MGB: republicannots

all they can do is complain, they are unable to offer a solution of their own.

The Republican Minority Leader in the House was pushed on Sunday to explain just why the party had not introduced a counter-proposal to Democrat-led efforts to overhaul the health care system.

Rep. John Boehner's (R-Ohio) reply was to direct viewers to the GOP's House website, where they could "see our eight or nine ideas about how to make our current health care system better."

In a contentious interview with CNN's "State of the Union," Boehner insisted that the Republican Party would produce an actual piece of legislation that would be scored by the Congressional Budget Office.

"What I am hopeful for is to take these eight or nine ideas and put them together in a bill that is being scored right now by the CBO and presented on the House floor during this debate," he said.

But, when pressed, Boehner largely danced around the details. It has been more than 135 days since the GOP leadership in the House promised to produce an alternative health care bill for the American people to debate.

Boehner did offer some hints about what the bill would resemble. For starters, it would touch on the major points of Republican health care reform orthodoxy.

"We are trying to make the current system work better," he said. "We take a step-by-step approach by allowing people to buy insurance across state lines, by allowing small business and other groups of individuals to group together for the purpose of buying health insurance at lower costs like big business and unions can... We need to do something about junk lawsuits."

Perhaps more telling, a GOP health care reform effort, he said, would be defined by incrementalism. "We do not attempt to cover 46 million more Americans," he said. "We will cover millions more Americans but we won't attempt to do this. This is not affordable... what this is going to do is bankrupt America."

There would be several ways to fix the existing system and use incrementalizm pretty well, but I am not sure why they would bother. Pelosi would never allow anything to see the light of day. It is her perrogative and she would never allow it. If the Republicans only dealt with two issues, the portability and pre existing conditions it would completely derail the Democrat effort.

Strategy wize they seem to be understanding that this abomonation is going to happen and it will be a disaster so they may as well just hang it all on the Democrats and let them sink or swim with the results. If they somehow defy logic and make it work they will get all the credit and if it fails they get the blame. If there was a way to stop and they give up on that just to blame that would bother me but if it is inevitable as it seems then you have to look to the future.

It is easy to say no to something you have no input to.

Dick, if the healthcare fix is that easy, why didn't the republicannots fix it when they had complete control in 2000-2006? Because they like the system just the way it is maybe????

[quote=walshja]
Dick, if the healthcare fix is that easy, why didn't the republicannots fix it when they had complete control in 2000-2006? Because they like the system just the way it is maybe????[/quote]


Dont forget, they were too busy spreading democracy and freedom in other countries through invasion and destruction to address the failing healthcare system.. Tax cuts for the wealthiest, and military expenditures skyrocketing.. they had no time for this.

maybe this is all tied together, instead of providing expensive healthcare, their solution is to kill the people instead.

Two quick dumb posts but I think they were too busy spending money and losing their identity 2000 through 2006. Why do something worthwhile when you can act like a Democrat and just spend. Much more fun and much easier.

We will have to wait and see what they do when and if they ever come back into power. If they accept the Democrat operative desire that they vote moderates and Democrat light then I would suspect they will be out of power for a great many years. The Democrats will have free reign to pretty much destroy the whole process.

I think a good example of that is in NY 23 where the establishment Republican got out of the race in a Republican district and then endorses the Democrat. That is the problem there is not much real difference. We will see now if the Conservative candidate can win now against a Democrat and the New York Republican apparatus.

[quote=6863m]
Two quick dumb posts but I think they were too busy spending money and losing their identity 2000 through 2006. Why do something worthwhile when you can act like a Democrat and just spend. Much more fun and much easier.

We will have to wait and see what they do when and if they ever come back into power. If they accept the Democrat operative desire that they vote moderates and Democrat light then I would suspect they will be out of power for a great many years. The Democrats will have free reign to pretty much destroy the whole process.

I think a good example of that is in NY 23 where the establishment Republican got out of the race in a Republican district and then endorses the Democrat. That is the problem there is not much real difference. We will see now if the Conservative candidate can win now against a Democrat and the New York Republican apparatus.[/quote]


Yeah, there was no spending under Bush... 700B bailouts.. wars, someone has early onset of Alzheimers.

Surplus to deficit..... were you awake 2000-2006?

your hero sarah palin is supporting the remaining candidate, so that should be enough for a victory.

your people love her, and follow her blindly.

What is confusing about "I think they were too busy spending money and losing their identity 2000 through 2006.[/b] " and this response [b]"Yeah, there was no spending" under Bush..

What did I miss.

The Republicans were thrown out of office for losing spending control as a platform. We just did not realize that we were still pykers when compared to Obama and Pelosi.

[quote=6863m]
What is confusing about "I think they were too busy spending money and losing their identity 2000 through 2006.[/b] " and this response [b]"Yeah, there was no spending" under Bush..

What did I miss.

The Republicans were thrown out of office for losing spending control as a platform. We just did not realize that we were still pykers when compared to Obama and Pelosi.[/quote]



You just proved your point, you said democrats spend... while handed a surplus W spent the well dry and then some.. thats all.. nothing more, no hidden meaning.. no terrorist fist jab Richard.. just point out a fact the Republicans spent like drunken sailors the past 8 years..

So this Republican thinks that the govt would be killing seniors? Conspiracy Reich WIngers?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wii-d0NX3NY&feature=player_embedded#

Rep. Foxx: Health care reform is a bigger threat than ‘any terrorist right now in any country.’
Few Republican congressional members have served as a greater fount for hyperbolic and uninformed ranting about health care reform as has Rep. Virginia Foxx (R-NC). As ThinkProgress previously documented, Foxx has claimed Democratic reforms would mean seniors are “put to death by their government,” that health reform is a “distraction,” and that “there are no Americans who don’t have health care.” She was at it again today on the House floor, arguing that health reform is a greater threat to our country than “any terrorist right now in any country”:

Everywhere I go in my district, people tell me they are frightened. … I share that fear, and I believe they should be fearful. And I believe the greatest fear that we all should have to our freedom comes from this room — this very room — and what may happen later this week in terms of a tax increase bill masquerading as a health care bill. I believe we have more to fear from the potential of that bill passing than we do from any terrorist right now in any country.

And I believe the greatest fear that we all should have to our freedom comes from this room — this very room — and what may happen later this week in terms of a tax increase bill masquerading as a health care bill.

Hey, she got that part right!

Very confusing thread. I read today that the Republicans have an alternative but it is not posted. It won't go anywhere.