Drew Sheneman for February 25, 2010

Right.

and for regulating the financial services industry and for campaign finance reform and well, for reform of anything in general … oh but if the reform will squash the rights of we the people in favor of furthering the interests of big business … then the ‘funts want their version of reform.

Would that it were.

The Republicans believe that the power of government should be used first of all to help the rich and the privileged in the country. With them, property, wealth, comes first. The Democrats believe that the power of government should be used to give the common man more protection and a chance to make a living. With us the people come first. ‘A Government as Good As Its People’

The power of gov. should be reduced to the will of the people, not the will of the gov..

One more time folks- WE ARE THE GOVERNMENT! If folks aren’t doing their job (working at it!) as CITIZENS- then the idea of a republic doesn’t work. Complaining is NOT “working”, and that failure to chip in, with ideas, letters, attending meetings and “town halls” with IDEAS and support for valid causes, is why the system isn’t working well.

“No” is a bad response to the challenge, and those who keep repeating it as a mantra should ALL BE GONE from Congress- House AND Senate.

“The Democrats have said NO to every Republican Ideal.

This is clear to anyone paying attention”

Really? Paying attention to what, exactly - rightwing talking points? Sorry, man, but as you might have guessed, I’ll really have to disagree. Here’s why:

The GOP has been clamoring for tort reform as it’s the only thing that mattered. The bill has options for states to handle this at their level. They were offered more - if they cooperated on the bill.

The GOP has called for plans being able to apply across states boundaries (although technically the only thing a company needs to do for that is register in another state); the Senate bill has the option for states to enter agreements to recognize plans - as long as they meet the criteria of all states. Otherwise you deny states the right to regulate healthcare on their level - and the GOP supposedly stood for state-level government.

The GOP has been calling against “government takeover” despite the relatively weak public plan that, realistically speakng, would be little danger to any private insurer that could get its bum in gear (just like, you know, private education exists). The GOP still cried bloody murder - well, there’s no public option in the current plan, although it did fairly well in polls late last year.

The GOP has called for the option to give low individuals and small businesses to band together to buy insurance. Umm… sounds a lot like those exchanges in the bill would be?

The GOP has called for cost-control options. There were plans for an agency (healthcare research and quality) to do just that in the bill.

Look, man, let me put it simply: the Dems are messing with their own electorate and campaign promises to produce a bill that has a chance of bipartisanship, and all the GOP says is “We don’t care for this bill, whatever you do, start all over again (so we can campaign on you having done nothing and call it our success”..

Hey, I know Dems are good at snatching defeat from the jaws of victory, but even they’d have to be pretty dumb to do that. In effect, the Dems have already put a lot of stuff in the bill their own people don’t like. If the GOP really wants bipartisanship, it’d have to live with some things they aren’t too keen on, either. They have gotten a few things they’d normally want, and they might get some more. Right now, imo they want to just play politics and mess with the Dems rather than pass the policy they campaigned on.

But yes, the Dems have said no to Republican ideaLs. Not all, but a few. That’s why they are Dems, not Reps ;) .

This toon is totally left wing BS. Playing to the Kool aid kids.

The party of “no” couldn’t say no to tax cuts, or wars, or excessive “defense” spending, or de-regulation of the thieves in our midst- they could have just said “STOP” at the time, but it was two letters beyond their intellectual capacity. They had the votes, or intimidation by “public opinion” to get their way, and we will pay- for a long-long time.

“This toon is totally left wing BS. Playing to the Kool aid kids.”

So… the Republicans are invited to discuss the healthcare bill, they (85%, let’s say) say they don’t care for the bill and it needs to be scrapped (after it ditched the public plan, among a lot of other things), and they are NOT the party of no?

Dude, bipartisanship is when both parties get something they want and something they’d rather not have. If the GOP is going to say no to anything that’s not 99+% of what it wants, then “the party of No” they deserve to be called.

Pretty pointless to bring these guys to the table. All they want is to keep private insurance in the loop, setting up failure systems like co-ops so they can prove that private insurance works, or have people create saving accounts that go towards private insurance.

“The Republicans believe that the power of government should be used first of all to help the rich and the privileged in the country.”

Don’t forget to go after gay people. That’s critically important to their platform. Ask Bob Cut-protections-for-gays-immediately-after-being-elected McDonnell.

I don’t really think the GOP cares that much for gays. As a public issue, sure, they’ll tell you where they stand (and again, and again, etc), but they don’t seem to be doing all that much on the topic.

“I don’t really think the GOP cares that much for gays.”

GOP itself, perhaps not. But your “base” gets you elected, which is why so many target LGBTs with legislation and negative rhetoric. Personally I’m tired of people who claim to be “small government” and ”government should stay out of our lives” sitting there with their ladder in my bedroom window. But for now, I point you to GOP leadership and our disappearing or blocked rights and protections that so many others take for granted. That is their use of ‘power of government.’

That is what I meant. The Republican politicians don’t care much for sexual orientation in itself, just for what the issue means for them.

“Shouldn’t it be the Libs saying, I mean, whining, “No, we can’t.” With some tears showing for dramatic effect?”

Amen to that.

Not as boring as the Heffalumps, who react to all criticisms, data, and concepts with the same simpleminded, knee-jerk, know-nothing responses programmed for them by FoxNews.

^ no, why would you assume that?

“When will Obama stop performing for the camera”

“I disagree with everything Obama says… except that I actually don’t really disagree, I just disagree on T.V. When I go home I celebrate the things he does… but the moment the camera rolls, I hate everything he does. Even when he decides to do things that I originally either campaigned for or signed for.” Republican performance.

“I hear of nothing being done to protect the average American’s way of life. ”

Republicans are blocking it.

Ever notice that the elephants in Shenemen’s cartoons always look very tired? Very tired, and very old. It seems to be a thin thread running through all his themes.

Interesting.