Republicans do NOT have a mandate to scrap Health-care reform plan

[Thunder]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20101111/ap_on_go_co/us_ap_poll_gop_agenda

and it appears they do NOT have a mandate to just stand in the way of everything Obama and the Democrats want to do.

the American people want more compromise, diplomacy, and working together. NOT gridlock and stagnation for two years.


....I would have quoted from the article but its having technical issues with JREF.

 

[TragicMonkey]

Do you really expect a political party to ever act in the interests of the people ahead of its own interests? The parties exist to further the power and wealth of the parties. No policy or legislation is ever advanced for any other purpose than to score points against the other party. The people are just the pawns in...well, I don't want to use a chess metaphor, as chess is far too cerebral. Perhaps a belching contest. The two parties are competing against each other in a longrunning belching contest, and we the people are the food and drink they guzzle in order to fuel their belches. Eventually all will be consumed, but in the meantime we have to put up with the increasingly foul stench and noise of their antics.

 

[Thunder]

Do you really expect a political party to ever act in the interests of the people ahead of its own interests?

yes. The Democrats have done it numerous times over the last 2 years.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

Do you really expect a political party to ever act in the interests of the people ahead of its own interests?

yes. The Democrats have done it numerous times over the last 2 years.

All the trillions of taxpayer dollars gratuitously squandered on fraudulent “stimulus” plans were most certainly not done in the interest of the American people, no matter what lies are told in their defense. Neither was the cluster-foxtrotting of the health care industry. It's difficult to discern anything that the Democrats have done over the past two years which had any effect or obvious intent other than to expand the power and burden of the federal government at the expense of the freedom and prosperity of the American people.

 

[Thunder]

tobacco products are now regulated by the FDA.

car/truck/SUV fuel efficiency standards were increased dramatically.

the Federal College Loan program no longer has banks as a profit-driven middle man.

major car companies were prevented from going under, saving possibly hundreds of thousands of jobs.

these things are all in the interests of the American people.

and now, the democrats want to preserve the Bush-era tax cuts for working-class and middle-class Americans.

 

[Cobalt]

major car companies were prevented from going under, saving possibly hundreds of thousands of jobs.

And in my last Street Fighter tournament, I came in third out of a possible thousand.

But in reality it was only four.

 

[Snide]

And in my last Street Fighter tournament, I came in third out of a possible thousand.

But in reality it was only four.

That does not argue against the claim that it was done in the interest of people. You can disagree with how many jobs it saved, or possibly saved, whether it was worth the effort, etc., but that still says nothing about who the desired benefactor of the action was.

 

[eeyore1954]

tobacco products are now regulated by the FDA.

car/truck/SUV fuel efficiency standards were increased dramatically.

the Federal College Loan program no longer has banks as a profit-driven middle man.

major car companies were prevented from going under, saving possibly hundreds of thousands of jobs.

these things are all in the interests of the American people.

and now, the democrats want to preserve the Bush-era tax cuts for working-class and middle-class Americans.

Assuming everything you say was in the publics best interest what makes you think the party did not think it was also in their best interest when they did these things?

Originally Posted by TragicMonkey
Do you really expect a political party to ever act in the interests of the people ahead of its own interests?

 

[Thunder]

Assuming everything you say was in the publics best interest what makes you think the party did not think it was also in their best interest when they did these things?

much if not most of the things done by Democrats are in the interest of the American people. and what's good for the American people, is good for the Democrats.

however, Republicans have a different interest group in mind, namely the rich, corporations, fossil-fuel industries, military contractors, HMOS, big drug manufacturers, etc etc.

 

[Just thinking]

Republicans have a different interest group in mind, namely the rich, corporations, fossil-fuel industries, military contractors, HMOS, big drug manufacturers, etc etc.

Just a smatter of things that made America (USA) great!

 

[Francesca R]

According to James "Wisdom of Crowds" Suroweicki, all age cohorts except for Medicare-hooked seniors (who have an incentive to pull the ladder up) want to keep Obamacare.

http://www.newyorker.com/talk/financial/2010/11/22/101122ta_talk_surowiecki?mbid_social_twitter (ETA: weird--this article is from the future since it's dated 22 Nov)

[ . . . ] the real reason is that it feels to them as if health-care reform will come at their expense, since the new law will slow the growth in Medicare spending over the next decade [ . . . ]

There’s a colossal irony here: the very people who currently enjoy the benefits of a subsidized, government-run insurance system are intent on keeping others from getting the same treatment.

[ . . . ] seniors today get far more out of Medicare than they ever put in, which means that their medical care is paid for by current taxpayers [ . . . ] “I’ve got mine—good luck getting yours.”

This therefore reflects the same demographically induced inter-generational competition that makes it so hard to do things like raise retirement ages and rebalance social welfare equity in Europe.

 

[Kestrel]

According to James "Wisdom of Crowds" Suroweicki, all age cohorts except for Medicare-hooked seniors (who have an incentive to pull the ladder up) want to keep Obamacare.

http://www.newyorker.com/talk/financial/2010/11/22/101122ta_talk_surowiecki?mbid_social_twitter (ETA: weird--this article is from the future since it's dated 22 Nov)



This therefore reflects the same demographically induced inter-generational competition that makes it so hard to do things like raise retirement ages and rebalance social welfare equity in Europe.

The article made me wonder how much senior opposition to the Health Care law is based on false claims spread during the campaign. In the weeks before the election, it was almost impossible to watch a TV show without seeing ads claiming that thousands of seniors would be dropped from Medicare.

 

[WildCat]

yes. The Democrats have done it numerous times over the last 2 years.

 

[Thunder]

this is all you have to say? everyone else has at least expressed something in words regarding the OP.

 

[TragicMonkey]

The article made me wonder how much senior opposition to the Health Care law is based on false claims spread during the campaign. In the weeks before the election, it was almost impossible to watch a TV show without seeing ads claiming that thousands of seniors would be dropped from Medicare.

You give too much credit to people. My parents oppose the health care legislation without knowing a single provision or function of it. They heard it was bad, and socialist, and evil, and won't work, and is bad from their chosen media (one channel in particular springs to mind) and that's it. You can't demolish the arguments of people who don't make any arguments, and you can't educate people who don't care about knowing anything. It's bad! Bad! Bad! Of course both of them are enjoying two versions of socialized medicine, being military and on Medicare, so they got theirs, so why should they bother with facts or other people?

And there are millions of people who think just like they do. America is not the JREF messageboard, where people actually try to construct arguments to justify positions. Reason is not universal. Too bad suffrage is.

 

[Lurker]

Do you really expect a political party to ever act in the interests of the people ahead of its own interests? The parties exist to further the power and wealth of the parties. No policy or legislation is ever advanced for any other purpose than to score points against the other party.

Too cynical. This is clearly incorrect. If political parites were only interested in furthering their own wealth and power then we would see both political parties extolling the virtues of lowering taxes at all times. If you are seeking to buy voters you promise them low taxes no matter what happens to the deficit. Heck, you trot out the canard that lower taxes leads to more revenue, defying all logic.

If my sole purpose was to retain power and be relected eyar after year you can bet that lowering taxes would be one of my planks.

 

[Beerina]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20101111/ap_on_go_co/us_ap_poll_gop_agenda

and it appears they do NOT have a mandate to just stand in the way of everything Obama and the Democrats want to do.

the American people want more compromise, diplomacy, and working together. NOT gridlock and stagnation for two years.


....I would have quoted from the article but its having technical issues with JREF.

"We stood in the way (past tense) and were wildly rewarded at the election. We will continue to do so."


I don't know what planet you're on, buddy, but it ain't this one.


By the way, I already predicted that, as a practical matter, they won't repeal much of the health care stuff. This is based on their almost complete failure to do anything on the Contract With America list after 1994.


They have a mandate to repeal it all, and to slash spending. They will do little of either.

 

[dtugg]

Too cynical. This is clearly incorrect. If political parites were only interested in furthering their own wealth and power then we would see both political parties extolling the virtues of lowering taxes at all times. If you are seeking to buy voters you promise them low taxes no matter what happens to the deficit. Heck, you trot out the canard that lower taxes leads to more revenue, defying all logic.

If my sole purpose was to retain power and be relected eyar after year you can bet that lowering taxes would be one of my planks.

You can also buy votes by forcibly taking money from people and giving it to others.

 

[Lurker]

You can also buy votes by forcibly taking money from people and giving it to others.

True, but you lose the votes of those who you took the money from. Far better to just always promise lower taxes for everyone.

Situation : Solution

Country at War : Lower Taxes
Country at Peace : Lower Taxes
Country in Recession : Lower Taxes
Country in Expansion : Lower Taxes
Country running Deficit : Lower Taxes
Country running Surplus : Lower Taxes
Social Security Needs Overhaul : Lower Taxes
President Lied to Congress : Lower Taxes
Too many imports : Lower Taxes
Too few imports : Lower Taxes
Space Aliens Invade : Lower Taxes
Worldwide Epidemic : Lower Taxes
Zombies Take Over : Lower Taxes
Nuclear Apocalypse : Lower Taxes
Rapture : Lower Taxes

 

[Grizzly Adams]

Republicans do NOT have a mandate to scrap Health-care reform plan

And Democrats did NOT have a mandate to pass Health-care reform plan.

That didn't stop them from doing it.

What's your point?