You are where you belong, Arlen.

[Bbucko]

Other than the 'Big Tent' on display at conventions were they ever the 'Big Tent'? If it weren't for the Deep South they would never have won a single presidential election since the 60's. The South went republican after the civil rights laws of the 60's were passed and hasn't looked back since.

Whether or not I agreed with him (and RR always made my skin crawl), it's highly disingenuous to dismiss the "Reagan Democrat" demographic as a myth. Reagan needed them (and got them) in '80 and '84, and GHWBush got them in '88. It was left to Pat Buchanan at the convention in '92 to drive (most) of them away with his infamous Culture War speech. The GOP has continued its slide rightward ever since. Witness Dole, GWBush and McCain returning Log Cabin campaign contributions as just one of the many examples that spring to mind, along with the refusal to even consider Tom Ridge as McCain's running mate due to his pro-choice views.

In my opinion, GWBush did not win because he cobbled together a diverse electorate, he won because Gore was a very weak candidate: if he'd carried his home state of TN in '00 there wouldn't have been the Florida debacle, period. It was Gore's enormous hubris that cost him the election. It kept millions of voters home on election day.

A couple points, Bbucko.

Many on this site love to fantasize about the Joe the Plumber and Sarah Palin movement. Its grossly inaccurate and incorrect. It is a liberal fantasy. Period. Great soundbite.

You know, I hear this a lot from moderate Republicans and just don't buy it. The fact of the matter is that Palin drew bigger numbers to rallys last fall than McCain did, her speech electrified the convention: it was easily the biggest event of the whole affair, and I watched it on PBS and C-Span. "Joe" the "Plumber" would not have been flown around the country to attend McCain's rallies if he didn't have a great impact in rallying the base. He was, and it did.

If he was not considered important to the conservative message, why would Pajama Media have picked him up and sent him to Israel to cover the Gaza disaster? Are you really saying that his continued presence in the conservative media is strictly because he's a media whore? He's got legs because he resonates with the conservative electorate, and, yes, I find that telling. Liberal media may cart out what he says in an effort to make conservatives look dumber than dirt, but they quote him from conservative media appearances. It's not as if MSNBC has him as a regular commentator.

You can also take someone like Michelle Malkin, who is a fire-breather for the most extreme elements of the right-wing base. Liberal media largely ignores her as a lunatic, but she's a regular contributor/talking head for Fox News. Then there's Hannity, Limbaugh, Keyes and Beck, and they're just the most obvious and best-known lunatics of the bunch. I do not see Republicans attempting to downplay their importance to the cause.

There is no expression among Democrats that expresses the same thought as RINO or Rockerfeller Republican, both of which are perjoratives for moderates. "Blue Dogs" are an important subgroup of the Democratic party and there's no sense of having compromised all their ideals away. Jim Webb is very popular, Olympia Snow is considered a traitor to the cause. If she weren't from Maine she couldn't be a conservative. She'd never get elected in UT or OK (two of the reddest of the red states left): it just wouldn't happen.

Marriage equality is a big deal to a tiny, far right fringe of the republican party. Its not even an issue in terms of losing members of the party.

I can name several prominent Democrats who support full marriage equality. Can you name one Republican?

With all the gravitas he has within the party, Dick Cheney would be the obvious choice for shifting the party away from the bigots. His daughter Mary has been partnered for many years and is obviously loved by her parents. But even there, there's been zero discussion on how the entrenched homophobia within the Republican party seeks to marginalize his daughter: he bristled at the very suggestion that having Mary for a daughter might temper his views against efforts to amend the constitution preventing her from ever having her relationship recognized on the same level as her sister's.

By all accounts, Cheney has little patience for the bible-thumping Religious Right. But he dares not cross them, even as he defends breaking the law to allow torture of terror suspects.

Michelle Bachmann is a fucking publicity whore dipshit. No one listens to her - even in the republican party. She's embarrassing. You get that kind of shit in Minnesota, i.e., Jesse Venture, Al Franken, and so on.

Michelle Bachmann is loony-tunes certifiable, for sure. I'll be fascinated to see if the Republican party floats anyone to challenge her in '10. If she's that much of an embarrassment, any thinking, rational person would want to see her removed from office before she tarnishes the Republican brand any further.

It's going to be very easy to point out that the Democrats have their own nutbags and bigots, and I'll agree with that completely. I'm no Republican but am no Democrat, either. I have no stake in seeing one of the two political parties in the US go down the shitter; in fact, I'm passionate about our not turning into a one-party country. But this discussion is about Republicans, not Democrats. If you want to make hay over the foilables of elected Democrats, go for it in another thread. This thread's about how the Republican party can no longer make room for someone of Arlen Specter's stripe, despite having been a Republican since the 1970s.

 

[2322]

Take a look at the mouthpieces of the Republican party. Here are the three most popular of them spouting off on what it is to be a Republican. Do you think for a moment that what they say makes anyone other than a hardcore Christian conservative feel welcome?

Within these comments is a wealth of bigotry that's frankly alienating to most Americans for its fascist leanings. These people are tragic because they're taking the Republican party down the shitter.

Before you say they don't represent all Republicans, keep in mind that these are the people who are the face of the party. McCain is a has-been and Palin's not yet credible. Jindal is laughable and Steele was made to look like a house darky when he was forced to apologize to Rush Limbaugh. Every moderate is marginalized any time these three speak because they have such an audience and that audience was cultivated by the Republican party itself by endorsing these folks. They're monsters who've taken over their masters.

Sean Hannity:

It doesn't say anywhere in the Constitution this idea of the separation of church and state

I'll tell you who should be tortured and killed at Guantanamo: every filthy Democrat in the U.S. Congress.

I guess this is just another example of how the anti-war left supports our brave troops (referring to the Westboro Baptist Church protesting the funerals of veterans).

Devotees of multiculturalism and political correctness who do not see how damaging to the fabric of American civilization it is to allow Ellison to choose his own book need only imagine a racist elected to Congress. Would they allow him to choose Hitler's Mein Kampf, the Nazis' bible, for his oath? And if not, why not? (referring to Rep. Ellison's use of the Koran for taking his oath of office)

Rush Limbaugh:

Take that bone out of your nose and call me back. (referring to a black caller he was having trouble understanding)

The NAACP should have riot rehearsal. They should get a liquor store and practice robberies.

Look, let me put it to you this way: the NFL all too often looks like a game between the Bloods and the Crips without any weapons. There, I said it.

Hugo, Cesar — whatever. A Chavez is a Chavez. We've always had problems with them.

As I said yesterday, truce is an old Arabic word. Goes way, way back in Islamic-Arabic culture, and it means, "We will get you later."

It's one thing to have a sizable minority like the Democrats stand in your way, but it is just unacceptable when a tiny, tiny, tiny fraction of Republicans in Congress also rear up in opposition and join the liberal Democrats to derail an agenda. At some point that has to be faced. It has to be faced because these RINOs, these moderates, are undermining our agenda on taxes; they are undermining our agenda on spending; they are undermining our agenda on oil drilling, and they are undermining the war on terror — and I'll give you some names. You want some names? Here they are: Olympia Snowe, John McCain, George Voinovich, Mike Castle, Christopher Shays, and about 30 to 35 others.

I don't care if they're Republican liberals or Democrat liberals, they're still liberals. They're not "moderates." Don't hit me with that. There's no such thing as a moderate. A moderate is just a liberal disguise, and they are doing everything they can to derail the conservative agenda, and they've been frustrated, they haven't been able to do anything about it because conservatism has been so strong. This propaganda attack on the president has weakened him.

He is exaggerating the effects of the disease. He's moving all around and shaking and it's purely an act... This is really shameless of Michael J Fox. Either he didn't take his medication or he's acting.

We're not going to stay the United States if we start reducing energy usage. Conservation is not the answer. So because a free market's percolating and gurgling and burbling out there, somewhere in this mix will come the magical alternative fuel source. It may not be for a hundred years, it may not be for 50, but it will happen, and it will happen all by itself ... if we stay free.

Ann Coulter:

"We should invade their countries, kill their leaders and convert them to Christianity. We weren't punctilious about locating and punishing only Hitler and his top officers. We carpet-bombed German cities; we killed civilians. That's war. And this is war."

[Canadians] better hope the United States does not roll over one night and crush them. They are lucky we allow them to exist on the same continent.

These people can't even wrap up genocide. We've been hearing about this slaughter in Darfur forever — and they still haven't finished. The aggressors are moving like termites across that country. It's like genocide by committee. Who's running this holocaust in Darfur, FEMA? This is truly a war in which we have absolutely no interest.

There are a lot of bad Republicans; there are no good Democrats.

Now our forces are killing lots of al-Qaida jihadists, preventing another terrorist attack on U.S. soil, and giving democracy in Iraq a chance -- and Democrats say we are "losing" this war. I think that's a direct quote from their leader in the Senate, Harry Reid, but it may have been the Osama bin Laden tape released this week. I always get those two confused.

The ethic of conservation is the explicit abnegation of man's dominion over the Earth. The lower species are here for our use. God said so: Go forth, be fruitful, multiply, and rape the planet — it's yours. That's our job: drilling, mining and stripping. Sweaters are the anti-Biblical view. Big gas-guzzling cars with phones and CD players and wet bars — that's the Biblical view.

God gave us the earth. We have dominion over the plants, the animals, the trees. God said, 'Earth is yours. Take it. Rape it. It's yours.'

I would like evolution to join the roster of other discredited religions, like the Cargo Cult of the South Pacific.

They're [Democrats] always accusing us of repressing their speech. I say let's do it. Let's repress them. Frankly, I'm not a big fan of the First Amendment.

You would think there were "Straights Only" water fountains the way Democrats carry on so (as if any gay man would drink nonbottled water)

These broads are millionaires, lionized on TV and in articles about them, reveling in their status as celebrities and stalked by grief-arazzis... These self-obsessed women seemed genuinely unaware that 9/11 was an attack on our nation and acted as if the terrorist attacks happened only to them... I’ve never seen people enjoying their husbands’ deaths so much.

So for those of you who haven't read any of my five best-selling books: Liberals are driven by Satan and lie constantly.

You don't want the Republicans in power, does that mean you want a dictatorship, gay boy?

Which brings me to this week's scandal about No Such Agency spying on 'Americans.' I have difficulty ginning up much interest in this story inasmuch as I think the government should be spying on all Arabs, engaging in torture as a televised spectator sport, dropping daisy cutters wantonly throughout the Middle East, and sending liberals to Guantanamo.

I think [women] should be armed but should not vote...women have no capacity to understand how money is earned. They have a lot of ideas on how to spend it...it's always more money on education, more money on child care, more money on day care.

Liberals' only remaining big issue is abortion because of their beloved sexual revolution. That's their cause: Spreading anarchy and polymorphous perversity. Abortion permits that.

 

[Principessa]

:yikes: I don't want him you can have him! :wtf1: Until further notice I'm treating him like a Trojan Horse. :zx11pissed:

Many times people partner with those that share the same qualities, characteristics, objectives and integrity.

Arlen Specter is one of those people.

FYI:

"I am staying a Republican because I think I have an important role, a more important role, to play there. The United States very desperately needs a two-party system. That's the basis of politics in America. I'm afraid we are becoming a one-party system. I think as a governmental matter, it is very important to have a check and balance"

-Arlen Specter March 17, 2009.

Good riddance.

His principles fit in nicely with his new party. Self interest is the only interest. Principles are a non-issue.

Words mean nothing. Lie, twist, pander...anything to get a vote. And then turn your back on the very people that provided your ascent.

I'd rather the Dems had 95% of Congress, than have one worm like Arlen Specter in my camp.

Once again, good riddance.:wave:

Nice legacy. Bet the grandkids are proud.

 

[deleted15807]

In my opinion, GWBush did not win because he cobbled together a diverse electorate, he won because Gore was a very weak candidate: if he'd carried his home state of TN in '00 there wouldn't have been the Florida debacle, period. It was Gore's enormous hubris that cost him the election. It kept millions of voters home on election day.

That could be a factor I don't doubt. Coming off the heels of the relentless pursuit of Clinton by the Right Wing for 8 long years. I think the taint of all that was a big factor. The Republican Noise Machine was in full operation and a very powerful source of propaganda and dis-information accused him of saying things he didn't say. It attacked viciously as it went to work bringing Kerry down as a so called 'elitist'.

In the 2000 presidential campaign, the Republican Noise Machine, which worked for years to convince Americans that the Clintons were criminally minded, used the same techniques of character assassination to turn the Democratic standard-bearer, Al Gore, for many years seen as an overly earnest Boy Scout, into a liar. When Republican National Committee polling showed that the Republicans would lose the election to the Democrats on the issues, a “skillful and sustained 18-month campaign by Republicans to portray the vice president as flawed and untrustworthy” was adopted, the New York Times reported. Republicans accused Gore of saying things he never said — most infamously, that he “invented” the Internet, a claim he never made that was first attributed to him in a GOP press release before it coursed through the media. Actually, Gore had said, “During my service in the United States Congress, I took the initiative in creating the Internet,” a claim that even former House Speaker Newt Gingrich verified as true.

The right-wing media broadcast this attack and similar attacks relentlessly, in effect giving the GOP countless hours of free political advertising every day for months leading up to the election. “Albert Arnold Gore Jr. is a habitual liar,”

---

This impugning of Gore’s character and the questioning of his mental fitness soon surfaced in the regular media. The New York Times ran an article headlined tendency to embellish fact snags gore, while the Boston GlobeThis Week, former Clinton aide George Stephanopoulos referred to Gore’s “Pinocchio problem.” For National Journal’s Stuart Taylor, the issue was “the Clintonization of Al Gore, who increasingly apes his boss in fictionalizing his life story and mangling the truth for political gain.” Washington Post editor Bob Woodward raised the question of whether Gore “could comprehend reality,” while MSNBC’s Chris Matthews compared Gore to “Zelig” and insisted, “Isn’t it getting to be delusionary?”

The well-orchestrated media cacophony had its intended effect: The election was far more competitive than it should have been — and, indeed, was decided before the Supreme Court stepped in — because of negative voter perceptions of Gore’s honesty and trustworthiness. In the final polls before the election and in exit polls on Election Day, voters said they favored Gore’s program over George W. Bush’s. Gore won substantial majorities not only for his position on most specific issues but also for his overall thrust.
-------
According to an ABC exit poll, of personal qualities that mattered most to voters, 24 percent ranked “honest/trustworthy” first — and they went for Bush over Gore by a margin of 80 percent to 15 percent. Seventy-four percent of voters said “Gore would say anything,” while 58 percent thought Bush would. Among white, college-educated, male voters, Gore’s “untruthfulness” was cited overwhelmingly as a reason not to vote for him, far more than any other reason. The conservative columnist George F. Will pointed to Gore’s “serial mendacity” and warned that he is a “dangerous man.” “Gore may be quietly going nuts,” weighed in with gore seen as “misleading.” On ABC’sagreed: “The real question is how to react to Mr. Gore’s increasingly bizarre utterings.

Has the Republican right hijacked U.S. politics? - History and politics
​

 

[Brandon801]

Keep in mind.. Arlen started his career as a Democrat.. and switched to Republican and now back to Democrat.. the truth is.. his career has as many holes in it is his "single bullet theory".. yeah.. give me a break.. he is an idiot .. and is poised to LOSE his primary to Patrick Toomey nex time around.. (he already put out a TV ad against Toomey before Toomey even anounced...lol).. god forbid. .Arlen has to enter the provate sector and have a real job.. and oh yeah.. PAY THOSE 70% TAXES THAT THOSE RICH PEOPLE WILL HAVE SOON.. not for Arlen.. he is too smart for the rest of us.. clinging to his god given career as a politician.. (oh.. cant say GOD GIVEN.. oops.. )... not PC enough.. ASS..

 

[houtx48]

His principles fit in nicely with his new party. ''Self interest is the only interest.'' Principles are a non-issue.......................lolllllllllllllllllll like that sounds like a republican to me. repbs think only of others never themselves, in a pigs ass.

 

[B_Morning_Glory]

Its like a popular local Democrat says, "We'll take anybody."

.

you mean When your abandoned and put out on the street by heartless greedy republicans and your goals and dreams are robed from you, such as under your father bush . ...the Democrats are there to embrace you.

And make sure your bills are paid.

yes they mite some be a Little expensive at some things, but at least in order for them to be this way they do realize they have to at least help out their fellow man , so they can at least keep their way of living style. your republicans don't give a rats ass about the American people or even their own party. they cant even stick together on one issue except how the Dem's. aren't kissing the reps. ass anymore. an even then they dont agree on how much kissing shoud be done. newsflash they don't have to. I'm proud of Arlen. at least he has the balls to change something when he don't like it. whats the reps. done? nothing stay the corse their favorite word. what corse? straight to hell? hope how soon they get their then, as some of us have been burnd bad by their stupidity and ill be hard coming out from under the mess they left behind as well as created for us in the future for our kids and our seniors. and most of all our [ VETS ] i hate to thank what bad care they would have gotten under your McCain play ground in the white house. so its time they lost everything they have stolen from us. so to the republicans i can only say this [ BURN BABY BURN ]whats your party ever done for any working american trying to take care of his family best he can? not a dam thing. OH YEAH HERE IS A FEW THINGS. WARfor oil, EXCESIVE debt. LOST JOBS . CLOSED plants factories .you name it its happened and under YOUR republican one rule philosophies as well. oh wait i thank thats called socialism isn't it? [ something like they tried to accuse PRECEDENT OBAMA of doing? republicans make me sick always have. so no thanks. ill vote DEMOCRAT i know where my bread an butter comes from. reps, steal it from me an call it a tax break. congratulations ARLEN welcome to the democratic party.

 

[D_Ireonsyd_Colonrinse]

Happy 100, Mr. Obama.

Don't let the Rush Limbaughs and teabaggers and starinvestors and envious conservatives detract you.

http://blogs.abcnews.com/photos/uncategorized/2009/04/20/ht_washingtonian_090420_main.jpg


Cheers, Mr. President

 

[Guy-jin]

Specter changed parties for purely political reasons, but he has always been a thorn in the Republicans' side, often going against their general consensus on issues.

And yesterday, from what I heard, good 'ol Rush was spouting on about how McCain should go with him. Meanwhile, Michael Steele bags on Specter for doing what politicians do.

I'd rather the Dems had 95% of Congress, than have one worm like Arlen Specter in my camp.

I'm a little surprised that the Republicans seem to want to marginalize their party. I'm really starting to believe that we'll see an Independent or Third Party revolution to fill the void the Republicans are leaving by shifting so far Right.

Also, all this crap about how he has no "integrity" or "principles" because he switches parties in order to have a better chance at winning the election is laughable. For a Moderate like Specter, he can be a member of either party. It absolutely make sense for him to switch parties if he's got a better chance in the other one. The difference now will be that he owes the Dems something for taking him in.

If the Republicans want to stop playing ball, they're going to have to accept that they're not a part of the game anymore. And yeah, you'll have a whopping 5% of Congress in the future if your party keeps on this way. I'm not sure why you'd want that for the party you support, but then again, you guys haven't made much sense to me for a very long time.

Queue a bunch of garbage rhetoric about how I don't understand because I have no "morals" or "principles".

 

[Brandon801]

Arlen is like all typical politicians.. only out for himself.. with the guise of helping society.. take nationalized health care.. do we really want the system of France or even Canada.. where they are flooding our borders to have operations performed here.. because some beurocrat decides when and if you get care..in their country?? and this 47 million americans which dont have health care.. what a crock.. ! !.. most of them are umemployed, or 20 somethings who choose not to have it.. the rest.. cannot be denied health care from any hospital in the USA. so I dont buy that crap either.. it will destroy the quality of our care here.. Why are liberals and Dems all for amnesty for ILLEGALS.. ?? more panhandling for votes.. seems noone in this country wants to get off their lazt ass and work.. just want govm't handouts.. nice attitude.. sounds like France and the 35 hour work week..(supposed to create more jobs.. did not work.. ).. just lower productivity.. Name ONE SOCIAL PROGRAM IN THE USA WHICH WORKS?.. welfare.. dont think so..just made the urban situation worse.. if you want MORE or something.. throw moeny at it.. if you want LESS of something.. TAX it.. that is why Tax hikes produce less income.. and tax breaks produce more income.. while we are on the subject.. TERMS LIMITS... get your lazy non productive butts out of congress.. ! !! ..

 

[Brandon801]

Some common sense for ALL
"Republicans believe every day is the 4th of July,
but the Democrats believe every day is April 15."
--Ronald Reagan
Democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts and murders itself. There was never a democracy that did not commit suicide. John Adams, Letter, April 15, 1814
US diplomat & politician (1735 - 1826) We are seeing it now.. I am for doing good to the poor, but I differ in opinion of the means. I think the best way of doing good to the poor, is not making them easy in poverty, but leading or driving them out of it. In my youth I travelled much, and I observed in different countries, that the more public provisions were made for the poor, the less they provided for themselves, and of course became poorer. And, on the contrary, the less was done for them, the more they did for themselves, and became richer. -- Ben FranklinMillions of individuals making their own decisions in the marketplace will always allocate resources better than any centralized government planning process. -- Ronald ReaganWe don't have a trillion-dollar debt because we haven't taxed enough; we have a trillion-dollar debt because we spend too much. -- Ronald ReaganConservatives have excellent credentials to speak about human rights. By our efforts, and with precious little help from self-styled liberals, we were largely responsible for securing liberty for a substantial share of the world's population and defending it for most of the rest. -- Margaret ThatcherAND MY PERSONAL FAV..I'd rather entrust the government of the United States to the first 400 people listed in the Boston telephone directory than to the faculty of Harvard University. -- William F. Buckley

 

[2322]

Arlen is like all typical politicians.. only out for himself.. with the guise of helping society.. take nationalized health care.. do we really want the system of France or even Canada.. where they are flooding our borders to have operations performed here.. because some beurocrat decides when and if you get care..in their country?? and this 47 million americans which dont have health care.. what a crock.. ! !.. most of them are umemployed, or 20 somethings who choose not to have it.. the rest.. cannot be denied health care from any hospital in the USA. so I dont buy that crap either.. it will destroy the quality of our care here.. Why are liberals and Dems all for amnesty for ILLEGALS.. ?? more panhandling for votes.. seems noone in this country wants to get off their lazt ass and work.. just want govm't handouts.. nice attitude.. sounds like France and the 35 hour work week..(supposed to create more jobs.. did not work.. ).. just lower productivity.. Name ONE SOCIAL PROGRAM IN THE USA WHICH WORKS?.. welfare.. dont think so..just made the urban situation worse.. if you want MORE or something.. throw moeny at it.. if you want LESS of something.. TAX it.. that is why Tax hikes produce less income.. and tax breaks produce more income.. while we are on the subject.. TERMS LIMITS... get your lazy non productive butts out of congress.. ! !! ..

French and Canadians are flooding our borders? Nobody in France is forced to go anywhere. French citizens are free to choose their doctors and their hospitals. Same in Canada. It appears you have been misinformed.

47 million without health insurance forces them into far more expensive emergency rooms when they need care and guess who pays for that? WE DO. Hospitals go to the states for reimbursement for uninsured care. If they didn't, many would go broke. And when they have catastrophic problems, who pays for that? WE DO, via Medicaid. Yes, they pay too, draining their assets to nothing so they can be eligible for Medicaid and voila! We've forced a person to become poor to get medical care. That means that person will need food stamps, welfare, and all kinds of other public support just to live while they receive treatment. Of course in any other westernized nation with public health care, that wouldn't be necessary. They might even be able to continue working part time or perform less active work during their illness. Not in the American system. It also means that with certain conditions, like cancer, that person will never be able to get health insurance of any kind for the rest of their lives because of pre-existing condition limitations on private and employer sponsored health plans, and absurdly high monthly premiums that can run to thousands of dollars a month.

Who needs health insurance more? Someone with a steady job or the unemployed? Duh, it's the unemployed! Even then, employees with employer-sponsored plans are experiencing rising contribution costs, rising employer costs, and decreased benefits at a rate that far outpaces inflation and wage increases. There is no end to the cycle and employer-sponsored plans are becoming increasingly out of reach for those who don't earn much. These people effectively have no health insurance. What happens when they're ill? See above!

Bureaucrats telling you where you can and can't receive care? It's already true here! Americans have HMOs and PPOs and rather than a bureaucrat telling you where you can and can't get care, it's the health insurance company telling you. You must use doctors in the plan, you must use hospitals in the plan, you must use laboratories in the plan. You're told where you can get care and with which doctors. That's far less freedom of choice than they have in Canada and France.

Illegals are here because we hire them. When the jobs dry-up so do the illegals. Many have gone back to their home countries because the economy here has displaced them. When the economy improves, they'll be back. Granting them amnesty actually increases money in our coffers because that means they can gain citizenship and, because they're working, they're pulling their weight -- something that seems important to you. Once they're citizens, we can tax them too so they pay back into the system. It also means they can go to the law when they run into unfair employment practices, something their current employers won't necessarily like. Who makes the most money off of illegal immigrants? The very people who want to keep them in a state of illegality are the ones who make the most money off of illegal work. These employers don't have to pay FICA or any other payroll tax or even a minimum wage or adhere to OSHA standards. To keep illegal immigrants illegal is to subvert the law and that makes YOUR taxes higher!

Medicaid, if you can get it, works. Medicare, if you qualify, works. SSDI, if you qualify, works. Food stamps work. They do not work together, but each works in itself. All three of the systems need to be unified and overhauled, but if you have the benefits, they do work. I know because I'm a beneficiary of all of them (except Medicare which will kick in in two years if I live that long).

As for term limits, why use the law to prevent the people from voting for whom they want? It's a double-edged sword. You're going to get rid of the good with the bad just because the law says so? What's to prevent the electorate from voting for a challenger? Nothing. If you don't like a candidate, don't vote for that candidate. Take responsibility for who you vote for, don't make the government responsible for who you can and can't vote for.

 

[Brandon801]

Interestign debate.. however..
1. I know many Canadians and French who choose.. to come to the USA for medical help.. no one is forced..
2. I know a CFO of a large midwest hospital group..(multi biilion in holdings)... the ER visits for uninsured are not reimbursed by the Govnm't.. they are written off as bad debt..yes.. tax break..
3. You say bureaucrats already dictate our health care via PPO.. HMO.. may be true.. but I can choose to ARGUE with them for medical attention and also vite with my dollars.. and get my care form another supplier.. it is called capitalism.. and it makes things more comptetitive and lower cost and higher quality.. NO MORE OPTIONS when the government is in charge.. heck..the same guys who took over the congressional cafeteria.. from private control.. and quickly bankrupted it.. no more choice.. and poor service from our government.. wiht no incentives for getting better..
4. regarding illegals.. I only have a problem with the word ILLEGALS.. I want them here .. and paying taxes..just like the rest.. and not draining our pockets for billions..
5. regarding social programs.. "see quote from Ben Franklin".. we are abusing short term help into a society of people with hands out.. and the more hands out.. the larger the voting base for the democrats..it is what destroyed Rome..the lack of worth ethic and personal responsability.. It is the job of family to take care of indivuduals needs.. not government..
6. Terms limits.. you prefer a system of elite royalty..?? like the Kennedy's perhaps.. No limits promotes the corruption of government.. and the pathetic driv eto stay in power.. we should stop pretending that our politicians have our best interest at heart.. everything they do is centered around getting elected again..and again.. and again..
Best of luck to you in New York.. you will need it ..

 

[D_Ireonsyd_Colonrinse]

In the Pennsylvania senate race, Arlen Specter would have had to beat conservative Pat Toomey to be the (incumbent) nominee.

The conservative party is becoming very non-moderate. Polls showed that Arlen Specter could not win the republican primary, although he stands a very good chance of winning the general (Specter's been a senator for 29 years - he's the 12th-most senior member in the senate).

In other words, conservatives in Pennsylvania dislike Specter and wanted to unseat him, even if they could not win the general election, because Specter has supported pro-choice positions, is socially liberal, voted for the stimulus bill, etc.


Today, republican senator Orrin Hatch said: "I don't think there is anybody in the world who believes he {meaning Pat Toomey} can get elected senator there." Orrin Hatch is the vice chairman of the National Republican Senatorial Committee.

Asked if the NRSC would back Toomey, Hatch said, "I don't think so" and that the party should look for "someone who can win there."

--------------------

So, Specter cannot win the conservative primary in PA because of some liberal views he holds.

And the National Republican Senatorial Committee will not back or fundraise for Pat Toomey because Toomey is too weak of a candidate (he's too conservative to win a general). So why is it wrong for Specter, who's as much a democrat as republican at heart, to switch parties to remain politically viable?

When you hear conservatives (Limbaugh, Michael Steele) getting angy at Specter, it's simply misplaced anger at the republican party in general. The GOP is imploding and there's a lot of inarticulated frustration in the air among republican congresspersons.

 

[2322]

Interestign debate.. however..
1. I know many Canadians and French who choose.. to come to the USA for medical help.. no one is forced..

Sure they do. We have good specialist care. Americans travel to Europe and other places for care as well not because the care is any better, but because it's affordable to pay out-of-pocket and their health insurance won't cover what they need.

2. I know a CFO of a large midwest hospital group..(multi biilion in holdings)... the ER visits for uninsured are not reimbursed by the Govnm't.. they are written off as bad debt..yes.. tax break..

Which is great for the for-profit hospitals.... which are only about 5% of American hospitals. The vast majority are not-for-profit. They don't need tax breaks because they're not taxed. They need money for unreimbursed care and so are forced to hit-up the government to stay alive. Private hospitals only have the obligation to stabilize you and ship you off to a not-for-profit hospital however far away that is (nor do they have to take Medicare and Medicaid patients) which is why they have so little unreimbursed care costs.

3. You say bureaucrats already dictate our health care via PPO.. HMO.. may be true.. but I can choose to ARGUE with them for medical attention and also vite with my dollars.. and get my care form another supplier.. it is called capitalism.. and it makes things more comptetitive and lower cost and higher quality.. NO MORE OPTIONS when the government is in charge.. heck..the same guys who took over the congressional cafeteria.. from private control.. and quickly bankrupted it.. no more choice.. and poor service from our government.. wiht no incentives for getting better..

You can do the same in a government-supported system. Argue with whomever you like. You can also change doctors, hospitals, drugs, or whatever you like. You get far more freedoms than just what your employer or HMO offers. I think it doesn't make much sense to put your health care in control of the very people (insurance companies whose officers have legal fiduciary responsibilities to make the most profit possible) who profit from you receiving the least care possible. If you think that works, great, but it's illogical.

4. regarding illegals.. I only have a problem with the word ILLEGALS.. I want them here .. and paying taxes..just like the rest.. and not draining our pockets for billions..

So you do support amnesty. Excellent!

5. regarding social programs.. "see quote from Ben Franklin".. we are abusing short term help into a society of people with hands out.. and the more hands out.. the larger the voting base for the democrats..it is what destroyed Rome..the lack of worth ethic and personal responsability.. It is the job of family to take care of indivuduals needs.. not government..

Forcing people to lose their homes, cars, and their life savings is a great way to keep someone dependent on government. We're the only western country where you have to be impoverished, and stay impoverished, to get health care. The limit on monthly earnings for Medicaid is $741 a month. That's far below the poverty level. People in the middle or the working uninsured (that pesky 47 million) will have no choice but to become destitute if they need health care. Wouldn't you rather have these people working, keeping their assets, and able to work in the future when their health improves? Right now they can't. If the illness is chronic, they'll never be able to get private or employer-sponsored insurance. The only way to solve this issue is a national health care plan. Believe it or not, it's a world cheaper than hoping 47 million don't get sick and need health care. Health care costs will consume 17% of US GDP. Contrast that with other top-notch health care systems like Germany where it's 10.7%, Switzerland where it's 10.9%, 9.5% in France, and 9.7% in Canada.

2008 saw the first year where insurance premiums for family coverage ($12,800) outstripped the earnings of a minimum wage worker. That doesn't even mean the family received that amount in health care. For most families, it's money down a rathole. Now they can't afford it and there is no end in sight to the increases. At the current rate of health care cost escalation, most middle class families won't be able to afford private or employer sponsored coverage. Premiums are rising at four times the rate of wage increases and also new for 2008, health care costs have out-paced profits for most businesses.

It may shock you, but employers don't want to offer insurance coverage any longer. It's just too expensive and getting more so. How much? Administrative costs in the US are in excess of $480 billion a year compared to western European countries. That's money into some pencil-pusher's pocket, not necessary to the cost and administration of medical care.

Hate to say it, but you're being scammed by insurance companies who love this system and want it to continue. They spend millions of your premium dollars buying lobbyists and advertising to convince you that national health care is a disaster waiting to happen. They love that you spout their argument without bothering to learn the facts.

And if you still believe that national health care is a disaster, what do you have to offer as a solution to the current problem of costs escalating, coverage diminishing, and those 47 million uninsured? Let's hear your solution.

6. Terms limits.. you prefer a system of elite royalty..?? like the Kennedy's perhaps.. No limits promotes the corruption of government.. and the pathetic driv eto stay in power.. we should stop pretending that our politicians have our best interest at heart.. everything they do is centered around getting elected again..and again.. and again..
Best of luck to you in New York.. you will need it ..

For someone who decries government involvement in life and champions personal freedoms, it's surprising that you'd espouse the government telling you who you can vote for and who you can't. Nobody's holding a gun to your head to vote for these people. You're free to pull the lever for anyone else you'd like. How about taking responsibility for who you vote for and if you don't like who's running then vote for somebody else. If political dynasties take hold in the US then we don't have anyone to blame but ourselves. We're responsible for our government, not the government itself.

 

[D_Tully Tunnelrat]

No need for integrity, principles or consistent conduct. Anyone with a heartbeat and a registration to vote...come on down.

Please... don't even try and submit the idea that all Republicans are principled. For starters I'll give you two names: Richard Nixon, and Spiro Agnew. I can add more if you like...

Arlen bolted because Bohner (what an appropriate name..) and the rest of the Repubs have simply become obstructionists.

 

[D_Tully Tunnelrat]

. We're responsible for our government, not the government itself.

Best political quote here.

As Pogo (Walt Kelly) coined for the first Earth Day in 1970:
"We have met the enemy, and he is us."