Division on the Right. Ambivalence about Bush's Medicare bill.

NRO ^ | November 21, 2003, 9:00 a.m. | Ramesh Ponnuru

[.cnI redruM]

Pat Toomey is fighting a desperate, rearguard action, on behalf of free enterprise, against socialism. He might be the last non-apostate left in the temple.

[WOSG]

Yes, its a shame. A clueless shame that you care enough to whine but not enough to move america in the right direction.

Go ahead and call and write your congressmen to tell em how you think. send money to support the congressmem/women who support your views.

And vote.

If you dont, you leave the field to those who oppose you.

This otoh is simplistic nonsense: "If some must attach blame, attach it where it belongs, on the socialist Republican Party."

[Charlotte Corday]

If some Congressthing from Florida or Arizona were to draft a bill that simply says, "Take everything that everyone under 40 owns, and divvy it all up for everyone over 65", would there be enough votes to defeat it???

[laotzu]

Wow!! You got all that from her post?

She doesn't care, doesn't move American in the "right" direction, doesn't write her congressman, doesn't send money, doesn't support those who share her views, and doesn't vote!!! Oh, yea....and she's full of simplistic nonsense.

I know this sort of superhuman insight would win me over to the Republican party. Maybe if you insulted her, you know...."she wants to starve children", or something very adult like that.

Just remember, a good sheep is never disloyal to the herd.

[laotzu]

"think again"

I have given it more thought, and appreciate your patience.

I think you're a slimey little socialist. My nausea is only abated with violent disgust.

[WOSG]

Democrats are against it because the Conservative reforms in the bill have a chance to cause medicare to 'wither on the vine' as Gingrich long ago suggested would happen.

The Conservatives reforms, specifically the MSA, is the health-care equivalent of giving tuition tax credits as a replacement for monopoly public schools. Add to that the experiements that allow private health plan competition against fee-for-service medicare, and you've got yourself a mechanism for digging us out of the hole that is sending us headlong into Socialized medicine.

It takes us away from "govt run healthcare" to "govt subsidized choice in healthcare". In effect, admit that we will have to support health provision financially for many in society, then figure out the most conservative market-oriented way of doing it.

You end up with something that Kennedy and the Socialists hate with a passion, because they know it's a dagger at the heart of the Liberal Welfare state.

So they will oppose this even though it will hurt them politically. The Democrats hate these reforms because once we put them in place - it will be IMPOSSIBLE to go to 'single-payer' or anything like that.

I'm seeing some simplistic arguments here about a complex bill and complex situation. As if this is merely about adding a benefit to the package. WE NEED THOSE CONSERVATIVE HEALTHCARE REFORMS OR MEDICARE WILL BANKRUPT US!

If people are opposing it, or supporting it - talk about which parts of this complex bill you like and dislike and what your alternatives are.

More light and less heat is demanded here.

[WOSG]

"She doesn't care"
yes, that was the exact quote she said. Correct.

Caring enough to whine but not enough to vote just doesnt impress me as smart thinking.

And yes, calling all republicans "Socialist" is indeed simplistic.

Now if you or her want an intelligent debate about how to be a 'strategic conservative' and win on issues and influence politics, and correct the errors of defeatism and division, I'd be happy to discuss. You're obviously well-enough concerned to post comments, can you direct your passion productively?

[jjm2111]

But the RINOs will say "oh when we have a filibuster-proof majority some REAL conservative reform will be pushed." Bah! People need to be taxed less. A LOT LESS! This is the wrong way to go.

[.cnI redruM]

This bill is stupid. Dense like depleted uranium. WHy again did we fight socialism in the cold war.

[Always Right]

A conservative reform would not add $400 Billion to the budget. The Republicans are paying far too great of a price for the possibility of future reforms.

[laotzu]

"can you direct your passion productively?"

Based on your creative insights as to my fellow posters productiveness; I doubt I could satisfy such presumed lithmus testing.

Of course, it goes without saying that I, too, have never voted, never cared, never conversed with my congressman, never donated money, never beat the street for a candidate, etc...

I have done all of these things, and much more. I am continually disgusted by the Republican party, and disappointed with myself for having been strung along by euphemisms like "strategic conservatism" for so long.

"Conservatism" and "Principle" were a topic of discussion by the Republicans, on the floor of the Senate, during the mid 90's. Both were specifically abandoned as being a handicap & an embarrassment. It was then, they they abandoned me.

I will not drop principle for politics. Those that can abandon principle, will continue to win, and enjoy the support of those who understand this new "strategic conservatism".

Are you on your elected Republicans throat for dividing, and abandoning conservatives; or is this productive passion for correcting the errors of division something just discovered today?

[WOSG]

"I am continually disgusted by the Republican party"

hmm, I'm not.

Didnt we have a pretty good session in Austin this year?
Probably the best session for Conservatives ever in the history of Texas.

So why use "continually disgusted" when much good is being done?

[WOSG]

"disappointed with myself for having been strung along by euphemisms like "strategic conservatism" for so long."

has someone else used this term "strategic Conservatism" before me? I thought I'd coined it.

[WOSG]

""Conservatism" and "Principle" were a topic of discussion by the Republicans, on the floor of the Senate, during the mid 90's. "

It was also a subject of debate last week when the Senate Republicans took to the floor to debate the judicial nominess. It was also the topic the week before last when the partial birth abortion bill was finally signed into law, after many years of vetos and waiting.

Despite a judicial tyranny and leftist media and hollywood and elites that oppose us, Conservatism is alive and well.

"I will not drop principle for politics."

Nobody here suggests otherwise. That's our common plan.

"Strategic conservatism" is about advancing your principles and finding the right strategy, tactics and focus to be effective in doing so. It's a strawman to suggest effectively advancing principles means abandoning them.

"Are you on your elected Republicans throat for dividing, and abandoning conservatives; or is this productive passion for correcting the errors of division something just discovered today?"

I put my money where my mouth is: I have supported Toomey against the RINO Specter and urge you to do the same. We need to 'choose our battles'. This is a particular battle conservatives need to win.

btw and fwiw, Toomey is against the medicare bill i understand.

Since you are in Texas, I suggest you look into the primary races for the open new congressional districts. It's a once in 10 year opportunity to either get strong Conservatives or get wimps/RINOs that will be hard to dislodge. I'm in district 21 but am looking into district 10 race to see who to help. So far the best candidate I see there is Judge John Devine.

[laotzu]

"why use "continually disgusted" when much good is being done?"

Is this a trick question? I say that because I am continually disgusted.

I am more and more overtaxed each year. I lose more & more liberty each year. My government divides us against each other more each year. My elected public servants lie to, and about me, more each year. My Republican neighbor is more & more comfortable with this treatment each year. I am disgusted.

"Much good" is not being done. The Democrats are hell bent on running this country to ruin. It is not really "much good" that the Republicans are fighting for us to skip instead.

"Strategic conservatism"; good one. Right there with "compassionate conservatism". Both are clever, with an intrinsic insult of conservatism. Strategy is a game, conservatism is a principle.

Even when principle was popular, that's not why we were principled. It was never a game.

[laotzu]

I have answered your question. In the spirit of "intelligent debate", please answer mine.

Are you on your elected Republicans throat for dividing, and abandoning conservatives; or is this "productive passion for correcting the errors of division" something just discovered today?

Why are abandoned voters held more to blame than those who abandoned them? It's almost as if it were a herd, isn't it?

[laotzu]

"It's a once in 10 year opportunity to either get strong Conservatives"

The Republicans had a strong conservative....me. They had a great many just like me too.

We have been stabbed in the back, and our children's future threatened, by Republicans. You, like so many, think I should just forget about it, as looking to the primary races is more important.

It is not more important. It is a principle you want to drop for politics. Demanding that your elected servant represent you is a principle. Choosing, instead, to look to the primaries is politics.

Stop suggesting politics to me, and suggest principle to your party.

[WOSG]

"The Republicans had a strong conservative....me. They had a great many just like me too. "

Cool. Did you run for any office? What are your top issues of concern?

[WOSG]

"Stop suggesting politics to me, and suggest principle to your party. "

Well the party in Texas expresses its beliefs in the platform. Have you read it? Do you like it?
Which principles in Texas Republican Party platform do you most like? Which do you most dislike?