|
| | HOME | CONTACT | OLD STUFF | POLLWATCH: LATEST POLLS | RSS FEED | |
|
ADVERTISING
STATE BY STATE POLLS
Alabama
Alaska Arizona Arkansas California Colorado Connecticut Delaware District of Columbia Florida Georgia Hawaii Idaho Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maine Maryland Massachusetts Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska Nevada New Hampshire New Jersey New Mexico New York North Carolina North Dakota Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Rhode Island South Carolina South Dakota Tennessee Texas Utah Vermont Virginia Washington West Virginia Wisconsin Wyoming
Search
|
TX: Perry Leads Hutchison By Double DigitsScott Rasmussen has a new poll out this morning for Texas that shows sitting Governor Rick Perry is holding a double-digit lead in the Republican gubernatorial primary over Kay Bailey Hutchison. GOVERNOR – TEXAS – GOP PRIMARY (Rasmussen) This poll was done November 11th among 798 likely voters.
363 Responses to “TX: Perry Leads Hutchison By Double Digits” |
ADVERTISING
I READ 'EM
I RECOMMEND 'EM |
She’s toast.
Stay put or join the private sector.
I have to admit, Perry has made all the right moves recently. She never had a great chance in my opinion, but this now looks absolutely foolish.
2009 races were a yawn .. hopefully we can have some exciting races in 2010.
I’m very curious to see if Hutchison follows through on her stated intention to resign her senate seat. The primary is only 3.5 months away (first Tuesday in March 2010). I think resigning would help her by demonstrating commitment to the Gov. race, but you have to wonder if she really wants to give up a safe senate seat for a less than 50-50 shot in the Gov. race.
She thought it was a slam dunk. She thought she’d have a huge advantage in money. Perry will match her dollar per dollar. Perry will beat her like a mule in the primary. Book it.
I don’t think she runs. Also, bugging out in the middle of the healtcare debate doesn’t look so good with GOP primary voters who hate Obamacare.
She’s toast if she runs. I don’t think she does.
Phil, if she gives up the Senate, does Mike Williams have a shot down there.
A terrific Black Conservative who had a great speech at the GOP Convention.
I wouldn’t say she is toast but what helped Perry is the Medina numbers going down.
The Palin book tour sounds like it will be a whinefest.
NY Times profiles John Thune… Great Article!!!
“And now as they look to the future of their party, and who might lead it in 2012, the name John Thune keeps popping up.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/13/opinion/13brooks.html?_r=1
Medina had little to do with it, what was she 6 or 7 % before? Kay went down, and Rick went up. Matches up quite well with what I see in the DFW paper headlines and the evening local news shows. Rick is playing quite well to the voters at the moment. Does not hurt that Texas finances are in great shape, and there is even a funded “rainy day” fund in case of unforeseen emergency. Who would have thought that government could be run like you run your own finances? Helps to have real conservatives in the legislature for sure.
Does Thune help in the electoral college? From a small state that is red. He is a Giant Killer and maybe would help in the Midwest.
Thune will never need Federal Funding and will raise dollar for dollar with Hussein.
Every Right Winger in this country will send in $$$ because he took down Daschle.
Felix,
I hear Williams is one of three or 4 contenders. I wouldn’t say he was the favorite, but he’d be extremely popular with Perry’s base. I love the guy.
Thing is, Williams isn’t part of the GOP establishment here. Those candidates would be David Dewhurst, lt governor and Greg Abbot, state attorney general. I don’t know which way Perry would go. He and Dewhurst haven’t been very close allies in the past so I’d be shocked if he got the nod. Abbot is pretty good and would win statewide pretty easily.
I’m pulling for Williams although I predict Kay Bailout won’t resign and run for governor when all the dust settles.
Bill Clinton proved, in my opinion, that beyond a doubt the electability of a candidate trumps the electoral college gain.
Now if Rob Portman was senator of Ohio-right now or Ric Santorum was still US senator of PA that would be another matter.
If we need a Texan or a Floridian to hold those states in 2012 it might be 270 votes would a stretch.
Thune at least is Midwestern and not Southern or Western. I think diversity is a must for the GOP. Now Thune-Jindal would be a dream ticket be it 2012 or 2016.
of course if Huckabee or Romney beat Obama in 2012 who to nominate in 2016 is a real mute point.
did I say that Thune was my perference
Comments:
Palin book tour will could redeem her political career. The O Reilly interview will be issue orientated and could be a huge help to her image. A couple Sunday am shows would put her over the top as well.
Perry has established himself as a “states rights” leader in the nation. He is not afraid to confront the issue. He will be leader in the coming years against this crazy liberal takeover of the USA.
John Thune is the top GOP Senate potential national leader and Mike Pence is the top GOP House national leader. With Ryan a close second.
Daniels, Perry, Palin and Jindal are the top State leaders in the GOP.
Within the next year or two all of these will pass Romney, Huck and Gingrich as party leaders.
Doesn’t matter if Thune is from SD. He’ll run better than McCain everywhere including the suburbs. He’s an extremely attractive candidate. The best our side has.
I think Gingrich is all wind at this point.
he Palin book tour sounds like it will be a whinefest.
Comment by Chekote — November 13, 2009 @ 10:34 am
Yeah it will be all the whining of you Palin-haters that can’t stand the fact that she has bestselling book.
I don’t know what KBH is playing at, but Perry’s anti-washington rhetoic is hugely popular in Texas, and KBH is considered to be part of the problem. Mind you, if KBH runs for senate, she’ll be reelected in a walk, but as Phil says, she’s earned a lot of ire from rank and file republicans in Texas for even possibly making her seat vunerable especially in the middle of the Obamacare fight.
KBH GET OVER IT! This is not your year.
-Polaris
#18 Yep. Seems to me that Gov Palin will finally have a chance to say her piece unedited and unconcered about what “handlers” will have to say or think.
It would seem that the Couric disaster was due at least as much due to McCain’s Staff mishandling the issue as Palin. Couric is NOT the friend of any conservative candidate. That being so, if I were in Palin’s shoes, I would never do an interview with Couric without at least one of my OWN people doing the recording as well (and make sure that Couric knows it). If Couric then declines, make it blindingly public WHY Couric declined.
-Polaris
Rdel, Phil fine points.
I am sure Rahm Emanuel and Soros are going thru Thune’s garbage cans right now.
Couric sister was a ulta liberal State Senator in VA who dies of Cancer.
The Couric family is huge Pro-abortion
That would be the key on a Thune Ticket, but would have to take a woman or a minority to balance it?
Obama is already laying out his focus for 2010. After obamacare & Cap -Trade is passed in 2009. He will want to focus in 2010 on the deficit and job creation.
What a joke.
I might add that Reid has not introduced a bill to the senate yet. There are reports that he wants a 1.45% tax surcharge on all income over 250K per year. This will include dividends/interest/capital gains/business income or lottery winners or anything.
This is to offset doing away with the Cadillac health plan surtax. Its seems that for chief executive that has a cadillac health plan there are 10 union workers who have one. Its okay to tax bankers but not auto workers.
So reid is still working on taxes
A peanut farmer from Georgia and a Governor from Arkansas are two reasons why the State is not as important and the man and the message. John is a telegenic, and thoughtful guy who would be a huge improvement over the current ditherer.
#35 My pet Airdale would be an improvement over the current ditherer, and I don’t have an Airdale.
-Polaris
Polaris,
Pride may keep her from withdrawing from the governor’s race. However, she could save some face but just announce she’s staying in the senate due to the importance of the healthcare fight or something such as that.
If she does run she’s going to have to reach out to expand the primary electorate by reaching out to a more “moderate” group of voters – Dems and indies. That pisses off GOP conservatives and further helps Perry.
BTW, indies are really angry with Washington down here and I’m not sure she’d get the indy support she’d have in any other year.
Your dead pet might be an improvement. LOL
#9 — EXCELLENT!!! He’s my pick for 2012.
In regards to the details coming out regarding the 2008 campaign in Palin’s book, these unnamed sources that are trying to diffuse the damage are firing away with a anonymous assault. These jokers should never be allowed to run a campaign again. You hear that Steve Schmidt and Nicole Wallace? I wasn’t aware that Nicole Wallace had worked at CBS prior to joining the McCain campaign. That would have thrown up red flags right there. Then again, this was the ultimate RINO presidential campaign with the exception of the VP candidate. No wonder it went down in flames.
#27 Oh I know. NOTHING to do with Washington DC plays well at all with Texas (Texas Indies even less than GOP) except in places like the People’s Republic of Austin, and Gov Perry has positioned himself just right to ride the popular wave INCLUDING his talk of secession (ridiculed nationally but very popular in Texas).
The only way (and this is part of the Texas Dem game plan), for KBH to win the primary is for huge numbers of Democrats to cross-over and vote for her in the GOP primary.
If it turns out that this is what happens, KBH’s political career is over. She’ll never get elected governor or anything else after that.
-Polaris
See what Charlie Cook sees and then apply your own assessment not a loyal Democrat’s assessment:
http://moelane.com/2009/11/12/looking-at-the-cook-competitive-race-chart/
Thune would be GREAT and is my #1 choice. They will attack his “born again” fundamentalist views. He went to BIOLA for undergrad and they will be all over that. He’s got to decide if he wants to be dragged through the mud by the left wing nut jobs ala Sarah Palin.
#31 Grim reading if you are a Dem. Assuming the more pessimistic overal model (need to be at least Dem+0 for a Dem incumbant to hold), we’re looking at a GOP gain of at least 50 seats in the house.
-Polaris
A shame we don’t have more Dem targets here in Texas. Chet (I kiss Nancy’s butt but I’m a conservative at election time) Edwards is the only Dem left to go after in our state.
He’s going to be in for the fight of his life this time.
#35 Doggett is probably the biggest Lib in the state, but since he represents the highly liberal (and gerrymandered) district that includes much of Austin, he’s totally safe.
-Polaris
Our Freedom and Liberty are in DEEP DOO DOO (to quote our esteemed 41st President) if we have a significant part of our population and so-called “leaders” pining for the days of repressive Bolshevekism:
http://www.realclearworld.com/printpage/?url=http://www.realclearworld.com/articles/2009/11/13/the_curious_case_of_communist_nostalgia_97353.html
This tyranny only disappeared 20 years ago and now people are crying for re-enslavement? Madness, utter and sheer madness!
Phil
Not true. Ciro Rodriguez can be had as well. That was a Republican district until just recently.
Here is a good analysis on why Perry is handing KBH her skirt on a platter:
http://realclearpolitics.blogs.time.com/2009/11/13/tx-gov-poll-perrys-anti-dc-campaign-a-winner/
Gary, Clinton and Carter had geographical advantage because they were able to take states in the South, which broke the GOP firewall.
#39 Also Clinton and Carter were considered moderate southerners and moderate southern governors at that.
Carter we all know about. Clinton really did turn out to have moderate instincts once his political life was in jeapordy (after 1994) but IMHO that’s less do with Clinton’s “moderate” nature and more to do with the fact that IMHO Pres Clinton had no moral compass whatsoever.
-Polaris
Here is exactly what everyone wants – more bailouts!:
http://www.nypost.com/f/print/news/opinion/opedcolumnists/phony_fixes_for_the_wall_st_mess_TUl6qy81IAkeE0She4W7CN
As I have said numerous times, Government intervention ALWAYS creates the problem. The FAILURE of Government intervention is then used as JUSITIFCATION for yet MORE INTRUSIVE AND HEAVY-HANDED Government Intervention all while BLAMING/Demonizing the FREE MARKET and individual liberty.
The statist always DEMANDS perfection from the free market but always EXCUSES failures of government intervention!
The cry is to always transfer MORE POWER and cede MORE LIBERTY to the CENTRAL GOVERNMENT and elite politics/technocrats under the illusion that they will provide “security” and “stability” in exchange for our loss of freedom!
The solution to our problems is MORE FREEDOM/LIBERTY and DECENTRALIZATION!
When my RJC group met with KBH in September, she couldn’t give a valid reason to vote Perry out. All she did is talk about Perry raising business taxes (business margin tax) and TXDOT being dictatorial. Weak, weak, weak. And we told her that her rationale for running was weak. She seemed to be taken aback by our brutally honest assessment of her speech.
#42 In that case, KBH can still undo the damage and not run this year for governor. It seems painfully clear that the political winds are not going the way within her party as she expected and that Perry far from being the vunerable incumbant he was last year, now looks pretty much unassailable.
There’s pride and then there’s idiocy, and I think KBH is coming very close to that line now (if not already over it).
-Polaris
#41
So you think I am a KOS plant? I just love the way Eph prenteds that the reason he is not posting here is because of me and not because he was banned. Stay at BJG where dissent is not allowed.
Here is exactly why CrappyCare is designed to fail and collapse into single-payre/socialist medicine in the promised “15 to 20 year” transition period promised by the “dear leader”:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704402404574527493169603118.html
Mandated insurance, one-size-fits all “community rating” schemes, and forced coverage of every medical/mental health procedure on the planet will cause costs to skyrocket and force the young/healthly to forgo buying private insurance!
This is failure by design and, quite predictably, the free market will be blamed!
#43
I am afraid you are right. She seems determined to run and all she will achieve is badly bruise herself and Perry in the process. Honestly, Perry has done nothing to kick him out of office. That is the biggest hurdle she faces.
#44 You seem to take many odd and contradictory positions. In any case, I am trying to ascertain their opinions on what is going on. Continue to vent your hostility if that makes you feel better!
#44 What are you talking about Chek? #41 was one of Wylie’s usual (and generally correct) diatribes against Socialism (and yes the WH is pushing for another so-called ’stimulus’ bill) [The first one worked soooo well....]
Point is, I see nothing in #41 directed at you.
-Polaris
#45
There is no way that they can “free markets” if the Dems pass their bills. The only reason they were able to blame “free markets” for the economic downfall was because Bush called himself a “conservative” while governing as a big government liberal. Now that Obama and the Dems are in charge, such sleight of hands will not be possible.
O-men to freeze public spending?
What type of headline on Yahoo is that? It must be from the bizarro-universe.
Also, a mosque in Houston is upset that they might be seized. They recieved funding from an organization that provides money to Iran according to the FBI.
Their response; “we’re under attack”. Oh, they also seem to post signs with swastikas and Israeli flags intermixed.
Wylie, keep up your good work.
Wylie,
I am talking about your comments at BJG regarding “?”. Let’s leave it there. I am for freedom; however, you have to find a way to bring people who aren’t politically engaged to your camp. The Dems do this not by talking about the merits of socialism as a philosophy. Instead, what they do is tell people that they will solve their problems at no cost to them. All I am saying is that talking about liberty vs. tyranny in the abstract will not attract the indies to your camp.
52…Wylie doesn’t HAVE to DO what YOU tell him to do. The last I checked, this was a free country, and this being an open blog, he can do whatever he wants so long as he doesn’t get banned for violating the rules Dave has established.
Chek,
I do think that the question: “Do you want to put Aunt Susie in jail just because she didn’t want to buy health insurance?” to be a perfectly valid question and one that WILL get Indies on our side. It doesn’t take an expert in rhetoric and logic to point out that if the government can make you buy health insurance or go to jail, they can do it with other things too…..
-Polaris
54…that is a good question, along with the one from the other day….IF gov’t health care is such a wonderful thing, then why does it require the threat of criminalization to force people to comply?
The biggest problem with Wylie’s posts is that he consistently fails to address the current situation i.e., we don’t have the freedom to refuse to pay the medical costs of irresponsible who fail to purchase health care coverage. I have posted this before, but it is worth repeating. I am not free to refuse to pay for other people’s mistakes or irresponsible behavior. We have privatized the decision (i.e. we can’t tell people to purchase health insurance) and socialized the consequences (i.e when people can’t afford to pay for their medical treatment, the rest of us pick up the tab). I want him to address that because frankly, I don’t give a rip if people are made to pick up their share of the tab.
#52 I am following that you took offense at a comment I made reference your postings that I made earlier today at BJG.
Your clarification here makes somewhat more sense.
I agree with you to a point. However, the D do spend alot of time talking about collectivisim/statism in a moral sense too ie “we are all in it together” and “a decent society” etc as some of their “solutions” involve draconian tax hikes and regulations.
I have said repeatedly that “abstract” discussions are not what is needed from our side. Rational explaination about how protection of indvidual rights/liberties/freedoms directly translate into personal wealth/prosperity because they most certainly do.
I say that the GOP and conservatives in general message this poorly and often times do not even try. If we simply talk about who can provide more free goodies thru government intervention we are fighting the political battle on the D terms!
#56 I have said repeatly that worrying about this is utter NONSENSE.
“the costs of others” amount to 1% of total medical costs!
A pittance – a total non issue!
#53
True. But I don’t see why I have to let him get away with saying that I don’t support freedom or that I am a KOS plant just because I make the obvious point that talking about freedom in the abstract is not going to win votes. As Margaret Thatcher said, the trick in politics is make relate principles to current problems.
#37. It WAS a Republican district. It was redrawn by order of the Supreme Court in 2005. It was the one district out of Delay’s redistricting by the legislature that the courts threw out. More Hispanic than it used to be. That’s why Republican Henry Bonilla lost his seat in the first place. It went from 46% to 65% Hispanic with the redraw. Even though Bonilla was Hispanic he was conservative and that did him in with the more liberal redrawn district. He lost Republican suburb areas of San Antonio in the redistricting.
“the costs of others” amount to 1% of total medical costs!
BS. Knova has posted several times that the costs of the uninsured is much higher than that. Ask California and other states how much Medicaid and the cost of covering illegals is affecting their budgets. Let me ask you, oh brilliant one, why have healthcare costs increased at TWICE the rate of inflation?
#60
What? I thought that Hispanics were a natural constituency for the GOP because of our stances on social issues!?!?!?!?!?!??!?!?!
/sarc
#56 Again, this is exactly the same arguement that Obama and Pelosi made for forcing you to purchase private insurance!
Its a minor cost – comparable to what you pay for similar “free riders” in other products/service you buy!
Plus you assume people do not pay their medical bills without health insurance – this is also false!
And finally, Mandatory insurance has been proven a failure in MA, ME, TN etc in attempting to limit this “issue”. Its a failure.
The Obama/Pelosi arguement is a very very weak and easy debunked one.
As #54 puts it, if their huge government intervention into Medical Care and Health Insurance really reduced costs in any meaningful way then it wouldnt have to be compulsary!
Hispanics are in LOVE with the GOP. Or at least that’s what I was told yesterday.
Chek,
OK, bottom line. This is a pass/fail question:
Do you think that a person should go to jail for NOT buying a good or service?
This is a yes or no question. No quibbling. The wrong answer means you are not a conservative and not a republican.
-Polaris
As #54 puts it, if their huge government intervention into Medical Care and Health Insurance really reduced costs in any meaningful way then it wouldnt have to be compulsary!
Because the reimbursements are lower than the actual costs. Again, we are made to pay for their costs. And yet you are insisting that cost of the uninsured (or underinsured) are a mere pittance. I don’t support Obamacare but this current situation where the responsible people are FORCED to pay for the decisions/behavior of the irresponsible people is UNSUSTAINABLE.
Chek,
Please answer my question. It’s a simple yes or no question. No quibbling allowed.
-Polaris
BJG does not allow dissent. I post the same ideas, position and in the same style in every blog. I got banned at LFG for defending Rush (Charles Johnson is known for his tolerance of dissenting opinions) and at BJG (where they are known for their diverse opinions). /sarc
Phil
Iknew all that. But its still a winnable district. Ciro is a turd, and a lot of that district knows it. Its not one that does not switch in a tidal wave, and that is what I see heading for the Ds.
#61 No, you are wrong. I have posted several links to non-partisan studies that show its a 1% (at most 2%) cost. Here it is again since you have poor recollection:
(http://www.kff.org/uninsured/upload/7810.pdf).
Here is the key quote from Kaiser Study (a non-partisan group):
“The remainder of uncompensated care left to be covered by private dollars is relatively small compared to the $830 billion that will be spent by the privately insured this year (< 2%)"
So for less than 2% of costs per year you propose to tax and spend Trillions and take flexibility and choice away from 300 million citizens?
As far as costs, that can easily be explained too. Simply put, their is too much demand and not enough supply!
Government intervention in the health insurance market and in the delivery of medical care have caused a restriction in the supply….
An aging population has caused a great increase in demand (thing babyboomers)….
We have the most cutting edge medical technology and drugs in the world – these come at a premium cost….
And finally, a payment system for medical care based where people have been condition to become totally reliant on third parties (government and health insurance) to foot 100% bill has caused the loss of most consumer disicipline in the market….
The current HC takeover scam will address none of these underlying probelems related to "costs" and will in fact make them worse….
Plus, I never will cede the argurement to you that "doubling of medical costs, GDP," etc is a BAD thing! A free people who willingly CHOOSES to spend their OWN MONEY on their OWN MEDICAL CARE is EXACTLY what should be allowed to happen vice taking the "medical care as line item on the budget" rationing approach to HC!
Fundamentally, if you really care about these issues you would not be an advocate for Obama/Pelosi compulary insurance scheme….
Since you parrot the Democratic party line on this, you elicit my suspesion as being a "KOS Plant"…..
#68 Answer the question
-Polaris
#66 Again, read the facts and studies I cite. It is a mere pittace!
And the compulsary health insurnace scheme simply does work to fix these costs – period. MA, ME, etc have proven that.
59…you don’t HAVE to do anything either. You are just as free as anyone else here.
65…I agree, but there is a sense in which someone is not really buying a good when they are “forced to buy.” It really is more like a tax. Every April 15th, I am “forced to buy” the absence of IRS agents knocking my door down and dragging me in jail.
Do you think that a person should go to jail for NOT buying a good or service?
No. I also think that people should not be forced to pick up the tab for other people. That’s my point.
Darrell
Its like protection money to the Mafia!
Nice place ya got here, it would be a shame ifen sumpting was to happen to it.
Chek
Once AGAIN, please answer my question in #65. If you fail to do so without quibbling, then I will think that Wylie is right about you. My question is a simple one and one that no true republican or conservative should have any problem with.
-Polaris
Gallup is having trouble propping up Obama: 52(-1)/41(nc)
http://www.gallup.com/poll/113980/Gallup-Daily-Obama-Job-Approval.aspx
BTW, Eph said that he has three other IPs that he can use to post here and he is CHOOSING not to post at HHR. So the petition drive is unnecessary. Also, if people choose not to post here, let it go! It is their loss.
#74 Chek. You needed to stop with NO.
That’s is the bottom line. NO means all the rest of your argument is indefensible. I agree fwiw, that others should not be forced to pick up the tab of freeloaders, but that happens in any sector of the economy (in retail it’s called ’shrinkage’).
You SHOULD NOT advocate criminalizaton of healthcare (which you came periously close to doing).
-Polaris
#76
I said: NO!
We are already paying for lots of care of the poor and the indigent. Does anyone believe that we are suddenly not going to have a public supported hospital in damn near every decent sized county in the country? Or even that they are going to give me back those taxes and make the hospital compete for customers that pay?
If you do, sea side land in Kansas can be picked up for a song.
Gary
Ciro is indeed a turd. In a tidal wave election he could be had. He’s another of the phony lap dogs. I’d be thrilled to see him gone.
I am getting tired of this little routine that unless people fall all over each other in praise equals supporting the Dems. Just because I point out that Wylie’s posts don’t fully address the current situation, it doesn’t mean that I embrace Obamacare. If you want to see people falling all over each other in praise go to BJG.
Since I have done my job today on HHR and BJG to foster “vigerous debate”, I am going to go and “stimulate” the local economy by purchasing a set of tires for my privately owned CO2 producing automoblie while that is still permissable for me to do so in our “pre cap n trade” world….
I will assume my patriotic duty and pay the extra 2% of cost for my tires and 9% sales tax to help support the state/local governmental agencies that provide numerous “essential” services and facilitate all the mentioned “free riding” in the name of “compassion”.
Brandon
I watch Univision from time to time. Well, they are protraying the HC House as a great victory for the Latino community since most of the uninsured are Hispanics. When someone said that it was disappointed that “illegals” were not covered, the presenter pointed out that Obama and Dems will push for amnesty. Yeah, the Hispanic community is ripe for the GOP to win. /Sarc
Do you think that a person should go to jail for NOT buying a good or service?
No. I also think that people should not be forced to pick up the tab for other people. That’s my point.
Comment by Chekote — November 13, 2009 @ 1:08 pm
I agree. People should pay for their own health care.
Well, it seems that my prediction has come to pass. The Gitmo people will be tried in US courts. Ladies and gentlemen, the show is about to start. Before all is said and done, the George Bush and Dick Cheney will be held responsible for 9/11. But that’s what America voted for when they put Obama in the White House.
#87
Yep
#83 I more then fully address the “problems” (many of which are fictional and pretexts for government intervention) of a minor nature in our HC system….
I and other have proposed many many solution for the real issues in HC – all increase individual freedom/patients & provider rights and reduce costs…..none of which you acknolwede or embrace.
While you say you oppose CrappyCare, you always seem to advocate for a government intervention of some type to “fix” things either real or imagined….
Yes, I have paid a heavy price today for asking the opinions of other as to you why you hold this contraticory beliefs….
So, as you point out, you can hold whatever beliefs you want but do not be upset when I or others question them…
The point I am making is that there are some core principles that conservatives need to agree on (and I think most moderates will agree with me too):
One of them is this: You should NOT go to jail (or get a criminal record) for failing to buy a good or service the govt demands.
IMHO the only people that can say otherwise, really are liberals and really are beyond help.
-Polaris
Ah the frum-plant is going after another HHR poster. Shocking.
wylie
please answer my question regarding the reason health care costs have been increasing at TWICE the rate of inflation?
Palin to include Fort Hood on her book tour.
#93
Of course.
#92 Please read post #70 as I answered your question in detail….
#91 I dared to ask “why” – my mistake lol
I paid with losing an hour of my life that I will never ever get back lol
Anyone have a link to Palin’s book tour schedule sities and dates?
#92 That’s easy. The consumer (patient) hasn’t had to bear the full weight of the costs, thus there is no intrinsic control of those costs.
This is micro-econ 101.
-Polaris
#92 Please answer my question as to why you support a scheme which will cause costs to rise at MORE then “double the rate of inflation” since CrappyCare is modeled on the MA, ME Compulsary Insurance scheme?
If you “care” so much about this it would be fool-hardy to support this approach as its a proven failure!
#93 Why not? Going to Ft Hood on her tour sounds like a politically smart thing for Palin to do and she really is popular within the rank and file of the military.
-Polaris
#97. http://texas4palin.blogspot.com/2009/11/sarah-palins-going-rogue-book-tour.html
Since you parrot the Democratic party line on this, you elicit my suspesion as being a “KOS Plant”…..
How have I parroted the Dem party line? It is not true the cost of the uninsured, uninsured is 2%. Why are you purposefully leave it out the people covered by Medicare, Medicaid. Who do you think makes up the difference? The rest of us responsible people who buy health care insurance. How do you plan to fix that? Unless someone is prepared to put into law that people WILL pay for their own medical costs, all the talk of liberty vs. tyranny is an empty exercise.
The rising cost of private health insurance is multifactorial:
1. increasing availability of new technologies and drugs that cost a lot
2. cost shifting from Medicare which underpays doctors to private insurers and
3. yes, picking up the tab of uninsured who are too poor to pay(which is mostly the case).
Without mandates you cannot get to universal access(insurance). That is the roiute Canada and Europe have taken with disastrous results. I believe having cheaper insurance products like catastrophic cure and medical HSA would encourage some of the real small businesses to offer health insurance to employees and expand coverage to a larger chunk of the population. That could bring coverage to 90=92% of the population. Yes, if somebody in the 8% falls sick, we will pick up the tab if they are too poor but that is a small price to pay for stopping government health care where we will all be insured and we will all wait in lines and get inferior care(atleast in my specialty of oncology).
#87 Chekote
The civilian trial will backfire on Obama. The political strategy employed by the liberal Democrats in this matter is quite sophomoric and is destined to be a long term political failure for them.
The likelihood of another terrorist attack on the United States is fairly high and if that happens, the liberals will be held accountable by the voting public. Obama will likely not be the benefiary of a “rally ’round the flag” effect either, because he doesn’t attract that kind of emotion from the public. The bottom line here is that today’s Democrats don’t have any idea as to how to defend the country and defeat the jihadists.
In my opinion, the Republicans will do extraordinarily well in the 2010 elections and they have a better than 50% chance of retaking the White House.
#104
I totally agree. It just makes me sick to my stomach that so many Americans are willing to accept the notion that we are to blame for their terrorist acts.
all the talk of liberty vs. tyranny is an empty exercise.
There you go again Chek making me doubt you once again. Talk of freedom vs tyranny is NEVER an empty exercise. It’s vigilance that must always be maintained.
There is NO EXCUSE for criminalizing the failure to buy a good or service the govt demands. Zero.
Why? Because if you allow it even once, then the govt can crdiminalize all acts that you fail to do and then you have a totalitarian state.
-Polaris
#104 Chek
Those people aren’t actual real Americans, they are trans-national liberals, just like Obama is.
They better hope against hope that KSM and his ilk dont get a lame prosecutor and a jihadi infested jury. If they walk out into regular society free as birds, the fence around the white house and all of the SS will be well short of the security needed. Americans will storm the place.
I can also imagine the pressure the O’men will put on the military to not seek the death penalty for that Hasan a**h***.
They’ll argue that since he is likely paralyzed he has suffered enough. Too bad that we’ll be paying for his care for the next 50 years in a federal prison ward.
I can just see now the libs breaking out scenes from the movie “Paths of Glory” where they execute a injured soldier.
A very good postgame of the NJ race
http://www.politickernj.com/matt-friedman/34958/cryan-we-were-stuck-30s-was-real-story-election
Chek, the root cause of most of the problems is the inefficiency of Medicare and Mecdicaid. Medicaid is a huge partof state budgets and yet more than half the doctors do not accept it. If you really wanted to fix the health insurance system, it is to scrap Medicare and Medicaid. Privatise the whole thing, have it available across state lines, put in cheaper products and subsidize poor seniors and working poor. It will work more efficiently, prices will come down and government will not be in it. Problem is, who will tell the seniors?
There you go again Chek making me doubt you once again. Talk of freedom vs tyranny is NEVER an empty exercise. It’s vigilance that must always be maintained.
It is an empty exercise if our side loses elections.
#112 If presented properly, espousing FREEDOM does NOT lose elections.
As Benjamine Franklin once said, “He who signs away his freedom for security deserves neither”
Looking at you with that quote, Chek.
-Polaris
Republicans have gottn low marks for health care as the people feel they do nothing about it. However, after seeing Crappycare upfront and close, the republican stock is rising. I do believe that when they get into the majority, they should seriously push for private sector based reform like we have suggested here on several posts.
#111
BINGO! So Wylie’s assertion that people who don’t pay for their medical treatment is immaterial is just plain wrong. You are right. Somebody needs to tell the seniors. But what are the Republicans doing. They are harping on abortion coverage. Is that really that important? What percentage of the total health care costs can be attributed to abortions? I said this many times. What we lack is leadership.
#113
My point is that we need to frame the argument in a way that will attract the indie/non-ideological people to our point of view. Running around calling Obama a socialist didn’t work during the election why would it work now?
#114 If the GOP makes enough gains in 2010 (we’ll see), there could be a window of opportunity for true market-based HC reform….and then the GOP could dare Obama to veto it.
It all depends on 2010, though.
-Polaris
The American People, it is oft said, are slow to anger and wake up. If, god forbid, there is another “indisputable” terrorist attack on this country and/or the 9/11 mastermind and his ilk are somehow acquitted at trial, the liberals will be done for a generation. the GOP will have supermajorities in Congress and Obama, just may get “stormed” out of the White House. They are playing with fire here.
#115 Actually Chek, right now Stupak (who is a pretty left leaning Dem in most cases) and other DEMOCRATS are the ones harping on Abortion in healthcare.
The GOP as a party has been actually (and IMHO intelligently) very quiet except for providing the votes to put a monkeywrench in the process.
-Polaris
#114
I agree. Sometimes people have to experience it for themselves to believe it. This is why I don’t buy into “it is not reversible”. Socialized medicine was implemented around the world shortly after WWII. People had nothing to compare it to. But here in the US people will compare the level, quality of care pre and post Obamacare.
Maybe I missed this, but according to today’s article, there are at least 7000 ballots that will be opened and counted beginning Tuesday. (NY-23) I hadn’t seen anyone post a timeline yet.
“Mr. Owens has garnered 68,963 votes, according to the most recent unofficial results in the 11-county district, and leads Mr. Hoffman by 3,176 votes. There are at least 7,178 absentee ballots districtwide that have been received by elections officials and will be opened Tuesday. That count likely will take at least three days.”
http://www.watertowndailytimes.com/article/20091113/NEWS03/311139951
#102 You start comparing apples to footballs when your throw in the cost of Medicare/Medicade as forcing people to buy Health Insurance in no way address the cost of government medical welfare programs….
You cite the problem of “free riders” and “Uncompsenated care” by the unisured and now shift to government medical welfare costs…..
If you are concerned about “paying the bill” for charity care by the government then you advocate abolish of these programs which I support philosophically but is not on the table….
If you want dont want to eliminate them but to “control” their costs then you need to transfrom them from the current welfare model to something akin to MediCare advantage where they are adminsitered by private insurance firms who have an incentive to control costs and eliminate fraud….
If you want people to not sign up for medical welfare, you need to tighten elgibility not expanded as CrappyCare does. You also need to incitivize them to pay for their own medical care with devices such as HSA where they have a stake in making their own payments and providing/paying their own insurance.
You are correct in that MediCare costs are “shifted” to private paying paitients and private health insurance as a form of stealth tax but compulsary insurance schemes only further encourage this to happen not addressing the root cause of the problem.
Finally, all of the CrappyCare mandatory insurance requirements comes with trillions of Subsides to “low income” purchasers….so you get to pay more for somebody else…..again, this is selfdefeating…..
Again, following your shifting “concern” you still lose out under compulsary health insurance/government interverntion schemes….
The solution is to allow a truly free market in Medical Care and Health Insurance and to provide medical charity thru private donations instead of compulsary taxation if this is your new concern.
#116 I’ll tell you why running around calling Obama a socialist will work now. He has proven beyond a shadow of a doubt to even the moderate middle that he really is a socialist!
Before he was in office, too many people didn’t want to believe this even when the evidence was pushed up in front of their face.
-Polaris
#118 Dylan
Americans awoke on 7 Dec 41 and were filled with “a terrible resolve” (to quote Adm Yamamoto). The problem for the Democrats is that if an undisputed terrorist attack on the United States happens on Obama’s watch, the terrible resolve filling Americans will be directed at both the terrorists and the Democrats on election day.
First NY 23 said 10K ballots remain, then 5k now 7K??
#121–This is truly a pathetic state of affairs. republicans and conservatives need to wake the hell up and realize that EVERY SINGLE ELELECTION is critical and you cannot commit amateur moves like conceding before it is absolutely certain that you have lost. Hoffman likely will still lose (and regardless of the fact that he has no personality or charisma–he should have known better).
The GOP senatorial campaign head better also realize that the GOP needs to seek out and run potential superstars in all races where the Dem is the remotest bit vulnerable. I am not optimistic based on what I saw with Libby Dole and John Ensign–regardless of the fact 2006 and 2008 were anti-gop years.
#125 Howard Dean
Kinkos
#120 You espouse radically naive and unproven theory. There has historically been no repeal in a democratic counrty of a major nanny state program.
Your theory on medical care will be false as it has proven to be in the UK, Canada, etc for the same reasons there – most of the population DO NOT have significant negative interaction with the system until very ill (usually old when they are not the priority) and often die and therefore are not around to complain. Also, the amount of sheer dependency created (to include millions of new unionized government employees) trumps any complaint with the socialist medical system people may have (and as I explained they usually dont personally experience problems until its too late).
This is a very dangerous idea to espouse. The idea that to let CrappyCare pass so that the GOP will have an issue to “run against” or it can be repealed later is a dangerous pipedream that grossly underestimates the damage this will do.
#120 I’m afraid Obamacare really is irreversible if passed and the Dems know it. I can’t think of anywhere in the world (baring a total economic collapse) where socialized medicine was ever allowed to be defunded or removed once installed even IN places where the govt became hostile towards it.
That’s because it brings too much dependency which makes it too hard to remove. Think of social security on steroids.
-Polaris
wylie
Can you please tell me who has an opposing view at BJG? I can’t think of anyone. It seems to me that most of the posts are just congratulatory of each other.
#125 10K ballots were requested H-D, but apparently only a bit more than 7K were received by the deadline. At least that’s what I’m reading.
-Polaris
#129 Polaris,
We decided last night that Obamacare will probably die in the Senate because moderate Democrats don’t want to vote on any of it. It could be tranquilzed next week when Reid fails to garner the 60 votes necessary to even begin debate. (No, I’m not naive, I predicted that Navy would beat Notre Dame last Saturday too.)
#115 No my assertion is correct that uncompsenated care is a 1% cost – this is the excuse you cite for supporting compulsary insurance schemes.
And nowhere do you show how a massive expansion of government intervention and of the medical welfare schemes will “solve” your new concern (ie too much government medical welfare)
#129
Germany and France are currently in the process of moving towards our current system and away from socialized medicine. The point is that that socialized medicine is unsustainable.
#132 Your lips to God’s ears as the saying goes. I am not nearly so optimistic. I think Obama and Pelosi are going to make this an explicit test (complete with primary challenges and other dirty tricks) of party loyalty, and I expect a good many Dems to cave in the senate….at least enough to consider the nuclear option.
-Polaris
#133
Knova has presented many times evidence that costs are closer to 10%-15% for the uninsured. And my point was about people NOT paying their own medical bills. That includes Medicare.
#134 Chek AND all such progress has been stymied in their legistatures and massive public discontent even WITH economic collapse staring them in the face.
National Healthcare is Social Security on steriods. You can’t touch it or you will politically die.
-Polaris
#132
I used to think that it would die in the Senate. However, I think the Dems have made the calculation that not passing it is worse than passing it.
#130 What are you asking exactly? On several issues or topics I have been contridicted or have seen opposing view points espoused by the posters…..
If you are asking something about personal political philosophy, I have not taken a poll over there put generally speaking almost all seem to be conservative and/or libertarian…..
There seems to be a distinct lack of the “troll” sorts which is fine as I think thats part of the general premise of site which you are free to agree or disagree with….
#136 So we lockup all the uninsured and we wind up paying for them anyway (healthcare in Jail).
That’s the ticket!
Please. In any market, there will always be a “shrinkage” or free-rider problem. I don’t like it, but most people are willing to tolerate it for healthcare.
-Polaris
#140
I am for making people pay their own way in life. Clearly, there are situations where beyond the control of individuals and I am all for helping them. The problem is that our “free-riding” population is almost at 50%. That’s unsustainable.
In atlas shrugged,Galt’s gulch was a place of refuge for like minded people, it was not a haven for malcontents venting their spleens.The BJG blog is designed to be a respite from the other vitriolic crapola on the web. It is a place to retire to after sallying forth to cross swords on other blogs. IMHO
#135 Polaris,
The moderate Democrats in the Senate aren’t really threatened by a primary challenge from the left.
The left is weak in LA, NE, SD, IN, and ND so those Senators can withstand the challenge. They are threatened in a general election by conservative Republicans, which is why I think that Obamacare’s chances in the Senate are weak.
#134 If those country actually acheive that reform in any meanigful way (yet to be seen) it will be a histroric first. What is more like is more of the same – government medical rationing as this is the historic norm.
Yes, you expanded your agruement when convient to do so. Still, Knova has never cited a fact or study or link to verify this info (at least none I have seen). Simply saying it does not make it so.
I have cited and linked a non-partisan study of the issue for my numbers and facts. I choose to beleive it. You can choose to beleive whatever you want but do not expect me to take it as the truth without proof.
In anycase, whatever the degree of the problem in “uncompenstaed care” or the cost of medical welfare programs. The Obama/Pelosi government intervention/use of force solutions make the problem WORSE. The solution that work are free market oriented.
I am sure you agree with me now – can I go buy my tires as the taxcollectors are counting on this economic stimulus from my wallet lol
#141 That number is cooked Chek and you know it.
Of course, the answer would be to remove/control Medicare and Medicaid.
If you don’t think that’s political possible (and it’s not), then you have no reason to think that a larger nationalized healthcare system would ever be removed either.
Right NOW, we need to kill this abomination. We can argue the wherefores of the “true” cost of healthcare later.
Right now Chek, we don’t have the votes to “quibble” about who pays what. Perhaps later will be different.
-Polaris
#139
And what was the disagreement? Oh no, wylie you are too tame in your advocacy of freedom?
#143 It’s not just a primary challange. The DNC could cut off funding or do other nasty things. Don’t underestimate Rahm’s ability to twist arms.
-Polaris
#138 Chek,
The moderate Senate Democrats are not at risk when Obamacare fails. Their best political move is to let it tank. In fact, I think that is their calculation, irrespective of what Bill Clinton says.
I also think that Bill Clinton doesn’t believe a word of what he says about Obamacare and that he would just as soon it fail along with Obama’s presidency. Seriously!
Marv,
The one person who caucauses with the Dems that has done the most damage to Obamacare is Sen Lieberman because unlike the others, since Liberman won his seat as an Indy on his own hook, Obama has nothing to threaten him with or offer him to change his mind. Lieberman is the exception.
-Polaris
#141 Well governments at various levels control 46% of the health spending if thats your concern….
True “free riders” who dont pay for their care come from the 8% of the population that is uninsured (by choice or other reason) and they account for a 1-2% increase in our costs…..
MediCare recipients would say that they have paid for this based on a lifetime of taxation but we do know this is in fact a ponzi-scheme and usually the MediCare patient outstrips his lifetime payments into the system as most SS recpients get more out then they pay in….
MediCade is pure medical welfare…..
Again, if government medical welfare costs are the issue then you advocate for an elimination of this charity by taxation scheme….which is not currently up for debate in terms of elimination or meaningful reform (althought privitization of both would greatly reduce the costs)…..
In other words, their is simply no “fix” that involves further government intervention that works….
Polaris
My point is that the Dems win not because they run around and talk about how wonderful and just Marxism is. They win because they tell the ignorant masses, we will take care of your medical expenses at no cost to you. We need to make the argument for freedom relatable to people’s lives or we will lose elections. And if saying this makes me a KOS plant. So be it.
Here in NC, the state recently announced it was no longer funding vaccinations for children. The state said that private insurance companies should bear the cost of the vaccines. The report ended by stating that uninsured children and children on Medicaid would still get the vaccines for free. That last statement caused me to do a double-take. I mean, I thought the uninsured were all denied health and died on the streets. Am I missing something?
#149 Polaris,
I agree about Lieberman. I still say Obamacare is in trouble due to folks like Nelson, Landrieu, and others who just wish it would go away. Hoeven is waiting to see what Conrad and Dorgan do and is acting as a check on both of them.
#148 I think I agree with Chek on this one Marv. I think that Obama will do everything he can to make life miserable for the senate Dems if they sit on their hands, and Reid is facing a near certain loss next year no matter what he does.
I agree that some of the moderate dems would love to stall and let this die (and I don’t think that Bill Clinton would shed a tear if it did….get his wife out of the house and on the campaign trail), but I think you are really underestimating the blood that Pelosi and Obama are willing to spend to get thiks done.
-Polaris
147. Polaris , they cannot twist arms by threatening primary challenge to DEM in Red states like NEB, ND, Ark etc..
It will not work. The bulk of DEM primary voters in deep Red states are conservative DEM’s, who smell liberal trolls a mile away.
Nelson, Dorgan,Conrad etc.. can kill HC and be safe.
HellCare will never get out of the Senate, watch and see
Don’t count on Landrieu though, she’ll vote for it if she can, having just been re-elected
Meant to say “denied health care”
We all agree that Zero, Botox, and Dingy will do anything to pass it, but they just do not have the political capital.
#155 Who has to say the primary challenger need to be a liberal troll. He could (on paper anyway) be even MORE conservative then the guy they are threatening….as long as he’s willing to follow DNC orders.
THAT is part of the threat. There are also many things within DC that the party can do to make a senator’s life miserable.
-Polaris
I agree on Landrieux. Lincoln is up in 2010 and she is gone if she votes yea for even cloture.
Guys,
I really think you are underestimating just how BAD Obama wants this and to what degree he is willing to do.
I fully expect the nuclear option next month. So should all of you.
-Polaris
#158 If you are willing to go Kamikazi, then those three have a lot more political capital than you think…and they ARE so willing.
-Polaris
The Democrats IN GENERAL need to get this passed, but INDIVIDUAL Democrats want nothing to do with it
I think, for example, Evan Bayh can read the VA election results and see electoral suicide if he votes for this
Remember, they have NO margin of error, NONE
Pelosi has an 81 vote margin, the loss of even one Communist in the Senate brings Reid to 59 and he’s kaput
#155 Felix
Thanks for reminding me about AR. Lincoln and Pryor don’t like this thing either.
159. Polaris we agree to disagree. Several DEM presidents have tried the same thing going back to FDR.
Ben Nelson is more worried about the general Election than any primary.
They can’t get 60 for cloture and they can’t get 50 to go reconciliation
Dude, if they do this by reconciliation they’ll lose the SENATE as well as the House
137…we already made up the examples of ads that would run against the GOP congress candidates who would run against incumbent DEMS after Obamacare is the law of the land:
“Meet Suzie Leech. She has cancer. The only hope for her survival is her government health plan. The GOP wants her DEAD, leaving her children orphaned. Say NO to the GOP grim reapers. Vote for Ima Fascist (D) for congress.”
#166 I hope you’re right Felix, but I don’t think you are.
We’ll see.
-Polaris
Presidents come and go
Senators (at least nowadays) stay in office forever
President Bunny Rabbit threatening moderate Democrats?
Pffffffffftttt
They’ll be there long after he’s gone
I don’t think that the Democrats are any more likely to use the nuke for Obamacare than the Republicans were for Bush judge nominations. Once the nuke option is used by one side, the other side will use it at its first opportunity.
I stand firm that even the Desperate DEMS will not go Nuclear.
It would be political Suicide. We shall see Polaris, but if ever happened look for a Revolution.
If it happened the minimum number of House Democrats to switch to the GOP would be at least 40. Every Blue Dog in congress would lose.
the Supreme Court would get involved also.
I dont expect the nuclear option so we shall see who is right. I think it will be drop back 15 yards and punt, passing a week “reform” bill, saying that is all that can pass.
Much celebrating will ensue, and then with a straight face Obama will tell us that its time to focus on jobs.
Thats my vision.
MFG, great point. Senators are there for life.
#146 geeshhh, I am not going to rehash every specific post on their to refute your delisuional genralizations.
Why does this bother you so much assuming you have this impression?
If it does, I recommend not going to the site….I see no way in which spreading your predujical opinions helps anyone
Plus Obama’s deteriorating poll numbers
Look, all of these moderate Dems have already concluded that Obama’s Presidency is a failure and they have to save their own rear ends
Go off the cliff for a guy who will soon be at 42% popularity?
Pfffffffttt…
#172 Gary Maxwell
The Republicans will block the punt and then score on their ensuing possession.
Dude, if they do this by reconciliation they’ll lose the SENATE as well as the House
Comment by MFG
Are you sure that the “man in the street” will understand the differences? Most of them can’t even define filibuster,cloture,budget recon. I think the method of the cram down won’t matter to the great unwshed either way, only the results.
Polaris an excellent debate though.
Hopefully members of the RNC and Senate GOP are also discussing this worst case scenario.
I call BS on the whole concept of rising health costs. It all depends on what you call “healthcare costs”
1. Price one is what folks on medicare/medicaid for a hospital stay
2. Price two is what somewhat on insuances pays at that hospital.
3. Finally if what someone without insurance would pay at that hospital or at that doctor’s office or at the RX shop.
When someone walks into the doctor’s office and can literally pay one of three prices based what card they have or do not have I dispute the idea that we can accurately say healthcare costs are rising.
Are medical costs rising at corporations. You bet but its not the cost of healthcare its the amount of healthcare that you spend. For instance we have 10 million kids today being treated for ADD(including two of my own). This was an untreated illness 30 years ago and now its a significant expense. I could go down the list of exams from mammograms to colonoscopies to MRI’s that did not exist 30 years in any significant amount.
There is an explosion of additional tests that we are doing that did not exist in the past.
If you think you can lower total healthcare costs by lowering the cost of treatments you are wrong. The only way to lower the costs of healhcare is to reduce treatments/tests.
#173 Felix
Look at Byrd, 500 years old and still hanging on, Kennedy DIED in the seat
We’ll never get rid of these *** ****** Landrieu’s down here, her DAD was in politics in the 60’s and we STILL can’t get these people out
MFG, the moderates are watching the tea leaves and realize Unemployment will continue to sink Hussein.
If they go Nuclear Obama will hit the low 30’s like Bush.
Marv
unfortunately the Republicans are playing with the third string and are quite happy just to be on the field of play. Dont expect them to capitalize, how many days has it been since the vote in the House, seen any ads lambasting the faux conservative Democrats who voted for the most ridiculous and expensive bill to come down the pike yet?
Felix,
How would SCOTUS get involved. There is nothing in the constitution that says the Senate has to permit a fillibuster or even have any of the rules that it does.
All it will take is 50 votes for Reid to change the rules to pass Obamacare. Do any of you think he can’t get those fifty votes?
I’m not willing to bet my freedom against it. I’ll put it that way.
The best way to stop it is to howl about it and make the public aware of it and NOT to simply and blindly assume the Dems can’t or won’t do it.
They can and IMHO they will (or least least they’ll try).
-Polaris
If they go Nuclear Obama will hit the low 30’s like Bush.
Comment by Felix
see post 177
#180
Let’s face it. Lots of ignorant people voted based on name recognition.
I don’t think he can get those 50 votes for reconciliation, no I don’t
IP
The tea parties show that not all members of the public are idiots
let me go one step further. If you hand 30 million people health insurance cards will these folks take advantage of this situation and go to doctors? Have you got an insurance card as a new hire? Its time then to get checked out and take advantage of your new benefit.
That’s why the CBO says the health insurance curve will not bend under Obamacare. The line will continue to go as more people flock to the doctor’s offices. As TN, MA, CA and other state experiments have proven when you extend coverage you to always know that your estimate of benefits will be too low.
Everyone gets checks out and if a doctor can’t find something to prescride you ain’t no MD
Bottom line:
If they had the votes to do any of this IT WOULD ALREADY HAVE PASSED
If the Senate does pass a “weak” reform bill, then Pelosi’s POS bill minus the Stupak language will come out of “reconciliation” and it will be appended to a budget bill.
If Reid can’t get his 60 any other way, he will use budgetary reconcilliation. In fact he’s already preparing for that battle.
-Polaris
#177 D. QUIXOTE
The “man on the street” and the “great unwashed” generally don’t vote in mid-term elections (unless they’re mad about something) and may not vote in 2012 either. Obama was elected because of his cult-like followers…….he is starting not to be cool anymore.
#151 You are correct that the case for linited government, individual rights and freedoms must supporting personal wealth and properity freedom must be linked more clearly. I have never advocated anything but this, however your bleated acknowledgement of this is “progress” to borrow and overused word lol.
I would take issue that the D/statist go around talking or promising “free” stuff either as a “political winner”.
In fact, quite the opposite, they steal the languauge of the free market (choice/competition) etc to conceal their real motives or talk in such platitudes that their statements are taken to mean anything and everything to the listener (think hope n change). They do not make arguements to voters that more government, “freebies”, or regulation are in anyway part of their program.
It can be said that they use the correct terms and pharseology to cover up for the wrong ideas and principles.
Nothing will get out of the Senate
Passing a weak bill will be just as difficult as passing a strong bill, don’t you see?
Placate one vote here, lose two votes over there
Nothing gets out of the Senate
Stall till the end of the year, push this crap into 2010, an election year, and it all dies, without any bill at all ever being produced
Stupak’s language will come out either at conference or it will be struck down by a federal judge if passed. Abortion is a constitutionally guaranteed right. There is no way you can have a federal plan refuse to deny coverage for a constitutionally guaranteed procedure.
To all who think they won’t go “nuclear”, I have to tell you, as things stand right now, Reid (in conjunction with Obama) has full plans to make this pass by attaching it to the budget, elections be damned. They are willing to lose in ‘10 as they think I will be a short lived loss, in order to get this done.
From an R on The hill in the senate who is as conservative as it gets tells me it’s very very very very likely they will use the budget if needed to pass it.
The only silver lining is that. As with any budget item, it expires in ten years, not that reauthorizarion won’t be hard.
Wcome to obama’s world. They are all terrified of this guy.
#189 What MFG, just like you said that Pelosi’s POS Bill right after tehe Dem’s Tuesday disaster had no chance of passing in the house?
How did that work out for ya?
Don’t understimate how “persuasive” Reid, Obama,and Pelosi can be (let alone Rahm).
-Polaris
#183 Exactly – the louder the public outcry and the worse we can make public option against the takeover is the correct route.
Reliance on CW political calculation or parlimentary “safeguard” in the Senate will allow this monster to pass.
No, I dont want to rely on the Supreme Court or the unproven theory of “people wont put up with” to defend my personal freedoms and the lives/health of millions!
I never said that the House would stop HellCare
The Senate is where it will die
#194 Chek,
The libs are at risk of ROE being further weakened or overturned by taking Stupak to the Supreme Court. Some of those justices up there are just waiting for the appropriate case to gut ROE.
Chekote
sorry. It’s not a cnstitutinally guaranteed right. If so please provide us the language where abortion is guaranteed. Thanks
I would take issue that the D/statist go around talking or promising “free” stuff either as a “political winner”.
Your political naivete has been exposed for all to see. My job is done.
“They” may be willing to lose
“Evan Bayh” is not willing to lose
“Ben Nelson” is not willing to lose
etc etc
“Let’s all commit suicide!” is almost always answered by “You first!”
Roe v. Wade
#199 Unfortunately ROE has five votes (for the constitutionality of abortion as a right to privacy). That’s all the Dems need.
-Polaris
It’s not about abortion
It’s about abortion with MY MONEY
If you’re going to do that, do it with YOUR money, not my tax dollars
To head you off at the pass the SC (in a decision even liberals recognize as horrible jurisprudence) INTERPRETED vaguely a clause which the infer gives the right to abortion. The constitution makes absolutely ZERO mention of abortion as a right, unlike the second amendment which guarantees the right to bear arms.
#200 Vic, Abortion is a constitutionally guaranteed right if five justices on SCOTUS say it is. I think it’s very likely that there are five such justices.
-Polaris
#206 You are right about that Vic and a solid case could be made for the constitutionality of Stupak. However, I’d rather just kill the bill, wouldn’t you?
-Polaris
Unfortunately I agree with Polaris. They are close
to a goal true socialist democrats have wanted
forever. They are in my opinion without conscience.
It is the old Bill clinton mantra we have seen
over and over from them ” the ends justify the means”
I fully expect them to get this through by hook
or crook. Probably crook. They don’t care about
what is right for america its all about power.
Power corrupts- absolute power corrupts absolutely
Going nuke, would forever wipe out the filibuster, not just on this bill.LINK
Attaching it to an existing bill (the budget) would by pass this nuke option, as the filibuster doesn’t apply to buget matters.
Anyway, as noted above, it’s about the federal government forcing people to pay for others to have a prcedure they are vehemently opposed to. Hence the reason why absolutely no federal dollars should be spent to pay for abortion.
#207
Exactly. So why is so much time wasted on discussing something that will be addressed by federal justices. Same with illegals coverage.
Between Perry and Hutchinson, I am partial to Perry.
#203 Chek,
Roe v. Wade said that the Constitution implied a right to privacy and that abortion is a private matter. Abortion ceases to be a private matter when public money funds it; it then should follow that there is no constitutional right to public money for abortion.
Hey, Acroso, is your guy going to win in KY?
#201 Why do you gloat as you are the one who are as politically ignorant and as wrong as two goats having an Abortion lol
Did you ignore the whole previous presidental campaign where our current leftist president ran from his voting record and marxist connenction and won as a “centerist” using vauge and deceptive languauge?
In the current HC debate, how many times have we all heard the talking point from the D about how their plan promises “choice” and “competition” while in fact limiting both?
You are ignorant to say the D win by promising goodies to people – this may work in the gerrymandered districts for Pelosi, etc but IS NOT what wins in most statewide or national race.
it then should follow that there is no constitutional right to public money for abortion.
Comment by Marv — November 13, 2009 @ 3:09 pm
From a rational logical standpoint that is correct, but the oligarchs on the court would drag in the 14th and mandate it’s coverage.
There will be no reconciliation. They will recess for the year and their butts will be chewed off by their constituents. I know how badly Obama needs and wants this but he has been weakened considerably, politically, in the last three months. I believe there are about 15 senators who will ask him to take a hike, much like what Bill Clinton got from the Senate in 1994. The reason is that benefits do not kick in until 2013 and therefore, the dems will get kicked out of the House and Senate if they cram it through. And what is reconciliated once can be reconciliated again and again. That road will not be taken, saner heads will prevail.
Some of those justices up there are just waiting for the appropriate case to gut ROE.
Doubt it. I don’t see a court saying that people have no right to privacy.
wylie
The Dems don’t run on being socialist. They run on helping people with their problems at no cost to them.
#217 D. QUIXOTE
Do you think that Kennedy is in that camp?
Here is the practical effect of the “moderate” position of Mandated insurance:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704402404574527493169603118.html
What Health Reform Will Do to My Insurance -
Congress wants the nation to adopt the same rules that have made coverage expensive in New York.
By ANDREW R. HEINZE
“I’m a registered Democrat living in New York City, and I buy my own health insurance. But now, having seen the health-care reform bill that passed the House, I’m preparing for life without health insurance. And unless I’m the only person covered under the Empire Blue Cross/Blue Shield “Tradition Plus” plan, a lot of other people will end up just like me, uninsured.
I will gain one thing, though—an annual fine for losing my insurance. The exact amount of that fine isn’t clear yet, but so far it looks like I’ll be paying about the same amount—$2,000 a year—for having no insurance as I do now for having it.”
#218
Yes
DQ
I defended McCain here for not going nuclear in 2005. I got hammered on that point. I said you go Nuclear once when you have the 51 votes just wait til the senate turns and you are in the minority.
No the senate will not go “Postal-budget reconciliation-nuclear” or anything like that on healthcare.
Even FDR & LBJ did their sweeping government actions in a bipartisan way with popular opinion on their side. You will not see Obamacare backdoored in by parliementary rulings.
I might add that CBO and Harry Reid have not agreeded on a bill yet. Looks like next Thursday to Friday at best. If anyone thinks the healthcare bill starts on Tuesday before Thanksgiving I got a bridge for you.
My best guess is 12-1-2009 and that’s if reid gets his calculator fixed
acroso
Don’t you find it funny that MFG and IP are so starved for a discussion that they hang out here?
#217 D. QUIXOTE
Do you think that Kennedy is in that camp?
Comment by Marv
He would be the swing vote. Who knows?
We just enjoy your pleasant company, ?
The dems know they are losing not because they cannot achieve Crappycare; but, because the people are sick and tired of too much government and Crappycare is but one manifestation of this problem(WEC, I like your terminology). They will be walloped, however, by blocking Crappycare, some of the moderate dem senators may get off the hook. Yes, those moderate dems are not scared of the libs, they are shit scared of the tea-party crowd.
#219 Chek
It won’t be a privacy case, it will be a federal funding for abortion case. That’s what I meant when I suggested that there probably are 5 justices who would rule that way, in the unlikely event they ever hear the case.
#227
I doubt it. I think you guys are bored out of your mind. I mean how many times can you congratulate each others posts.
Here’s the foolishness of Obamacare. There is money available to buy healthcare for the uninsured. I am self employed. What stands between me and being uninsured? I call up my agent and tell I am now smoking.
Since I am canceled I now qualify for $4800 per year in assistance in getting insurance as I am uninsured.
Can anyone tell me how you can offer one person a benefit without offering it to all??
No this turkey dies
#229
Marv,
What they point of having a right if you can’t practice it? That’s the argument.
You’re quite a prize, ?
Bet you were voted Miss Congeniality
Don’t you find it funny that MFG and IP are so starved for a discussion that they hang out here?
Comment by Chekote
We have eclectic interests, unlike the one track pony you ride.
What is that pony, IP? (yes, I know that’s a rhetorical question)
?:
ALL abortion
ALL the time!
#220 You said the democrats ran on “promising free stuff” to people.
“Solving people’s problems” is another way of saying advocating for government intervention – no they dont overtly/specifically push that either in national or most state races.
“at no cost” is a fiction that both parties sell. If its an economic issue, costs always has to be paid – its a question of who pays them and who gets to make this decescion. You or the state.
#232 Chek,
Those who want an abortion can have one if they want to, they just have to pay for it. I have the right to a penile implant, if I needed it, but the taxpayers shouldn’t have to pay for it.
chekote
IP
LOL!
#236
Actually, it is mostly people like you who worry about it. If it weren’t for clowns like you wanting to criminalize it, this would be a nonissue. I mean getting all upset about the RNC health plan. I think the GOP has bigger problems than their health care plan.
Polaris
the abortion argument is not one I normally get involved in as it stirs a lot of passions. I’ve taken my time to carefully weigh both sides and have made m decision where I fall on the issue, but will normally only comment on it when brought up (see chekote). If she had merely made a coherent argument then I say nothing, but the militant pro-abortion stance deserved a response. This constitutionally guaranteed “right” is not that, but is an interpretation of another right, and you’re correct, it’s only a right so long as five justices say so.
Ironic in that the pro-abortion crowd thinks no r v w means no abortion, which is false. Just means states will determine what their law is and some states will have it and some won’t.
As for use of the budget I’m telling everyone here please do not underestimate the very real possibility that’s how this will play out. You’re making a dangerous assumption if you do.
For those who give a crap, it’s poetry night at BJG. Usually at 6.00 pm central
#239 Pimpin’
Vic
The Supreme Court once held that black people were property without rights
Simply because the Supreme Court makes a ruling is meaningless
Many, many Supreme Court decisions are garbage/wrong/moronic
They’re all politicians, just like the whores in the House and Senate, and we should treat them that way
Here is a great article for all you pro-lifers and pro-abortion-on-demanders to consider:
http://andrews.blogtownhall.com/2009/11/10/an_implausible_argument.thtml
#245 Right on bro! Right on!
They be HOES!
Ironic in that the pro-abortion crowd thinks no r v w means no abortion, which is false. Just means states will determine what their law is and some states will have it and some won’t.
It depends on whether the states bothered to repeal the laws that were in existence prior to the Roe v. Wade decision banning abortion. If those laws are still on the books, Roe being overturned will result on abortion being illegal until the state legislators have a chance to change the laws. And yes, I am militant when it comes to defending people’s rights to determine their own beliefs regarding when personhood begins. I am militant when it comes to avoiding women being subjects of criminal investigations upon having a miscarriage.
#248 Then take it up with the state legislatures as this is no way a Federal issue.
#248 Plus we have this thing in the 21st century called a “car” (still allowed last I checked despite persistent attempts to outlaw) and a “moving van” so you can move to a state that allows abortions in a manner you see fit.
Welcome to a concept that works for a large and diverse nation – its called “federalism”
wylie
I think that Roe v. Wade was a bad decision. I don’t believe that federalism is best when it comes to this issue and other contentious social issues. However, most pro-lifers support the HLA which means they also DON’T believe in federalism.
I have the right to a penile implant, if I needed it,
Actually to paraphrase Robin Williams in Good Morning Vietnam, you are more in need of a penile implant than any white woman on this planet. LOL
They be hoes, WEC…
Chekote
can we say “hyperbole”…”women being subjects of criminal investigations upon having a miscarriage.”
seriously…if that’s your best argument then you’ve already lost.
Btw explain to me how you (plural not singular) can be pro-abortion based on a womanss right to choose wha to do with her own body, yet DEMAND that someone buy insurance if they “choose” not to?
BTW, poetry night is the only worthwhile thing about BJG.
You would have been a good slave holder, ?
“They’re not really people” is an argument you’re so comfortable with…
I am militant when it comes to avoiding women being subjects of criminal investigations upon having a miscarriage.
Comment by Chekote
you are militant about making an ass of yourself
#254
And how do you justify saying that you oppose the government getting involved in the doctor-patient relationship and at the same time advocate that government gets involved in the woman-doctor relationship. I say keep the government OUT period.
There’s a poetry night at that loony site, Chek?
Obama approval 49-51 in Zogby (no change).
independents: 40% approval
http://www.zogby.com/news/ReadNews.cfm?ID=1767
Oh, great. An abortion debate. Can we discuss a few more slient issues here, people?
And please pro-lifers, explain to me HOW you are going to enforce laws banning abortion WITHOUT going through people’s medical record. How will you make sure that a miscarriage is indeed a miscarriage without an investigation?
If it weren’t for clowns like you wanting to criminalize it- ?
why, do you always put words in people’s mouths that they do not utter ?
is there something about picking a fight that turns you on ?
get some therapy, girlfriend !
::Shakes head:: A week and a half after a victory that shows the American people may yet be willing to reverse the Dem tide, and what do we all do? We start discussing abortion. Did none of you learn from the handling of social issues by Christie and McDonnell the economy is what the GOP needs to focus on to oust the Dems next year?
Howdy Wes,
Where you bin?
262…strange, that didn’t seem to be an issue prior to abortion being legalized.
In more slaient news: Bob Etheridge has announced he will not challenge Richard Burr next year. That means all three of the top-tier Dems eyeing a challenge to Burr next year have bowed out of the race. A bad sign for the Democrats, who were bolstered in 2005 and 2006 by similar refusals on the part of top-tier Republicans to run for Dem Senate seats that year.
#251 Chek, to use a popular cultural pharse, I “call them out” on the HLA too – I dont support this and it will be as equally as damaging as Roe v Wade.
To borrow your term, I must “militantly” disagree with you on Federalism. It is THE ONLY way a large and diverse society can possibly be expected to successfully deal with social and other contentious issues!
To the extentnt that someone’s “one-size-fits all” solution is imposed is the CAUSE for perpetual friction both pro and con.
Federalism solves this issue as a solution that is best in agreement with the opinion of the local population governs.
The only “non negotiable” at the national level are basic individual rights (as articulated in our Constitution and declaration of Independence).
Lunch and physical therapy for the most part today, Marv. what about you?
#260 What is Zogby’s party ID?
Wes #264:
Good point.
Though you are missing one salient feature of both the NJ and VA races.
Both Deeds and Corzine made a big deal about the “so-called” social issues in their campaigns, didn’t they?
#251 Chek, to use a popular cultural pharse, I “call them out” on the HLA too – I dont support this and it will be as equally as damaging as Roe v Wade.
Completely agree. Both equally bad.
#264 A discussion is a discussion….its interesting but I am in agreement with you that it isnt (and shouldnt) be a major GOP election focus for the foreseeable future….
They should focus on fiscal/libertarian conservative platform and solution as campaign issues
Wes
I’m standing by waiting for my wife to tell me when to come to the dinner table.
They did, Sam. Their opponents neutralized the issues by not acting like Al Salvi and pointing to kitchen table issues like taxes, the economy, and increasing jobless numbers. With evasive targets on the social issues in opponents whose focus was on jobs, the Dems lost. Had McDonnell and Christie run ads playing up their pro-life credentials, then the races may not have turned out as they did.
I am militant when it comes to avoiding women being subjects of criminal investigations upon having a miscarriage.~~~????
It was the doctors that they went after,as they were the performers of an illegal act, not the female.
#272 Well I can leave now that we agree on something lol
I suppose my earlier offense has caused you to scratch me off your Christmas card list…..too bad – Acme Inc has a nice design coming out this year lol
#264
Wes,
Shortly after the elections, the SoCons were out in force pointing to the Maine same sex as evidence that social issues are winners for the GOP. I guess that they haven’t noticed that Dems’ official position is against same sex marriage. People in California voted to ban same sex marriage and turned around and voted to put Obama in the White House even though he opposed Prop 8.
#271 Billy-Bob Deeds tried too…..Corzine not so much.
Pitchaboy said it best, Wilye. The GOP achieves its biggest victories when it is loud on economics and soft on social issues. Well, that may not be his exact wording, but that’s the general idea of what he said. McDonnell is very socially conservative. His campaign avoided discussions of such issues though. Christie is moderately socially conservative, but he like McDonnell focused on salient economic issues. Al Salvi is extremely socially conservative and played that up in his race against the Personification of Evil Itself, Dick Durbin. For me, the evidence of what is the best way for the GOP to campaign couldn’t be more clear.
“Hey, Acroso, is your guy going to win in KY?”
I don’t know if Rand’s going to win. His campaign manager released a really dumb ass press release yesterday or the day before. Maybe he needs a new campaign manager.
As long as he doesn’t implode, well he might win.
Rand has reached out to get Palin’s support, but she hasn’t responded. Apparently she doesn’t like him much. heh.
Maine voters opposed gay marriage because it was soemthing imposed on them by the legislature. It’s that simple. Probably many supporters of gay marriage were like me and not concerned enough about the issue to turn out. Ah, well. The fact remains that while social conservatives and those who simply wanted to buck the legislature had a clear enthusiasm edge over its supporters in Maine, social issues were non factors in the two major races last week. Ironically Republicans who couldn’t be troubled to put their social positions anywhere near the center of their platforms won both. Imagine that.
#221 I do esp Kennedy and his love of “International Norms”
-Polaris
Ah, great. A Rand Paul supporter. Were you formerly known as Libertarian girl by chance, Invalid?
Joe,
I agree that this was a rough loss, but I don’t know if they should fire Weis for it. You have to keep in mind the game was a giant fluke! How many teams can win against ANYONE, much less a solid team like Navy when you (1) throw a fluke interception at the 4 yard line, (2) fumble on the half yard line, and (3) miss field goals from 14 and 25 yards with a FG kicker that set an ND record for most field goals in a row. Combine that with fumbling in our territory on the second play of the game and turning it over on downs at the 4 and you see why we lost. At this point, the Michigan loss was worse than the Navy loss because at least we outgained Navy by 150 yards.
I guess if we could get Meyer, I’d agree with you on firing Weis, but right now I’m just not sure any alternative is better.
285. I’ve never posted here before last week.
It was the doctors that they went after,as they were the performers of an illegal act, not the female.
BS. The Texas statue challenged in Roe v. Wade subjected women to penalties. Besides, if pro-lifers truly believe that it is murder why give the woman a pass? She is the one seeking the doctors, not the other way around. In any case, to obtain evidence against the doctor would involve government agents going through people’s medical records. The American people will no stand for that.
Hey Chekote- Do you think Garry Johnson would be a good presidential candidate?
Rand might win the nomination if he can con enough that he is not a nutcase, which I doubt. The problem is any Democrat would crush him because then he would be running in the real world and the kook factor would doom him.
#280 I agree with to the point that currently econmic issues dominate the list of people’s concerns…..
In other times, the issues mix shifts……then social issues become the focus and like it or not the GOP must compete on them
I say that to the extent that the GOP “loses” on social issues is that they are not consistent in their defense of individual rights and personal freedoms……
They get roped into some kind of one-size-fits-all government interventionist solution for every social ill – while the public may support the overriding social goal (for example a majority are pro-life and wouldnt consider an abortion personally) they reject the government interventionsit solution….
IF the GOP would stay consistently on the side of indiviudal rights/freedoms and limited government on ALL issues (social, economic, and foreign policy/defense) they would be consistent political winners as their is broad based public support for such policies since they have consistently delievered real world results!
#290 the “kook” factor is one of Trey Grason’s talking points.
Of course, he has not said one thing kooky so it’s just a talking point.
I am a social conservative and active in GOP politics since 1970’s.
Here is in TN I cannot recall any GOP candidate who made social issues the centerpiece of his or her political campaign.
What always happens is this. A candidate like Chris Christie will say “Corzine has broken his word on taxes, he is a big spender and he runs a corrupt adminstration please vote for me”
Then Corzine runs an ad that says “Christie is pro life and back yard abortions will return to NJ”. Then the NY times says “social issues are on the front burner in NJ race”
I have yet to see a GOP candidate run on social issues as the starting point and that’s from Reagan to Bush 43
Let me see if I can get this straight. We have Muslim extremists responsible for the deadliest terror attack in history being tried in nYC. The economy is a shambles. A Muslim extremist the Army overloooked for PC reasons killed 14 people last week. A healthcare travesty has a somewhat good chance of passing. The President can’t decide if he actually wnats to win the two wars he’s presiding over. The dollar is losing value rapidly. Spending and government regulation are mushrooming. With all that, we have to discuss abortion–an issue on no one’s political radar screen at the moment. Ay Dios mio. Que audacidad horible!
(AP) – The New York Times News Service, which repackages Times stories for other media outlets, is laying off at least 25 employees.
Those cuts are in addition to the 100 newsroom jobs the Times plans to eliminate by the end of the year, according to New York Times Co. spokeswoman Diane McNulty.
New nonunion jobs will be created at the Times Co.’s Gainesville Sun in Florida to handle editing the wire service.
……
Love it.
Wait, new nonunion jobs will be created?
Hypocrites.
Good point, Wilye.
In VA McDonnell ran on jobs and taxes.
We know what Deeds and the Washington Post did.
Having to drag your dad around on the stump would indeed be rough for Rand. He would have to convince me he is not Dem light like his Dad, who votes with the Democrats more than any other Republican and claims its because he is for small govt!
Wants to return to the Gold Standard and thinks the govt was behind 9/11. A nutjob.
Wes, Invalid is a Ron Paul nut from polipundit. He spams and trashes that site.
#293 Very true and amusing lol
Just to shovel some raw meat out to your lions:
http://rightwingnews.com/#post3773
“The George W. Bush Institute: Free Markets, Small Government…”
Al Salvi, Kris Kobach, Ronna Romney, Bob Dornan, Tim Hutchison, and John swallow just to name the first five that pop into my head, Rdel.
“Wants to return to the Gold Standard and thinks the govt was behind 9/11. A nutjob.”
Neither Rand nor Ron have said that.
One good thing though is that if Rand wins his senate seat, that will pave the way for a presidential run.
Wes, I was hoping Etheridge would be stupid enough to run For Senate. that we could have taken his House seat and watched him get crushed by Burr.
Chekote I would jump in here on the abortion debate but I think you are doing fine for the pro-choice view. The main point I would make is that this is a lose-lose issue for Republicans in the sense we will not get any more votes by pushing this issue and will in fact lose votes from people who would otherwise be attracted to the economic, foreign policy, immigration, and other positions Republicans stand for. If you are pro-life the Republicans are the only game in town, but we need pro-choice voters that agree with other conservative positions.
The Gold Standard actually worked out well for the country when it was in effect until 1933, Gary. On most issues though, you’re right. Ron Paul is a nutjob.
Etheridge may be in trouble anyway, Jason.
“One good thing though is that if Rand wins his senate seat, that will pave the way for a presidential run”
Rand is not fit for dog catcher let alone the Senate.
Wes, at least Hutchinson won in 1996 and served a term, but was a moron with his wife.
The others were non electable boneheads
Wes, do you see the Democrats committing Hari Kari with a Nuclear Option?
Well Garry Johnson for president is a good backup plan if we can’t get Rand or Ron to run for the White House in 2012.
Not as exciting, but he has the best record of any governor so he’s a decent choice.
“Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano expressed confidence Friday that Congress would introduce a comprehensive immigration reform bill in early 2010 and that debate and passage of the legislation could occur before the mid-term elections later that year.”
Tommy will say otheriwse and cite some nonsensical poll as proof, but the GOP lost the suburbs precisely on the social issues. Even Michael Barone in the Almanac of American Politics (Don’t leave home with out it!) points out the suburbs trended away from the Republicans from the mid-’90s on because of the perceived attachment of the GOP to social conservatives. By running strictly on economic issues and avoiding even the slightest discussion of social issues, both Bob McDonnell and Chris Christie neutralized the issue when the dems opposing them tried to bring those issues to the fore. That is the way the GOP can win. Unfortunately the moonbats at BeJosephStalin.com are incapable of understanding such apparent logic.
Wes,
We got into the abortion debate via the Obamacare issue and the Stupak ammendment.
No, Jason. I see Reid trying it, but with a boatload of Dems being in serious trouble next year, I see many of them moving to defeat such a thing if Reid does try it.
Anyway, now that Pelosi passed HC reform there is tremendous pressure on the Dems in the Senate to pass something. I think they will. Unfortunately.
#305 That may be true with regard to the Gold standard, but a return to the gold-standard is a total non-starter these days. It would dry up all the international credit funds quickly and there wouldn’t be enough gold in the world to float enough LIBOR loans to keep the world solvent….and Invalid, I’ve known some Ron Paul followers and they slavishly follow the Vienna Circle Econonmists and they DO want to destroy the world economy in order to save it by making the economy crash in just the way I’ve described (and yes they DO want to return to a commodoties based currency).
Ron Paul is not someone that mainstream republicans should associate themselves with. I’ll leave it at that.
-Polaris
I completely support the Stupak Amendment. If a woman wants to have an abortion, then by all means far be it from me to stop her. She’d better not expect my tax dollars to fund it though. If anyone seriously expects the Liar Dogs to oppose Obamacare en masse if it goes to the floor without the Stupak Amendment in it though, then I have some oceanfront property at a Martian pole I want to sell you.
The tabloid newspaper “Globe” says that Obama has lung cancer.
http://www.globemagazine.com/story/421
“The Gold Standard actually worked out well for the country when it was in effect until 1933,”
So what…it was obsolete and it only worked because gold was artificially pegged at 35 dollars and ounce which was unsustainable.
Neal Boortz said it best: The people who did the most damage to the Psaul campaign were his supporters.
#311 Yep. This is stage 2. State 1–> Nationalized Healthcare. Stage2–> “Anmesty”
In two easy stages, the Dems are in power forever regardless of polls.
-Polaris
I think the Dems have made the calculation that it is better to keep their base happy and hope that the economy turns around in time for the 2010 election.
As opposed to the fiat currency we currently have in place, Jason? Look, I’m under no illusions we’ll ever reinstate the Gold Standard. My only point was that it kept spending and printing of money in check. That’s something current economic policy simply is not doing.
Hope is not a strategy I’d hang my political hat on, Chekote.
#321
What have I been saying? Making a big deal about covering the illegals is dumb. The GOP needs to make a big deal about the fact that no matter what the Dems pass, the illegals will get coverage either via amnesty or a federal judge. If people want to make sure that illegals don’t get coverage then they need to oppose HC reform. That is the point that needs to be driven home.
Wes…I understand you represent the “moderate” wing of the party, and to be frank abortion isnt normally a topic I bring up, as today there are many more issues which are pertinent and that the country faces. Abortion was brought up only because of chekote’s militant position on the issue, and her desire to see ameircans who are opposed to the procedure (whether from a moral standpoint or like me from a personal resposnibility point of view) pay for abortion procedure of other with their federal tax dollars.
It was not a pro or con abortion argument, just whether tax dollars should be used for it.
I understand you think social issues should never come up In Campaigns, and they should be a backdrop that only allow the voters to see where a persons moral convctions lie and then Use that to determine what that particular person in the electorate feels it matters in determning yheir support. But…without social conservatives you will never win an election, just as social conservatives need to realize that the needs and desires of fiscal conservatives need to be heeded.
We must find a balancing point where both feel they can mutually push forward, together, to defeat the extremis
we face right now from the left. That’s real moderation.
Van Hollen knows that the Democrats are screwed in 2010.
http://www.rollcall.com/news/40553-1.html?type=printer_friendly
#319 So simply allowing the government to print currancy upon whim is sustainable? Base on the opinions of a small group of elite bankers who can be politically influenced?
The recent phenomenon of “boom/bust” can be directly tied to the creation of the Federal Reserve in 1918 (a big “progressive” reform) and the resulting inflation of our currency – the gold standard’s elimination ended the last check on the government’s power to inflate
Amnesty would only pass if the economy were good. The people do not want to give away their union jobs to newly legalized aliens when unemployment is double digits.
The day they get amnesty, first thing they would do is go looking for highly waged Union employment.
Honestly, Vic, never once have I seen Chek say Americans should pay for abortions with their tax dollars. i’d have a hard time believing she would support such a thing too because it would be out of line with her laissez faire approach to the government.
“I understand you think social issues should never come up In Campaigns, and they should”. Should have been. “I understand you think social issues should never come up In Campaigns, and I agree to a Point. I think they should….
Wilye and Jason T, you both made great points in your last two posts.
Chekote, a economy is not good with Unemployment in double digits. Most Economists say that it will stay that way thru 2011.
People without jobs have cashed in their 401k’s and portfolios, they do not give a damn about Wall street
#326
Total lie. I NEVER supported government funds to pay for abortion. All I said was that it was a waste of time to try to stop coverage of abortion (Stupak amendment) since a judge will probably restore the coverage. If you want to stop government funds to pay for abortions, then you need to defeat Obamacare.
Vic, I think McDonnell and Christie found the blancing point you’re looking for. Both are personally socially conservative, but they understood economics would drive more voters to their camps while focusing on social issues would have had at best a canceling effect. I have absolutely no problem with social conservatives. People like Al Salvi–who play up the issues to the extent of driving off droves of potential voters–are people I have no time for though.
#326 A consistently advocating limited government, federalism and defense of individual rights/freedoms is the prefect way to appeal to moderates on these issues as it address their primary concerns in a reasonable and workable manner….
When amnesty was first brought up and nuked by a Bipartisan vote in the Senate, the GDP was great and unemployment was low.
Amnesty is a political loser for whites and Blacks right now
Good point in 334, Chek.
New thread
#334 You are correct here – Obamacare means Federal taxpayer support of abortion. It may not be direct or overt support but it be there regardless thru the regulations and implict Federal government gurantees.
CrappyCare – something for everyone to hate!
#334 Chek,
Obamacare is dead in the Senate because moderate Democrats don’t want to vote on it. It won’t get the 60 votes necessary to bring it to the floor next week. (We’ve come full circle on this thread now and we need a new one.)
Chekote
false. I don’t make claims to promote my own agenda or to attack people. You 100% gave the impression to the board that you support tax payer Funded abortion. Will you go on record right here and now stating you don’t believe the government should pay for abortions or that abortion coverage shouldn’t be part of the “health care” reform package should it pass.
Please don’t be disingenous.
Actually “Fiat” currency works as well as any other. You just factor in a minimal rate of inflation (about 2CPI) rather than zero. As for boom and bust economies, that is wrong. Boom and bust economics have been with us for a long time….long before the gold standard was removed at any rate (just ask those ruined by the panic of 1890 for example).
No Ron Paul and his cronies are the political front for a self-appointed and notoriously elite (in all the bad senses of the word) cabal of bankers and economists that live mainly in Europe called the “Vienna Circle”. They actually WANT to destroy the economy to “make it sound” (i.e. make it as they want it) and they want to do so by destroying the credit markets.
-Polaris
Polaris,
Gold standard worked fine before we got the Federal reserve.
We should probably get rid of fractional reserve banking too though.
I don’t believe the economy will recover. I am just saying that the Dems are counting on a recovering economy to distract from their vote to pass HC reform.
“Ron Paul is not someone that mainstream republicans should associate themselves with. I’ll leave it at that.”
Even though he won his primary last time with 71% of the vote? Must be a “fringe congressman.”
Polaris,
New subject; I’ll bet that all three service academies will win their football games this Saturday.
Will you go on record right here and now stating you don’t believe the government should pay for abortions or that abortion coverage shouldn’t be part of the “health care” reform package should it pass.
I don’t support the ENTIRE package. To me the abortion issue is a distraction from the bigger problems with the HC reform. Go back and re-read my comments. They talked about a judge restoring the funding. That, my friend, is not the same as supporting government funds for abortions.
The only thing worse than Obama’s foreign policy is Ron Paul’s foreign policy.
345. Fair enough chekote
Chekote- Do you think Garry Johnson would be a good presidential candidate?
Polaris, as I recall, a big economic issue in the 1890s was the attempt by liberals to devalue the dollar by backing the dollar with silver as well as gold. Remember Bryan’s famous Cross of Gold speech? When we were on a precious metal-backed currency, no economic downturn ever lasted longer than a couple of years. The Great Depression hit in early 1932 and lasted all the way to 1943. Are you seriously going to tell me the shift from gold-based to fiat currency had absolutely nothing to do with that?
I specifically asked you if you support federal funds bein used for abortion procedures as it was outlined in the house bill. Not the entire bill, just that clause.
Please don’t try to dodge the question.
Can we get rid of this invalid character? Gary Johnson was a brainless idiot.
#343 You are correct about their being such cycles prior to the elimnation of the gold standard and prior to the advent of central banking but they were a symptom of government intervention in the banking system. Here is a great article on the issue and potential solutions:
http://andrews.blogtownhall.com/2009/02/20/the_inflation_engine.thtml
“The supposed boom-bust cycle is not a feature of the free market, but of the inflationary banking structures we currently have. Yes, there were crashes before the federal reserve, but, as I will explain below, the prior system was similar to the Fed, so it helps to explain the previous cycles. In a free market there can be booms and crashes, but the pressure of the free market on a free banking system work to discourage general excessive issue of credit, making a single boom and bust unlikely, much less the regular cycles with which we have become familiar. Boom and bust cycles are a government phenomenon, caused by the centralization of banking.
Having said all that, what I want to look at is how inflation happens, and, more importantly, how our banking system, since at least the Civil War, has been designed to do nothing but create easy money and a permanent market for federal debt.
The current Federal Reserve system is built on the basis of the old three tiered banking system which was put in place immediately before the civil war. The Federal Reserve takes the place of a consortium of New York banks, and individual banks no longer issue their own notes, but otherwise the current system resembles the past one in many details.
One of those common features, and the most important from my perspective, is that banks consider treasury notes as reserves. In the past they were considered reserves on par with gold, today, without gold, they are the sole reserves. In either case, this practice means that banks must rely on constant federal borrowing. If they rely on having treasury notes to back their deposits, they must replace them as they come to maturity, which means the government must continue to run a deficit. In fact, even worse, as any planned expansion of deposits requires that they acquire more federal notes, requiring an additional expansion of national debt.
In the past this was not so bad, as there was the choice between treasury notes and gold. Banks could always find additional gold reserves if they could not find notes. In fact, during the period between the Civil War and the founding of the Federal Reserve, national debt was retired without doing harm to the economy. With our current system that is just not possible. The Federal Reserve relies upon treasury notes, that is national debt, both to expand the money supply and to provide “reserves” against their outstanding issues. So were the government to stop running a debt, the Fed would be faced with having to contract the money supply as the notes they held were retired and no replacements found. Our system is set up to demand a constant influx of new government debt.
And that is one of the biggest problems with the central banking system. Not only does it set us up for the boom-bust cycle with its politicized decision making, which makes inevitable a cheap money policy, even with the best management in the world, it would inevitably be a cheap money engine, as the government would pressure it into buying up what debt could not be sold on the market. Not only that, but the pressures have two “positive feedbacks”. First, as money becomes cheaper, it becomes easier to sell debt on the market, allowing the government to run up larger debts, requiring the Fed to buy up more bonds, making money cheaper, allowing the sale of more debt on the market, and so on. Second, should the government ever think of exercising fiscal responsibility and issuing no new notes, the immediate impact on the money supply would spook most of America, create demands for government “stimulus”, and thus encourage deficit spending which would increase the money supply**.
Our current system is set up to be nothing but a market for federal debt. Unfortunately, that also means it serves as a massive inflation engine. I can think of no better proof than the fact that Alan Greenspan was widely seen as “too conservative” in his issue of money, yet the CPI nearly doubled between 1988 and 2008. If that is an excessively restrained position, then imagine what a “normal” position would be. And before someone points out that doubling in 20 years seems innocent enough, recall the massive increase in wealth and productivity in those years. With a fixed money supply, prices would have fallen significantly. Taht they rose suggests a pretty significant inflation.
The solution is simple, but unlikely to be popular. The first half is what I am sure my readers expect, the return to a commodity backed currency, to act as a break on inflation. However, I differ from some in arguing that is not enough. We had gold in the 19th century, but also had an inflationary boom-bust cycle. What we really need is not just a gold standard but a free banking system, one without a central agency to enforce uniform inflation and create such cycles. In a free system, if a bank inflates too much, investors and other banks lose confidence and it goes under. It causes a small slump, but much less than when a centralized system engage sin the same fallacy. With individually manged banks, the chances of a universal inflation or deflation is close to zero.”
I would add too, that the author is by no means a Paul supporter in anyway if you read his other works and comments.
You have to get rid of fractional reserve banking if you want to eliminate the business cycle entirely or almost entirely.
So then we switch to an open banking system or a closed banking system.
Those are the two alternatives I’ve seen.
Wes
I saw Tim Hutchinson’s campaigns in AR from my perch here in memphis. He did not run a social conservative campaign in 1996 with ads saying anything about Abortion or Gay Marriage or prayer in school. Did he hammer Clinton and the democrats on Bill’s zipper problem. You bet he did. I might add that lying to a grand jury and having sex outside of marriage is not your normal social con issues.
B-1 Bob Dornan ran his campaigns in the 1970’s and 1980’s on Defense issues 1st and for most. He was also strong on Prop-13 and other tax issues. Later he became concerned with immigration-Vietnam war Vet issues and other CA issues.
Wes I do not believe that I saw any ads from Salvi, Kobach or Renna Romney. Illinois and Michigan (not sure where Kobach was from) so that would only be a guess?
I do not one social conservative that you are bound to be me familar with. That would be one Jesse Helms. He certainly was anti abortion but Jesse railed against government spending, taxes, the Cold War, panama canal, reverse descrimination and what not.
#353
I DO NOT support any government funds to be used for abortions unless the life of the mother is at stake. You are free to have an abortion on your own dime.
#351
I don’t know who he is. But if you support him, he must be bad.
Wes
Social conservatism for the GOP is not what you say. Its who you are. That’s why they dug into McDonnell’s past at Regent’s college as Pat Robertson is one of the arch devils of the ultra left.
I had to tell all my conservatives friends that McCain was not a liberal churchman that he went to a baptist church. McCain and his wife left their mainstreet liberal protestant church 15 years ago. Yet just being a member of that church was a huge black mark against McCain.
If you look at voting records or what they expoused McCain & Palin were nearly two peas in a pod. Perhaps 95% agreement. Palin, however, had a lifetime of attending a conservative church. Dr. Dobson and the influential christian conservatives were cool with her while McCain was viewed with suspiscion.
As I said perhaps Salvi and Renna Romney ran abortion commercials and what not. I am fairly familar with most other contested house and senate races of late. Even senator Coburn did not raise abortion as issue. His opposition yes but not him.
8 – Oh the irony in that statement is just too good.
12 – Yup, I’ll max out if he is the nominee.
21 – My sources tell me they have this is correct.
257 – lol
285 – Your talking to acroso from pp.
294 – Yup you have that right, same chit different day.
346 – He is a fringe congressman, there are quite a few of them, doesn’t me we want to see them in higher office.
349 – Creative, but may not be true for much longer at the current rate.
354 – Good luck.
Knighthawk
if you read all the posts on this thread
You are a better man then me.
or least more driven
Can’t say I finished every one.. but yeah I try to at least scan most of them, never know where the good nuggets will turn up.