Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
09-22-2010, 08:21 PM   #1
Veteran Member
jeffkrol's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Wisconsin USA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,434
Pledge night at the frat house tomorrow

QuoteQuote:
The plan focuses primarily on jobs and the economy, with a short reference in the "preamble" to the party's position on social issues.

According to the document, House Republicans want to permanently extend all the tax cuts due to expire at the end of this year, give small businesses a tax deduction equal to 20 percent of their income and require Congress to review any new federal regulations that add to the deficit.

The document lacks, however, a pledge against unrelated pet projects that members of Congress insert in spending bills to bring funding to their home districts -- known as earmarks. Banning earmarks is typically a staple of Republican policy.
QuoteQuote:
Several Republican sources said there was no intention to directly address social issues because the electorate is so heavily focused on jobs and spending.
Republican leaders settled on a line that states: "We pledge to honor families, traditional marriage, life, and the private and faith-based organizations that form the core of our American values."
This language was a late addition, according to a GOP source, after conservative Rep. Mike Pence of Indiana argued that social issues should be included in the document representing the agenda of House Republicans.

QuoteQuote:
A GOP lawmaker involved in putting together the document said House Republicans realize that voters are angry with both Democrats and Republicans. The agenda contained in the "Pledge to America" is intended to convince such voters that their concerns are taken seriously by Republicans, who will act differently if returned to power than they did when controlling Congress during parts of the Bush administration, the legislator said.
GOP's 'Pledge to America' lays out a governing agenda - CNN.com
no mention of how they will "fix" the health care system except to return it to the way it was......... I assume you know how I feel about that, but maybe there will be a surprise.....
as they say.. where's the beef?
QuoteQuote:
a plan to repeal and replace the government takeover of health care
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/23/us/politics/23repubs.html
Subtle reminder:
QuoteQuote:
Before today, an insurance company had dictatorial powers. It could, and often did, the following: exclude children from coverage, drop coverage once a person became ill, refuse to insure someone in the first place if they had pre-existing illnesses, refuse to include children 18 and over under their parents' insurance.
No more.
To Republicans, 9/23/'10 is a day of infamy. To the American people, including many Republican voters who will benefit, it is a day of freedom and justice. [Incidentally, our Preamble talks about Liberty and Justice, and so does our pledge of allegiance. This law achieves both].
But, this is the law the Republican Manifesto pledges to destroy. And, while they are at it, throw Medicare overboard as well.
Vote them in, and they will vote this out. And, if they do not get their way, they will shut down the government until the Administration caves.
Republicans fight to maintain the absolute dictatorship of insurance companies over peoples' lives, and, when they are not doing that, apologize to oil companies.
And, Americans are seriously considering trusting these people with their livelihoods, healthcare and retirement?
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/paul-abrams/92310-the-absolute-dictat_b_735983.html
QuoteQuote:
Workers on average are paying nearly $4,000 in 2010 toward the cost of family health coverage, a 14 percent increase over last year, according to a September survey by the Kaiser Family Foundation. What’s more, workers’ contributions to premiums have gone up 47 percent since 2005, while premiums rose 27 percent and wages increased 18 percent.
QuoteQuote:
In reality, analysis by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) as well as independent groups estimates the added cost of healthcare reform will be no more than one to two percent. “Insurers have been raising rates for a decade, so the idea health reform is to blame is a total canard,” Ron Pollack, executive director of Families USA, which supports health reform, said. “If anything, when the law is fully in place, price increases will be moderated, costs overall will be reduced and consumers will be better protected from outrageous premium hikes.
http://blogs.reuters.com/deep-pocket/2010/09/22/will-healthcare-reform-lead-to-higher-premiums/


Last edited by jeffkrol; 09-22-2010 at 11:51 PM.
09-23-2010, 07:45 AM   #2
Veteran Member
jeffkrol's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Wisconsin USA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,434
Original Poster
Update:

QuoteQuote:
By contrast conservative blogger Erick Erickson of RedState.com says the Pledge pales in comparison to the Contract.

"These 21 pages tell you lots of things, some contradictory things, but mostly this: it is a serious of compromises and milquetoast rhetorical flourishes in search of unanimity among House Republicans because the House GOP does not have the fortitude to lead boldly in opposition to Barack Obama," Erickson writes. "Like a diet full of sugar, it will actually do nothing but keep making Washington fatter before we crash from the sugar high."

He contends that the pledge fixates on goals the GOP should already be working toward while ignoring meaningful, long term goals.

"There is a promise to 'immediately reduce spending' by cutting off stimulus funds. Wow. Exciting," he writes.

David Frum, a former economic speechwriter for President George W. Bush, responds to Erickson: "What did he expect?"

"Here is the GOP cruising to a handsome election victory," Frum writes. "Did you seriously imagine that they would jeopardize the prospect of victory and chairmanships by issuing big, bold promises to do deadly unpopular things?"

The Pledge's timidity amounts to "a repudiation of the central, foundational idea behind the Tea Party," Frum continues.

"Tea Party activists have been claiming all year that there exists in the United States a potential voting majority for radically more limited government," he writes. "Republicans will redirect the federal government to a new path that is less expensive and intrusive than the status quo. But if you want promises of radical change? No. Too risky."

While Frum interprets the document as a rejection of Tea Party principles, blogger "Allahpundit" on HotAir.com sees a rejection of social conservative priorities. The National Review praised Republicans for mentioning social values, but Allahpundit says it's not enough.

"In fact, here's the sum total of language in the document about that: 'We pledge to honor families, traditional marriage, life, and the private and faith-based organizations that form the core of our American values,'" he writes. "One line, buried at the end of the preamble on page one, and according to sources, even that was only added at the very last minute after Mike Pence objected... Think social cons are going to like that, after all the warnings lately about not taking them for granted?"
Another look:
QuoteQuote:
"The document speaks constantly and eloquently of the dangers of debt -- but offers a raft of proposals that would sharply increase it," he writes. "It says, in one paragraph, that the Republican Party will commit itself to 'greater liberty' and then, in the next, that it will protect 'traditional marriage'... It is a document with a clear theory of what has gone wrong -- debt, policy uncertainty, and too much government -- and a solid promise to make most of it worse."
"Pledge to America" Gets Mixed Reviews from Conservatives - Political Hotsheet - CBS News
09-23-2010, 08:04 AM   #3
Veteran Member
Nesster's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: NJ USA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 13,056
Meanwhile, at the party...
Tea Party Standard | The American Prospect

QuoteQuote:
Tea Partiers themselves would no doubt protest that they are here to stay as a unique and independent force. But think ahead, say 10 or 12 years from now. There's a Republican in the White House, and control of Congress is divided. The economy is doing reasonably well, neither fantastic nor awful. Can anyone seriously believe that if that were the case, there would still be people stomping about the National Mall wearing tricornered hats?

It's the "Republican in the White House" part that makes it unimaginable, of course. The Tea Parties are the latest iteration of what has become a repeating pattern in American politics.

...

What sets the Tea Party apart from its earlier incarnations is the way Republicans are groveling before it. Barry Goldwater may have tried to keep the John Birch Society at arm's length, but with just a few exceptions, the entire Republican establishment is outfitting themselves in Revolutionary gear. You can bet your musket that every 2012 GOP contender will be rushing to claim the Tea Party mantle.

And it won't be too hard, since there isn't a Republican anywhere who can't make at least some claim to Tea Partieshness. Which Republicans have been targeted by the Tea Party for primary challenges? Not those who have been wobbly on deficits or individual liberty, but those who were insufficiently partisan.

--

We should rid ourselves of the fiction that the Tea Party is something ideologically distinct from conservatism as it has been practiced for the last 30 years in America. It isn't. It's a far-right version of conservatism, but it's conservatism all the same. The fact that Tea Partiers are emphasizing something different from, say, what Republicans were advocating in 2004, isn't because these are different people with different views. It's because the political moment has shifted, and the most politically potent message right now is one that concerns economics and government, not social issues like abortion and gay marriage.
--

Running candidates in Republican primaries was the best (and maybe only) path to political power for the Tea Party, but it has a downside. Now that these primaries have finished, no one has any doubt that the Tea Party is something that exists within the GOP. Which makes it impossible for Tea Partiers to say to independents and Democrats that it has much to offer them.

All the talk of shaking up the establishment notwithstanding, once they take office, the Tea Partiers will fit comfortably within the GOP. The GOP's relative ideological homogeneity is what enables it to be so unified in Congress, and this election will only make it more so. Some of the Tea Party candidates may be a bit nuts, but they won't be voting against their party's leadership on anything important, or much of anything at all. This is in stark contrast to the Democratic centrists who constantly make life miserable for Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi.

And we'll also see whether the Tea Partiers can put the taxpayers' money where the newly elected officeholders' mouths are. Once you're in Congress, you can't just talk about "spending" in the abstract -- you have to decide where you stand on specific kinds of spending. Will they be voting against projects for their own districts? Will they be railing against things like the billions we spend on farm subsidies? Will they be rooting out waste in the Defense Department? Or will they adopt the typical Republican version of "fiscal conservatism," which is to oppose spending money only on programs you don't like anyway?

In other words, will elected Tea Partiers be something distinct, or will they just be a bunch of very conservative Republicans? In a party where the ideological spectrum increasingly runs from far right to very far right, they won't look different for long



---------- Post added 09-23-10 at 11:30 AM ----------

McGovernites ~= Tea Partiers? I find the following fairly persuasive:

Palin Is the New McGovern - The Daily Beast

QuoteQuote:
George McGovern would understand. When parties lose power, pundits generally expect them to move to the center. But they don’t, at least not at first. Instead, recent history suggests that defeated parties become more extreme. The Republicans nominated a relative moderate, Richard Nixon, in 1960, and lost a squeaker; four years later, they nominated the arch-conservative Barry Goldwater. In 1980, the voters turned out a moderate Democrat, President Jimmy Carter, and four years later, Democrats nominated his more liberal vice president, Walter Mondale. And most significant of all, for the purposes of analogy, is what happened between 1968 and 1972, when a centrist, Hubert Humphrey, lost a close race, and Democrats responded by nominating McGovern, the most left-leaning candidate ever to seek the presidency.

=---

Something similar is happening in today’s GOP. Between 2000 and 2008, George W. Bush pushed American politics sharply to the right: cutting taxes, appointing highly conservative judges, and shredding government regulation. But the Tea Partiers aren’t inclined toward gratitude. In their minds, Bush was an accomodationist, a big spender. Like the McGovernites in the Vietnam-era Democratic Party, the Tea Partiers are taking over the GOP, state by state. And in all likelihood, they will select a party nominee who runs substantially to the right of both Bush in 2000 and 2004 and John McCain in 2008.

That candidate, whether it be Palin herself or a Palin wannabe, will, I suspect, be crushed in the general election. The one major advantage today’s Republicans have over the Democrats of the early 1970s is the economy: If it is actually worse in 2012 than it is today, all bets are off. But if it improves, even modestly, Republicans are likely in for the kind of rude awakening that Democrats experienced in 1972. The reason is that in their fervor to make their parties ideologically pure, the Tea Partiers, like the McGovernites, have not noticed that the bulk of the country is actually moving the other way.

---

It may seem odd to talk of a blowout Republican defeat in 2012, when the GOP is headed for a blowout victory in 2010. But it is precisely the over-interpretation of the latter that could produce the former. When the dust from this massive recession settles, it will be clear that America is not moving right; it is moving left because America’s fastest-growing demographic groups reside on the center-left. Hold on, Republican moderates; you may be poised for a big comeback in 2016.
09-23-2010, 08:42 AM   #4
Veteran Member




Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: La Crescenta, CA
Posts: 7,454
"Pledge to America" =



09-23-2010, 08:51 AM   #5
Veteran Member
Nesster's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: NJ USA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 13,056
the SEC rules require this


09-23-2010, 08:57 AM   #6
Veteran Member




Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: La Crescenta, CA
Posts: 7,454
Pentaxforums.com: Fair and Balanced
09-23-2010, 09:01 AM   #7
Veteran Member
jeffkrol's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Wisconsin USA
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,434
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by deadwolfbones Quote
Pentaxforums.com: Fair and Balanced
+1 wahtever that means........
Addendum.........
QuoteQuote:
But there is a paragraph halfway through the pledge that sums up the limits of the Republicans' willingness to wade into controversial territory. Under the innocuous title of "Reforming the budget process to focus on long-term challenges," Republicans say this:

"We will make the decisions that are necessary to protect our entitlement programs for today's seniors and future generations. That means requiring a full accounting of Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid, setting benchmarks for these programs and reviewing them regularly and preventing the expansion of unfunded liabilities."

That paragraph neatly skirts one of the toughest challenges facing both parties in the years ahead, and one that may come quickly to the fore when the president's debt and deficit commission issues its recommendations at the end of this year.

Identifying the scope of the long-term financial liability is one thing. Offering solutions, whether through raising the Social Security retirement age, changing the cost-of-living formula, offering personal or private accounts or other measures to put the system into long-term balance is another. Faced with an opportunity to offer voters a clearer indication of how they would tackle entitlements, Republicans flinched.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/09/23/AR2010092302...l?hpid=topnews
Hmmm.... don't ask don't tell.............. ?
EDIT: Comments are funny...
http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/09/23/gop.pledge.reaction/
From redstate.....
QuoteQuote:
The Pledge to Nowhere has a Recipe that looks like this:

1 part - Enumerated powers
10 parts - Wickard v. Filburn (1942)

stir until pasty (When you can no longer see the Enumerated Powers, stop)
let sit 10 minutes then add:

1 teaspoon - Cost Cutting
3.6 Trillion parts - Big Govt. Spending
heat in a sauce pan at low temperature and let simmer

lastly add:
1/4 cup of Repeal
3/4 cup of Boehnercare
A pinch of Liberty for Flavoring

stir gently and serve
EDIT: Just a blog but a good summation.............TOO long to quote
http://seminal.firedoglake.com/diary/72766
but I will post his closing remark......
QuoteQuote:
It’s an astonishing record; its [im]morality rivals anything in the Bible’s Old Testament. They’ve become the most irresponsible, ignorant and morally repugnant party in my lifetime.

And based on all that, they say, "Vote Republican."

*Any resemblance to policies, votes or actions of corporate Democrats/conseraDems or the current Administration, is both likely and inexcusable, but it just might explain that "enthusiasm gap" thing.

Last edited by jeffkrol; 09-23-2010 at 08:53 PM.
09-24-2010, 04:37 PM   #8
Forum Member




Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 67
I love big oil, they get me to my union job everyday, & the health insurane companys keep me feelin great!
Did I mention I can see November from my back porch!
We're gonna party like it's 1773

Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
agenda, congress, document, health, house, insurance, law, percent, pledge, voters
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
A little help for tomorrow shuie Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 5 03-20-2010 08:17 AM
My first wedding tomorrow melander Photographic Technique 17 09-23-2009 07:14 PM
Frat House shooz Photo Critique 5 07-29-2009 06:08 AM
An apology and a pledge FHPhotographer Photographic Technique 27 03-21-2009 10:52 AM
House at night ChipB Monthly Photo Contests 0 08-27-2008 08:46 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 12:05 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top