second term (he becomes your buddy and you feel bad not voting for him) and he controls all those people who are good for phone calls, donations and cards and letters.  My friends dutifully called ten friends, went to other people's homes to plot their map for getting HC passed, sent cards, letters, emails to their representatives and made phone calls to all of their representative's offices, republican or democrat.  They are organized, real organized and it shows.  I bet these people in congress and the senate would tell you with a straight face that they got more communication from those for the HC bill than against.  They would not be lying.  they probably did because these people are organized and the republicans and the tea party folks aren't.

Posted by: curious at March 31, 2010 09:48 AM (p302b)

406

To recap:

Mark Kirk (R-IL-10) is the current republican US representative from the north suburban area of Illinois.  He won the republican primary back on Feb 2, 2010, so he is also the republican candidate for US Senate from the state of Illinois.  He's running for Obama's former senate seat, which is currently occupied by the worthless Roland Burris.

The democrate candidate for that US senate seat from Illinois is Alexander Giannoulis.  He is currently the Treasurer for the state of Illinois.  His family owns Broadway Bank in Chicago, where Giannoulis worked for years.  Broadway Bank is allegedly a mobbed-up bank, it did make questionable loans to organized crime members.  It also made loans to Tony Rezko and other unsavory characters.  It's also about to be shuttered by the feds, and the Giannoulis family is said by the local papers to be walking away with about $15 million when all is said and done. 

Paul Ryan is a republican US representative from Wisconsin.  Close to Illinois, but much cleaner in every single aspect of life.

If the polling on Giannoulis gets bad, I fully expect the Democratic Central Committee to get him off the ticket.  It only took about a week for them to shove Scott Lee Cohen off the ticket after he won the primary battle for Lt. Governor.  Scott Lee Cohen owns pawnshops, and there was some question about his involvement in beating up his girl friend and putting a knife to her throat.

Just this past weekend, the Democratic Central Committee put (former Senator Paul Simon's daughter) Sheila Simon on to replace Scott Lee Cohen.  Senator Simon was a popular politician here in IL, and had a reputation for integrity & honesty.  They're hoping his mojo from the grave will be a winner.

Posted by: Boots at March 31, 2010 09:49 AM (06JTY)

407 I don't live in IL and have no feel for that's state's sentiments on HC.  Is Kirk's non-position now because of split sentiment, ie not a firm majority opposed?

I think he's a liberal Republican or, at least, a Republican from a liberal district. 

I'm not in Illinois any longer, but my guess is that there is a split on HCR. 

My read is that he's a pretty big squish on HCR repeal, but I think that he's a better bet than the Democrat. 

Posted by: Y-not at March 31, 2010 09:49 AM (Kn9r7)

408

414 From what I understand, The Patient's Choice Act would encourage those who are without insurance to buy insurance by way of tax credits & other incentives. So, you're not providing anyone with insurance, but rather giving them reasons to have coverage.

http://tinyurl.com/yekokbd 

“The Patients’ Choice Act of 2009,” transforms health care in America by strengthening the relationship between the patient and the doctor; using choice and competition rather than rationing and restrictions to contain costs; and ensuring universal, affordable health care for all Americans. “The Patients’ Choice Act” promotes innovative, State-based solutions, along with fundamental reforms in the tax code, to give every American, regardless of employment status, age, or health condition, the ability and the resources to purchase health insurance. The comprehensive legislation includes concrete prevention and transparency initiatives, long overdue reforms to Medicare and Medicaid, investments in wellness programs and health IT, and more.

http://tinyurl.com/rbvml8

*Plan also offered by Dr. Coburn

Posted by: Miss80sBaby at March 31, 2010 09:54 AM (yfJ6g)

409

This is a fool's argument.  Yes, there are proper sentences in the 2700 page monstrosity, but so what?  It must be repealed (or attempted) in its whole - as DeMint's bill says in 41 simple words. 

There are "good things" in this bill?  Wrong.  There are attractive nanny-state, un-Constitutional giveaways in this bill.

America didn't care about health insurance reform.  THis was a manufactured crisis from the start, as was proven time and again by the polls showing that most people were happy with their insurance.  What people didn't like was that more and more burdens were being placed on healthy and wealthy individuals to cover unhealthy and poor ones - who still get better health care today than anyone on Earth did 30 years ago - thanks to the advancements in medical technology that the healthy and wealthy pay for in our system.

The way some of you people are speaking, it's amazing that anyone on Earth lived before the advent of the medical technology of the last 5 years.  A little perspective would be a nice thing, since the Constitution seems to be too passe for anyone to fight for.

Posted by: progressoverpeace at March 31, 2010 12:42 PM (N49h9)

Sorry I took so long to respond, in a perfect world the Constitution would have been followed exactly.  Tell me where there aren't thousands nanny state giveaways in anything Congress has put out in over 100 years?

Realistically, it's not going to happen.  I am as rightwing as anyone, but it doesn't change the fact that it will not be repealed.  The best we can hope for is that it is unfunded or just left to go by the wayside and/or modifications are made before this shitsandwich goes into effect.

I'd love nothing more than to keep my employer provided insurance that I pay nothing for that covers everything under the sun with all my pre-existing conditions than be thrown into the wind and pay out of pocket for some shitass plan that doesn't even begin to cover my prescriptions per month, all the while covering some asshole who can't get his shit together.  Sound like a fair deal to you? 

I'm just trying to be realistic, that's all.  Sorry for being a "fool" and not living up to your intellectual standards.

 

Posted by: Jaimo at March 31, 2010 09:56 AM (9U1OG)

410 I have noticed that the republican party has been infiltrated by the democrats.  Just like those militias were infiltrated by the FBI.  All of a sudden, in a state like NY, a democratic coounty chair jumps ot republican and decides to run for governor?  And you don't think the dems are controlling things.  And watch, Bishop is being challenged by a Cox as in Trisha Nixon Cox.  And the guys dad is apparently the republican party state chair.   so aren't all these old political names the same, aren't they all looking for the same outcomes only with an R or a D after their names?  Actually had someone tell me the other day that they don't like Newt cause he is in cahoots with the dems and has been for a long time.  This was a regular American hard working fellow....and he said this as though everyone knew it and he only had a HS education. ....Makes you wonder doesn't it?

Posted by: curious at March 31, 2010 09:57 AM (p302b)

411

"My read is that he's a pretty big squish on HCR repeal, but I think that he's a better bet than the Democrat.  "

I'd say that's a very good bet.  I guess he ran against more conservative opponents, but his more liberal positions won the day.  The primary is over.  The die is cast.  Hold you nose and support Kirk.

Posted by: MDr VB1.0 CS1st at March 31, 2010 09:58 AM (ucq49)

412

Kirk is probably middle of the road liberal, his current district is very liberal.  Since Obama and many of his WH cronies came from Illinois, there are plenty of voices saying how great ObamaCare is and will be.  The media here doesn't ever say anything critical about Obama. 

The interesting race to watch will be Illinois-10 come this fall.  The republican candidate is Robert Dold, a blue-blood republican from Kenilworth.  He made all the right conservative noises during the primary so we will see. 

The democrat is again (for the third time) Dan Seals.  Seals is an Obama clone, except Seals is actually handsome.  Tall, bi-racial, no real job to speak of for years now.  His wife is asian, and there are quite a few asian voters in IL-10 and they are organizing for Seals.  That part of the race for the 10th is going completely unnoticed.

Posted by: Boots at March 31, 2010 09:59 AM (06JTY)

413

418 394 You're condemning him for not speaking out more about the constitutional issues when he says he's going to focus on his area of expertise, which is the financial sector. But he's still making some of those constitutional arguments without saying, "The Constitution says...". Don't see why that's such a terrible thing.  

I feel you're trying to discredit his conservative credentials without fully understanding his personal stance on the issues. He's not some RINO squish who believes our Constitution doesn't matter. Furthermore, libertarian & social conservatives will always be at war, but we need to recognize that both are part of the party. Mr. Ryan is not Mike Huckabee, though, for Heaven's sake.   

Posted by: Miss80sBaby at March 31, 2010 10:01 AM (yfJ6g)

414

Rat Patrol 405 As a Texan, I apologize for Cornyn. I just voted straight R. I give my word I will volunteer my time and money to defeat him in the next primary.

As a Texan, I don't have to apologise for Cornyn, because I voted Libertarian.

I know this clown. His first campaign was on God and apple pie, with no substance on economics or political theory. I saw this coming.

Posted by: Charles The Mad at March 31, 2010 10:02 AM (9Sbz+)

415

Look, this is simple:

The GOP cannot repeal anything unless it has a veto-proof majority in both houses.

Lets try to make that happen in 2010 or 2012. 

Meantime, lets at least get a majority in the House and Senate, enough to defund big portions of Obamacare so that it can't kick in. Obama can't veto what's not funded, at least w/o creating gridlock.

That's not just sensible, it's engaging in "the art of the possible", aka politics.

Posted by: effinayright at March 31, 2010 10:02 AM (3sB5l)

416 Hmmmm.

Fucking Republicans.

Dear Santa Claus please deliver a pair of testicles to every leader in the GOP.


Posted by: memomachine at March 31, 2010 10:03 AM (MwCol)

417

Stupid, stupid sock.

Anyway. You get the picture. If it runs on the Ten Commandments, it's a crook who's in it for the loot. If it runs on a serious platform of actual issues, it's someone to take seriously (right or wrong).

Posted by: Zimriel at March 31, 2010 10:03 AM (9Sbz+)

418 Meanwhile, James Carville, White Trash Extraordinaire, has sent out a letter on behalf of the Democratic Fascist Governors' Association describing the Republicans thusly:

"Why are these races so important?

"My gut tells me, day in and day out, that Republicans are sneaky as hell. They'll try and spread like a brushfire from the governors' offices to the House of Representatives by gerrymandering the redistricting process into a new majority. We gotta stop 'em.

Speaker of the House John Boehner? Not on our watch."

Er, right. Gerrymandering, BTW, is a longtime specialty of the Dimwits. Especially racial gerrymandering (see Congressional districts). And the Republicans are looking about as threatening as Emanuel Goldstein right now. It's up to us citizens to put lead in their pencils.

But that's always been our job, in this Republic. Shoulder arms, folks, and step lively!

Posted by: Beverly at March 31, 2010 10:04 AM (gwJe4)

419

effinayright is, f'in A, right in #431.

However it should not be too much to ask for Cornyn etc to put a sock in it and quit depressing the base.

Posted by: Zimriel at March 31, 2010 10:05 AM (9Sbz+)

420

426 The Republicans must choose whether they will be Dem-lites or stand for conservative principles; but no, I don't think they're inherently the same, nor are a majority of their members (the same). If they were, the Rs wouldn't have voted against ObamaCare. Rather, what we are seeing is that both parties are moving farther to the left. But, no, their stances on foreign policy, certain aspects of domestic policy, & other issues is quite different.

*Newt has spent too much time in D.C. & all he really cares about now is getting invited to the cocktail parties. He no longer speaks for the Republican Party.

Posted by: Miss80sBaby at March 31, 2010 10:07 AM (yfJ6g)

421 431 Here, here!

Posted by: Miss80sBaby at March 31, 2010 10:08 AM (yfJ6g)

422 What is most frightening is that the republicans are in just as much hot water with the American people as the dems.  The problem is, the dems know they are in hot water, the republicans don't.  Unless the republicans start listening to the people who elected them, I think they will lose more seats in 2010 and it just may be to the dems cause the other candidates from the small parties will split the votes and the dem will be elected by default.  Regular people won't mean to do this but it will happen.

I'd rather avoid it if at all possible, but sadly if the republicans force the issue there will indeed be a third party movement starting in short order I'm afraid.  I don't think they will though.. I think as long as we make it clear to the republican party that we will not support them if they continue with this nonsense they'll quit.  It's in their best interest to do so after all, and our entire system of government is more or less based on the principle of enlightened self interest.

So yes, whenever anyone floats a trial balloon like this one we need to shoot it down in a loud and spectacular fashion, and send a loud and clear message to the party higher-ups.  The time for half measures is over.  Stand on conservative principles or you stand alone.

If we stand by and let them drift left because the main stream media keeps whispering in their ears about having a "big tent" and other such nonsense, then they'll simply fall back into their old habit of taking the path of least resistance.

We need to let them know that that particular path is frought with resistance, loud, hairy, do not go down this road kind of resistance.  If we do then we'll get some representatives in office that might actually be worth a tinkers damn.

If we don't were going to get stuck with the party of Maybe, a bunch of John McCain clones/clowns who will throw conservative principles under the bus at the drop of a hat and then figure well when the election cycle comes around I'll just veer right again. 

No, we need them to understand that we don't forget, we don't forgive and we will not compromise on the principles of smaller government and less spending.

Just my 2 cents worth.



Posted by: StuckOnStupid at March 31, 2010 10:09 AM (e8T35)

423

>>>I feel you're trying to discredit his conservative credentials without fully understanding his personal stance on the issues.

I think I've shown that I have a full understanding of Ryan's positions. 

>>>He's not some RINO squish who believes our Constitution doesn't matter.

I never said that he was.  But he doesn't argue Constitutionality.  His arguments are about efficiency, and I already fully addressed the problems with that.  In addition, I said that he was good at that part, but only that part - as he himself has said, though not in those exact words.

>>>Furthermore, libertarian & social conservatives will always be at war,

Not sure what this is about.  I am neither a libertarian nor a social conservative.  I'm more your run-of-the-mill conservative with a good understanding of the Constitution, why it was written, what it was meant to do, and why it works - in addition to realizing that private property rights are the true anchors of individual freedom and lead to a growing, dynamic economy.

>>>but we need to recognize that both are part of the party. Mr. Ryan is not Mike Huckabee, though, for Heaven's sake.   

Posted by: Miss80sBaby at March 31, 2010 03:01 PM (yfJ6g)

But, like Ryan, Huckabee has his good points that I very much agree with.  Huck has done a fantastic job addressing several issues.  But, I am not a Huckabee supporter, because he drifts too much on issues that really irk me - like his love of a nanny-state, his poor position on illegals, ...

I like Ryan and Huckabee about the same amount, as both are very good within some narrow limits and tend to drift away outside of those.  But I consider neither to be strong conservatives on broader principles.

Posted by: progressoverpeace at March 31, 2010 10:12 AM (N49h9)

424
Re#303 Y-not
"By "this" do you mean promoting HCR repeal?  Or do you mean she should be head of the RNC?"

I mean head of the RNC.

"I like Palin and at one point thought she might be an RNC chair candidate, but I've concluded she wouldn't be effective with the cocktail party set that we (unfortunately) need for donations."

I doubt that the "cocktail party set" is that important anymore with respect to donations and, more importantly, volunteering time.  Palin would be superb with the people that matter.

Sorry for the late reply.

Posted by: RayJ at March 31, 2010 10:16 AM (YcjCJ)

425 If it runs on the Ten Commandments, it's a crook who's in it for the loot. If it runs on a serious platform of actual issues, it's someone to take seriously (right or wrong).

Posted by: Zimriel at March 31, 2010 03:03 PM (9Sbz+)

Yeah, thou shalt not kill, and steal and such is so limiting. I think I'll stick to not voting for lawyers. That seems like a higher probablility of being a crook.

Posted by: Rat Patrol at March 31, 2010 10:17 AM (dQdrY)

426

""Candidates are going to test the winds in their own states. ... "

Ya need a wind test...? Pull my finger butt biscuit.

Once again the GOP is determined to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. What is it with the dunces at the national level??? Sure, run on 'jobs' but also to dump this entirely discredited so-called health care disaster.

This is why I no longer contribute to the Party, but to individual candidates like Michelle Bachmann.

Posted by: chuck in st paul at March 31, 2010 10:17 AM (adr25)

427 It's not hard to figure out what the Dems are going to do - they're doing it already. They're going to point out specific provisions that are popular, like keeping children on the parents' policy till age 26 and filling in the Medicare 'doughnut hole'. If the Repubs are smart, they'll stop the generalized 'repeal' and start focusing on the specific parts of the plan people object to.

Posted by: JEA at March 31, 2010 10:24 AM (ZO0u/)

428 They just point out it is too much of a furball to unravel. Repeal.

Posted by: Rat Patrol at March 31, 2010 10:28 AM (dQdrY)

429

439 I think I've shown that I have a full understanding of Ryan's positions. 

Not all, or you wouldn't think he isn't conservative enough.

I never said that he was.  But he doesn't argue Constitutionality.  His arguments are about efficiency, and I already fully addressed the problems with that.  In addition, I said that he was good at that part, but only that part - as he himself has said, though not in those exact words.

Are they all only about efficiency? Has he only ever made arguments about efficiency? He's been in Congress since '99. Did you even listen to his CPAC speech? He believes that the Republican Party is now too liberal & has shied away from its Founding principles & it roots. Mr. Ryan has expressly argued for less govt intrusion into the lives of Americans. For example, he's for completely overhauling the current tax system & having a much more basic approach.   

 Not sure what this is about.  I am neither a libertarian nor a social conservative.  I'm more your run-of-the-mill conservative with a good understanding of the Constitution, why it was written, what it was meant to do, and why it works - in addition to realizing that private property rights are the true anchors of individual freedom and lead to a growing, dynamic economy.

I was referring to the failure of attempts at long-term Fusionism. Personally, I get the sense that you are opposed to social conservatism in all its forms & are a social libertarian. That's fine for you, but please understand why religious people feel the way they do. The Founders never had to deal with the abortion issue or gay rights as well. They also understood that morality would help guide our nation & was a key to her success.

But, like Ryan, Huckabee has his good points that I very much agree with.  Huck has done a fantastic job addressing several issues.  But, I am not a Huckabee supporter, because he drifts too much on issues that really irk me - like his love of a nanny-state, his poor position on illegals, ...

I like Ryan and Huckabee about the same amount, as both are very good within some narrow limits and tend to drift away outside of those.  But I consider neither to be strong conservatives on broader principles.

Mr. Ryan isn't a strong conservative on broader pinciples? On what grounds do you make that charge? It certainly can't be the War on Terrorism & foreign policy, so perhaps it still revolves around your view about social issues:

"A “libertarian” who wants limited government should embrace the means to his freedom: thriving mediating institutions that create the moral preconditions for economic markets and choice. A “social issues” conservative with a zeal for righteousness should insist on a free market economy to supply the material needs for families, schools, and churches that inspire moral and spiritual life. In a nutshell, the notion of separating the social from the economic issues is a false choice. They stem from the same root."

Posted by: Miss80sBaby at March 31, 2010 10:29 AM (yfJ6g)

430

Any time JEA starts a sentence with "If the Repubs are smart" it's followed by complete horseshit.  Other than that he/she/it shares the donk's fetish for regarding people at age 26 as children.  Fine advice, turd.

Posted by: Captain Hate at March 31, 2010 10:33 AM (EbYty)

431 "446

Any time JEA starts a sentence with "If the Repubs are smart" it's followed by complete horseshit.  Other than that he/she/it shares the donk's fetish for regarding people at age 26 as children.  Fine advice, turd.

Posted by: Captain Hate at March 31, 2010 03:33 PM (EbYty)"

That whole "on your parent's HC policy until age 26 so unnerves me.  That means, if you leave home at 18, you have 8 years to come back and live at home if you somehow fail at life.  The other unnerving thing is that your parents are responsible for your debts until age 23.  So, if you are on some college campus and they "hook you up with a good credit card" you can mow through the credit limit on that card and get other cards, cause you have established credit and just keep mowing through one card after another without your parents realizing what is going on.  Can't you see this being used as a way to get back at parents that a kid is unhappy having?   Before you know it, you can be a hundred grand in debt that isn't your debt and if you have like four kids, you can be "in the poor house in short order." ( i love this phrase, my gram uses it when she is yelling at you about being responsible with money and savings)

Posted by: curious at March 31, 2010 10:41 AM (p302b)

432

Of course it will be a fight, DUH. But if repeal of this colossal bullshiat isn’t legally “possible”, then I conclude that Federal Dems and Repubs could pretty much pass whateva they whant, wheneva, they whant, so long as they have the “votes”, Constitution be d@mned, and we’re stuck with the bill. Just bend over and smile, the three-hole r@pe is a foregone conclusion.

This is really the Republicans fear of losing elections, not a genuine fear that a bill can’t be undone. Once again, Repubs worry more about their seats than their constituents. Third party, anyone?

So, if Repubs can (won’t) stop this legally through repeal, then the focus is on lawsuits in the courts by the states or interested private parties. If the states don’t, then they are on the hook for a financial collapse, both interstate and intrastate.

This grand-mal legislative health care thug-move will be precedent, considered “normal” and “legal” and will bolster even more overt power-grabs in the near future. Wanna see a recipe for violent revolt and/or economic collapse? You’re looking at it.

This is the goal of the left, and the Repubs are buying right into it – let the Left pass whateva they want, and the left then uses the claim that repealing it will “rob” the voters of their “right” i.e. benefits, and the Repubs cave to the pressure.

My proof-

“My attitude is, go for it,” Obama said in Iowa on Friday. “If these congressmen in Washington want to come here in Iowa and tell small-business owners that they plan to take away their tax credits and essentially raise their taxes, be my guest.”

No wonder McCain was nominated.

Posted by: Saltyron at March 31, 2010 10:57 AM (oM+Px)

433 I always thought that McCain changed his mind when he suspended the campaign and came back to DC to address the situation.  If you recall, mr. cool said "i'm here guys if you need me" and continued to campaign.  Wasn't it about that time that they began their "regular security briefings"?  Oddly enough, whatever was said, I think McCain didn't have the stomach for the campaign or having the presidency anymore.  He probably realized he had more power as a Senator than he would have as president (that is, if you played by the existing rules).  It is interesting that Sarah Palin was at those same briefings and came away more determined than ever.  McCain, if you recall, hired dems to run the Sarah Palin part of the campaign, and they effectively squelched her when they realized that she was golden.  If they are in power now, the line between the R's and the D;s is wholly cloudy and the American people are beginning to see this.  The have's are the politicians and the federal employees who are becoming a small overpaid army and the union guys, the have nots are the rest of us.

Posted by: curious at March 31, 2010 11:06 AM (p302b)

434

Personally, I get the sense that you are opposed to social conservatism in all its forms & are a social libertarian.

Posted by: Miss80sBaby at March 31, 2010 03:29 PM (yfJ6g)

You could not be more incorrect, and there is not a single thing I've written here that could have led you to this conclusion.  With respect to general social issues, I am a traditionalist, though everyone needs to keep in mind where these social issues are to be hashed out - at the state level.  You're mixing apples and oranges, here.  There is the Constitutional separation of powers and responsibilities - which is the supreme law - and then there are the individual ideas on how those powers (once seated correctly) should be exercised.  My individual ideas on social issues are quite traditional, for the most part.

Posted by: progressoverpeace at March 31, 2010 11:14 AM (N49h9)

435

>>>This grand-mal legislative health care thug-move will be precedent, considered “normal” and “legal”

It already is, which is why I have said, since the beginning, that The Precedent and the Washington junta have been doing irreparable damage to our nation and our institutions - which was The Precedent's original intention more than passing any legislation, itself.  Taboos, once broken, can never just be repaired and forgotten.  They are gone.

>>>and will bolster even more overt power-grabs in the near future. Wanna see a recipe for violent revolt and/or economic collapse? You’re looking at it.

Posted by: Saltyron at March 31, 2010 03:57 PM (oM+Px)

Bingo!

Posted by: progressoverpeace at March 31, 2010 11:18 AM (N49h9)

436 I doubt that the "cocktail party set" is that important anymore with respect to donations and, more importantly, volunteering time.  Palin would be superb with the people that matter.

It wasn't long ago that they were all that mattered.   You couldn't get the cash together for a decent campaign without them, just took too long and was to ineffective to try and get thousands and thousands of small $10-$20 donors contacted, have them send in a couple bucks via the mail, get it all processed, etc..

But those days are over now.  Now with the power of the internet small $10, $20, $50 dollar donors can come to your site, fill out a quick form and shazam, instant campaign cash.

This is something the Republican party needs to come to understand, and quickly.  These are the donations that got Scott Brown elected in the first place, and that grass roots power is the only power worth having at the moment.


Posted by: StuckOnStupid at March 31, 2010 11:29 AM (e8T35)

437 Merely passing the health care abortion was fatal: it has become the new Social Security/Medicare/welfare, i.e. the "minimum" socialism that "responsible" politicians will countenance.  Republican politicians are a misnomer; they should actually be called politician Republicans.  Politicians first, Republicans (or conservatives) when convenient.  Their primary interest is in getting elected/re-elected, not an agenda.  These guys are afraid of appearing extreme or fixated on an issue and thus less electable.  They try to accommodate whatever statist agenda the Democrats devise, and sell themselves as more efficient managers of the socialist state.  Thus the old canard: Republicans are the tax collectors for the welfare state.

Obama and his ilk are many things, but they are not fools.  I'm sure they trusted that the Republicans would react in just this way.  Stand by for much more of the same left wing agenda to be enacted and ultimately accepted by Republicans and nominal conservatives.

Posted by: JPowell at March 31, 2010 11:40 AM (G1AXB)

438 Sent an email to my congress critter here in Elk Grove, CA., to make the pledge, but I doubt Dan Lungrin will respond.  He never has, and even  Babs Boxer and DiFi responded to emails I sent them.  Kinda ticks me off.

Posted by: timothyJ at March 31, 2010 12:29 PM (IKKIf)

439 The GOP: "Socialism is TEH AWSUM, so long as we aren't the ones getting blamed for it."

Posted by: Fa Cube Itches at March 31, 2010 12:48 PM (kmEfr)

440

"The treachery is not all on the Dem side...."

Told ya so...

Posted by: w'evver at March 31, 2010 01:40 PM (GkYyh)

441

@116: "I have Dick "Dick" Durbin and Roland "Dick" Burris. No one can beat that combination. Well, except maybe Vermont."

Um, California is pretty competitive.  And as an added bonus, I get Notstildamus as my Rep.

*pokes Yellowstone Supervolcano with a short stick*

C'mon! What's taking so long?

Posted by: Fa Cube Itches at March 31, 2010 01:51 PM (kmEfr)

442 Nostrildamus.  Good lord, the typing lag on this site/my computer is really bad today.

Posted by: Fa Cube Itches at March 31, 2010 01:52 PM (kmEfr)

443

@170: "If the Repubs are dumb enough to play that game..."

They are.

"...we are doomed."

We are. 

Posted by: Fa Cube Itches at March 31, 2010 02:01 PM (kmEfr)

444

@173: "I'm just waiting for Obamacare to start denying coverage to people who don't live by Michelle Obama's rules, i.e. obese, smoking"

Um, that's some of the Dems' primary demographics.  Won't ever happen.

Posted by: Fa Cube Itches at March 31, 2010 02:03 PM (kmEfr)

445

@269: "We need to provide ourselves and each other with clothes pin for our noses to help control the stench and we need to vote Republican."

No, we don't.  Even without MessiahCare, the economy will collapse under the existing entitlements and debt repayment.  Not might colllapse, will collapse.  The GOP has never shown even the slightest inclination to fuck-all about that.  At best, they merely propose to slightly delay the inevitable. Amnesty and Cap & Trade are coming.  They'll probably pass, too.  The economy will collapse even faster.

At the point, electing Dems = a bullet in the national brain; electing Repubs = a bullet in the national heart.  Same end result, one just kills slightly slower than the other.

Posted by: Fa Cube Itches at March 31, 2010 02:23 PM (kmEfr)

446

@360: "Two AP reporters take one ambiguous line from Cornyn and surround it with their opinion piece and the next thing I know all hell breaks loose and Republicans and Cornyn are lying on the floor dead shot dead by the over the top outrage gun."

Sadly, both Cornyn and the GOP have earned that honor.

Posted by: Fa Cube Itches at March 31, 2010 02:57 PM (kmEfr)

447 This is PRECISELY what the Conservative party did in the UK.

The reason why the UK is such a socialist wasteland with all of the cultural ills that entails is because the Conservative party there did not stick to their guns. 

They became content to simply administer the mess that the Labour party created rather than try to fix it. 

If the Republicans pull the same stunt here (and lets face it, this would not be the first time they did) then our republic is DOOMED.


Posted by: Lee at March 31, 2010 04:59 PM (ByuEK)

448 One day, I hope John Cornyn is replaced.  He talks the talk... sometimes... and then walks the walk... sometimes...

We need somebody real.  All.  The.  Time.

Posted by: The Borg at March 31, 2010 05:12 PM (SgL5z)

449

I'm not defending it.

But I heard one GOP insider (I didn't catch who he was) as I was changing from one radio station to another say the thinking is that the Dems thought once they passed health care reform the issue would go away. And now Barack Obama has to sell it 24/7. Besically, he's sinking the rest of the Dems ships. It's not ging  away, they have to talk about it, and it's such a loser the more he talks the worse it polls.

So many in the GOP think they should just let him do most of the talking about that, while they talk about jobs and economic growth.

He didn't make it sound like they weren't backing away from repealing it, just about talking more about how they're going to improve the economy while Obama and the Dems have to perpetually try to sell their job-killing loser of a policy.

For what it's worth. I read the article with what I heard on the radio in mind. The guy on the radio made it sound plausible. Of course, he was speaking in his own voice, uninterrupted. Filter the message throught the AP and it gets muddled.

Something for the GOP to always keep in mind when working on its messaging.

 

Posted by: Matt at March 31, 2010 08:52 PM (V+nNN)

450 Kirk is a politician who legislates according to the direction of the wind. He voted YES on cap and trade in the House; one of only 8 Republicans to do so. He has no principles and is rapidly pro-choice. Republican leadership should forget about focusing on Illinois, and let Kirk twist in the wind. If he loses, we get a corrupt liberal Dem, if he wins, we get a liberal Republican. If I was voting today, I'd leave the ballot blank for this seat.  

Posted by: Kyle Smith at April 01, 2010 06:24 AM (516Gw)

451

I don't blame the liberals... they are just losers and need government help.  I BLAME THE RINOS!  Reach around Juan McAmnesty, Ghramnisty, and now Cornhole.  VOTE THE BASTURDS OUT!

No more moderate republicans that just want to get along.  Vote out all you can in November and then keep working.

Posted by: Rob at April 01, 2010 06:32 AM (M+tE3)

452 This is why I am NOT a REPUBLICAN any longer.  This is why I don't donate to the GOP!  These people are, in the end, worse weasels than the Deem-ocrats! 

THEY ALL NEED TO GO! 

Posted by: WarEagle at April 01, 2010 07:29 AM (07orU)

453

I am thoroughly fed up with all of this nonsense. However, I am also starting to get sick of the blogs bemoaning the fate of this nation.  How about some solutions people?  The Republicans need to get their act together.  I know of a lot of good people who are fed up and we would all be more than willing to take over the party, stand up to the bs, and impart some common sense into legislation.  The Tea Party is a good movement but they too need to focus in on what they want to accomplish.  To me, the best best would be to reorganize the Republican party. 

In regards to healthcare, I do think it is true too much attention has been given to healthcare.  What about jobs and the economy?  Maybe if we put the focus on jobs that may shed more light onto the stupidity of healthcare reform at this point.  It would have seemed more logcial to me to first get the job situation a bit more manageable and the economy looking a little more secure before having passed this ridiculous bill.  In the meantime, I hope they still intend on pressing through with repealing it.

Posted by: JRJ at April 01, 2010 01:31 PM (8r0oQ)

454 Reliable and professional website for retail where you can buy Clearance MBT Shoes, Air Yeezy Shoes and Air Max 2010 with free shipping

Posted by: puma running shoes at April 01, 2010 11:31 PM (ULaGr)

455 Republicans do not want health care reform because most of them are rich bastards who can't stand to lose a penny from their paycheck. What I don't get is how people from southern Virginia do not want health care reform, saying that it just blows. Hello assholes, this is a fact; MOST of the money the southern Virginia gets is from NORTHERN VIRGINIA. SO, you assholes should not be complaining as we pay more taxes than you guys to accommodate your expenses. Quit complaining about health Care reform because you bastards do not understand that a lot of taxes you guys do not pay is because of NOVA. BTW, asshole republicans need to STFU saying how "the american people do not want this." HEY ASSHOLES, say the right thing "the rich american people do not want this." Fuck you assholes, too many people who want this so quit acting like you know what everyone wants, piece of shits.           If you assholes never fucked up during bush's term, we would probably not have a democratic president right now and if we did, health care probably would not have been as argued about. So quit complaining about something you assholes caused..... Also you fucking retards, EVERY FUCKING MONTH THE PREMIUMS INCREASE FOR HEALTH CARE. RICH ASSHOLES GETTING RICHER SO HOW THE FUCK IS THE REFORM SUPPOSED TO MAKE THINGS WORSE??? TELL ME YOU FUCKERS, I WANT TO KNOW YOUR STUPID LOGIC IN THE MATTER. FUCKING DUMBASSEs NEED TO LEARN THAT THINGS CANNOT GET ANY BETTER SO A REFORM WAS NEEDED TO SEE IF THINGS COULD GET EVEN A LITTLE BETTER!!!!

Posted by: aldo at April 09, 2010 11:04 PM (qpGfe)

456 Not sure what this is about. I am neither a libertarian nor a social conservative. I'm more your run-of-the-mill conservative with a good understanding of the Constitution, why it was written, what it was meant to do, and why it works - in addition to realizing that private property rights are the true anchors of individual freedom and lead to a growing, dynamic economy.  dental care

Posted by: Harriot at April 15, 2010 09:41 AM (k2I6b)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Comments are disabled. Post is locked.
415kb generated in CPU 1.39, elapsed 3.0475 seconds.
62 queries taking 2.4423 seconds, 692 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.