Posted on 09/23/2010 7:55:47 AM PDT by jessduntno
How about you try reading it first rather then just “skimming” it looking for, as you always do, the next thing to bitch about?
How about they simply keep the Pledge they make before God when they are sworn into office to uphold and defend that document?
If you don’t know what your enemy is doing you have no way to plan your defense.
Link to full document at initial link and at post #8 for those who care to read the whole thing.
hope I didn't disappoint you.
Repeal and Replace health care-—Replace it with what? That does not sound like it any thing I want.
“Repeal and Replace health care-—Replace it with what? That does not sound like it any thing I want.”
Portability, trade across state lines, privatization. Sounds pretty good - the trick this time is getting it done.
I’ve read this a number of times now, and think that overall it’s a crap sandwich, to borrow Michelle Malkin’s somewhat crude but very apt descriptive phrase.
On ObamaCare it advocates “repeal and replace.” This is political short hand for the Romney-Brown claim that they can do healthcare better. Bleh.
More than half of our healthcare system in this country is already socialized, and the Republicans give us no reason whatsoever to believe that they have any intention of doing a single thing about that. It certainly isn’t in this document. Just more rearrangement of the deck chairs on the Titantic.
Same goes for spending, and stopping abortion, and protecting marriage, and fundamental tax reform, and immigration. It’s all a bunch of deceptive dreck.
One other thing: This document is not binding on anyone. It has no teeth. The Republican leadership overwhelmingly ignores its own party platform. They have for years. Why would this be any different?
Republicans did NOT get elected in 1994 because of any “Contract”...and continuing to believe they did is harmful to the cause, which requires an understanding of why the middle 30% of the country moves between parties.....ie indepedent vote...
Clinton ran appeared too liberal in 1993...abandonned his middle class tax cut pledge....brought back Yassar Arafat....Hillarycare...midnight basketball.....Congress corruption and incompetence....Waco...
The Republicans were lesser of two evils in 1994-—after the economy slowed down following the big Clinton tax increase of 1993.
Clinton promised that his tax increase would cause interest rates to FALL, but interest rate on the national debt ROSE after the Clinton tax increase..and Greenspan raised his Fed Funds target rate.....
and by election 1994...we almost were back in recession..so Rush Limbaugh appeared to be RIGHT about Clinton.....
Clinton’s people criticized Greenspan...and you just don’t do that without paying a price, even if he’s wrong....
That’s why Clinton had to hire Bob Rubin off Wall Street to make amends to a certainb offended group....
“Erick Erickson of RedState and Frum are not Conservatives.”
Excellent point, always bears repeating.
it is a toothless PR stunt by a few republicans who think the beltway knows best how to control citizens.
Once in, the rinos will gore the conservatives.
I think so.
it’s missing a flat tax ,term limits and a balanced budget amendment...be bold or go home and let someone lead who is.
Too much living in the past. It’s like the constant quest for “the next Reagan”, the Contract was 1994, this is 2010, time to think in 2010 terms.
Is what you are saying in the GOP documents or is it what you desire?
Reagan inspired and provided a course correction to the economy but didn't stand a prayer of stopping the Federal Juggernaut. It will only be done in a long term majority in Congress and in the State legislatures. It will be up to the states to correct the course of education at both the secondary level and at the university level.
Portability, trade across state lines, privatization.
It's what Paul Ryan said was in there ... I have not yet read the complete final draft..
Any indication the Pubs want to really start making the federal gvt smaller? Like eliminating the DOE and DOE for example?
I would vote for anyone who would pledge to do that
The momentum in this election is the tea party movement. Its from the bottom up, people telling politicians what they want. The Republican Party can only diminish its effect by putting top-down policies on their candidates.
When something is growing that benefits you, you water it, you don’t put a cap on it. By defining a program for Republicans, the focus is taken off of the malfeasance of the democrats. What they should be saying is “Look how the democrats have governed, forcing social programs we can’t afford down our throats, ignoring the voice of the people, taxing and spending, not even bothering to propose a budget, using our troop funding bill as a political ploy to force even more unwanted bills on us, placating our enemies and alienating our friends.”
I’m more convinced than ever that the establishment Republicans do not want to win this election. They don’t want the added responsibility that governing entails.
Way too many of them used the last contract for toilet paper once they got into office. Why should we think their pledge will be any different?
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.