Just five?
Five memes destroyed by Brown’s victory:
The GOP is just a regional party that’s limited to the south.
36 Responses to “Just five?”
Remember, I do this to entertain me, not you.
Uncle Pays the Bills
 |
|
Find Local
|
Categories
- ATF (769)
- Death Match (10)
- Eminent Domain (225)
- In the bag (9)
- Notes to Junior (546)
- Poker (74)
- Recipes (142)
- Shotgun Noob (11)
- The Airing of Grievances (19)
- uncategorized (47,725)
January 22nd, 2010 at 12:01 pm
Ted Kennedy replaced by a conservative, that is, a conservative Republican. A non-RINO Republican. Unbelievable. I mean, I would have believed that could have happened if a huge tidal wave had lifted Massachusetts up and deposited it next to Alabama or Texas, but otherwise, not so much.
Turns out that Obama’s good for more than just selling guns!
Now, if he can just change Congress to a Republican majority and then lose his office to a non-RINO Republican . . . and you know, I think he may just have it in him to do that.
January 22nd, 2010 at 12:09 pm
I really think it’s hilarious how people are over-reading Brown’s win. He beat an incompetent boob who spent three of the last five weeks of the campaign on vacation and ran an embarrassingly bad campaign. I didn’t have much of a dog in the fight, but this all smells like straw grasping.
If the author reaaaaallly thinks healthcare reform is a loser for Dems, he should be careful–if the Dems ever get a clue, they’re going to locate their balls and point out that the reason the healthcare debacle is getting worse and worse isn’t them–they tried something (admittedly a poor compromise and a kludge of a bill…but something) whereas the GOPs better idea is…what?
They just signed the mortgage on doing nothing about the cost of healthcare (that we’re all paying whether we have insurance or not) as it creeps toward 20% of the GDP, with no ceiling in sight.
Not sure that’s the winner so many seem to think it’s going to be.
January 22nd, 2010 at 12:23 pm
If Brown had demolished a strong, popular and competent Democrat then some memes would have to be rewritten. But as he beat an absolutely terrible candidate who was widely disliked, this is like talking about what a good fighter you are after beating up a paraplegic. Not sure this is as big a sign as you think it is.
January 22nd, 2010 at 12:35 pm
Most people oppose the nationalization (i.e. communist takeover a la Castro) of health care.
Health care really was a loser for the Dems. Polling showed that over 90% of people who voted for Coakley supported “health care reform” and the reverse of that was true for Brown too – over 90% of his supporters opposed the “reform”.
Dems, such as Dean, have tried to spin the election by saying that people voted for Brown because they were angry about the Dems failing to pass it – that’s pure, self-serving BS. People voted their feelings directly, Coakley or Brown, for or against the idea, and the Dems were blown out of the water as a result, in Marxachusetts of all places, where people have been brain-dead, kommie-zombie, Kennedy voters for 50 years!
“Not sure that’s the winner so many seem to think it’s going to be.”
I am sure that it is not the loser that health care communization actually was on Election Day.
January 22nd, 2010 at 12:37 pm
I wonder if this surprising win will teach the dems that we do not want socialized medicine. At least it looks like the rats are fleeing the healthcare ship.
January 22nd, 2010 at 12:37 pm
Way to miss the point Chas–if you oppose “nationalization” (which isn’t what the bill Brown ran against is, but whatever), what’s your better idea?
Sooner or later (probably sooner) that check is coming to the table. The GOP just made sure they’re the ones who’ll get to pay it, and from what I can tell, their wallet is empty.
January 22nd, 2010 at 12:38 pm
Same question, Dan (and your post is still an example of that overreaching–Brown didn’t beat socialized medicine, he beat an incompetent, lazy machine candidate).
January 22nd, 2010 at 12:54 pm
Well pgp, then why does every poll on the subject say that people do not want this monstrosity?
The majority of Americans agree that nothing is better than what is being proposed by the dems. If it is so great, why is it not passed yet? The dems own government. Oh yeah, because they are afraid of losing elections.
January 22nd, 2010 at 12:55 pm
Forgot to add, Brown’s main platform was being the 41st vote, not “Martha coakley sucks.”
January 22nd, 2010 at 1:02 pm
Markie Marxist sez: “How about free, universal transportation for all Americans? The federal government will make sure that everyone with a drivers license always has a working car available to them at all times. We can sell the idea to the public by claiming that it’s to control the high cost of transportation. Of course, it’ll be outrageously expensive, but anything that moves America towards the 100% taxation that is communism is a good idea as far as we Marxists are concerned.”
January 22nd, 2010 at 1:06 pm
You’re basing your position on polls? Why not build a skyscraper on a sand dune near a fault line? You can make polls say just about anything.
You’re STILL missing the point. Healthcare costs are a crisis, the firebell clanging in the night of our generation. If you don’t think the current bill is the answer…GREAT! I don’t care.
I’m just dying to hear what the GOP’s better idea is. Because at the end of the day, the continuance of the status quo is going to be something they own, lock, stock, and barrel.
January 22nd, 2010 at 1:13 pm
Brown won based on his opposition to socialized medicine, fact.
People do not want this socialed crap, and it tears you apart that most of America think this way. Get over it.
January 22nd, 2010 at 1:14 pm
Sebastian-PGP,
Ah, so easily you drink teh Kool-Aid.
From the very beginning, Republicans have offered multiple, readily written into law, mostly unobjectionable, common sense ideas — NONE of which would either destroy the current health care system, NOR stand in the way of it being reformed in the manner the President syas he wants.
The Democrats won;t even let them into the meetings, much less seriously discyuss the options. All while crying to teh cameras that the Republicans aren’t offering anything but “NO!”
Unfortunately for the Marxists, the American people by and large understand that it isn’t a choice between teh Democratic “Its Our Way or the Highway” and nothing.
There is also teh choice to make key fixes now that DO NOT completely upset the American health care system and turn it into something that hasn’t worked anywhere else it’s been tried over the last 60 years.
January 22nd, 2010 at 1:24 pm
Healthcare costs are a crisis,
No, they aren’t. Healthcare has never been as widespread and as cheap as it is today. What’s expensive is that we also get a crap-ton more of it than we ever have before as well. 50 years ago, you didn’t get a $200,000 heart transplant. You just died. But it *was* cheap.
People also didn’t go to the doctor demanding antibiotics for a cold (even though antibiotics don’t work on viruses).
You want to know what a better plan is? The status quo is a better plan than the current monstrosity making it’s way through Congress. It may not be the best plan (such as detangling insurance and employment by letting fraternities like Kiwanis, Moose Lodges, Rotary, and The KoC, etc. provide group healthcare coverage for members) but if we’re only talking “better” that’s a pretty low hurdle.
January 22nd, 2010 at 1:29 pm
Talk about Kool Aid. Name one.
Don’t think so? As the costs continue to spiral upward, it’s going to be increasingly expensive for your employer to afford YOUR coverage. Give it time.
The costs keep heading up, and the status quo isn’t sustainable. That’s the better idea?
Make no mistake, I’m hardly shilling for the existing plan. I’m asking a very fair question–as the cost of healthcare chews up an ever increasing portion of the GDP, your solution is…??
January 22nd, 2010 at 2:17 pm
We are talking about the people who gave us Thanksgiving and the Boston Tea Party, right? They’re the one who picked their new Senator.
January 22nd, 2010 at 2:57 pm
You’re STILL missing the point. Healthcare costs are a crisis, the firebell clanging in the night of our generation.
And the legislation the Dems have been pushing will do nothing but exacerbate that crisis and increase costs.
January 22nd, 2010 at 3:00 pm
Don’t think so? As the costs continue to spiral upward, it’s going to be increasingly expensive for your employer to afford YOUR coverage. Give it time.
This is already happening and employers are shifting a portion of that increased cost to their employees. This year my firm went from paying 100% of our healthcare premiums to 90%.
January 22nd, 2010 at 3:00 pm
Sigh…ok. Fine. For the shortbus crowd this time: assuming arguendo that you’re right, what’s the better idea?
Stillllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll waiting.
January 22nd, 2010 at 3:05 pm
Markie Marxist sez: “Universal Internet access for all! Everybody gets a free computer and we nationalize Internet access! To control Internet costs, of course. Then we give can everybody a free airplane . . . It’s going to be a lot easier to get to 100% taxation then I thought!”
January 22nd, 2010 at 3:19 pm
Tort reform, allowing people to buy insurance across state lines, not having it tied to employers, no federal subsidies for ins. companies, if you pay for your insurance/they pay for you to get sick(I have a HUGE problem with a company having no problem taking your money, and when you need the service you paid for, them leaving you out in the cold). That’s my plan, simple and doesn’t require 2000+ pages.
January 22nd, 2010 at 3:23 pm
sorry, meant they pay IF you get sick.
Carry on
January 22nd, 2010 at 3:34 pm
There’s very little evidence tort reform will have a substantial impact on the problem.
January 22nd, 2010 at 3:38 pm
And the rest? Tort reform was 1 ingredient to the recipe. Flour don’t taste like brownies, but it sure is a part of brownies.
What is your solution?
January 22nd, 2010 at 4:11 pm
I’m not sure there is one. And the point I’m making is the Dems are going to be able to say “hey, at least we had a plan…the GOP’s is the status quo and look where that got ya”. Not sure that’s going to be a winning argument in years to come for the GOP. Polls aside, I’m not sure it’s a winning argument now. People voted against Coakley, not for Brown–and that’s definitive. She had what, a 25% lead before she decided to take the last few weeks of the campaign off like an idiot?
It’s a big shit sandwich and ultimately I don’t think saying “well we were the party of the status quo but at least we stopped that bill back in 2009/2010” is going to be compelling when the cost of healthcare is more than a 5th of GDP.
But at the very least let’s quit pretending that tort reform is a substantial part of whatever solution might exist.
January 22nd, 2010 at 4:11 pm
PGP, if you’re not shilling, I’ve never seen shilling.
You may have a firebell clanging in your own personal night, but don’t presume the rest of the world to be suitably alarmed by your self-conflagration.
“Asking a fair question”? You’re only asking which version of statism–fascism or communism–we’re willing to sell out to, just to ease your troubled mind. Some choice. I have your “plan,” right here.
You don’t want a radical re-thinking of needs and abilities. You want a piss-warm rehash of a century-old failure, Bismarckian paternalism. There is nothing new, bright or forward-thinking in this. Stop being so old-fashioned, and find some new friends to borrow your original thinking from. Your old ones are embarrassing you.
January 22nd, 2010 at 4:39 pm
There’s very little evidence tort reform will have a substantial impact on the problem.
When the story you link to starts off by calling people opposed to Obamacare “obstructionists” you might think about finding a little more objective source. I also wonder if this same ‘insubstantial impact’ is similar to Obamacare’s ‘cost savings’.
So yeah, how about buying insurance across state lines, not being limited to the cadillac plans my state insists all must be covered under?
Allowing individuals to purchase health insurance with before tax money just as the employer can?
Having medicare/medicaid pay the market rate for care, so that health care providers don’t have to charge a higher rate to my insurance to make up the shortfall?
Deporting illegal aliens so they stop clogging up our emergency rooms receiving free care for minor non-emergent ailments? (I’ve worked in ER’s – this is a huge financial drain on hospitals)
Vouchers for those on Medicaid so they can buy their own insurance – Private industry has to compete (especially if you increase competition by allowing purchase across state lines) while government doesn’t. Competition forces waste out, government is the epitome of waste, sloth and inefficiency.
January 22nd, 2010 at 5:20 pm
How about getting the “insurance” aspect out of health care as much as possible? There is little incentive for consumers to decrease demand when insurance picks up the bill for even the most routine things.
There’s also little incentive for healthcare professionals to reduce costs for visits and procedures when they can just bill insurance at a standard rate.
Why shouldn’t we cut out the insurance aspect and actually pay for our medical bills while retaining insurance only as coverage for “catstrophic events” much like we do with car insurance?
We don’t go through insurance for new tires, brakes, gas or oil changes. The insurance covers major repairs / damage from unforseen events rather than every single little thing. Health insurance should be the same. Treat it as we would most other consumer products.
Imagine how expensive car insurance would be if we used it in the manner we use health insurance.
January 22nd, 2010 at 6:39 pm
Then apparently you haven’t seen shilling. Or put much effort into reading comp. See me pimping anything in particular here in re: advocacy for a particular rememdy? Well…other than “preserving the status quo ain’t gonna be a winner long term”?
No. You don’t. So try again, sweetheart.
It ain’t my self conflagration–it’s one in five of every dollar each and every one of us can produce. You’re only dumb enough to think this doesn’t effect you because you haven’t A) gotten sick or B) had an employer had to eliminate your position yet because the cost of healthcare has become that much of an albatross yet. That doesn’t mean it’s coming. Sticking your head in the sand between railroad ties doesn’t mean the train ain’t coming.
I’m confronting you with facts you find uncomfortable because they don’t fit neatly into your pigeonholed world view. I see you don’t care to answer the question because you know damn well you don’t have an answer either. At least I’m honest enough to admit as much; by way of contrast, you’re pretending namecalling and ad hominem is a suitable substitute for analysis, and hoping that a critical mind will ignore that your bipolar either/or platitudes miss the scope of the problem entirely.
The reality is this–if nothing is done now, and it seems you’re very attached to doing that nothing, the solution that’s eventually forced on you will be worse. If pointing out that uncomfortable fact makes you so squeamish that your only comfort is trying to hang a sign around my neck that clearly doesn’t apply, then you’re putting the mental coma in comatus.
Yawn…try reading past the first paragraph. Putting aside the author’s bias, they link to the CBO and Bloomberg. Redundant sources indicating that torts make up a very small portion of healthcare costs. Even if they’re eliminated entirely the problem isn’t solved.
Please don’t piss down our backs and call it rain. The idea that tort reform will solve the problem presented by healthcare costs is the childlike idiocy that leads people to think you can fix the urban crime problem by banning assault rifles–going after 1% of the tools used in crimes is no more likely to solve crime than going after 1% of the cost of healthcare will keep it from consuming 1 in 5 dollars in our GDP.
January 22nd, 2010 at 8:31 pm
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/01/21/fox-news-poll-voters-split-congressional-elections/
Mini-Ditka versus Nuclear Godzilla? Mini-Ditka.
Anyhow, I never bought the “regional” party thing. Still, when presented with someone like Mitch McConnell or Haley Barbour, the Massachusetts GOP family members I have look down and shuffle their feet.
January 22nd, 2010 at 8:37 pm
Sebastian you keep harping on tort reform like it’s the only thing that is being offered. I’m offering other solutions that you aren’t even touching on, so come on lets hear it. Beating the “Tort reform won’t work drum” ain’t offering up anything to the reasoned discourse gods of the internets…sounds a lot like the GOP…. “What your suggesting won’t work….oh me, I don’t have anything to offer except that what you are offering is wrong”
January 22nd, 2010 at 8:53 pm
Yawn?!? Really? Now I have the mental image of a smug Bryn Mawr grad looking down her nose at us unwashed masses.
Fine, forget tort reform and stop looking at the sun and saying it’s night – you asked for better idea’s and have been given several. Focus your myopic reading comprehension on those.
January 22nd, 2010 at 10:26 pm
It’s all about the incentives. People get health insurance through their employers because it’s not taxed, thus cheaper for the employer to offer health insurance than to pay you more. Health insurance is part of your pay. Change the tax laws and people will buy health insurance through their churches or clubs or whatever, and get paid more cash if they want, and not be tied to their jobs.
People get more health care in part because they don’t see the costs, because they get ‘free’ health insurance (at the cost of passing up higher salary/wage). If people actually felt the cost of the care, or even the insurance, they would shop around for a better deal and give up the care.
Doctors prescribe many tests that they know very well you don’t need, because they live in fear of getting sued over the thing they might have missed, or the thing your lawyer says they missed. The real benefit of tort reform is not to save the direct cost of abusive lawsuits, but to remove the encouragement for the massive indirect cost of unnecessary treatments and tests.
Again, it’s all about the incentives. Government distorted the incentives with dumb policies. The Democrat solution is to make policies that are both much stricter and much dumber. Republicans proposed policies that don’t get any airplay, leading PGP to pretend they don’t exist, that would change incentives.
The Dem plan is a train wreck guaranteed to destroy private insurance. How badly does PGP want that?
January 22nd, 2010 at 11:17 pm
If you think malpractice insurance costs are not a factor in medical costs, you aren’t looking very hard. Do a google, and see what costs are for adjoining states that have and don’t have tort reform.
It goes up every year, and coverage is getting harder to find, due to ins companies dropping that type of business.
Most doctors have to band together (little clinics) with other docs to try to keep a handle on their expenses. The office expense to handle all the ins and govt paperwork (lots of office employees) just kills any profit.
Just read that PA lost over 1000 doctors due to high ins costs. Got a BIL that would like to get out of the business. If he could do it over, he would not have gone to med school. It’s no longer a good field to be in. If Obamacare goes through, he would not be the only one to bail out of medicine. It might not happen overnight, but there would be a hell of a lot of the better ones who would quit. The bad/marginal ones would never leave, of course. They would have guaranteed govt jobs. We already have a shortage of docs right now. With O’s Care, we would have less to work on more people. That right there would be part of the expected rationing, not even looking at costs.
January 23rd, 2010 at 12:26 am
And anyone with at least two firing neurons and an understanding of history/present knows exactly where that plan is heading, and will treat such a statement with the disdain and ridicule it deserves.
A “plan” that is worse than the current situation, simply in a different direction, is not exactly an “improvement”… but, then again, Our Glorious President got elected on the promises of “change”, regardless of the fact that change is not always a beneficial event.
January 23rd, 2010 at 4:17 pm
Jesus! just quit responding to PGP. He is capable of denying reality, so you cannot reach him because he has an emotional investment in believing he is morally superior to everybody else because he “cares more”.
I have read his screeds here where his response has been “nyah,nyah, nyah, never happened” to things that everybody knows and witnessed as happening. His religion is Sebastian PGP, you cannot persuade him to worship anything else and to suggest he isn’t his own deity is to have him accuse you of being stupid or blasphemous or both.
Quit arguing with him. He worships himself because he “cares more”.