CO-04 (Special Election) See Full Big Line

(R) Greg Lopez

(R) Trisha Calvarese

90%

10%

President (To Win Colorado) See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Biden*

(R) Donald Trump

80%

20%↓

CO-01 (Denver) See Full Big Line

(D) Diana DeGette*

90%

CO-02 (Boulder-ish) See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Neguse*

90%

CO-03 (West & Southern CO) See Full Big Line

(D) Adam Frisch

(R) Jeff Hurd

(R) Ron Hanks

40%

30%

20%

CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado) See Full Big Line

(R) Lauren Boebert

(R) Deborah Flora

(R) J. Sonnenberg

30%↑

15%↑

10%↓

CO-05 (Colorado Springs) See Full Big Line

(R) Dave Williams

(R) Jeff Crank

50%↓

50%↑

CO-06 (Aurora) See Full Big Line

(D) Jason Crow*

90%

CO-07 (Jefferson County) See Full Big Line

(D) Brittany Pettersen

85%↑

 

CO-08 (Northern Colo.) See Full Big Line

(D) Yadira Caraveo

(R) Gabe Evans

(R) Janak Joshi

60%↑

35%↓

30%↑

State Senate Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

80%

20%

State House Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

95%

5%

Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
April 08, 2010 06:09 PM UTC

Repeal! Well, Except for the Good Stuff! Okay, Maybe Not!

  • 36 Comments
  • by: Colorado Pols

As the conservative American Spectator reports, Republicans continue to furiously backpedal from their initial bluster that they would repeal health care reform:

But in the GOP, cooler heads always prevail. What these Republican heads want to cool down is the campaign to repeal the health care takeover. Reports the Associated Press: “Top Republicans are increasingly worried that GOP candidates this fall might be burned by a fire that’s roaring through the conservative base: demand for the repeal of President Barack Obama’s new health care law.” [Pols emphasis]

One of the Republican leadership’s volunteer firefighters is none other than Sen. John Cornyn, the Texas Republican who chairs the committee responsible for getting GOP candidates elected to the Senate this fall. Cornyn initially unfurled the “repeal and replace” banner, only to quickly make an exception for the “non-controversial stuff,” such as the ban on preexisting conditions which is unfortunately exactly what necessitates the “controversial stuff” like the individual mandate.

Cornyn was later seen pouring cold water on the idea entirely. Asked by the AP whether he was going to advise Republican senatorial nominees to run on repeal, he said, “Candidates are going to test the winds in their own states… In some places, the health care bill is more popular than others.” Meanwhile, Sen. Bob Corker of Tennessee doesn’t need a weatherman to tell him where the wind blows: “It’s just not going to happen.”

Republican candidates seeking to join Cornyn and Corker in the club have gotten the memo. Shortly before Obamacare passed, Congressman Mark Kirk — the Republican running to fill Barack Obama’s old Senate seat in Illinois — bravely vowed to “lead the effort” to repeal the bill. Now he glumly tells a local newspaper, “Well, we lost.”

We wrote about exactly this reality when health care reform was passed last month. For all the fiery rhetoric from Republicans over the last 18 months, the actual health care legislation that was passed is not at all unpopular with the majority of voters — and many of those who are unhappy with it are Democrats who wanted it to be stronger.

We’ve said all along that the reform bill will ultimately benefit Democrats when the election finally rolls around this fall, and Republicans are apparently figuring that out as well. Too bad much of the knee-jerk reaction to the initial passage has already caused a lot of damage. How do you suppose Republican Attorney General John Suthers is feeling today? The silly lawsuit that Suthers joined ended up costing him an easy re-election bid by emboldening a strong Democrat to run against him.

Whoops! Sorry about that, John!

Tweet
Share

Comments

36 thoughts on “Repeal! Well, Except for the Good Stuff! Okay, Maybe Not!”

  1. – death panels

    – the gov’t take over and all the socialism

    – the 16,000 irs agents

    – the “cornhusker kickback”

    – the elimination of Medicare

    – the gov’t funded abortions

    – the free healthcare for illegal immigrants

    – the closing of Offutt Air Force Base

    – the cuts to Veteran’s health care

    – free viagra for sex offenders

    – the exemptions in health reform for Congress

    – the rule that prohibits future Congressional action to amend or alter the act

    All should be repealed and none of these should have been included when it finally passed anyway.

    2. Now that you, a Democrat, have proposed repealing these provisions, the knee-jerk GOP reaction will be to Just Say NO!

      Now we’re stuck with these insidious provisions FOREVER!



    3. – death panels

      do not exist cept for within insurance companies, and the minds of propagandists. talking to your doctor about a living will and reimbursement for it. should be a right

      – the gov’t take over and all the socialism

      paranoia. the insurance companies still run the show. only now with a little regulation.

      – the 16,000 irs agents

      what are YOU afraid of?

      – the “cornhusker kickback”

      No longer exists

      – the elimination of Medicare

      Propaganda Medicare is actually bolstered

      – the gov’t funded abortions

      More paranoia, the Gov does not fund Abortions

      – the free healthcare for illegal immigrants

      so you would advocate bleeding to death in another country you visit, because of resident hate and bigotry?

      – the closing of Offutt Air Force Base

      what is wrong with cutting waste out of the federal buget?

      – the cuts to Veteran’s health care

      this is a new one? did glen beck tell you this?

      – free viagra for sex offenders

      whoa/ this is nothing but fear mongering

      – the exemptions in health reform for Congress

      the Health care bill actually sets up the very SAME type of pool for the rest of us as congress (and all fed employees) enjoy.

      – the rule that prohibits future Congressional action to amend or alter the act

      Awww when Democrats write legislation like republicans… republicans complain BOO FUCKING HOO!!!

            1. the talking point conservatives push about “the American people do not want this.” is only the surface of it. the whole line should be “The American people do not want This particular watered down version of health care.

              reality shows us that Medicare for all actually polls in the 70%-80% range. so a candidate running on that platform probably would win an election (even with a felony record)

              Just sayin’.

              http://www.medicareforall.org/…

              and

              http://pnhp.org/blog/2009/12/0…

              so reality shows republicans would most likely die off as a party fighting against what Americans REALLY want.

              (something like the rest of the industrialized world.)

              1. is that voters generally don’t vote exclusively on issues. Personalities matter, and parties matter.

                Huge majorities favor Medicare for all, huge majorities believe in angels, and huge majorities favor bipartisanship. How the fuck are you supposed to get a candidate supporting all that stuff?

                3. It asked about various Reagan positions, without labeling them as such, and majorities were against each and every one.  When asked for opinion on Reagan himself, he was wildly popular, big majority approval.  It wasn’t that people liked him in spite of his positions. They simply liked his image and didn’t have a clue what his positions were if they were paying any attention to issues at all. Personalities seem to matter more than anything in statewide and presidential elections.

                  This would explain why Palin has suffered no decrease in popularity among tea-baggers who despise McCain even though she is actively supporting him. Just keep winking, Sarah.  

                  1. The Reagan love seemed pathological to me, but I was too young to understand it.

                    I remember being really freaked out in 2004, though, when someone explained to me that her biggest issue was using stem-cell research to cure a disease her brother had, and that’s why she was voting for Bush.

  2. 0 Comments | Examiner, The; Washington, D.C., Mar 21, 2010 | by Michelle Malkin

    If you cannot trust government’s numbers, you cannot trust government’s words. This is the lesson of the House Democrats’ desperate promotion of a phony-baloney Congressional Budget Office analysis of their latest health care takeover package.

    Democratic leaders leaked a solid-seeming price tag — $940 billion over 10 years — before the CBO released any official comment or report. House Majority Whip James Clyburn pronounced himself “giddy” over the supposed CBO scoring. Math lover and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi proclaimed: “I love numbers. They’re so precise.”

    But “precise” does not mean “accurate.” And the most “precise” numbers can be utterly worthless. That is basically what CBO Director Douglas Elmendorf pointed out in his summary of the unofficial preliminary analysis of Demcare:

    “Although CBO completed a preliminary review of legislative language prior to its release, the agency has not thoroughly examined the reconciliation proposal to verify its consistency with the previous draft. This estimate is therefore preliminary, pending a review of the language of the reconciliation proposal, as well as further review and refinement of the budgetary projections.”

    Translation: Garbage in, garbage out.

    The CBO didn’t release its non-report because it was finished. The agency released it because Democrats needed cover for their bogus transparency pledge to post the bill 72 hours before voting on it (which they still didn’t fulfill).

    snip

    There’s an old saying that “figures don’t lie, but liars sure do figure.” Every major Demcare statistic — from the inflated number of uninsured to the politicized junk-science statistic on the number of Americans who purportedly die from lack of health insurance to the mythical savings that will come from squandering “$940 billion” – – is a single-payer-promoting figment of liberal imagination.

    Mathematical corruption is ideological corruption. The health care battle — and the battle over truth in government accounting — is not just about health care. It’s about the lies that will be used to ram through cap and trade, illegal-alien amnesty and endless bailouts.

    As Pelosi vowed last week, “Kick open that door, and there will be other legislation to follow. We’ll take the country in a new direction.” Yep — straight to a red-ink-stained hell in a handbasket.

    http://findarticles.com/p/news…

    2. The author keeps talking about math, but doesn’t seem to know how it works. You estimate various things, and then combine them, and get another estimate out. It’s not garbage just because you don’t know the future. Elmendorf’s statement sounds like a standard legal disclaimer to me, not as a secret indictment of the bill written in ancient runes that only Malkin can decipher.

Leave a Comment

Recent Comments


Posts about

Donald Trump
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Lauren Boebert
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Yadira Caraveo
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado House
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado Senate
SEE MORE

154 readers online now

Newsletter

Subscribe to our monthly newsletter to stay in the loop with regular updates!