FromForum:Waterloo (David Frum--Health Care Bill Related) "We followed the most radical voices in the party and the movement"

[Baculus]

Both parties seem to be more interested in scoring points that working for what's best for the country. Without a third party, it will never change. The political heads on each side are so far apart that the people end up having to pick sides. Most of us are picking the lesser of two evils. I'm a fiscal conservative. I really dislike this bill but like everyone thinks there needs to be reform on HC. Unfortunately, this bill calls for more govt than I would like. I almost always vote for Rep's because I'm hoping they will not expand the govt/spend too much. The Bush years were a huge failure fiscally. The problem is, I think they would have been fiscally worse with a dem in office.

Essentially, until there's a third party holding the big two in check, the partisanship is here to stay. Term limits would help but I don't see that happening. Politicians build up promises over the years and have no room left to do what's right and fair.

I totally disagree. The Democrats knew their political position was in jeopardy by voting for this bill, but they did it anyway, because they felt like it was the right thing to do. In the face of screaming Tea Partiers and Republicans and threats, they still did it.

When was the last time the GOP took such a political risk?

If any party has been using this purely for politics, for 2010 and 2012, it would be the GOP. After all, this is what they themselves have said, as evidence by their remarks over the last year and from the CPAC.

[twa]

I had an idea after reading this (while it's still early) and then the other new thread this morning on this topic.

We should maybe craft a policy where each political topic has one thread officially designated as the "stable" discussion, and then the typical assortment of other "conversations" where the obviously-more-partisan-than-they-pretend, the openly partisan, the actual hacks, and the outright whackjobs conglomerate for traditional forum frolicking, nutty misadventures, and hilarious madcap hijinks.

:evilg: :pfft:

I thought that was the Stadium?

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

I totally disagree. The Democrats knew their political position was in jeopardy by voting for this bill, but they did it anyway, because they felt like it was the right thing to do. In the face of screaming Tea Partiers and Republicans and threats, they still did it.

When was the last time the GOP took such a political risk?

If any party has been using this purely for politics, for 2010 and 2012, it would be the GOP. After all, this is what they themselves have said, as evidence by their remarks over the last year and from the CPAC.

I'm stunned the Dems passed this. This was legitimate political courage that I thought had long since left the Party.

And - you know what? - I'm giving Nancy Pelosi credit here. Passing a bill that you think is good for the country but is almost certainly going to hurt you politically? When is the last time either Party passed such a thing?

[JohnLockesGhost]

So the Congress passes a water-downed hodge-podge of unfunded mandates and it's Waterloo? It appears to me the Republican opposition was pretty effective at watering-down or eliminating alot of the more liberal proposals.

Besides the Democrats passed this bill because they have huge majorities in both houses. To my mind, they got those majorities because the voters were rightly recoiling from the disatrous presidency of George Bush, whom Frum worked for. So it seems funny that a guilty guy like Frum is casting stones.

[Burgold]

Yeah,I agree. The Republicans were successful at shaping the Bill despite not voting for it. I think they neutered the reform and made it weaker and less effective.

[Henry]

That seems strange to me because some of these guys like McCain, or the current head of the GOP strike me as more moderate than conservative in their styling.

McCain is feeling the heat these days.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/elections2/election_2010/election_2010_senate_elections/arizona/election_2010_arizona_republican_primary_for_senate

However, I object to the idea that Tea Party folks by association are necessarily extremists. THere are certainly some in the Tea party who we might think are extreme, however, the Tea Parties are a very angry lot, and I think for good reason.

I posted that in response to your assertion that the base wasn't energized until November of '09. I think that between the town hall shout-downs of summer and the Tea Party Express, endorsed and hosted by such notable dignitaries as Sean Hannity, Michelle Malkin, Neil Cavuto, Glenn Beck and others, we can conclude that the base was indeed energized throughout 2009. Whether or not you agree they were led by extremists is another matter. But I disagree that the conservative base just decided to roll over until Brown was elected.

[Destino]

Both parties seem to be more interested in scoring points that working for what's best for the country.

I really hate this type of comment. The democrats practically BEGGED the GOP to join them in crafting this bill. The GOP would have nothing to do with it and as a result the bill passed without their input. The ONLY thing the republicans did during this is launch a massive misinformation campaign to shake the confidence of the American people as much as possible to hopefully turn this into a political victory in november.

[helptheSKINS]

I totally disagree. The Democrats knew their political position was in jeopardy by voting for this bill, but they did it anyway, because they felt like it was the right thing to do. In the face of screaming Tea Partiers and Republicans and threats, they still did it.

When was the last time the GOP took such a political risk?

If any party has been using this purely for politics, for 2010 and 2012, it would be the GOP. After all, this is what they themselves have said, as evidence by their remarks over the last year and from the CPAC.

I think this is a perfect example of scoring political points. The dems tried to hide as much of this bill from the public as they possibly could. They pushed this bill through to satisfy the base. Some of the base wanted different things such as the public option but they all wanted more govt control which is exactly what happened. Obama made it clear his presidency depended on it so it was passed by his congressional friends. The dems certainly didn’t follow the will of the people. The people wanted real solutions for rapidly rising health care costs. Instead, they got a transfer of power to the federal govt. They certainly went out on a limb but the reasons were not for the American people, they were for the talking heads of their party.

Watch this Pelosi interview with Diane Sawyer.

http://abcnews.go.com/WN/Politics/house-speaker-nancy-pelosis-exclusive-interview-diane-sawyer/story?id=10172685

1:30 – corrects herself when she originally says “Healthcare Reform” she changes it to “Healthcare Insurance Reform”. The truth is they are not addressing the real problem with this bill, healthcare costs. I would be happy to be proven wrong if someone can provide some examples. Paying doctors less for the same or worse service doesn’t count.

2:20 – Great effort at avoiding the question about costs ballooning like they did with Medicare. She knows there is nothing in the bill to fix the rising costs, she’s making sure she doesn’t say anything she’ll be held accountable for.

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

Yeah,I agree. The Republicans were successful at shaping the Bill despite not voting for it. I think they neutered the reform and made it weaker and less effective.

But that was never the goal. The goal was to "Kill the Bill."

No Republican dare run on "It's not as bad as it could be" lest the Tea Partiers throw poop at him.

[PeterMP]

The "conservative" media is killing the Republican party. They aren't interested in winning elections or getting things done. Just ratings.

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

I think this is a perfect example of scoring political points. The dems tried to hide as much of this bill from the public as they possibly could. They pushed this bill through to satisfy the base. Some of the base wanted different things such as the public option but they all wanted more govt control which is exactly what happened. Obama made it clear his presidency depended on it so it was passed by his congressional friends. The dems certainly didn’t follow the will of the people. The people wanted real solutions for rapidly rising health care costs. Instead, they got a transfer of power to the federal govt. They certainly went out on a limb but the reasons were not for the American people, they were for the talking heads of their party.

The hard-left base of the Democrats are angry with this bill. They wanted nationalized insurance, would have settled grudgingly for a public option, and got nothing. Howard Dean wanted them to start all over (which would have been suicide).

The Democrats pleased no one in passing this bill. But, in the end, passing it was better than not passing it. I think there is ultimately a lot of good in it, and it is certainly a platform to build from.

The Democrats always have a more difficult time governing than do the Republicans. In the Republican Party, you have to deal with radicals like John McCain - who, you know, is right in the middle of the mainstream. Dems have to somehow convince both the Maxine Waters of the world and the Heath Shulers to vote for a bill.

[The Evil Genius]

Looks like this has been said before.

[Veretax]

I posted that in response to your assertion that the base wasn't energized until November of '09. I think that between the town hall shout-downs of summer and the Tea Party Express, endorsed and hosted by such notable dignitaries as Sean Hannity, Michelle Malkin, Neil Cavuto, Glenn Beck and others, we can conclude that the base was indeed energized throughout 2009. Whether or not you agree they were led by extremists is another matter. But I disagree that the conservative base just decided to roll over until Brown was elected.

That's not entirely true. I agree sometime last year, and I don't know exactly when it happened the funk from 2006 lifted. I don't know where it began. Was it the Stimulus bill maybe? I dunno something got conservatives to prioritize things and reshuffle a bit. That happened before November 09 though. And no the tea party stuff was going on before Beck and Hannity knew about it (although I believe Malkin was one of the first to report on this phenomena cause locally there was a group she knew about.)

I really hate this type of comment. The democrats practically BEGGED the GOP to join them in crafting this bill. The GOP would have nothing to do with it and as a result the bill passed without their input. The ONLY thing the republicans did during this is launch a massive misinformation campaign to shake the confidence of the American people as much as possible to hopefully turn this into a political victory in november.

See you need to remember, the Democrat's symbol is a donkey, so they were treating republicans like a donkey. Holding out this fancy carrot called Healthcare they wanted us to take a bite out of.... Problem was The Republicans that were in the minority were going to get smacked by the stick behind the donkey no matter what they did so they made a decision not to take a bite and get smacked at the same time.

As far as misinformation, while there was some going around, it didn't help when the likes of Reid, Pelosi, and even Obama himself were spreading lies about the bill when there was no bill yet, and noone had read it either. Even after a couple bills were out they still weren't on the same page, and you know what its that kind of lack of leadership that had some conservatives upset at Bush as well.

Ultimately the nomination of McCain really took the fire out of a lot of conservatives. He recaptured that in a moment by choosing Palin, but as his campaign bad mouthed her behind closed doors, and reigned her in etc, then he goes and does little if anything except voting for TARP, when we were saying Don't do it, let the banks fail! At that point it was forgone conclusion he was going to lose I think.

[Baculus]

I think this is a perfect example of scoring political points. The dems tried to hide as much of this bill from the public as they possibly could.

I disagree. While the Republicans were claiming that "no one has read the bill," the bill(s) were posted online and anyone could download a .PDF of it. How do I know? Because, last year, when people were making the same claims, I was posting a link to the .PDF (for H.R. 3200, as an example) so anyone could read it for themselves. That is the exact sort of political attacks I was discussing, which has now become a meme.

The problem was that the public didn't bother to try looking for and reading the Congressional bills.

Another common myth: "The health care debates were never televised!" which is totally untrue, since C-SPAN televised these debates, especially from the House.

They pushed this bill through to satisfy the base.

A lot of Dems and liberals are not happy with this bill because it is does not go far enough in their view. These are many of the people in the "unhappy with the bill" column on all of these recently referenced polls.

The constant accusation of this bill as being "far left" has so far distorted the reality that folks are having difficult on gauging it on the political spectrum. It is not a radical bill. It the sort of centrist bill which was possibly necessary for its passage.

Some of the base wanted different things such as the public option but they all wanted more govt control which is exactly what happened.

Not really. More government control would have been the implementation of a single-payer system. Or the Medicare buy-in.

You are saying this with the misguided, often-repeated right-wing cliche that liberals only want this "for control." This is a fundamentally misunderstanding of American liberals.

Where, in all of the debates on this board, have liberals members of this board indicated they supported reform for the sake of more governmental "power and control"?

Obama made it clear his presidency depended on it so it was passed by his congressional friends. The dems certainly didn’t follow the will of the people.

Who are "The People"? So, do you think "your people" are the only people, and that people which voted for Obama, and the Democrats are now non-people?

Considering how come close of the polls are on this subject, are you saying that half of this country are not real people?

You, and they other folks who say this, have it all wrong: The Democrats, in fact, followed the will of the People, considering they won in 2006 and 2008, with health care reform as being part of the platform. The problem is they just didn't follow the will of your people.

Apparently American is now two countries: the country of real Americans, and the country of Obama-supporting, non-real CommuNazis.

Wonderful. I guess I will have to quit saying the Pledge of Allegiance when I go to SRA dinners, right?

The people wanted real solutions for rapidly rising health care costs.

Let me guess:

Tort reform?

Too bad the GOP didn't seem determined to offer "real solutions."

"Real solutions" has become such an empty phrase, providing no actual "real solutions."

Instead, they got a transfer of power to the federal govt. They certainly went out on a limb but the reasons were not for the American people, they were for the talking heads of their party.

I disagree. The easy way out would have been to completely fold to the Republicans.

2:20 – Great effort at avoiding the question about costs ballooning like they did with Medicare. She knows there is nothing in the bill to fix the rising costs, she’s making sure she doesn’t say anything she’ll be held accountable for.

Once the bills went away from single-payer and more federal intervention in the health care industry, then yes, much of this bill become centered on insurance reforms. Why? Because of the entire attitude, which you have demonstrated, that this is about "government control."

That is the problem -- you want magic fixes. Health care or health insurance reforms are not possible without SOME sort of government intervention, because free market solutions have not bee sufficient (as RomneyCare as demonstrated). And yet, when the Dems want to implement more stringent reform measures, it becomes a case of "government seizure of power." Basically, you can play it both ways: You can attack the solution without providing the solution that would accomplish the stated goal of reform.

It's the sort of position that a minority party can use as a point of attack. They can say "the Democrats are doing too much," while complaining "they are not doing enough."

It's really a bit ridiculous. Under these circumstances, it is possible to have any hope of a bi-partisan resolution, because the Republicans want to Democrats to adopt their exact same position, and nothing more.

[JimboDaMan]

Former editor at the Wall Street Journal editorial page, then editor at the National Review, and now a resident fellow at the American Enterprise Institute. He wrote the "axis of evil" speech for George Bush.

He's conservative.

He's also - suddenly - unemployed.

Conservative forced out at think tank.

But that couldn't have anything to do with his criticism of conservative bombast, could it?

[Johnny Punani]

He's also - suddenly - unemployed.

Conservative forced out at think tank.

But that couldn't have anything to do with his criticism of conservative bombast, could it?

Shhhhh! You weren't supposed to let anyone know that!!

[Smoot Point Really]

Why would Republicans want anything to do with the current deal?

Has anyone actually read the bill yet?

If the Democrats wanted to deal they would've offered Republicans tort-reform or something as a compromise... Instead, they struck deals with Democrats on the fence.

[NoCalMike]

I can't remember who this quote is attributed too, but I know it came amongst all this healthcare fanatacism.

"The Republican party thought Fox News was working for them, but instead the Republican party is now working for Fox News"

Couldn't be more true.

[mjah]

He's also - suddenly - unemployed.

Conservative forced out at think tank.

But that couldn't have anything to do with his criticism of conservative bombast, could it?

Be vewwy, vewwy quiet. I'm hunting RINOs...

[G.A.C.O.L.B.]

http://capitalgainsandgames.com/blog/bruce-bartlett/1601/groupthink-right-would-make-stalin-proud

David Frum and the Closing of the Conservative Mind

by Bruce Bartlett

March 25th

As some readers of this blog may know, I was fired by a right wing think tank called the National Center for Policy Analysis in 2005 for writing a book critical of George W. Bush's policies, especially his support for Medicare Part D. In the years since, I have lost a great many friends and been shunned by conservative society in Washington, DC.

Now the same thing has happened to David Frum, who has been fired by the American Enterprise Institute. I don't know all the details, but I presume that his Waterloo post on Sunday condemning Republicans for failing to work with Democrats on healthcare reform was the final straw.

Since, he is no longer affiliated with AEI, I feel free to say publicly something he told me in private a few months ago. He asked if I had noticed any comments by AEI "scholars" on the subject of health care reform. I said no and he said that was because they had been ordered not to speak to the media because they agreed with too much of what Obama was trying to do.

It saddened me to hear this. I have always hoped that my experience was unique. But now I see that I was just the first to suffer from a closing of the conservative mind. Rigid conformity is being enforced, no dissent is allowed, and the conservative brain will slowly shrivel into dementia if it hasn't already.

Sadly, there is no place for David and me to go. The donor community is only interested in financing organizations that parrot the party line, such as the one recently established by McCain economic adviser Doug Holtz-Eakin.

I will have more to say on this topic later. But I wanted to say that this is a black day for what passes for a conservative movement, scholarship, and the once-respected AEI.

[TheGoodBits]

^^^ I think that may be even more condemning than what Frum wrote... both pieces kind of confirm what I think was a general perception of the GOP from the liberal point of view. That Republicans are now not about ideas and working toward making the country a better place. They are about winning elections through any means, even silencing it's own and disowning those who speak out against them from within.

I'm can't say for sure, but I suspect that the root of it is corporate elites trying to maintain the status quo and increase their profits by manipulating the ignorant masses into thinking they have their best interest in mind. It's all about money and power; using money to gain power and using that power to gain more money.

[JimboDaMan]

If this is true -that AEI scholars have been ordered not to agree with Obama - it pretty much blows off any legitimacy the institute has as a think tank.

I agree with sf_1215. Its one thing to fire David Frum if he's judged to be not conservative enough. It is, after all, a conservative think tank that we assume is bankrolled to think conservative thoughts.

Its another thing altogether to order conservatives not to think conservative thoughts because they might be in agreement with a Democratic proposal. Then the AEI is no longer a conservative think tank, its just another arm of the RNC and has no real credibility as a source of honest opinion.

This is a shame. I'd love to know what these guys like and don't like about the health care law. As time goes on there will be many changes made to this, there's real value in letting ideological but non-partisan views be heard.

[Veretax]

I actually had problems with medicare stuff bush was doing, can't recall what though

[alexey]

They are about to start talking about the banking regulation bill... That may end up playing a huge role in November.

Looks like the battle lines are drawn. Dems are pushing for more power to the Fed and another govt agency. GOP, well, guess.