Posted on 11/22/2009 11:26:57 AM PST by eekitsagreek
Assuming that there is some kind of healthcare law in place by 2010 and assuming that the GOP can win back Congress. We may not have enough votes where a repeal can withstand a veto. That said, can't the GOP simply kill it by ending any funding?
If it passes it will NEVER be repealed. Such programs never are. We must fight this NOW!
It will be a mess, but they have to try. My thought is that we have to get the whole thing declared unconstitutional. Since I am hearing impaired, I should be able to sue for the new tax on hearing aids.
Perhaps you should familiarize yourself with what the State Controlled Media did to Newt Gingrich and the 1994 Congress.
Realistically though I think it is beyond possibility that we can regain the Senate in 2010.
If you can’t stop it now; you’ll never be able to turn it back. It’s much easier to say “no” to that first {insert name of addictive substance}; than it is to undergo rehabilitation, once addicted. Here, in Canada, government health care is called a “sacred trust” (a term coined by a former Conservative PM).
There is no “IF” or we’re gone.
I pray these traitors are branded as traitors and their family name goes down in history linked to treason against the USA. They declared war upon the American people; never has there been such treason committed, IMO.
I'm aware of the fact that repealing is difficult. That is why I am asking if a GOP-dominated Congress (whether in 2010 or 2012 with a GOP in the White House) can simply kill it by denying any funding.
It has about as much chance of being repealed as Medicare and Medicaid.
If this doesn't happen and Obama is re-elected in 2012 expect the USA to quickly look like East Germany complete with a mass exodus of our best and brightest to other countries.
Take provisions of it, tag repeal of those provision on to bills the Dems don’t dare veto or fillibuster. or alternative solution win a fillbuster proof majority and the White House in 2012.
Any candidate I vote for in 2010 will have to promise that he will either vote to repeal this liberty-grabbing health care bill or deny its funding.
Make your candidate state his intention if elected.
You’re assuming that the GOP would actually support the position that it should be repealed.
We’ll find out in the near future as the smart move would be to claim you would repeal the health bill garbage if elected. I wonder if any in the GOP would actually take this stand. All I see are more politicians who will treat it as an entitlement that will only cause them to lose their positions if they propose to take away money from voters (even though such voters rarely vote for the GOP in the first place).
This is a done deal from my viewpoint, and it’s yet another wealth redistribution nightmare that the majority of voters want. The majority of the population of this country are now parasites, IMO.
I keep wondering where the courts are in this mess now. Aren’t they supposed to be part of the checks and balances? Doesn’t the GOP have lawyers?
All believable polls show Americans DO NOT WANT this BS bill to pass. I don't know where you get the "majority" crap but you are wrong. The only majority that wants it are the dimwit congresspeople.
once done; this will never be undone.
And the damage will have been done.
If you want my advice, buy a gun... lots of guns.
In my world view, if this passes America is over. These traitors will have violated a sacred trust. We have a rule book we all agreed to follow, indeed these politicians, have taken an OATH to protect it.
If they will not follow the rules, there is no reason that I should either.
If history is a guide, when Pubs are the majority they become arrogant and complacent Dem-Lites.
We need Conservatives.
We do not need wishy-washy Republicans who are only worried about getting the Libs to “like” them.
Hey gang,the republicans are not interested in repealing any of this monstrosity.They are part of the problem.Its all about bigger and bigger gubmint and the party is all in favor of it.
repeal is impossible, but funding can be denied - threatening government shutdown which is politically possible but risky. Some small aspects may be killed by Supreme Court.
Like forcing you to buy healthcare insurance or risk hard time? I can’t see how that’s constitutional at all.
Don’t count on the gutless Republicans to roll back anything being put into place by the democrats, with the possible exception of higher tax rates.
They won’t want to deal with the name calling, bad press and vicious in-fighting that would generate.
They will be happy to leave the Health Care program and most other socialist changes in place so they always have a costly democrat failures to point at.
History shows us that once a socialist wealth redistribution program is in place it is never eliminated - it just gets bigger and bigger.
There are things will be rollback. We aim to get conservatives in. But if all else fails then expect this country go to civil war. So either we get the people who do the right things or we end up in war.
In 1988, with the support of the AARP, the House passed the Medicare Catastrophic Coverage Act by a vote of 328 to 72. A year later, Rep. Dan Rostenkowski, chairman of the Ways and Means Committee, had to literally flee an angry crowd of unhappy constituents wielding placards bearing slogans like "Don't Tax the Seniors." The law was repealed 16 months after passage by a vote of 360 to 66.
Dems in congress suffered two humiliating health-care routs in 1989. They also were foreced by an angry public to repeal another of Rostenkowski's pet projects, the infamous "Section 89", which tried to use the tax code to force employers to expand health insurance coverage for more lower-waqe workers. This was repealed by an even greater margin than the Medicare Catastrophic Coverage Act: 390-36.
It would still be better to kill this thing now, but if we can't, it is very possible that it can be repealed later, particularly if the GOP reclaims the house in 2010. The dems may have even unwittingly facilitated this by frontloading the costs, which as I understand it start kicking in before the alleged benefits (they wanted to do this to artificially keep the projected cost of the program down by including ten years of revenue but only seven years of costs in the bill).
If the Dim health care plan does pass with the mandates, the best approach for immediate relief would likely be in the states with some type of nullification provision or at least a provision that prohibits mandates. States like Oregon have upheld euthanasia despite federal prohibition.
A few good red states could gut the individual and possibly even the employer mandate. Killing an employer mandate to buy insurance would be key. Just think how many businesses a good red state could get from the blue north and coasts. The employers could use their discretion in purchasing more reasonable “unqualified” catastrophic plans in these states.
The big thing is that the federal government would then have to go to court to get the laws overturned and that might not be easy.
Texas are you listening?
Retaking the House with a bare majority in 2010 requires a GOP pickup of 41 seats, which is plausible but difficult. With only 40 Republican Senators, a pickup of 11 seats is needed to retake the Senate. Since there are at best only about 7 possible pickups, the Senate will remain in Democratic hands.
We may not want things to get so dire. But they will if we do not get the right people elected. AT times I feel everyone is too pessimistic, but then I see that if we don’t have a majority win by 2012 some thing will occur. In fact it might occur before then. I do not want it to happen, but it will.
Someone in the thread said about the best and brightest fleeing to another country. I think before that happens people will defend themselves and stand up for their principals. It all could very well lead to conflict.
Just us getting the right people in could all every well fix things. So America has to take a pick. Because they way thing look to me, we are haeading to a tipping point. So when we get there what do think will happen?
We may not want things to get so dire. But they will if we do not get the right people elected. AT times I feel everyone is too pessimistic, but then I see that if we don’t have a majority win by 2012 some thing will occur. In fact it might occur before then. I do not want it to happen, but it will.
Someone in the thread said about the best and brightest fleeing to another country. I think before that happens people will defend themselves and stand up for their principals. It all could very well lead to conflict.
Just us getting the right people in could all every well fix things. So America has to take a pick. Because they way thing look to me, we are heading to a tipping point. So when we get there what do think will happen?
We may not want things to get so dire. But they will if we do not get the right people elected. At times I feel everyone is too pessimistic, but then I see that if we don’t have a majority win by 2012 some thing will occur. In fact it might occur before then. I do not want it to happen, but it will.
Someone in the thread said about the best and brightest fleeing to another country. I think before that happens people will defend themselves and stand up for their principals. It all could very well lead to conflict.
Just us getting the right people in could all every well fix things. So America has to take a pick. Because they way things look to me, we are heading to a tipping point. So when we get there what do think will happen?
Are you kidding? What good will it do the American people if the GOP takes it back in 2010?
NOTHING...
Those of you expecting some dramatic change from the GOP are simply naive. They will say whatever they have to say during the campaign but after they are elected all we are doing is setting ourselves up for Gringrich II, Bush II and you know where that leads us: Pelosi II, Reid II and Obama II.
If you want to save our country you need to think beyond 2010 and anyone connected to the two-party system. They ARE NOT the answer.
We must break their hold and the tryanny they both represent. Never forget it was Bush that gave us both Pelosi and Obama. There were plenty of decisions that could have been made early in during the first time that would have put our country on the right track even with 9/11. But what did they do? We got a hugely corrupt congress which Pelosi overthrew in 2006 and we got McCain...
WAKE UP PEOPLE THE GOP ARE JUST AS BAD AS THE JACKASSES IN CONGRESS.
Instead of voting for a jackass or a donkey why don’t you think about voting for an EAGLE!!! America, the Constitution, our liberties and freedoms!
The constitution does not allow the Gov to force a citizen to purchase anything but it does allow the government to collect taxes. If our side wins even a small court challange on constitutional grounds, the dims will simply change the provisions of the bill to force the purchse of policies via a tax.
Very quiet ones, I guess.
But they do have people writing those stupid "surveys" known as fundraisers. Questions like, "Do you want Obama's people to inspect your house and car daily?" "Do you think we should let Obama outlaw free speech?" "Do your want Obama to make gun possession punishable by death?"
"If you said NO to any of these questions, say YES to the GOP! Send us a bunch of money so we can use it to elect more RINOs and Liberal Dems pretending to be Repubs."
Michael Steels actually said, "Don't let the GOP down"!! I'm still sputtering after reading that 4 hours ago.
I think some are giving the Republicans too much credit. If they did take back both houses of Congress (a TALL order, even at this point for a host of reasons)one would have to assume that they would have acquired a large load of gumption and a heaping helping of PRINCIPLES. I assume NOTHING of that nature from the Republicans as they are currently constituted...
“Someone in the thread said about the best and brightest fleeing to another country”.
And that country could be: the Republics of Texas, Alaska?
I’m hearing people who live in states that have constitutional provisions allowing the recall of Senators are organizing to do just that. Some offshoots of the Tea Party and 9/12 groups are leading that charge. Specifically they plan on targeting for recall their senators if they vote for crap n tax or health care.
Given how angry a good portion of Americans are, I can see recall attempts succeeding.
The whole damn party still plays politics. They should be calling those who voted for this bill AGAINST THE PEOPLE unamerican. They should be advertising that these people are going against the known wishes of the people, that they’re engaging in a conspiracy to overthrow Democracy. Instead, they’re poll watching hoping they’ll gain in 2010.
Just shoot me.
Most recall procedures are difficult and protracted, but some recall efforts may nevertheless succeed. A recent analysis by the Cook Report described the political environment in some US House districts as “beyond toxic” for Democrats. Similarly, even in states that voted for Obama, the numbers are tending against him and his party.
It may simply come down to citizens forcing their state legislatures to enforce 10th amendment protections as well as citizens taking the initiative to remove those who can not be voted out.
Do you happen to have a link to the Cook Report? I’d like to read what they are finding and see if they have any trending information for the country. I’m trying to find how moderately left areas are trending, is a switch to more conservative politicians coming from traditionally conservative areas/states or has the “toxic environment” toward Dems/liberals taken hold in traditionally more moderate to liberal areas.
The GOP had both houses of Congress AND the White House.
McCain undermined that.
Then the GOP nominated McCain for the Presidency.
May the GOP rot in hell.
I’m wondering how the federal government can use our tax dollars to create a government insurance company to compete with the private sector.
Just seems wrong.
That’s exactly what I wonder about. Will the GOP actually get up the energy to try to roll back all these bad laws? I don’t know. I kind of doubt it.
“McCain undermined that.”
Correction: Bush undermined that
Bush didn’t head up the Gang of 14.
McCain opposed Bush and the rest of Congress at critical points.
He divided what unity and majority there was.
It may simply come down to citizens forcing their state legislatures to enforce 10th amendment protections as well as citizens taking the initiative to remove those who can not be voted out.
______________________
I think you’re right with regard to States needing to force their Legislatures to enforce the Tenth Amendment. As far as citizens removing those who can’t be voted out — if a recall election fails to dislodge them, what other LEGAL recourse do the States or Citizens have? And what of those States that HAVE no recall provisioons for their Federal office holders?
There was a post on FR yesterday I believe that listed the states that have recall provisions in either their constitution or in law.
States that do not have the provision to recall a Senator the citizes of the state will need to force their legislatures to pass provisions allowing a recall.
We need to realize the old ways of handling rogue politicians is over - we either launch full attacks on them or bend over and surrender.
If your state legislature and/or Governor will not protect their citizens from an out of control federal gov through 10th amedment protections, throw them out of office and put in people who will.
Taking back our country is not going to be a quick fight. We will have to fight some of own citzens, politicians, courts/judges and lobbying groups that are well funded and oganized. Once we’ve won we can not let our guard down and we will have to teach the younger generations what is at stake if they get soft.
Those who are not willing to enter into this fight for the long term need to get out of the way and at least support those who are in this for the long term.
That may be so for McCain in the 14, but Bush was the standard bearer for the party for eight years.
His disastrous spending habits including the prescription health benefits and his support of amnesty for illegals, both of which convinced the general American voter that there wasm’t much difference between the parties.
McCain is a Senator. As someone said once, a US Senator is someone hired to offer an opinion, not more or less. He does not ever have to be in the majority and can be wrong most of the time, yet accept no accountability.
The President cannot do that, as he has to accept responsibility.
That’s one reason why we have so few sitting US Senators that successfully are elected POTUS.
We are experiencing the ravages of of why right now.
Congress spends, not the President.
I'm thinking you need to lurk a few more years!
McCain made grand gestures of being a maverick, not Bush.
Bush and the Republic majorities had ideas they tried to push that McCain derailed.
McCain developed a coalition that stole the power from the majority and used it for his own purposes.
Bush had failings that were his alone, and policies that I could not support. But some of his failings were due to McCain derailing support from Bush's and the Congressional agenda.
McCain made a power play and used his position for personal gain. He screwed over the GOP with a smile on his face, spat at the Conservatives, then totally squandered the GOP shot in 2008. He was such a weak candidate who ran such a weak campaign that he let a nobody senator with no resume beat him.
And there is no way you can truthfully argue that point.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.