1 Congressman King wants to be taken seriously.  And the rest of the GOP? ...

2

Rush talked to his insurance connection who said that premiums will double and/or triple long before we expect them to and the best we can hope for is two to three years more of private insurance before it goes under.

Check out this essay and read the 1st and 3rd comments afterward.  Maybe nullification is the best answer for now in lieu of putting this in the courts' hands.

http://tinyurl.com/yawhry3

 

3 I'll go for Repeal and Replace.  Why?  Because we get offer up our own solutions, better solutions, to fix this shit.  Tort reform.  Cross-state policy purchasing.  Deregulation.  No mandates.  Etc.

Just saying "Repeal!" isn't going to work out this Nov.

4 I doubt they will be able to repeal this.  Anyone else remember a time when a large entitlement program was repealed?  Me neither.

Reagan said it best: "No government ever voluntarily reduces itself in size. So governments' programs, once launched, never disappear."

5
Just like Rush said yesterday: The Republicans better fucking mean it, not just say it.

6 As someone who doesn't think the federal government actually has a role in this issue, I gotta say I like King's approach.

Drew, there's a lot of 'reform' that could be simply getting the Feds out of the business.

7

OT -

Under Bush, this would have been a problem: http://tinyurl.com/yb9sn3g

It's probably still his fault though.

via Instapundit and HotAir

8 Agree with the basic issue, but there's a political cost if the message is "Repeal" but nothing is offered to replace. The Dhimmicrats will then drag out their sob stories on lifetime caps, pre-existing for kids, etc., and try to turn the debate that way. I agree with Repeal. I want that now. But the politics of how you do that is, first get a Pub majority in Congress. That means the Pubs may well have to offer up some tangibles on Replace. I went last night to a Pub candidate townhall (Adam Kinzinger, IL-11 to replace the detestable Debbie Halvorson). Kinzinger is plenty conservative, but even he's talking about the 'certain things' in the current bill that Republicans would have voted for had they been offered up separately. I suspect the Pub leadership has been testing this theme very carefully in focus groups lately. If they decide that "Repeal and Replace" is the best message, I'm not going to argue. Just as long as we get repeal.

9 Man, I hope we aren't snatching defeat from the jaws of victory again.

10

At least some Republicans have balls.  And I also think King's bill should put in every damn bill Congress gets from here to eternity.

11

I like nullification.  The Red States can.  Most purple states can if they grow some. 

 

12 Repeal it?  I'm not even buying that one.

13 See,

With this batch of Republicrats, they just believe there's a better Democrat Party position to be had.

They don't want to eliminate this.

They want to improve it. Hell, they're for it ... with fixes.

Fuck that shit.

Democrats are offering me a much, much better deal than Republicrats.

So, guess I'll become a Democrat since their bribes are bigger.

14

I'm good with the strategy after all the current, (well prior to today's signing,) had some problems that needs to be addressed. Opening up cross-state shopping, tort reform and more tax breaks for HSA will go a very long way on addressing those issues.

Rush was correct, this is the repubs chance to rise to defence of the republic or become the next whig party. A time for choosing...

 

15

They can't run on just "Repeal it". All during the healthcare debate, the story was " Americans want some kind of health care reform, just not this one."

They better have something to offer or they will be portrayed as wanting to maintain the status quo.

 

Tort reform.

Selling across state lines.

Allow those businesses who "Self-insure" to join together.

Portability.

 

16

Have you noticed no one trusts the courts anymore?

Freedom is already a lie.

17

Posted by: Sam at March 23, 2010 02:22 PM (Cxsey)

--Are you bob's twin?

18 So, guess I'll become a Democrat since their bribes are bigger.

Posted by: someguy at March 23, 2010 02:28 PM (VRJIW)

Which is why the Democrats have been winning for the past 80 years.

19

Repeal & repalce is good. Some of the few good things in the bill (i.e. 25 year olds on their parents plan) were lifted from the reps.

 Keep the good trash the bad

20

Latest bumper sticker: http://tinyurl.com/yj6hqtp

 

21 How about a HOLD. The bill cannot go into effect until it has been debated, vetted, and real cost estimates and consequences projected. To remove the hold another vote or state by state referendums.

22 This is a:

STATES. RIGHTS. ISSUE.

Is ObamaCare unconstititional, or not? I ask you?

No Republican who wants to give me better socialized medicine than the Democrats socialized medicine is going to get my vote, or my money and I'll work very, very hard to make sure they're never elected to anything.

Tea Party is looking better every day.

23 Are you bob's twin?

Posted by: logprof at March 23, 2010 02:29 PM (CE2wR)

What do you think?  Not hope, but think.  Is it going to be repealed?

24 poopy?

25 Reposted from previous thread because it is so freaking unbelievably  BAD:

In the tense hours Sunday leading up to the House vote on a historic healthcare bill, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi took time to call the former president of Notre Dame, Father Theodore Hesburgh.

The House Democrats' leader was not seeking spiritual guidance. What she wanted was Hesburgh to help lock up the vote of Rep. Joe Donnelly, a Democrat from South Bend, Ind., who was wavering over the abortion issue.

Donnelly ultimately pressed the "yes" button late Sunday night.

h/t:  The Corner

For those of you unfamiliar with ND football, the famous "Touchdown Jesus" mural which overlooks the stadium is on the side of the campus library.  The library which is named the Theodore Hesburgh Library.

You know, if the world ended today, I really wouldn't want to be  in the vicinity of South Bend.

26 someguy, I suggest looking up the definitions for the words repeal and replace
and learn what they mean.  You are creating a total strawman.  No R has said they want to keep it and modify it.  They have said they want to REPEAL AND REPLACE IT.

Quit tearing down your own bullshit strawmen.  It's tiresome.

27

Jobs will still be the number one issue in November.

If the presentent's magic unicorn economy hasn't un-recessed by then, it won't much matter how the GOP frames the Health non-Care repeal.

28 Mitch McConnel is offering up the same tired old strategies of Democrap-Lite that have failed for the last 12 years.

We should take a play from their own playbook. The cry should be "repeal now and whe4n we have control we will give you real reform that improves the economy and doesn't destroy it.

Never offer specific numbers unless the commies bring in their lies first.

This is a hint of things to come folks.  The Republican leadership is STILL adhering to the bad ways.

29 I think it's going to come down to the States killing this thing and not the politicians.

30 I am fine with either.  I think America is generally clueless, they don't pay attention to these things like we do, but Americans aren't totally stupid, they know they were fooled by the fool in chief.  Independents will break 60-40 our way, just like they did in MA. Passion will be on our side.  "Messaging" is going to be wasted by both parties.

To the Dems - please, please bring up amnesty and cap & trade.

31 Repeal, absolutely. And, since the 'pubs have their own solutions which are sensible and reasonable, campaigning for replacement with a short, bullet point list of reforms will make people realize that overturning the whole apple cart was unnecessary.

32 Repeal and replace! And mebbe say something about the economy. It seems the socialists don't give a rat's ass about it.

33

The GOP has no intention of running on REPEAL.  They intend to run on FIXIT, and to offer you Mitt Romneycare, who knows mandates better than anyone.  And that is because the GOP is OK w/ big government, so long as they are in charge of Levianthan, Inc.  No thanks to the GOP.

Repeal--AND IMPEACH.

Opt out and Reassert Sovereignty.

34

The fuckhead's Secretary of Education Arnie Duncan manipulated a system to favor powerful political allies by placing their children in the schools of their choice

tinyurl.com/yb9sn3g

"The discovery of a list, the existence of which had been long denied by Duncan, and its composition of mainly high-powered political figures calls into question the appeals system used to reconsider applications that had been denied by the top Chicago-area schools.”

...but he seemed like such a lovable, good natured goofball

Just wait to see who gets organ transplants with this piece of shit bill

35

This is my cynical prediction:

Even if they do run on this and are successful, any attempt they muster against provisions in the bill will be half hearted at best, and here's why;

The Social Security and Medicare money wells are drying up.  Fannie and Freddie aren't really useful anymore for defacto campaign slush funds for both parties. 

Obamacare opens a fire hose of money to replenish (however temporarily) the source of money for congress people to fund their earmarks and to bribe states, corporations and individuals into doing what they ask. 

Republicans are likely to see the benefits that will accrue to them from many of the healthcare provisions and will likely have willing agreement from the Dems to match many of the more corrupt elements of the program - essentially duplicating the Louisiana Purchase and the others for Republicans.

Just watch.  The Republicans are much more upset about the fact that they didn't get any credit or payola from this than they are with the fact that it will harm the country.

In the end, they are politicians, not statesmen.

36 Repeal and Replace is kind of catchy, like Spay/Neuter Release. But one part, likewise, is integral to the success of the whole strategy.

37

I'm for neither one.

We fought this and we lost. To fight it again retroactively, albeit with greater numbers in Washington, is a bad idea. That's what Bush did with his first tax cut; it was a rebate. In other words, it was a retroactive tax cut. This is one of the bad precedents that Bush set. A repeal would be a temporary fix until they get numbers on their side again, at which time it'll be 2009-10 (and 1993-94) all over again.

So how about this: Once our side takes back Congress and the White House, they add riders to laws which, piece by piece, would supersede everything in the HCR Act until it's in effect gone.

Obama keeps his big historic win, and no one becomes the wiser that's it's meaningless.

38 No R has said they want to keep it and modify it.  They have said they want to REPEAL AND REPLACE IT.

Same as modify it. Just adds some spin that nobody will fall for.

Are Republicans for the individual mandate? Are Republicans for requiring people to buy health insurance?

Or not?

Is ObamaCare unconstitutional, or not?

I don't want better ObamaCare. I am not going to be forced to purchase insurance by either Democrats or Republicrats and I will work hard as hell to make sure Republicrats are not elected. I'll donate money to Democrats to ensure that Republicrats are not elected until such time as the party is pushed to the right and away from the left.

And look dude ... if you think the conservatives cannot swing the election you ain't paying attention to current events, bub.

Republicrats like Mitch McConnell need to be bitch-slapped.

Hard.

39 Fannie and Freddy should be dissolved.  And pardon me if I don't join the "Oh Jesus, were fucked no matter who wins" crowd.

40 I was getting my haircut this morning, and the whole barber shop watched Commander Zero with quiet rage. Man, everyone in there was pissed. It was like watching the jets hitting the World trade Towers back in 9/11/01. Methinks the Donkey Party has stirred up a real hornet's nest.

41 'Repeal & Replace' is a great idea, mostly because it needs a slogan.  It needs to be repeated constantly, until the two words blend together and one can't be said without the other.  That cuts off the inevitable 'Republicans want to take it away' and imprints 'Republicans want to replace it with something better.'  It's good marketing-- if it's backed up with good policy underneath, it's golden.

42 They should run on Repeal, Reform, and Restore Jobs by Rebuilding the Economy. Once they get in, they can do that and work on shrinking government. Because the only way to get libs out of government is to stop paying them to be there.
This Replace crap is a non-starter. Unless by replace they  mean totally privatize all government healthcare programs, enacting draconian tort reform, and allowing the free trade of insurance across state lines.

43 Don't be shootin' my Santa Claus down, now.

44 I was getting my haircut this morning, and the whole barber shop watched Commander Zero with quiet rage. Man, everyone in there was pissed.

And Republicans threaten to waste this historic opportunity - this unbridled rage - by admitting that ObamaCare has some good parts.

What. Fucking. Morons.

I'm fucking sick and tired of this shit, man. The people we have in charge of the Republican Party are mindless fuckers man with no idea how to strategize a political landslide.

Once you're in, you can do whatever you want ... but these bozos are too stupid to win.

45

As #2 alluded to, the various features that would start up in the near future may be popular, but they are also not in touch with economic reality. Premiums will have to go up rapidly, which will hit the public in a very unpopular way in short order.

...Unless there is some sort of mechanism to this bill that disallows that. If there is such a mechanism, then they'll start to shut down their businesses in short order.  And the public is likely to have a sort of wake-up call from that, too.

Big health care companies did well in the stock market yesterday, so I expect we can assume there is no such mechanism. Perhaps the market assumes these companies will end up like utilities, where the profits are relatively modest, but reliable.  As it is, these guys have relatively low profit margins, so that would be an improvement.

Anyway, if it doesn't get hung up in the courts, there should be plenty about this law for the average Joe to complain about by November.

46 By the time November gets here they will probably have amnesty and some sort of environmental legislation to add to the list of "Repeal and Replace". The Dems having already committed political suicide might as well finish the act of hari-kari by passing even more of their Socialist utopia ideas burned into their drug abused brains from the 60's.

47 Hey, I'm just a doc-in-training, but I've got to act to defend my livelihood. The Pubs are offering at least a chance to stop this shit before it's completely destroyed medicine in this country. So I stand with maddogg- this thing must be done away with. Not haphazardly, mind you, but smartly.

48 We do need some type of reform. If it's market based, I'm for it.

We need portability and tort reform.

As far as the welfare state goes, if you're going to give poor people healthcare, then forget insurance. That just gives them unlimited access to services -- and they use it.

Give 'em a voucher for routine care along with some catastrophic insurance with a high deductible.. Once your voucher is used for the year, tough shit. Live within a budget like the rest of us.

When my mom worked in the psych ward of the local hospital, these welfare dregs ate up a tremendous amount of resources checking themselves in for depression and laying around all day. That stuff has to stop.

49 This piece of shit bill must be expunged. Repealed. No fucking trace of Zero's goddamn fucking bill should remain. The socialists need to become a pointless laughing stock in history. The arrogant jackasses who ignored the public and were slapped back to the stoneage. They must be utterly defeated, with prejudice.

50
This is a good point Drew.

This article here on Big Government talks about this point at length from a historical perspective. 

Here is the core of it:
"Put simply, it is not enough that the Republicans claim that they can administer the welfare state more effectively than the Democrats. As FDR and Truman demonstrated, business progressivism is not, in the long run, a politically viable alternative to government-centered progressivism. For a realignment to take place, there has to be a return to first principles – to the principles of limited government embedded in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution"

I couldn't agree more.  This is a bit disturbing that Republicans are already starting to talk like this.  We need to give them feedback.

I like the line that Dennis Prager has come up with, and I think it makes for a concise, simple summary:

"The bigger the government, the smaller the citizen."

51 Here's the only way Repeal and Replace works for me:

1) Repeal
2) I get the money they would have spent on my so I can go buy my own insurance if that's what I want to do.

VOUCHER.

Only way Repeal and Replace works. Take the Democrats idea and take the money they would have spent and give it directly to people. Buy votes with it.

That's the Chicago Way.

That's how you get Capone.

What are you prepared to do?

52 Repeal and Replace has a nice ring.

Tar and Feather has a better ring.

53 FireHorse, your idea doesn't solve the problem you bring up.  The foreign party can repeal our riders and probably easier than passing the whole thing again.  Besides what exactly is the downside of forcing them to die on this hill again if they ever  are in this position?  We get to remind voters of what horrors the Democrats intend to inflict on them for every election forever, and when they win, they waste half their time on this mess again.

54

DeCarlo,

Where Santa's stash?

55 Once the depression hits they'll take over food production, and it is over.

56

A repeal would be a temporary fix until they get numbers on their side again, at which time it'll be 2009-10 (and 1993-94) all over again.

Uh, if November 2010 isn't November 1994 all over again, then we are doomed. We need Contract With America 2.0

 

57 They have to add the "Replace" part because the libs will scream that YOU JUST DON'T CARE AND DON'T WANNA FIX IT!!  I actually think this might be an opportunity to swing a fix in the other direction, if the GOP is smart enough to take it up (a young foal can dream, can't she?)

I have to say that many R's pleasantly surprised me in opposing the bill-- obviously they should have done much more, much sooner, but we can pressure them to make damn sure that the "Replace" consists of tort reform and the ability to purchase insurance across state lines.

58 I think plain and simple "Repeal" is better, and I have many reasons for thinking that--partially it places focus on the method used to get the bill in the first place, which will involve a learning process on the proper relationship between citizen and government. "Repeal and Replace" will put the focus on the "Replace" portion above all else, and much will be lost that needs to be said and done to prevent this problem from occurring again.

Look, I understand I may be doing something into the wind here, but while senior Republican leaders may be good men (or may not) there is simply nothing that indicates to me they are the means to ultimate victory. Historical analogy--Halleck, who, valuing safety above all else, lost opportunity after opportunity while quashing those who could win.

So by all means do what you think is best come November, but don't think this is anything but the beginning of a long process. Put your faith in the current leadership at your peril.  As for myself, I will express myself to my fellow citizens, but in no other way will I be active. But, personally, for the Republican party to act like it has some right to our votes merely because it long ago seized the position of one of two parties in a bi-party system is offensive in the extreme. Well, we can't apparently do a third party, or so I get repeatedly reminded. But I am tired of these guys basically not being willing to lose, for as was once said, "Half-measures are vain." I am also tired of them acting like they have the right to squash dissent. So fie upon them.

**Caveat--yes, I just tarred the GOP with a big brush. But as an entity, and not considering individuals, I think it be an accurate one. 

59 #52: That's Contract With America 2.0 worthy.

60 You HAVE to run on repeal AND REPLACE. Otherwise you're back to the "party of no" trying to take away John. Q. Dependent's health care.  Run on a simple message of: "Lets repeal this Democrat takeover, and replace it with a limited government approach that will actually do what the American people want."  BOOM. Win congress. And spend the next year and a half telling people that they can't repeal jack squat until Obama is out of Office.  BOOM. Win White House.

61 Rep. Brad Ellsworth (D-IN) finds himself down 18 points in the Indiana Senatorial race to replace Senator Bayh after supporting Obamacare on Sunday.;"63% of Hoosiers oppose Obamacare. 35% approve of the legislation.

I think we will be ok in the election. What happens after that will be the key, will the republicans force vetoes and cut spending to the bone?

62 Is that all the GOP has? Slogans? Just words?

63 57

A repeal would be a temporary fix until they get numbers on their side again, at which time it'll be 2009-10 (and 1993-94) all over again.

Uh, if November 2010 isn't November 1994 all over again, then we are doomed. We need Contract With America 2.0

And someone needs to cut Lindsey Graham's tongue out.  That would help.

64
someguy - You're pissing me off.  Are you a fishtroll?  a killfuck?

Really - go vote for the democrats and stfu.

65 You do both.  You come out with "This bill is a piece of shit" which most people already accept but when skeptics rhetorically ask "Can you do better?" you say "Actually, yes" and hit the talking points.

66 26 I would like to see Notre Dame's Catholic charter revoked. They can get a marxist one. Rename it Notre Comrad

67

You HAVE to run on repeal AND REPLACE. Otherwise you're back to the "party of no" trying to take away John. Q. Dependent's health care.  Run on a simple message of: "Lets repeal this Democrat takeover, and replace it with a limited government approach that will actually do what the American people want."  BOOM. Win congress. And spend the next year and a half telling people that they can't repeal jack squat until Obama is out of Office.  BOOM. Win White House.

I would add watch as Obama's foreign policy turns into Jimmuh Cartur's only worse.

68 At this point I'm willing to take anything.

69

I'm kind of with #38. It would probably be far more practical to defund & defang this beast than to try to repeal it, but I appreciate the sentiment of anyone who has the gumption to pursue the latter.

70
Obamacare will be the democrats downfall.  All the R's have to do is not blow it.  THE DEMOCRATS own the stimulus waste, and now they own health care.

71

53 Repeal and Replace has a nice ring.

Tar and Feather has a better ring.

Give us our country back - might work as well.

72

someguy - You're pissing me off.  Are you a fishtroll?  a killfuck?

No, he's just depressed. And frankly, I can't blame him. But I know 3rd parties are a joke, and I know as Rumsfeld said, we go to war with the troops and equipment we have, not what we wish to have.

 

73 Obamacare will be the democrats downfall.  All the R's have to do is not blow it.  THE DEMOCRATS own the stimulus waste, and now they own health care.

That is a damn good point. All the 3rd party cranks who claim "there isn't a dime's worth of difference" simply can't say that for the last several years. Not when every single Republican says no. Every single one.

74 They can go for repeal and replace without going after every single thing in the bill. Paul Ryan even had some ideas on dealing with people with pre existing conditions and things like that. They can however, take out the most obnoxious parts of the bill and improve what they can't take out.

75 You HAVE to run on repeal AND REPLACE. Otherwise you're back to the "party of no" trying to take away John. Q. Dependent's health care.

Bullshit.

Being the Party of No has brought about the fastest decline in Presidential Approval ratings in the history of those ratings.

Being the Party of No brought, for the first time in 40 years, a Republican to warm Teddy Kennedy's seat.

Being the Party of No has brought 60% of the American people to believing that ObamaCare was wrong for the country.

Now you fucking Republicrats want to fuck that historic success up? I don't fucking believe you people. What is wrong with your ability to think, dude?

I am telling you conservatives something: our party has been infiltrated with these fucking Democrats and they're starting today to make noises like this. They want us to accept ObamaCare as a fait accompli so they can move on to Amnesty next and bring in another 30 million low-wage Democrat voters.

We either have an opposition Republican Party or fuck it we will have a third party Tea Party and you guys can go fuck yourselves and the golf cart you rode in on.

76 VOUCHER.

Only way Repeal and Replace works. Posted by: someguy

Bullshit. An interstate insurance market doesn't require vouchers.

HSA's don't require vouchers. Tort reform doesn't.

Any other questions?

77 And as far as preexisting for kids, there is S-CHIP for kids now.

78 Kallisto is right at #28, the Party that can run with a solid plan on getting the economy going and act on it will be the party that stays in control of the government for the next 6 years. People can stomach paying taxes if they have jobs. Focus on the economy and include "Repeal and Replace" or whatever catch phrase you want. Focus on Biden's three letter word, J-O-B-S, and win or at least get rid of the super majority. Then we will need to start working with (Yes Work With) the "D's" on economy and repealing.

79

A lot of what is popular in the bill won't work without mandates. For instance, rescinding someone's insurance once they get really sick is fucked up and nobody likes it. But in order to keep rates managable, insurance companies pretty much have to do it. Once you prohibit recissions, costs go up. Unless you mandate healthy people into the pool to offset the costs.

We're really back to Square One, where nobody wants to be. Costs are high because the customer, a sick person, has no interest in keeping costs down. It isn't his money. Until it is, at least to some degree, there will be no cost control measure that can withstand public scrutiny, i.e. recissions.

It will be very hard to refight this in the fall. It might pay to take a page from the abortion-lovers and just scream, "Keep government out of heath decisions!" The Left sold that pretty hard until they saw a chance at single-payer--then government in the health business sounded real sweet to them.

 

80 What kind of Emergency Powers might such a vast majority of dems in congress give the president in the case of fiscal collapse, war, etc..

81 Unless by replace they  mean totally privatize all government healthcare programs, enacting draconian tort reform, and allowing the free trade of insurance across state lines.
Posted by: Iblis

YES, YOU STUPID FUCK. WHAT THE FUCK DID YOU THINK IT MEANS!!!!!!

82 Repeal and Replace is a better slogan than just Repeal.  The Replace part has to be short, sweet, and to the point.  But the main thing is to REPEAL first, then REPLACE with something better.

83 Republicans are likely to see the benefits that will accrue to them from many of the healthcare provisions and will likely have willing agreement from the Dems to match many of the more corrupt elements of the program - essentially duplicating the Louisiana Purchase and the others for Republicans.

There's already one of these Democrat Republicans running for Governor of NY, chief executive of Suffolk County Steve Levy, who supported Obama in the 2008 election. Levy defended the switch, saying that Republican leaders "liked what they saw" when he proposed the idea of running as a Republican.

I have no idea how anyone here feels about Rick Lazio, but Levy has brought on former McCain strategist John Weaver and also has the support of the New York Republican Party leadership, including its chairman Edward F. Cox, the same people who probably endorsed Dede Scozzafava.

A quick Google search says Ed Cox is a raving loon. Married Tricia Nixon. Worked with Ralph Nader, who recalled his old protégé as “deliberate, quiet, intellectual” and “progressively radical,” adding that, “as so often happens, he got ‘realistic’ and got a job.” As a corporate attorney. Nixon joked that he thought of him when his toaster broke. "Should have had it recalled." Served on Mr. Cuomo’s transition team in 2006. That's who runs the Republican party in NY state.

It's not Republicans selling out. It's parties going to hell in vulnerable blue states where Democrats shore up their defense and get their guy in. They're a few steps ahead of us and playing for keeps. They will utterly destroy this country while they keep us preoccupied with apologizing to them (Michael Steele) and distracted by social issues.

84 67 26 I would like to see Notre Dame's Catholic charter revoked. They can get a marxist one. Rename it Notre Comrad

Oh, and I should add that Hesburgh's president emeritus office is on the top floor of the library, so as to better watch the suicide of the university he is helping to destroy.

85
"No, he's just depressed. And frankly, I can't blame him. But I know 3rd parties are a joke, and I know as Rumsfeld said, we go to war with the troops and equipment we have, not what we wish to have."

Exactly.

I'd ass-  If you want to run every republican out of office based on some sense of purity, all we will get is more democrats/ communists in there.

86

In fact, Congressman Steve King (R-IA) has a bill ready. It reads in full...

 

Effective as of the enactment of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, such Act is repealed, and the provisions of law amended or repealed by such Act are restored or revived as if such Act had not been enacted.



That works for me.

87 Run on firing the new IRS agents.  That would be more popular than Santa Claus.

88 Eh, I was dissappointed when I heard about the repeal & replace concept. There can be no ambiguities between plans. The statists will hi-jack every new and old concept the repubs come up with and parade it as their own and simply say it was part of their original O'care bill. Tear it down completely and focus on the repub talking points: Tort reform, competition, medical savings accounts etc.       

89

Now you fucking Republicrats want to fuck that historic success up? I don't fucking believe you people. What is wrong with your ability to think, dude?

Not at all. We should be the Party of Fuck No, of course.But wouldn't it be nice when the Demunists snivel about what our alternative is, we have one, and we ram it into their sniveling skulls?

 

90 VOUCHER. Same plan that members of Congress have.

FIFY

91 "But I know 3rd parties are a joke, and I know as Rumsfeld said, we go to war with the troops and equipment we have, not what we wish to have."

Come on, dude. You've got Mitch Fucking McConnell out there today admitting that some parts of ObamaCare are OK, we just need to fix it ... replace the bad parts with other parts.

One dimes worth of difference is all there is between Democrats and Republicans. They're too cozy. They like each other too much. They're too deferential to their "colleagues."

Fuck that shit.

I want some fighters. People who will vote no and fucking mean it. How do you think Scott Brown got elected? The moment Scott Brown votes with a Democrat on any issue - any issue - he's done for.

Republicans have one more chance, dude. And that's it. They start making McCain-like noises reaching across the aisle to give the Democrats hand-jobs and they're fucking out of here.

You guys won't be able to get elected fucking dog catcher.

92
Republicans need to stay focused on what ObamaCare will cost.
During a recession, it's going to kill jobs, not create them.

It's the cost.

 

93 Repeal?  This abomination needs to be thrown out as unconstitutional.  Congress, had its chance.

Replace?  You know what, at this point I don't want their help.  Total incompetence reigns in Congress.

94 87
If we win back the house, that should be placed as an amendment to every single appropriations bill until we win back the executive.

95 If the plan was so good, they would use it themselves and not exempt their own staff.

IF YOU LIKE YOUR BRIBE, YOU GET TO KEEP YOUR BRIBE.

96

"ObamaCare Bankrupts America, Repeal It!" is a clean and neat concept most people will get behind.

That won't work either. It's too abstract. For most people, "bankrupt" is a technical term that doesn't change anything in the real, practical world. Chrysler went bankrupt; they still make Chryslers. Argentina went bankrupt, yet there's Argentina in the World Cup every four years.

America goes bankrupt -- so what? How does my life change for the worse in the here and now?

97 Tea Party time!  This could the biggest repudiation of government control in two centuries of American politics, and the GOP leadership is already working to undermine that in favor of making their own separate peace.  IF "replace" actually refers to real free market reforms (expanding HSA's, individual tax deductions, buying across state lines), not government programs, I'll get behind it, but I'm not betting on that from the current GOP leadership.  We need to back people like Paul Ryan and Tom COburn, and primary the moderate GOP leadership if they don't come through with better commitments.  Actually McConnell's safe until 2014, but I'm going to remember this.

98

I very much do not like Repeal and Replace.  Yeah, technically you could argue that the replacement could be a bill removing the more onerous existing federal tentacles from healthcare, but let's be honest:  it's not going to be that.  It's going to be a Republican Compromise (tm), where we only eat half the shit sandwich and the other half will be saved in the refrigerator for later when the Dems take power again. 

I don't want the Replace because, just like TARP, Prescription Drugs, Campaign Finance Reform, etc. the legislation that crawls out of the capital will be worse than no law. 

Repeal this shit, then come talk to us about your reform ideas.  Until then, Repeal this shit.  Oh, and if you have some time to spare, repeal this shit.  Have you repealed this shit yet?

99 But wouldn't it be nice when the Demunists snivel about what our alternative is, we have one,

VOUCHERS for $13,000/year for every family in America to buy insurance with (or whatever else they may need).

That's how much Democrats are spending giving this money to their donor base. Promise to take that, and write checks to Americans who vote Republican.

That's how you win elections dumbass.

Take what the Democrats have already committed the country to spend, and promise to give it to me directly. Won't cost the country 1 more dime, but now Republicans are writing the bribe checks.

You have two choices:

1) Democrats can write bribe checks to union thugs and win, or
2) Republicans can write checks to regular Americans and win.

Pick one.

Whoever promises to give me the money directly gets my vote.

100
I'd ass = "I'd add"


gfaw.

101 But wouldn't it be nice when the Demunists snivel about what our alternative is, we have one, and we ram it into their sniveling skulls?


Even MSNBC couldn't deny that when Republicans came to the healthcare summit with their facts, figures and solutions, they clowned the Democrats. The dumb President even gave them a forum where they otherwise wouldn't have been heard, taking away the meme that they were selfish, hateful, party of NO obstructionists. And to think some people were worried it was a trap.

102 PS.

You don't actually have to write the checks, you just have to promise to do it. You just have to campaign on that promise.

Democrats will block that plan by filibustering it ... but they'll do so as a minority party.

But you have to be smart enough to campaign on that promise to ensure a win. Then, you negotiate from a position of power.

103 You sure they're not pursuing their usual Refine And Retreat strategy?

104 Repeal & Replace should be Slash & Burn....baby!

105 We don't want ObamaCare Light. Or McCainCare.

We want the government off our ass and out of our wallets.

Tort reform. Interstate insurance sales. Free market capitalism for health services.

Incentive. Innovation. Ingenuity. Self-reliance. Responsibility. Accountability.

duh.

106 VOUCHERS for $13,000/year for every family in America to buy insurance with (or whatever else they may need.)

Watch the exchange between Louise Slaughter and Paul Ryan on C-span about Medicare funding. Bear in mind how Milton Friedman, despite earning his Nobel prize, has been demonized by the left. Independents don't want to hear about vouchers. Because they will be told by Democrats that by the time they retire, that money will have devalued. They will believe it and panic.

107 Yes, someguy is a troll.  Seen him spouting stupid democrat stuff here all the time trying to disguise it as some form of republican.

<sub>1) Repeal
2) I get the money they would have spent on my so I can go buy my own insurance if that's what I want to do.

VOUCHER.</sub>

Yeah, real conservative. Gimme, Gimme, Gimme.

108 As a potential third party crank, allow me to say that the Rumsfeld analogy is true only in this respect--you don't go to war with the Army you want but the one you have, etc. etc. etc. Sure. But, historically speaking, you do fire the generals you have until you get the performance you want from the generals you want. And since considering Rumsfeld himself got canned and a victory resulted thereafer, that analogy may be wanted to be used with some greater discretion in the future.

Having said that, I think what may  be sticking in the craw here is that what the time calls for is the spirit that may best be embodied by what Nelson said: "No captain can do very wrong if he puts his ship alongside that of the enemy." Instead, with "Repeal and Replace" we get the whiff of an attempt to "finesse" in typical fashion that has in the past proved to be all too feeble. We are simply going to have to take this battle again and again to the American people until the proper role of government in American society is decided upon and internalized so as to end the debate for once and for all. Finessing the issue so that you safely get a majority but are unable to change the dynamic of media and educational elites against you is in the end run a loser. So you need to never-mind maneuvering and just smash into them, and do so in such an intelligent manner that even a defeat sets you up for victory later on (which is what we have with health care today), instead of setting up small victories that limit larger ones. Maybe they can do that with "Repeal and Replace". Past experience, however, says they are wonderful at doing rear-guard actions but not much else, and that is what I fear this would be. 

But if that is all they can do, well, maybe the answer really should lie elsewhere anyway, in the hearts and minds of the citizens instead of a party. After all, the Navy of 1941 was largely fought out by 1943, but if did hold the line until the two-ocean navy could be built. So there is that.

109 You don't actually have to write the checks, you just have to promise to do it. You just have to campaign on that promise.

And a check for $13,000 sounds like chump change to people who are worried about paying for cancer, for example.

110

82 Unless by replace they  mean totally privatize all government healthcare programs, enacting draconian tort reform, and allowing the free trade of insurance across state lines.
Posted by: Iblis

YES, YOU STUPID FUCK. WHAT THE FUCK DID YOU THINK IT MEANS!!!!!!

Well, since McConnell hasn't said what he means by it, or what the GOP leadership in general means by it, some of us would like to get them on record.  This is the fucking GOP we're talking about here.  Remember McCain-Feingold?  Medicare part D?  Comprehensive immigration reform?  You apparently think you can read McConnell's mind and he thinks just like you do, but that's the same kind of thinking that got Obama the Centrist elected president.  Better to get these bastards on the record with specific promises and definitions of "repeal" than find out next January that we were the rubes this time.

111 They gotta get rid of the mandate and IRS involvement. In fact, I'm pissed at the R's for not harping on that aspect of this bill. When I'm out preaching against the bill, most eyes glaze over until I mention the IRS. That usually sets 'em off.

112

Come on, dude. You've got Mitch Fucking McConnell out there today admitting that some parts of ObamaCare are OK, we just need to fix it ... replace the bad parts with other parts.

You know, pithy statements when a mic is shoved in your face don't mean a policy. And in the numerous pages of the Obamunist monstrosity, there *are* a few nice statements the Demunists point to, to obscure what shit the rest of the bill is.

One dimes worth of difference is all there is between Democrats and Republicans. They're too cozy. They like each other too much. They're too deferential to their "colleagues."

When even the waffling Joseph Cao and the Maine Twins and Voinovich voted this shit down, how can you say that? It was 100% no. Total no. Absolute no.

I want some fighters. People who will vote no and fucking mean it. How do you think Scott Brown got elected? The moment Scott Brown votes with a Democrat on any issue - any issue - he's done for.

News flash: Brown already voted for more Porkulus.

113 Yes, someguy is a troll.  Seen him spouting stupid democrat stuff here all the time trying to disguise it as some form of republican.

Figures. What an asshole.

114

Trust is hard to regain.

115 If 'replace' is all the things we have wanted for years now, isn't that a good thing?  If it isn't, then it isn't, but just 'repeal' is going to be a hard (impossible) sell to the mind-numbed know-nothings who don't want to wind up back at the point of worrying about losing their job because their overpriced insurance goes with it.  There has to be a move forward, not just a move back-- but, yes, it has to be the right move forward.

Or we could just legalize polygamy and people could get married in huge health-care combines, with families of hundreds on one plan.

116 We want the government off our ass and out of our wallets.

Then you can't vote Republican.

Mitch McConnell wants to keep ObamaCare ... just replace the bad parts with less bad parts, but ... keep it nonetheless.

So, Republicans today - at least Mitch McConnell - have joined Democrats in the underlying concept of forcing people to buy health insurance.

117

Why don't they say they're going to reconcile BIG fucking deal! Bumblefuck's health care law with new provisions??

If its good for the goose after all...

118 I think now that the Republican patrician blue-bloods are looking at this thing they see the amount of power THEY could wield over the American people when the Republicans have the majorities.

If the McCain wing of the Republican party gets handed all this dictatorial power, I don't for one second think they will repeal it.

That is why we need the conservatives to control the committees and drive the movement. Then fire and replace the RINOS with more conservative candidates in time.

119

There can be no admission that any art of O-Care is good.  If there are good ideas, they should be claimed as Republican ideas and promoted as a new and alternative law.  Competition across state lines, preexisting condition stuff, all part of a new bill, and done right.  No mandates, no public plan, no windfall to the fucking insurance companies.

Not "Amend to get it Better" but true "REPEAL and Pass our own damn plan since the D's fucked up so bad"

120 Bullshit someguy. Your premise is faulty.

121

News flash: Brown already voted for more Porkulus.

He voted on the jobs bill. I don't even think it was the final vote. We've been over this, too. His constituents in MA supported that vote and elected him to stop healthcare. Hopefully, he will have an opportunity to repeal and reform it in the future. I'd take him over Senator Coakley any day.

122 Then you can't vote Republican.

Right, so we should just stay home.  Right, someguy, is that your point, douche?

123 Damn it. Italics @ News flash...

124

No, morons, someguy is not a moby or a troll (if it's the original someguy, which it sounds like), he's longer term than most of you. 

He's pissed at McConnell, and if that's the case, instead of circular firing squadding someguy, maybe we should see wha tthe fuck McConnel said to piss him off.

125

112 All Michele Bachmann talked about was the 16000 IRS agents that would be used to enforce, and so did Paul Ryan.

But I agree with you: overall, that piece was not widely broadcasted. So we had better get to work in our own personal networks.

126 I think someguy is wanting to start the Ralph Nader 3rd Party Revolution. lol

127 News flash: Brown already voted for more Porkulus.

So did 12 other Republicans in the Senate. The jobs bill won bi-partisan approval. It was not controversial in the Senate.

But it raises an interesting question: What's the difference between the Republican Party and the Democrat Party again?

128 If the McCain wing of the Republican party gets handed all this dictatorial power, I don't for one second think they will repeal it.

^
iawtc

129

I got It! I got It! How bout'  Repeal and big fuckin deal?

130 McConnell is just trying to steal some Maverickiness from McCain, someguy.

Don't throw all the progress we could make into a third party sinkhole is all I'm saying.

We're pissed too.

131 He's pissed at McConnell, and if that's the case, instead of circular firing squadding someguy, maybe we should see wha tthe fuck McConnel said to piss him off.

Sorry, not buying it.  You think the govt should hand out money too.  I don't care how long he has been here, them there is dem talking points.

132

82 Unless by replace they  mean totally privatize all government healthcare programs, enacting draconian tort reform, and allowing the free trade of insurance across state lines.
Posted by: Iblis

YES, YOU STUPID FUCK. WHAT THE FUCK DID YOU THINK IT MEANS!!!!!!

Well, since McConnell hasn't said what he means by it, or what the GOP leadership in general means by it, some of us would like to get them on record.  This is the fucking GOP we're talking about here.  Remember McCain-Feingold?  Medicare part D?  Comprehensive immigration reform?  You apparently think you can read McConnell's mind and he thinks just like you do, but that's the same kind of thinking that got Obama the Centrist elected president.  Better to get these bastards on the record with specific promises and definitions of "repeal" than find out next January that we were the rubes this time.

Posted by: Dave R. at March 23, 2010 03:10 PM (LMn96)

Dave R., exactly. This is a great, once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to save healthcare with privatization, free trade, tort, etc., but we have to be super-vigilant to pressure the GOP to do it, and not cave in with some wussy compromise. Do not trust them. But don't give up on them entirely either. Just pressure the crap out of them all summer to make sure they understand it's our way or else. 

133

I would run on that. Repealing something that is going to instantly cause massive distortions in price and availabilty.

2.7 million people now qualify for healthcare in NYC alone. What is that going to do to wait times? The people that are paying for their insurance are going to get squeezed out. Let's not forget some doctors won't take subsidised patients because they are alreay moving away from Medicare because of the ridiculous delays in payments.This scenario will play out in all the major cities.

Don't be afraid to run on repeal. Our government will most likely not have anything set up by the time November rolls around. And if they do it pretty much screws anyone living in a major city. Lots of new patients and not a single doctor added...

134 I think someguy is wanting to start the Ralph Nader 3rd Party Revolution.

No, I want to avoid that.

If Republicans do not turn hard right, the Tea Party will be created and succeed in empowering Democrats for the next 50 years.

It's that simple.

Republicans cannot win by being Democrats. They will only succeed in creating a third party if they attempt that.

135       They say the new healthcare bill will be nearly impossible to get rid of because entitlements once enacted are difficult to repeal. Historically this has been true, but the country has now reached a point of financial and economic exhaustion that cannot be ignored or gimmicked away. With trillions of new  expenditures in combination with trillions more in current liabilities, the United States is on a collision course with reality that will eventually result in economic collapse.  

136 I think it's going to come down to the States killing this thing and not the politicians.

But the Feds still keep the taxes.  That's the boat the whole "the states will save us" crowd keeps missing.  Your state can "save" you from the mandates and ostensible benefits all it wants; you're still going to take it in the pooper on the taxes.

Even if all 50 states tell Black Brezhnev to shove Commiecare, those hundreds of thousands of new bureaucrats in those 100+ new bureaucracies still need to be paid their grossly outsized salaries and get their ridiculous Mandarin bennie packages.  There could not be a single person covered and not a health care professional or insurance company left to regulate into oblivion, but these worthless leeches still need to eat.  Forever and ever.

137 McConnell is just trying to steal some Maverickiness from McCain.

Why is John McCain even in the War Room?

He fucking lost. His ideas lost. His strategy lost. He lost.

Retire him. Until then, keep the doddering old fool the fuck out of the War Room and out of substantive policy discussions.

138 Gimme, Gimme, Gimme.  I want my stuff.  Those republicans are bad.  They must turn to the right and gimme, gimme, gimme.

139

112 All Michele Bachmann talked about was the 16000 IRS agents that would be used to enforce, and so did Paul Ryan.

This works...Its what got the attention of the blue-haired dopes in my office. I mention the IRS policing this mess and all of the sudden The biggest loser and dancing with the stars did'nt seem so important. The IRS sends chills up peoples spine.

 

140 But it raises an interesting question: What's the difference between the Republican Party and the Democrat Party again?

youtube DOT com /watch?v=m4qy3bGYii8

youtube DOT com /watch?v=iGKkPEvD2OM

141 The Republican party is our only hope. Our only tool. And is ours to mold as we see fit. Groups like the Teaparty can influence who the party runs. We need to get more involved in their organization nationally. There is no other possible way to make this happen. The Republican party is there, with the whole apparatus of a century+ of politics. We can take the party over, just like George Soros and the unions have inserted communists into the Democratic party.  RINO's exist because we have allowed them to exist in the party. Please note how the Democrats have weeded out any pro-life people in their party.

142 But wouldn't it be nice when the Demunists snivel about what our alternative is, we have one,

The GOP has already presented their ideas, a thousand times.  The fact is that the federal government has no business in the individual health insurance business.  The alternative to Democrat uncontrolled government is Constitutional federalism and each government staying in its place.

As to needing to respond to the treasonous Dems, screw them.  One doesn't negotiate with terrorists, and the dems are terrorists.

143 sock off!

144 McCain is bad. McConnell is bad.  Brown is bad. Democrats are good campaigners. Pence is bad. Ryan is bad.  We need to kick out all republicans and go to the right with democrats.  I need my free stuff.

145 I like free stuff. When I get my Republican voucher, I'm going to go buy some earrings like the First Wookie, and then I'm going to demand more free stuff.

146 "I don't care how long he has been here, them there is dem talking points."

GuyFawkes,

What is your solution to this problem?

Mine is: Repeal it. But if we're going to replace it, then replace it with a voucher that lets any person buy insurance at any company in the country.

That is an extremely conservative position. It removes from the Democrats the weapon they use against us: CASH MONEY.

Democrats are going to spend the money. We can't stop them (apparently, given McConnell's statements today). So, my idea is to buy votes with that money by telling Americans we'll give you the money directly to do buy insurance directly (in addition to tort reform and eliminating state boundaries and 10,000 other subtleties that you don't have to run on but which can be in the bill once Republicans take over).

Those are hardly Democrat talking points.

147 Please note how the Democrats have weeded out any pro-life people in their party.

It's an Achilles heel. The tide of public opinion is turning against abortion.

148

140

Right - which is why you never heard the presentent or Cackler of the House EVER mentioning it in their mad sprint to disaster.

All we heard was: Oh noes!!! Republicans are in the pockets of the evil INSURANCE COMPANIES...

Yes of course, genius, that's why all the Republicans voted against a bill that would require every citizen to buy - what - HEALTH INSURANCE...

fucking dopes and idiot shit for brains.

149 "I don't care how long he has been here, them there is dem talking points."

True. We've seen them take over names we haven't seen in a while, only to get busted when the real moron turned out to be just lurking.

150
The GOP has already presented their ideas, a thousand times.  The fact is that the federal government has no business in the individual health insurance business.  The alternative to Democrat uncontrolled government is Constitutional federalism and each government staying in its place.





progressoverpeace, yes. and i swear i'm not trying to be facetious, i'm sincerely asking, can't the "Replace" part of this strategy be replacing it with federalism, i.e. getting rid of all the national red tape and allowing free movement of insurance plans across the states? i mean, isn't this a great opportunity to get exactly what you want? if we repeal it and go back to the status quo, that isn't federalism, because of all the bs laws that currently exist and infringe on the free market in healthcare.

151 It seems that this might be better argued from several fronts.
1) the bill's restrictions on personal freedom (concretely listed i.e. IRS snooping, bank access, privacy, govt health/exercise/diet restrictions to constrain costs, the actual meaning of Congress' unlimited power via Commerce Clause & Article 1 Section 8 intro clause, etc)
2) the bill's corruption and favortism (i.e. Congressional exemptions, union exemptions, bureaucrat cronyism on treatment, the House process, backroom deals, etc.)
3) the meaningful boundaries of the philosophy behind the bill - i.e where does the govt's power end in our society? To food, housing, clothing, air, cars, job? Do you own yourself?
4) the bill's economic impact - each premium increase or tax rise must be carefully estimated and concretely expressed (i.e. 300% premium increase coming in Jan, etc) because the Dems have rigged the pain around the election cycles.

Just thinking out loud...

152 That is an extremely conservative position. It removes from the Democrats the weapon they use against us: CASH MONEY.

I linked the video that shoots theory that to hell. The Democrat argument is that Republicans want to do nothing, while Democrats are trying to do what they can, even if you have to pay alot of people off with the taxpayers' money. "Let us keep the bribe money and give out vouchers" will go over like a fart in a space suit. Repeal and Replace aka Contract With America 2.

153 I'll give you my fucking solution. Yes, Repeal it, along with 75% of the other fucking federal laws. Other than protect us from enemies and ensure interstate and foreign trade, I don't want the govt to do anything for me or to me.

Instead of a voucher, how bout they lower taxes and let me use my money my way, instead of how they want me to spend it.  How bout that?  You want a voucher given by the govt, get a food stamp.

Democrats are going to spend the money. We can't stop them.  If they aren't there, we sure the fuck can.

Buying votes is the acme of a democratic talking point.  Go troll somewhere else. You don't have a clue about conservatism.

154 reginaldL

I'm wondering about strong constitutional arguments, too, because Democrats seem quite defensive on this point and keep bringing up the commerce clause. Must be BS, since the administration went after the Dept of Commerce before anything else. This was where Obama wanted a Republican patsy while he put ACORN in charge of the census.

155 progressoverpeace, yes. and i swear i'm not trying to be facetious, i'm sincerely asking, can't the "Replace" part of this strategy be replacing it with federalism,

Posted by: Adrian at March 23, 2010 03:31 PM (5V4wO)

Sounds good to me.  The federal government does have the job of making regular interstate commerce of insurance, but that is a very light touch.  But that is, basically, what the GOP has been proposing. 

Better to just have it all be "Repeal" and worry about anything else afterwards.  People shouldn't lose sight of the fact that most people were fine with their insurance - something like 85% and they would all be happy with interstate markets.

Even the demwits admit that everyone was getting care before.  They are happy to drone on about how everyone gets care in the emergency rooms, which we all pay for.  But, interestingly, the savings from not having to pay for that is nowhere to be seen in their bill.  They only steal money from Medicare, not Medicaid, which is where a lot of the uninsured expenses are found.  In fact, they steal from Medicare to put more into Medicaid.  Crazy.  And no one called them on it.  Of course, there were so many other problems with their awful, un-Constitutional legislation ...

156 I have a small, growing hope the Reps actually mean it. Not one of them sold out to Obama for any amount. This is a good sign.

Repeal it. Repeal the EPA and the Energy and Ed depts.

Starve the Federal beast with lower taxes.

Free market for insurance carriers.

157 Calls for Tort reform is stupid knee-jerk crap akin to busting on Insurers for not giving away insurance for free. Everything you know about it is a hegemonic lie, it is not the driver of high costs in our system, except to the extend it makes doctors treat you like an individual instead of a member of a herd.

158 Democrats are going to spend the money. We can't stop them.  If they aren't there, we sure the fuck can.

Gee, that sounds lovely. Like everything they said about the Bush years, but true this time. The media would never point that out.

159 Go troll somewhere else. You don't have a clue about conservatism.

Here's what I know about it:

John McCain ain't one.

Mitch McConnell ain't one.

Michale Steele ain't one.

Mitt Romney ain't one.

Can you name one conservative left in the Republican Party?

160 You know what else would be great? Amnesty! And raising taxes on the middle class! And welfare for everyone!

161 Can you name one conservative left in the Republican Party?


Jim DeMint

Tom Coburn

Sarah Palin

Paul Ryan

Dick Cheney

Liz Cheney

162 Can you name one conservative left in the Republican Party?

Me, for one.  But you won't make 2.

163 Is Liz Cheney on the short list to be the next President?

Cuz I just looked at the list and it only has one name on it: Mitt Romney

164 SarahW, you wouldn't be a malpractice lawyer by any chance?

165 I can't get behind vouchers for fucking medical insurance.

That turns it into a right as much as we think of education as a right -- something the gov't provides but that we can pay more for to get better quality.

And realistically, that's the best thing that "healthcare" is going to be nowadays.  Some good doctors operating on a cash basis, the rest the equivalent of public schools for your medical needs.  Good in some places, abysmal in others.

Again, realistically, that's what's likely.  But it is not something to campaign on!

166 Cuz I just looked at the list

Your list only includes B. Obama.  We keep our list away from democrats.

167 Cuz I just looked at the list and it only has one name on it: Mitt Romney

Romney is effectively dead with this new healthcare bill passed. Game over for Mitt. He knows it, and everybody does.

168


as I've said elsewhere, everyone hates (plaintiffs') lawyers until they need one.

169 The "good" things could have appeared in a bipartisan bill and are relatively insignificant. The real issues are the loss of individual freedoms to a totalitarian type government, the dictatorial mandate to buy insurance whether you want it or not, the inability to select your doctor of choice and ultimately the care you want and need, the destruction of the worlds highest quality healthcare system, the reduction of funds and quality care for seniors, and, the unsustainable cost of this socialist aberration. Obama knows what he is doing . . . he's throwing a few small but succulent bones to the masses hopping for the usual glut of admiration. Don't fall for the tactics of this charlatan lest you allow him to destroy the very foundation of the Republic.

170 Well, tort reform would lessen the amount of testing taht everyone complains about. The docs have to test you out the wazoo in order to cover their asses from the lawyers if they miss something.

171 Even Jim DeMint is saying "repeal," period should be a litmus test for GOP candidates.  There's simply no reason to give away the store at this stage of the game.  We need to negotiate for as much as we can, and that includes inside the GOP.  If you think "repeal and replace" makes a good slogan, fine, but there's absolutely no connection between it being a good slogan and McConnell and other moderate Republicans using "replace" to mean what you would like it to mean.  Could be tort reform and cross-state purchases, could be a kinder, gentler Obamacare.  And with McCain and Graham at the table I don't like those odds.

172

Just REPEAL the damn Bill.  Repeal TYRANNY with LIBERTY.  WITH JUST WHAT does one "replace" CANCER?!  HEALTH.

173 Be prepared for the new campaign to soften resistence and break the spirits of the opposition. Besides "No entitlement is ever undone" --

Let's be real. This healthcare bill isn't perfect, but it's similar to the plan established by Mitt Romney in MA. Mitt Romney (likely 2012 Pres nominee) keeps insisting his plan in MA is different than this health care bill and he's right. His plan covers abortions!

Don't kid yourself. The Republican opposition to this bill is purely political.

p.s. I'm a registered independent

174 172 and 173, see 141. It's not a new concept.

175 as I've said elsewhere, everyone hates (plaintiffs') lawyers until they need one.

And as I've said, that is proof positive that the legal profession is running a protection racket.

176

And as I've said, that is proof positive that the legal profession is running a protection racket.

Needing half the profession to protect us from the other half = 100% employment.

177

The theme should be REPEAL and REBUILD.

People are angry this day about Obamacare passing but they will be even more mad when, come November, the unemployment rate is still 10% and the deficit is $1.5 trillion dollars. Obama blew almost the entire 10 year budget for Obamacare in one year on Porkulus.

But realisticly the Republicans could just run on I'M NOT A DEMOCRAT and still win massively.

Personally, I would like to see someone run on repealing the income tax (both corporate and personal) in favor of delinking the payroll tax from SSI and upping it to 10%/10% employee/employer and 10% on investment income or some other measure.

178 Republicans can run on whatever they feel like. However, Conservatives better be sounding the bell on the whole host of disasters waiting to happen, and have a cogent story on how to solve the problems.

This health care business is just one part of the story that needs to be retold.

179 Calls for Tort reform is stupid knee-jerk crap akin to busting on Insurers for not giving away insurance for free.

Everything you know about it is a hegemonic lie, it is not the driver of high costs in our system, except to the extend it makes doctors treat you like an individual instead of a member of a herd.

Posted by: SarahW at March 23, 2010 03:40 PM (Z4T49)

Newsletter?

180 I'll go for Repeal and Replace. Why? Because we get offer up our own solutions, better solutions, to fix this shit. Tort reform. Cross-state policy purchasing. Deregulation. No mandates. Etc. Just saying "Repeal!" isn't going to work out this Nov. ---------------------------------------------------------- How bout we repeal it and replace it with nothing? I'm all for fixing the healthcare system.... it needed fixing before the debates began. But in order to 'repeal and replace' we first have to REPEAL. Ryan had a plan to continue funding Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security. They laughed at thin. Well liberals... that was our compromise. This time around, you get nothing. I say we run the same table--The American populace has two choices: either live short miserable lives in the Bankrupt Statist States of America (because that's what it will come to) or toss off the yoke of entitlements completely. They were wrong to begin with, still wrong now, and will most definitely kill the republic slowly if not quickly. We either live in the land of the free and the brave, or the land of the destitute and enslaved. Take your pick... because you can have one or the other, but not both. Recent experiences have taught us this. I cannot imagine... for the life of me, why someone would NOT vote for a hard liner conservative if that was the choice. Heck... that was kind of the choice in 1980... and some hard liner conservative ran the table that year by running an unabashedly conservative campaign. We can do this again and bury the libs for good by dismantling the system they created to keep themselves in perpetuity. I say go for it. The republic depends on it.

181 The one line fix for a lot of health care woes --

"Health care providers may deduct the unreimbursed portion of charity care from their income."

Eliminates the ability of Democrats to parade charity care anecdotes in front of the cameras.  People in need would get top quality charity care. 

Provides a check and balance against underpaying (bankrupt) Medicare, Medicaid, and SCHIP programs.

Providers could develop their own sliding scale programs to provide quality care to those in need customized to their own community. 

Puts doctor patient relationship first -- politicians somewhere else...

Simple -- easy to understand.

182

Here is what "repeal and replace" out of the mouths of Senate Republicans means:

"There is non-controversial stuff here like the preexisting conditions exclusion and those sorts of things," the Texas Republican said. "Now we are not interested in repealing that. And that is frankly a distraction."
-John Cornyn, R-Texas

So moderate!  So reasonable!  Who could argue against excluding pre-existing conditions?  Well, for one thing, we wouldn't have to argue against it if traitors like this guy had stuck to their guns and backed Steve King's move for a full repeal.  That's where the public mood is at anyway, and giving that up is an unforced error.  For another thing, even an idea like this that's tempting to weak-minded conservatives contains its own poison pill.  If you can't exclude pre-existing conditions, that means free-riders can stay off insurance until they need it, then sign up.  It strikes at the actuarial heart of insurance as a concept.  If private insurance can survive it at all, it will be jacking up premiums.  And I'll be prohibited by law from negotiating a cheap, high-deductible policy which doesn't cover pre-existing conditions even if that's what I want.  That puts Senator Cornyn, R-Fuckyouistan, on the same side as my state-level democrat party in imposing arbitrary mandates that actually keep me uninsured.  And I'm supposed to rally behind him?  Screw that.

183 I'm so pissed off I missed the most obvious and important point from the above quote.  "Repeal and replace" really means no full repeal, just a partial roll-back.  And if this is the GOP's opening bid, they're going to settle for a business as usual, half-way to what the Dems asked for compromise.

184 Chaz, that would be great, but they'll say that Reagan never reduced the scale of government, that rich people paid less taxes and everything went to defense including buying guns for Saddam Hussein. You need a viable alternative that even independents can understand.

185 "Repeal and replace" really means no full repeal, just a partial roll-back.

No, it doesn't. It means when you promise to kill it, the majority of Americans who still feel the system needs reformed knosw that you are proposing ideas instead of taking something away from them. Because something will be better than nothing for them, and they've already tried nothing, in their minds.

186 183

OK that's a good point.

187 Ryan had a plan to continue funding Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security. They laughed at thin. Well liberals... that was our compromise.

I linked the video upthread. It was an alternative, not a compromise, and we've been having this debate since Nixon v. Kennedy.

188 I'm sickened but not surrprised by all the so-called conservatives endorsing Repeal and Replace. It just shows that many of you are cowards who are unwilling to actually stand for those conservative values you claim to espouse.

I don't want socialized medicine and it doesn't matter if the Republican Party thinks that the way to victory is by proving it can do socialized medicine better than the Democrats. I'm against it because of my principals and not because of what party is pushing this crap.

It's because of fellow Republicans like you that the Republican Party is nothing more than Democrat-Lite. I'm sure that many people here will find this comment offensive, but the truth hurts and that's just a fact of life.

 

189  So, Drew... what yer sayin' here is that government controlled health care is really, really bad...unless it's controlled by Republicans.

 ...idiots...

190

And that is frankly a distraction."
-John Cornyn, R-Texas

Goodbye, senator.

191

Tattoo De Plane, you're engaging in wish fulfilment if you think that's what it means to GOP senators and leadership.  It means that to you, it may even mean that to the general public, but I just freaking quoted a GOP Senator to whom it means a partial rollback and compromise.  And if you're right about the general public, you have to ask how they're going to respond when they get hung out to dry by the Cornyns of the Senate.

To be plain, I do support real free-market health care reforms.  I want expanded HSAs, tort reform, purchase across state lines and other stuff to replace the monstrosity that just got passed.  So I'm there on substance, I just don't see how you get from there to trusting GOP leadership to be your BFF without some specific commitments.  I'm suggesting that when the GOP's opening bid is "repeal and replace" and nobody asks them what they mean by replace, the end result is going to be a partial repeal and acceptance of the least worst provisions.

192 187:  Thanks!  I typed my last screed before seeing that.

193 Posted by: Warren Bonesteel at March 23, 2010 05:50 PM (wmtV/)

And I wrote that where exactly?

194 Posted by: Warren Bonesteel at March 23, 2010 05:50 PM (wmtV/)

Actually, I kind of wrote the exact opposite. Not at some distant point in the past but, um, in this very fucking post.

As someone who doesn't think the federal government actually has a role in this issue, I gotta say I like King's approach.

195

Ahh, the GOP.  Its fine with ever-increasing socialism, it just doesn't like to look like the ones enacting it.  King gets it, McConnell's office window insurance premiums probably just went up.

196

@109: "But, historically speaking, you do fire the generals you have until you get the performance you want from the generals you want."

No.  The Romans had it right: decimation.  You and your buddies draw lots, and the winners beat the loser to death.  Hell, the Germanic tribes did them one better: they'd kill your entire extended family and then off you.

Amazingly enough, in both cases, their fighters were quite motivated.

Used properly, pour encourages les autres works.  It can't be your only tool, but it is a damned effective part of a kit.

I don't suppose we can run around clipping our Senators and Representatives, but more of the same epic failure from them must result in some form of pain (removal of leadership positions, committee spots, etc.) and break up their staff, too.  We're stuck with the elected losers for a set period.  The unelected ones can be disposed of sooner.

197

@122: "His constituents in MA supported that vote and elected him to stop healthcare"

So he's already a total failure.  Even for a Republican, that was quick.

198

@136: "the country has now reached a point of financial and economic exhaustion that cannot be ignored or gimmicked away. With trillions of new  expenditures in combination with trillions more in current liabilities, the United States is on a collision course with reality that will eventually rapidly result in economic collapse."

Fixed.

Of course, it's gonna collapse on the GOPs watch, so who's gonna get the blame?

199 So he's already a total failure.  Even for a Republican, that was quick.

I have no idea why we're bad-mouthing a Republican who won the Kennedy  seat and hasn't really voted on anything. Yeah, blame Scott Brown for this healthcare bill, blockhead.

200 They should run on "repeal and work on the economy" because that's what people want. No big new entitlement, no year of work on a stupid health care bill, but JOBS DAMMIT.

201

@151: "i swear i'm not trying to be facetious, i'm sincerely asking, can't the "Replace" part of this strategy be replacing it with federalism"

Federalism got mortally wounded in 1865.  FDR cut off life-support in the 30s.  It ain't coming back.  It's not mostly dead, it's all dead.  Go through it's pockets and look for loose change.

202 Gah, "its pockets".

203 So I'm there on substance, I just don't see how you get from there to trusting GOP leadership to be your BFF without some specific commitments.

John Boehner and Paul Ryan have been explicit about wanting to repeal this, what the GOP alternative is specifically (and there are 30 bills in circulation) and the precedent exists saying very clearly where Democrat and Republican ideas are complete opposites. One means a takeover of our healthcare. Have youu heard any Republicans talking like this?

204 but JOBS DAMMIT.

The government doesn't create jobs, but this healthcare bill kills them. Killing the bill will take care of jobs. Replacing the bill will meet the demands of the Americans who recognize the system is broken but know Obama is full of it.

205

@185: "You need a viable alternative that even independents can understand"

Bit of a problem in a nation of semi-literate peabrains, isn't it?  That's why the Left wins: "Free Stuff!" and "Charge it to the Underhills" work very, very well as slogans to an idiot public.

You wanna save the country? You're going to have to either actively cull the herd, deport a big chunk of the herd, or cut all payments and let the dependent part of the herd starve - literally, starve.  No matter what, you're gonna get some serious "domestic unrest".

We're stuck because we need an almost overnight fix to a problem that has been carefully manufactured for 80 years.

206

@200: "I have no idea why we're bad-mouthing a Republican who won the Kennedy  seat and hasn't really voted on anything. Yeah, blame Scott Brown for this healthcare bill, blockhead."

Try some reading comprehension, fuckwit.  The original quote said he was elected to stop healthcare.  Healthcare passed.  Since what he was specifically elected to stop passed, he failed.  Since healthcare, which he was specifically elected to stop, passed very quickly after he took his seat, he failed very quickly.

There was no blame cast.  Anyone who thought one newly-minted Senator could stop something that the entire American Left was willing into existence was more than a bit delusional.

207 The Republican position should be " This law is fatally flawed. A much better law can only be enacted after it is repealed. We therefore will first concentrate on repeal and will offer a replacement after that is accomplished. Repeal, then replace."

208 Since what he was specifically elected to stop passed, he failed.

Except it passed before he was elected but other than yeah, he failed.