Posts Tagged ‘Republicans’
Smugness is obnoxious. Since the failed ObamaCare rollout, there have been a lot of smug Republicans.
They gleefully recount healthcare.gov horror stories—hours spent on the site without being able to sign up—and people who haven’t been able to keep their plans, period. Contrary to the pervasive joy in Conservative circles, these aren’t good things.
The average American may not have been a huge fan of the Affordable Care Act when it passed, but now that it’s law, they’d like it to work properly, make their lives easier. They’re worried. It seems like their government can’t do anything right. Their country appears to be faltering.
They look around for an alternative, someone to rescue them from this leaderless chaos, and what do they see? Republicans with sh**-eating grins on their faces taking triumphant turns on talking head shows. We don’t look like the better option.
If Republicans don’t change our behavior and attitude, we will squander the opportunity to right the terrible wrongs of Obama’s presidency. We can’t dance in the end zone.
We need to let people know that we don’t want to win for the sake of winning. We want to provide constructive solutions to improve their lives. Sometimes, those solutions are just to get government out of the way, a point Obamacare is effectively illustrating for us.
We have to say, “I know you’re frustrated and disappointed the health care law is not working, we are too and here’s what we’d like to do to make it better.” Or, “I recognize that aspects of Obamacare—letting young adults stay on their parents’ plan until age 26 or enabling people with pre-existing conditions to get coverage—really help your family, but we think there’s an even better way to help you and others, and here it is.”
As Republicans, we have the better ideas. If we truly want the American people to give us the chance to prove it, we’d better shape up.
In a decision that no one expected, the Supreme Court has upheld Obama’s health care law, but with a twist.
It was clear from the questioning during the oral arguments that the Court didn’t like the individual mandate – at least in the context of the Commerce Clause.
So, Chief Justice Roberts saved the Commerce Clause from Congress, while calling the mandate a tax. This is not welcome news to President Obama and the Democrats running for re-election. With the mandate considered a tax, it makes the bill one of the largest tax increases in history. This is going to make for an interesting fall.
I’m sure many will criticize Chief Justice Roberts, but he has managed to keep the court above the politics of this issue, and that’s probably smart.
Republicans should be plenty comfortable knowing that this health care law will be the focal point between now and November. It could be 2010 all over again.
This piece by Daily Caller contributor, Thomas Grier, hits tonights Walker landslide victory on the nose.
If you pause and listen carefully, you might be able to hear the despair coming from Jim Messina, President Obama’s 2012 campaign manager, and David Axelrod, Obama’s top strategist and communications director, as the meaning of Wisconsin’s recall election becomes clear.
In the final hours before Governor Scott Walker’s victory, with the writing on the wall, President Obama and his campaign could only muster a tweet and a last-minute video for challenger Tom Barrett. But do not let that tepid support fool you: Democrats and their union allies spent an astronomical amount on a judicial election, four state legislative recalls and the recall of Governor Walker, only to lose.
The spin has already begun. On Tuesday, White House Press Secretary Jay Carney said the Wisconsin recall election “probably won’t tell us much about a future race.” Regardless of what you hear, the results are a colossal failure for Democrats and President Obama’s re-election efforts. Even former Pennsylvania governor and Democratic National Committee chairman Ed Rendell, speaking on MSNBC last week, said the recall election was a “mistake.”
Read the whole thing. And then watch the spin for the next few days.
Bart Stupak will announce today that he will not seek reelection in November. After this so-called pro-life Democrat pulled a Judas on the issue of life, and providing the final votes needed to pass Obama’s government takeover of health care. This is what defines cowardice: selling out your principle, and then running away from defending yourself.
His seat is likely to go Republican, increasing the chances of a GOP majority in the House after the November election.
All I can say is good riddance. One less unprincipled Member of Congress to worry about.
The first question Republicans should ask Obama when they meet at the Blair House for the health care summit on Thursday is this: “If we turn to a government-run health care system like Canada, where will the Canadians go for their health care?”
As you may already know, Newfoundland’s Premier chose to come to the United States for surgery on his heart, rather than have it done in Canada.
Isn’t that everything we need to know about why we should have government-run health care?
The race to fill the Senate seat of Edward Kennedy in Massachusetts is turning into the most closely watched election of the season. In what can only be described as unbelievable, the Republican candidate, Scott Brown, is in a dead heat with the Democrat candidate, Martha Coakley.
For a Republican to even be in the game in a state like Massachusetts is incredible. This is a state where Democrats outnumber Republicans by more than 5-1.
It has gotten so dire for Democrats, that there has been talk about delaying the certification of the election if Brown wins. Just for those keeping track, the last time there was a special election in Massachusetts for an open House seat, the winner was sworn in two days later.
In reaction to a question about a delayed certification, the esteemed Representative Barney Frank said it was a “conspiracy theory.”
“There isn’t the slightest possibility of it happening—a way of doing it.”
Well Mr. Frank, we’ll remember that on February 20 if Brown ends up winning.
Even if the Democrat wins, this race does not portend a good year for Democrats nationally.
Another year, another decade.
I’ve been thinking about my memories of 1980, 1990, 2000 and wondering what will standout in 2010.
In 1980, the most vivid memory I have was witnessing the greatest sports moment in American history – when the USA Olympic hockey team beat the Soviet Union (“Do you believe in miracles?”). It was the symbolic turning point of West triumphing over the East, with the actual turning point happening 10 months later with the election of Ronald Reagan as President of the United States.
By 1990 the Berlin wall had come down and the Soviet Union was headed to the dustbin of history, as predicted by Reagan. The United States went through incredibly prosperous times even as it went through some interesting political shifts. The 1992 campaign saw Ross Perot as the spoiler for George Bush (who had famously broken his “no new taxes” pledge) and the election of the boy from Hope. 1994 was the “revolution” with the sweeping election of Republicans to the House and Senate. The decade ended with an impeachment of the President in the House, but no conviction in the Senate.
2000 was the year that divided the country in half, with the razor thin margin of victory of George W. Bush over Al Gore. And then Sept. 11, 2001 the country came back together, at least for a little while.
Bush actually did a lot to strive for bipartisanship. Not one of his major legislative initiatives was passed on a party-line vote. Bush’s two biggest legislative initiatives, No Child Left Behind and Medicare Prescription Drug Coverage, were opposed by conservatives in the House and Senate. But the war in Iraq and his push for big government initiatives had the dual affect of motivating the left against him and suppressing his base of support. The result was Republicans taking a beating at the polls in 2006 and 2008.
Looking at President Obama’s first year, bipartisan is not what comes to mind. In fact, there is a more partisan tone than I have ever witnessed myself. Is that a bad thing? Probably not. Big fights over policy are important. If everything big was just passed without strong debate we’d have a much more intrusive government. Partisanship puts a check on government, at least to some degree.
So 2010 will likely be the most partisan year in memory. There are going to be some big policy fights (health care will be the first) and this year will be fascinating to watch from an electoral standpoint. It could be a repeat of 1994. Time will tell.
One thing for certain is that time does not stand still. How will the decade of 2010-2019 be remembered? I don’t have any idea, but anticipation is half the fun.
Happy New Year and Happy New Decade!
It’s been well-known inside the beltway that there are more rich Democrats serving in Congress than Republicans. But Republicans are always branded as the party of the rich. Ironic isn’t.
Well, here is a list of the top 50 richest Members of Congress, and there are 28 Democrats and 22 Republicans. In fact, the top 10 is comprised of 8 Democrats and 2 Republicans.
Ironic, isn’t it.