Streetcar Line
Moving From Yes to No on Health Care
The honest way to explain new opposition.
It really should not be all that hard for a moderate Democratic U.S. House member to resist the pressure from Speaker Nancy Pelosi and White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel, and thus to do the right thing by switching from a “yes” vote on Obamacare to a “no.”
Imagine for a moment that you are — to pick a “swing vote” congressman almost entirely at random — freshman Rep. Mark Schauer of Michigan, who won his seat in the heavily Democratic year of 2008 with just 48.8 percent of the vote in a Republican-leaning district. You’re a smart guy, a Phi Beta Kappa with a Master’s Degree in Public Administration. You’ve been in elective office of one sort or another since you were 33 years old, in 1994, so you understand how politics works. You understand the interplay between popular opinion and an officeholder’s considered judgment. And you know that proposals that fail to pass can almost always be revived in slightly different form if they really have merit.
What you would do and say would be something like this: First, you put out a big press release serving notice that you will announce, either in a speech in your home district or in a “special order” on the House floor, your decision on Obamacare. And when the time comes, you say this, or something very much like it:
“Everybody, this question about whether to vote for this health-care reform package in a tough one. Don’t think it is easy, either way. As my constituents surely know, I voted for the House version when it came up for a vote last fall. I make no apologies for having done so. I thought long and hard about it, and it seemed like the right thing to do. It seemed to offer more advantages than disadvantages. We really do need to help the uninsured find coverage. We really do need to help people who feel the system is too complicated, too costly, and too uncaring. And in my considered judgment, the bill we voted on accomplished those goals, or at least moved enough closer to those goals that on balance it seemed a good idea.
“But here’s something else I understand: I understand something that politicians too seldom acknowledge; I understand that I can be wrong. Even when I think I am right, I might be wrong. And if enough people tell me I am wrong, on something that I think is a fairly close call anyway, then it is my responsibility to listen. It is my responsibility not necessarily to change my mind, but to leave myself open to changing my mind. Minds should not be changed for slight reasons or momentary advantage, but minds should be able to change if the reasons are of substance.
“We as congressmen have two roles. To us and to our judgment, our constituents delegate much of their governing authority. They know that while they go about the business of doing the jobs that make our country go, and of caring for their families and befriending their neighbors, they cannot examine every clause of every piece of legislation that comes down the pike. They delegate that job to us, and we must sometimes use our best judgment even against what seems to be the prevailing opinion where that opinion is not focused or well-informed. If the issue is ordinary and I am sure, in good conscience, that my position is right, I have a duty to follow my conscience even if a finger in the wind would tell me that a slight majority of my district might disagree. As a delegate, I must not sacrifice conscience for short-term political expedience.
“But we also have a second role, and it is an important one. We are not just delegates free to rush headstrong in whatever direction we want; instead, we also are representatives. We represent those who elected us. We serve them and must respect their collective wisdom. We are their servants, not their masters. This is particularly true on big issues that earn lots of attention: If the public is strongly engaged in an issue, if the citizens themselves have the chance and inclination in the midst of their busy lives to study a major public issue and think about it hard and then to opine about it, then I no longer am so much more an expert on that issue than they are. They defer less to my judgment in those cases, and it right for them to do so. They expect me less to act as an independent-minded delegate than as a representative of their best collective views.
“Now it must be said that there is no simple mathematical formula to say where the two roles intersect or collide. But think of it like this: If I have reason to believe that 52 percent of my constituents take one position, but I feel strongly the other position is best for my country and my district, I should vote with my conscience and let the chips fall where they may. But if I am only slightly sure that one position is the better one, but a large majority, say 65 percent, of my constituents feel otherwise, then I have a solemn responsibility to follow their lead. This is especially true when not only the numbers, but also the depth and intensity of feeling, is on the other side. My ego must not be so great that I act as if my slight inclination outweighs their overwhelming opinions. I may still think that I am right, on balance, but I nonetheless must serve my citizenry’s considered wishes. Not only that, but I must do so with pride in this system that insists that here, sir, the people rule.
“So we come to this health-care decision. I could pick a provision that I liked that was in the House bill that is not in the final bill we will consider — and there are indeed such provisions — and claim that the failure to include such a provision made the difference for me. Or vice versa: I might claim that the final version contains a new joker in the deck, to which I object. And that claim, too, would be honest.
“But to claim that it is for those reasons of pure policy that I vote ‘no’ would be dishonest. I could stand here all day and sound like a high-minded policy wonk, and while each statement might be technically true, the whole impression would be false. Because the larger truth is that my vote will be cast not because of my own great wisdom, but because I respect the wisdom of the people who sent me here. It is just not right, especially not in a republic, to cram a major change into law through the barest congressional majority, and a partisan majority at that, against the overwhelming opinions of the American people. And on this health-care legislation, there can be no doubt what the majority of the people believe, and what a large plurality of them believe with great passion after considerable reflection: They believe that this bill moves too far too fast, that it is too big and too scary, that it dictates too much and leaves too little choice to the individual. The majority may be right, or it may be wrong. But it has spoken in polls and at the ballot boxes and in letters and emails and phone calls and town meetings. And its message is utterly clear. Its message is to start over. To build a wider consensus before making such a big change. To slow down even though we in Washington might think our handiwork is not just well designed but of pressing importance.
“We in Washington must listen. Again, we must listen. And listen again. Some of us may not even like what we hear, but still we must listen.
“Toward that end, having not only listened but heard the message, I urge all of my wavering colleagues to make clear, in public, that we will not vote for this package — and that we further urge our leadership to withdraw it and to try to rework it almost from scratch, with input from whichever of our Republican colleagues actually are serious about solving these health-care problems. Look: I do believe that there has been some bad faith shown by some of my Republican colleagues. But I also know, without a doubt, that many of them are serious and sincere and principled. It is high time we stop bashing each other and start respecting each other.
“So I will vote against the comprehensive health-care legislation soon to come before us. I will do so because sometimes we must take time to breathe and reflect. We should not take a step backward, but there is nothing wrong with taking a step sideways. If the step to the side, for a pause, allow us to better hear the people and act accordingly, it can only be a good thing.
“I will vote no, and many of my colleagues ought to do the same. This is a republic. We are not rulers. We serve. We serve. We serve.
“Thank you very much.”
About the Author
Quin Hillyer is a senior editor of The American Spectator and a senior fellow at the Center for Individual Freedom. Follow him on Twitter @QuinHillyer.
Letter to the Editor View all comments (157) | Leave a comment
Related Articles
More Articles by Quin Hillyer
More Articles From Streetcar Line
http://spectator.org/archives/2010/03/11/moving-from-yes-to-no-on-healt
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
Current Issue
- What’s in a Name?
- A President Loses His Power
- Downton’s Class System — and Ours
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
ADVERTISEMENT
Brian Mc| 3.11.10 @ 6:57AM
It is much simpler than all that, Mr. Hillyer.
"Even if seventy-five per cent of the populace rants for the legislation, I must, in my gut, determine if said legislation goes agains the spirit of the Constitution of the United States. If the answer is yes, if it leads down a path of socialism, I must vote no...my duty demands it and my political career be damned."
That's what I'd like to hear from the mouths of some of these all-caring Dems, and stated with emphasis. What a pipe dream!
Alan Brooks| 3.11.10 @ 9:38AM
"The honest way to explain new opposition."
"Opposition"? why that's too harsh; Pee Wee Herman's self esteem might be harmed.
We are all united in the healing spirit of Huggy Bear.
MTB| 3.11.10 @ 8:40PM
Are you on Prozac or something? Very few of your ramblings make sense. Say something constructive or don't say anything at all.
philmon | 3.11.10 @ 11:20AM
Correct, Brian Mc... The Republic has this document called The Constitution which restrains those in power, and it even restrains what we the people might want.
For instance, what if 75% of voters wanted to re-instate slavery? Shouldn't matter. Uncontstiutional. So it's a no go.
Roxana| 3.11.10 @ 1:41PM
Yes, you have sworn to uphold the Constitution of the USA. And another question you need to ask yourself: Are you willing to be bound under the same rules and laws as your constituents would be bound under?
basur | 10.27.10 @ 6:40AM
The only time politicians apologize for anything comes when somebody has their nuts in grinder.
ggoblue| 3.11.10 @ 7:20AM
i will represent the wishes of my district.
my district does not want this bill.
it seems so simple but...the democrats don't even know what the meaning of is is.
freaking kooks from top to bottom.
George S| 3.11.10 @ 8:28AM
"The majority may be right, or it may be wrong. But it has spoken in polls and at the ballot boxes and in letters and emails and phone calls and town meetings...
... all throughout the summer of 2009; yet I still voted yes in the fall. Just shows you how much I valued your input. So what has changed that is making me listen to you? Well, I and my fellow Democrats didn't really believe that what we were seeing was anger -- how could there be after the election of the Post-Partisan Messiah? We just thought you were too dense to see the benefits of the bill. But when Scott Brown won the Kennedy Senate Bar Stool, well that kind of soiled my pants. I now realize that my comfy benefits here on the Hill may be snatched away from me this November, and I sure hate to troll for work in this economy. Doesn't matter what job I find, it will not have the wicked cool benefit of being escorted through Bethesda Medical Center by the Chief Doctor of whatever sickness I come down with...
... so, I am voting no. I heard what you said, but now I know you really meant it all along. Just ignore my voting yes, I was against it before I voted for it. Really. Would a congressman lie?"
MTB| 3.11.10 @ 8:41PM
Great comment! LOL. Thanks.
Ken (Old Texican)| 3.11.10 @ 8:43AM
Quin,
(Smile), once more into the breach, sir. Thank you.
I could wish that the speech/paper you just wrote were actually a reality. I could even consider voting for that man or woman.
We shall see, won't we?
Michael L. Hauschild| 3.11.10 @ 9:36AM
(None of that will ever happen Quinn, these people do not live by any creed that is discernible. Some people do, the last sentence fits Ken the best.)
Creed of a Nebraska Libertarian
Your fences need to be horse-high, pig-tight and bull-strong.
Keep skunks and bankers at a distance.
Life is simpler when you plow around the stump.
A bumble bee is considerably faster than a John Deere tractor.
Words that soak into your ears are whispered...not yelled.
Meanness don't jes' happen overnight.
Forgive your enemies; it messes up their heads.
Do not corner something that you know is meaner than you.
It don't take a very big person to carry a grudge.
You cannot unsay a cruel word.
Every path has a few puddles.
When you wallow with pigs, expect to get dirty.
The best sermons are lived, not preached.
Most of the stuff people worry about ain't never gonna happen anyway.
Don 't judge folks by their relatives.
Remember that silence is sometimes the best answer.
Live a good, honorable life.. Then when you get older and think back, you'll enjoy it a second time.
Don 't interfere with somethin' that ain't bothering you none.
Timing has a lot to do with the outcome of a Rain dance.
If you find yourself in a hole, the first thing to do is stop diggin'.
Sometimes you get, and sometimes you get got.
The biggest troublemaker you'll probably ever have to deal with, watches you from the mirror every mornin'..
Always drink upstream from the herd.
Good judgment comes from experience, and a lotta that comes from bad judgment.
Lettin' the cat outta the bag is a whole lot easier than puttin' it back in.
If you get to thinkin' you're a person of some influence, try orderin' somebody else's dog around..
Live simply. Love generously. Care deeply.
Speak kindly. Leave the rest to God.
--
Don't pick a fight with an old man. If he is too old to fight,
he'll just kill you.
Ken (Old Texican)| 3.11.10 @ 10:36AM
Michael,
Thank you.
I copy/pasted that and sent it to all my friends and associates.
Grant Johnson| 3.11.10 @ 9:39AM
Mr Hillyer,
If congressmen start sending speech writer job offers, please turn them down; we need you here. You might want to offer them use of this speech free of charge, however.
grumpygresh | 3.11.10 @ 10:05AM
It should not be that hard for a swing district Dims to go from yes to no on 0bamacare. The Republican party is still a weak brand. Being swayed by the will of the people will play well in these districts.
John| 3.11.10 @ 10:47AM
Reality. This thing is going to pass on recon as it always was. To be honest it's taken about 4 months longer than I expected but it's going to happen. And it will be very popular. Bill Kristol was not wrong.
Emo| 3.12.10 @ 7:42PM
If it turns out to be popular it wont be until after 2014, because none of the so-called benefits kick in until then
Michael Handley| 3.14.10 @ 9:59PM
Kind of makes you wonder what they will do with all the money they have collected up to 2014? I think the House and Senate will change hands and they will kill this pig. Then they will have a bunch of our money to spend as they want. They sure won't give it back...
Oldefarte| 3.11.10 @ 11:00AM
Let me simplify this [in my opinion]. Legislators owe their allegiance to their region's TAXPAYERS that fund/support the government primarily, and secondarily to everyone else. This country is now is in dire financial/economic condition, due to decades of political mismanagement/abuse from both Democrats and Republicans. This country simply cannot afford another social/welfaric grovernmental program that will result in further pushing our economy/country over the financial edge to bankruptcy/distruction. There has to be an end to the political philosophy of WE ARE OUR BROTHERS' KEEPERS AND OUR GOVERNMENT HAS TO FORCE OUR COMPLIANCE OVER SAME. There has to begin an age of PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY, where everyone has to solve their own needs/requirements, and not to depend upon others/taxpayers via government to do same. There is no RIGHT to healthcare or any other form of WELFARE, and there never was. Government [social programs] provided welfare has got to cease/stop; and the LIBERALISM CHURCH [of mainly Democrats] whereby elected politicians provide governmental benefits to indigent recipients in return for their political votes must be rejected by taxpayer-voters if they desire their own survival and that of their country!!!!!!
Ken| 3.11.10 @ 11:01AM
I agree that it will pass on reconciliation. It's a shame that the Republicans decided to make this about defeating Obama rather than doing right for America. The reason it dropped in the polls was because the Senate had to drop the public option for Lieberman. The notion that this will "lead to socialism" is a sick joke. The idea that this will have the government "in control of healthcare" is laughable. That would have been true with Medicare for all, but certainly not with Obama's proposal. This proposal is far from perfect, but "starting over" is Repub code for no improvement at all...
Henry Miller| 3.11.10 @ 11:16AM
Unfortunately, your initial assumption that it's "right for America" is wrong.
See, not everyone shares your opinion. In fact, for one reason or another, a majority of Americans don't share your opinion, and, even in the vague approximation of democracy we have in this country, that defines Obamacare as "wrong."
Oldefarte| 3.11.10 @ 11:48AM
This is neither about defeating Obama or what's right for America. It's WEALTH-TRANSFERRING WELFARE [with the taxpayers paying for not only their own insurance, but the indigent recipients as well]. It's popularity drop had absolutely nothing to do with the public option [but simply the public obtaining a small description of the GARBAGE ingredients contained within the bills]. It WILL result in governmental control of healthcare [which is what liberals want], and it will WEALTH-TRANSFER the 5-9% profit margins now going to PRIVATE health insurance companies to the coffers of the PUBLIC government. All federal government social [medical] programs, including this healthcare bill, are simply costs to TAXPAYERS that neither they or this country can now afford. Stop spreading BULLEXCREMENT and tell the TRUTH!!!!!
George F.| 3.11.10 @ 4:23PM
Not wanting this bill has absolutely nothing with Obama as a person. It's about a bad bill!.
Alan Brooks| 3.11.10 @ 4:35PM
"Not wanting this bill has absolutely nothing with Obama as a person. It's about a bad bill!"
A voice of reason. George F, you are like George F. Will; please say you are he. A political blogger who isn't a hothead is like water in the desert.
Pat| 3.12.10 @ 12:53AM
Ken, You are delusional. The proposal has job-killing taxes, freedom-destroying mandates, a trillion in new spending that will bankrupt us ... and you think this is about 'defeating Obama'?!?! Stop drinking the kool aid ... the Democrats are hell-bent on destroying the healthcare freedom for MILLIONS of Americans and turning millions more into dependents that will suck taxpayers dry, and puts Medicare in financial peril... Yes, it is the path to socialism and govt control - dozens of new bureaucracies. Quit spewing the talking points lies - the American people dont buy your lies.
Henry Miller| 3.11.10 @ 11:08AM
"We represent those who elected us. We serve them and must respect their collective wisdom. We are their servants, not their masters."
Unfortunately, there's not a single member of Congress, Democrat or Republican, who believes this. As Robert Heinlein put it, "In a mature society, 'civil servant' is semantically equal to 'civil master.'" and it's likely been that way since the first time a handful of cave men got together and decided they were in charge.
Tim| 3.11.10 @ 11:11AM
The only time politicians apologize for anything comes when somebody has their nuts in grinder.
Kelley Hannah| 3.11.10 @ 11:11AM
I would have loved to have heard one of the Republicans that Obama scolded at the Health Summit on Feb. 25, stand up and fight back. When such as Eric Cantor for example, was taken to task for bringing Obama Healthcare bill to the table, stand up and tell him it was his healthcare bill and how you really feel about all of this. This is just one more example of taking over our country. Pretty soon he will have every aspect of our lives under government control. Remember they are also trying to tack on the Education lending program to this bill and take it away from companies such as Ed Financial who has loaned students money for tuition for years. Imagine the red tape this is going to cause. If they cannot run the post office they surely cannot run school loan programs or health care. Keep your hands off my health care please.
mikey| 3.12.10 @ 6:58AM
That is because Obama has no class. He called the senators by their first names and showed them no respect.
We have THREE EQUAL branches of goverments and the Ass in Chief thinks that he is king.
Cindy Merrill| 3.11.10 @ 11:12AM
Imagine someone smokes like a chimney, boozes and weighs 40% over the norm: will healthcare coverage change his habits? NO. Because the person I just described is a DOCTOR, who's a friend of my sister in law.
Muriel| 3.11.10 @ 11:37AM
Maybe someone boozing, smoking, etc. won't change his habits, but as of now, we are a free society making our own decisions. I would rather live in a free society than having Michelle and Barack telling me what I am allowed to eat or I won't have health insurance. That's what this is leading to, and I know it is because now they want to take my 5th grader's Body Mass Index to see if he's "fat" due to Michelle Obama's new program! Horray for Michelle! What would we do without her looking after our children since we're too dense to do it ourselves?
redbudacres| 3.11.10 @ 1:26PM
If I was one of these "blue dog" dems under pressure from the botox queen, I'd assure her she had my vote...up until it was TIME. Then I'd vote no and shock the poop right outa her. HAHAA
I'd pay money to see her expressionless face.
Can I contribute to this fictional guy's campaign?
Canary| 3.11.10 @ 1:30PM
Quinn,
Great article. Why don't you make 216 copies and mail to the mailbox of the Democrats in Congress? It's so sad that the congressmen of the US act in no different manner than the 'representatives' of the congress of communist vietnam are doing right now. They voted yes with the gov's bauxite project to let the chinese come in the country free, to do whatever they want. People who protest it are put in jail. All the 'reps' vote yes.
I will mail this to the congressman of my district. tks
George Mooth | 3.11.10 @ 2:03PM
What a bunch of bull! You're just going with the flow. The day after the election in the event you win, you will be right back voting yes.
You give politicians a bad name.
VBMax| 3.11.10 @ 2:07PM
No sir, the fact that you voted for the bill to begin with proves that you have no judgement and deserve to be voted out no matter how you feel about it now.
Pingback| 3.11.10 @ 2:24PM
The American Spectator : Moving From Yes to No on Health Care links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Pingback| 3.11.10 @ 2:48PM
The American Spectator : Moving From Yes to No on Health Care capital university links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Pingback| 3.11.10 @ 3:32PM
The American Spectator : Moving From Yes to No on Health Care American Me links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
CJohnson| 3.11.10 @ 5:59PM
The collective expertise of a nation of people who shop insurance rates, initiate claims, and carry multiple policies is beyond compare. We know Universal Coverage is simply not feasible. Nice idea but....
MTB| 3.11.10 @ 8:47PM
If Brown hadn't of won "Teddy's seat" in Mass, this statement would never have happened. The Dems on shaky ground are now scared and most of them are back-peddaling as fast as they can.
Notice to all democrats: If you vote for this bill, if it becomes law, you have signed your own pink slip. You will be voted out of office. Whether you stay or go is up to you, but the PEOPLE have spoken. WE DON'T WANT THIS BILL! Simple, no?
JJ| 3.11.10 @ 10:49PM
they are 10 votes shy from fundamentally screwing america
Supra TK Society | 3.12.10 @ 2:46AM
Your blog keeps getting better and better! Your older articles are not as good as newer ones you have a lot more creativity and originality now. Keep it up!
And according to this article, I totally agree with your opinion, but only this time! :)
Katy| 3.12.10 @ 5:46AM
Mr. Schauer is my representative I'm sorry to say. I have asked him to vote no on health care and received a boiler plate response which basicly said 'screw you'. So Mr. Schauer will be voted out of office in November and I'm looking forward to voting for Tim Wahlberg, a true conservative.
Ralph Novy| 3.12.10 @ 1:55PM
Your piece is artfully crafted, but ultimately utterly disingenuous.
"It is just not right, especially not in a republic, to cram a major change into law through the barest congressional majority, and a partisan majority at that, against the overwhelming opinions of the American people. And on this health-care legislation, there can be no doubt what the majority of the people believe, and what a large plurality of them believe with great passion after considerable reflection: They believe that this bill moves too far too fast, that it is too big and too scary, that it dictates too much and leaves too little choice to the individual."
No. Not true.
A pity that your art tries to serve such ignoble purposes.
Ralph Novy| 3.12.10 @ 2:07PM
Afterthought:
"...dictates too much and leaves too little choice to the individual."
Uh-huh.
Conservatives as champions of individuals' freedoms, eh?
To paraphrase Samantha Bee on "The Daily Show" recently: "The conservatives are all against government power NOW -- until THEY have the political advantage in the executive and legislative branches. THEN they'll say that deferring to government power is a patriotic duty."
Oldefarte| 3.12.10 @ 5:02PM
To YOU and this equally moronic idiot Samantha Bee, I say ELECT A 'CONSERVATIVE PRESIDENT AND A 'CONSERVATIVE' CONGRESS, and then see how much 'government power' disappears/decreases thereafter, dummie!!!!
BigTuna87 | 4.9.10 @ 10:12AM
You obviously do not understand Republicans or you would not state such an ignorant line, "Conservatives as champions of individuals' freedoms, eh? " Conservatives are all about less government intrusion which equates to more freedom for individuals. You must be confusing responsibility with freedom as in liberals thinking that holding individuals responsible for their actions is a breech of ones individual freedom. Freedom does not give one the right to do what ever they want to others freedom.
Chris | 3.12.10 @ 2:48PM
Oh so NOW the voice of the people matters! I get confused because you wingnuts jump back and forth so often "flip! flop!". When you're in power, like when Dick Cheney was asked about the vast majority of the public opposing continuing the Iraq occupation and his answer was, "so?". I didn't hear a single "high minded" Republican saying, "75% of the people oppose continuing this war, it's time to go". I didn't hear any Republican declare, "80% oppose privatizing social security, maybe we should shell the bill and work with Democrats". NOW all of a sudden polling matters! I'll be willing to bet, in fact no I guarantee when you're party returns to power, sometime and because most people oppose your agenda when they hear of it, the answer will be "principles over polls". You people are so transparently hypocritical it's beyond obnoxious. On policy after policy, especially in the latter Bush admin, the people opposed and Republicans said it was a matter of principle. You lost, you're not in power anymore now stop acting like a bunch of hypocritical, petulent children who'll say ANYTHING to preserve this god awful health system your party created.
Let's face it, you cite polls when it's convenient and ignore them when it's not. The day I hear Republicans declare that public opposition EVER matters when it's thier agenda being carried out is the day hell freezes over. Times have changed and you remain the same bunch of bitter partisan hacks you've been since 1994 when Newt Gingrich decided being a bitter partisan hack was the way to power. Now look at you, one of your commenters calls President Obama "huggy bear" (Republicans aren't racist, that's just a figment of my imagination, like John Roberts says, it's not people who are racists, it's affirmative action that is, what planet do you people live on?).
The fact is, you people crammed down the throat of America unpopular legislation by any means necessary and accused anyone of opposing you of being communists, socialists or terrorists. Take your own medicine and deal with it conservatives, I have no sympathy for any of you.
Oldefarte| 3.13.10 @ 11:35AM
Name ONE piece of legislation that R's crammed down America's throats that was UNPOPULAR. You're referring to TAX CUTS, and how in the hell could that ever be considered unpopular, since it represents THE RETURN OF MONEY BY THE GOVERNMENT THAT ORIGINALLY BELONGED TO THEM. Anyone NOT wanting to receive BACK their OWN MONEY [which they wroked hard for and earned by their labors] is A FOOL, A MORON, A RADICAL, A SOCIALIST, AND A LIBERAL-TERRORIST!!!!!!!!!
chris| 3.12.10 @ 3:17PM
So, now elections matter too eh? How come when the Republicans lost every national special election until Mass. they had an excuse as to why elections don't matter? Now suddenly they do. This is why you're such angry, bitter wingnuts: cognitive dissonance. You hold to diametrically opposing viewpoints in your head at all times. Give the Democratcs credit, according to graphs their health bill will actually cut the deficit, when have Republicans done such with reconcilliation? If I remember correctly, and I always do when it comes to conservative hypocrisy, it was the Republicans who removed the deficit neutral requirment from reconcilliation so they could cram down ENORMOUS, BUDGET BUSTING tax cuts for the rich down America's throat. Reconcilliation wasn't so evil then, was it Republicans? The fact is, in a better climate, when the Bush economy hasn't destroyed America and then been blamed posthumously on the Democrats by the corporate media, we maybe could actually have a decent conversation on healthcare....naww, what am I thinking? it would be the same old disingenuous memes over and over. Why is it that everytime someone, ANYONE produces a piece of legislation the RNC doesn't back (not enough tax cuts for the rich is my defaul reasoning) it's socialism? This bill, sadly has little to nothing in common with socialism. If anything, it's too conservative, I don't WANT to be given a subsidy to pay one of these bloodsucking middlemen insurance companies. But that's what my choices are: an insurance company giveaway that gets me a policy or an insurance company giveaway in the form of taxes and deregulation that doesn't get me a policy. Hmmm, tough choice, eh? Not really.
The senate bill is lousy and with better alternatives I'd be totally against it, but seeing what you Republicans would do with health care I have no choice but to back it. If you conservatives actually carred about individual choice you wouldn't collude with Democrats to shut down independent parties that threaten you both come election time. Anyway, I don't believe this pablum and none of you should either. You may THINK the GOP has "learned its lesson" and become less corporate conservative and more popular conservative, but there's no chance in hell of that happening if you actually read their alternative bills.
Face it, what we liberals and conservatives have is a choice between bad and worse and that's not much of a choice at all, is it? What I'd do if I were you, is actually examine your own party and ask yourselves how many times did they pass legislation during Bush that vast majorities opposed? how many accounting tricks and legislation manuevers were used by Republicans to pass legislation that flew in the face of the majority. The Democratic party is in trouble because rather than back policies people want like say the public option, they back this bullshit instead. The fact is, if and when Republicans retake power, do you REALLY think they'll do anything to reign in the credit card companies so the public can dig itself out of 20 trillion in private debt we currently carry? of course they won't...if anything they'll make it MUCH easier for the credit card companies to screw us.
Republicans not only don't want health insurance reformed in any way, they don't care how many people are uninsured. So we'll continue to see people's family members die from lack of care long into the future. Republicans think nothing of giving terrorists at Gitmo great health care while denying it to the public. This isn't any longer a "Democrat vs. Republican" issue, this is about the soul of America. Do we really want anymore to have two parties fighting over which of them gets to be a bigger whores to big interests while using us as props like in this article here? I'll tell anyone who reads this, I'm sick of it.
You may disagree with me on how we fix any given issue, but be honest and don't think for a moment either party gives a damn what we think. We're not rich enough, we don't have a corporate charter and we can't write checks big enough to advertise. Enough of this "constitution" and "we the people" CRAP from the GOP and the DNC. Neither one of you care and you abondon the constitution and the public at a moments notice if you think it gives you some electoral advantage to do so. If you don't believe me, go over the Bush years and polling on issues during the Bush years and find out how Republicans voted on issues the people strongly opposed.
Ask yourself if the Constitution or "States Rights" as the current GOP rhetorically screams about mattered when Bush used the EPA and obscure civil war precedent to block Oregon, California and Washington from adopting the Kyoto Accords. Or if constitutional protections mattered with the USA PATRIOT ACT or if legal precedent mattered in the "Citizen's United" case. The answer is no, no, and hell NO. Don't be a follower, be a free thinker and vote against the parties.
emo| 3.12.10 @ 7:45PM
""Give the Democratcs credit, according to graphs their health bill will actually cut the deficit, ""
No need to read any further. The author is delusional
Oldefarte| 3.13.10 @ 12:03PM
In response [briefly] to CHRIS' excrement, the D's bill will not cut the budget, since anyone with brain cells should know that you can't add 30 million uninsureds and have it cost LESS. It wasn't tax cut to the RICH, but to the PEOPLE WHO ORIGINALLY PAID THE TAXES AND WHO FUND/SUPPORT/PAY FOR GOVERNMENT EXPENSES. Insurance companies pay the medical costs and receive compensation/profit for same; and the D's bill is socialism/welfare since it adds 30 million and forcing taxpayers to pay for their medical cost through taxiation. Additionally it attempts to confiscate the profits of insurance companies by the government taking over the health insurance industry [the government want to obtain said profits in order to fund more welfare]. This is what you refer to as THE PUBLIC OPTION, which is a government takeover of private insurance companies to steal their healthcare profits. Your comments regarding environmental treaties is nothing but liberal BULLEXCREMENT [ie cap & trade] which will explode Americans' fuel bills and become a an unneeded/unnecessary TAX. The Patriot Act was/is necessary to protect Americans against your beloved Muslim terrorists that want to destroy us all due to their radical religious beliefs. The SC's 'citizens' case simply allowed corporations to fund political campaigns, it disadvantaged Democrats [whose funding comes from foreign extremists, labor unions and morons like yourself]. 'NOUGH SAID'----go back into your socialist, liberal, rathole and stop demanding that taxpayers pay for your indigent needs in life; and grow a pair and begin self-supporting yourself [and quit asking the government/taxpayers] to do same!!!!!!
Pingback| 3.14.10 @ 9:12PM
Has anybody every had chemotherapy to treat rheumatoid arthritis? | Treating Arthriti links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Trackback| 4.15.10 @ 8:11PM
shoes that tone your legs, on shoes that tone your legs, links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
wow| 10.17.11 @ 1:03PM
yeah she has a good explanation and i like too.
actos lawsuit
yanyan | 10.10.11 @ 3:48PM
It helped me with ocean of knowledge so I really believe you will do much better in the future.mesothelioma attorneys
malibu real estate | 10.11.11 @ 2:09AM
Thanks for the in sighting post that provided ample information here on your post that can easily be understand by your readers. I am admiring you for that
yanyan| 10.11.11 @ 2:36PM
You have shared nice stuff. This is my first time I visit here. I found so many interesting in your blog especially its discussion.zoloft lawsuit
L Tod Schlosser | 11.4.11 @ 12:27PM
Thanks to a brilliant effort in publishing your article. One can be more informative as this. There are many things I can know only after reading your wonderful article.
L Tod Schlosser
balcuizar62| 10.12.11 @ 8:47PM
If possible, as you gain expertise would you mind updating your blog with more information? It is extremely helpful for me.
yaz recall
yaz class action | 10.22.11 @ 2:36PM
freshman Rep. Mark Schauer of Michigan, who won his seat in the heavily Democratic year of 2008 with just 48.8 percent of the vote in a Republican-leaning district. You're a smart guy, a Phi Beta Kappa with a Master's Degree in Public Administration. THIS SMART GUY REALLY HELP US. HE IS NOT LOOKING FOR HIS OWN INTEREST BUT FOR US.
ruth| 10.17.11 @ 10:21AM
i actually like this blog cause i read all topic writings thanks keep up for this P blog..
silver spot price
fiance visa| 10.17.11 @ 8:59PM
I think IE just keeps getting worse and worse I don't understand why anyone still uses them. I think most people don't even realize they can choose a different browser..
fiance visa
creamer| 10.19.11 @ 8:25PM
I found this blog very useful for me. Thanks for your sharing and specially for this great article.
actos lawsuit
love| 10.20.11 @ 5:43AM
picked upso and have picked up some good data as well as enjoyed the way youve got structured your site.
Actos side effects
accident attorney dallas| 10.20.11 @ 3:07PM
[[http://www.fnlawfirm.com|accident attorney dallas]]
devourment| 11.4.11 @ 1:32PM
instead of waiting for this blog i will search for interesting topic thanks..keep it up my friend im here wait for the next post
L Tod Schlosser
PIERCE| 11.8.11 @ 2:55AM
It's this sort of honor to achieve the chance to join the discussion with this great web site! I would like to extend my thank you this.
filipina girls
chester| 11.11.11 @ 1:31AM
Hello, i think that i saw you visited my site.I am trying to find things to enhance my site! I want to say thank for you about it.
zoloft lawsuit
Perfect !!!| 11.14.11 @ 3:58AM
That was exactly what I was looking for. You have done a wonderful job communicating your message. Keep up the good work.
mesothelioma lawyer