Stupid: RNC to pass resolution rebranding Democrats the “Democrat Socialist Party”
posted at 2:50 pm on May 13, 2009 by Allahpundit
Just the sort of smart, sober gesture we need to convince Americans of the party’s new seriousness of purpose. Even Michael Steele — Michael Steele — sees the publicity trainwreck a-comin’, although he’s powerless to stop it.
Oh well. The base will love it, and that’s all that matters.
A member of the Republican National Committee told me Tuesday that when the RNC meets in an extraordinary special session next week, it will approve a resolution rebranding Democrats as the “Democrat Socialist Party.”
When I asked if such a resolution would force RNC Chairman Michael Steele to use that label when talking about Democrats in all his speeches and press releases, the RNC member replied: “Who cares?”…
Steele wrote a memo last month opposing the resolution. Steele said that while he believes Democrats “are indeed marching America toward European-style socialism,” he also said in a (rare) flash of insight that officially referring to them as the Democrat Socialist Party “will accomplish little than to give the media and our opponents the opportunity to mischaracterize Republicans.”
More than anything, this reeks of impotence, operating almost as a concession that the right’s argument on the merits that the left is evolving towards socialism isn’t working to shift public opinion. So now they’re going to up the ante by trying the hard sell: Just repeat “socialism” as much as possible to try to drive it into people’s skulls, never minding the fact that that term’s already lost some of its taboo and might well lose more as it goes further mainstream. Or at least, I hope that’s the GOP strategy here. The alternative, that they’re simply sticking their fingers in their ears and repeating “socialist” over and over out of spite like a five-year-old, is too depressing to contemplate. What’s next, a formal resolution declaring french fries “freedom fries” in the Republican Party henceforth and forevermore?
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « Previous 1 … 4 5 6 7 Next »
Good idea.
ex-Democrat on May 13, 2009 at 8:39 PM
I think you’re giving, “the party of no”, far too much credit. How could the neigh sayers in the GOP possibly have stopped it when there are a number of crypto-socialists and neo-statists in the GOP?
FloatingRock on May 13, 2009 at 8:42 PM
Your head is completely buried in the sand. Offer legislation? Are you serious? The Republicans can’t get the Democratically controlled Congress to take tea when they offer it. Wake up and smell the coffee dude.
This will NOT backfire. The Democrats are offering Socialist proposals – they need to be called as such because it’s completely true and proper. And to a certain extent – extreme language is necessary to penetrate the liberal filter of the media.
“The Party Of No” … hell we branded the Democrats that during Bush’s first term – it didn’t stop them from taking the White House. Hell yeah – we’re the party of NO
NO NATIONALIZED HEALTH CARE!
NO NATIONALIZED BANKS!
NO NATIONALIZED AUTO COMPANIES!
NO TERRORISTS ON AMERICAN SOIL!
NO ILLEGAL ALIENS!
NO CAP AND TRADE!
NO CARBON RESTRICTIONS!
NO NANNY STATE!
NO PUNITIVE TAXES.
Yah bro – if all this don’t make you “NO” … talk to ZO … cuz you gotta GO!
HondaV65 on May 13, 2009 at 8:42 PM
Yes, you’re right – if only we had written up a reasonable alternative the overwhelming Democratic majorities would have easily forsaken Obama and come to us!
Oh wait – we DID give an alternative … didn’t we? And what happened? It was shot down by the Dems like a Scud by a Patriot.
HondaV65 on May 13, 2009 at 8:46 PM
Socialist Party of America presidential candidate Norman Thomas in the 1940s: “The American people will never knowingly adopt socialism, but under the name of liberalism, they will adopt every fragment of the socialist program until one day America will be a socialist nation without ever knowing how it happened.”
The Democratic Party now IS a socialist party and it is NOT benign modern European-style socialism; it’s hardline demagoguing totalitarian socialism, bordering on Mussolini-style classic fascism – I am European, so take it from me!
modifiedcontent on May 13, 2009 at 8:48 PM
This is probably why we’re talking past each other. Based on your statement above it seems that you believe the Republicans should be offering their own proposals for national health care and other Democrat issues in an effort to coopt them. In other words, socialism-lite. If this is the case, publicly linking Democrats with Socialism would harm your socialist-lite agenda as well.
FloatingRock on May 13, 2009 at 8:49 PM
Here! Here! EXACTLY Correct! We have to speak in truthful terms here – the Dems are perpetrating a scam on the American public. The more parallels we draw to Socialism – the more chance we have of stopping this.
HondaV65 on May 13, 2009 at 8:50 PM
And another thing, Republicans should stop refering to Dems and marxists as “liberals” and stop equating Republicanism with conservatism.
Classic liberalism was the founding ideology of America; pro-capitalist, pro-rule of law, pro-free speech, pro-seperation of powers, all the good stuff. That is NOT conservatism, it’s liberalism.
The Dems are NOT liberals, they are socialists. Please start identifying them as such! And reclaim liberalism, TRUE liberalism, for a new alternative to Obama’s coming totalitarian state.
modifiedcontent on May 13, 2009 at 8:54 PM
It seems a bit wrong to me.
Should be ‘Socialist Democrats’… or … ‘National Socialists’
Scribbler on May 13, 2009 at 9:04 PM
It’s not. Their life expectancy equals ours.
radiofreevillage on May 13, 2009 at 9:10 PM
This. I mean, if you’re gonna call a spade a spade, and all…
holygoat on May 13, 2009 at 9:11 PM
Yeah, because they can fly to the US for treatment.
FloatingRock on May 13, 2009 at 9:14 PM
Survival rates for various forms of cancer are higher in the US.
FloatingRock on May 13, 2009 at 9:15 PM
People in Denmark without US health insurance routinely fly to America to see their doctor?
Do you play an idiot every time you see an inconvenient fact?
radiofreevillage on May 13, 2009 at 9:16 PM
OK. *trying to recall how former gf dealt with kids when she worked in a kindergarten for children with developmental problems*
What does it say about other diseases in light of the fact the averages are equal?
radiofreevillage on May 13, 2009 at 9:19 PM
Huh? You don’t have to have American insurance to get medical treatment in the US. Europeans, Canadians and other medical refugees from socialist nations come here for medical treatment all the time. Didn’t you know that?
So…
Right back at ya’.
FloatingRock on May 13, 2009 at 9:26 PM
Alrighty then.
radiofreevillage on May 13, 2009 at 9:30 PM
If you’re going to get personal I’ll assume you’ve resigned yourself to having lost the debate.
FloatingRock on May 13, 2009 at 9:32 PM
I’m game for this! It’s past time for Conservatives to start identifying the Democrats as the Socialists they are.
I’d add also, Conservatives need to begin using phrases like this to further expose Dems:
DEMOCRATS HAVE PROVEN BY WORDS AND DEEDS, THAT THEY WOULD RATHER PROTECT AND DEFEND A TERRORIST THAN DEFEND YOU FROM THAT TERRORIST.
SoldiersMom on May 13, 2009 at 9:35 PM
The “Democrat Socialist Party” is rebranding Global Warming….
TN Mom on May 13, 2009 at 9:35 PM
I so totally lost the debate on Danish people flying to the US for treatment and inflating national life expectancy averages.
radiofreevillage on May 13, 2009 at 9:41 PM
Life expectancy is not the measure of a health care system, numbnuts. The availability and delivery of particular procedures, tests, and drugs are.
By your measure, some primitives in the mountains have had better “health care” than most modern nations since their life expectancy was longer.
You are truly stupid. Unfortunately, there’s nothing that can be done to help you – though I’m sure that The Precedent would love to spend millions trying to help raise your IQ by a point or two.
progressoverpeace on May 13, 2009 at 9:44 PM
I thought it was common knowledge that Europeans routinely come to the US for serious medical care but I guess not.
As to life expectancy, there are a number of other factors besides medical treatment that come into play.
FloatingRock on May 13, 2009 at 9:45 PM
This is 100% right on. We should be the party of NO on every one of these issues. We dont stand a snowballs chance in hell of stopping them from passing anyway.
Thats not saying we shouldnt fight them every step of the way. We have to be out there screaming at the top of our lungs what we’re in for…..BUT LET THEM OWN IT.
When the bills come due….and they will. When Joe six-pack figures out that he can olnly afford a 40oz. because Uncle Obama is getting 1/2 his check…He’s gonna start pointing his finger at all those people thats sold him “change”… Hey aint the media talking heads rich? better be taxing those fools at 90% and what about Hollywood? 90% for those idiots too.
In the end all we have to look foreward to is being the party of “we told ya so” but we have to stand our ground and let them OWN THE WHOLE MESS.
Paco on May 13, 2009 at 9:47 PM
Hey, don’t feel bad, until FR pointed this out, I also was ignorant of this situation. Now that my eyes have been opened, I realize that here in California, you can hardly get into an emergency room, they are so crowded with uninsured Danes, desperate to raise their nation’s stats.
/sarc
califcon on May 13, 2009 at 9:54 PM
Maverick Muse
your point taken…. then ” Fascist Statist Collective Party” it should be, true?
MNDavenotPC on May 13, 2009 at 9:55 PM
So what are you two saying, that socialized medicine is superior to what we have? No wonder you’re against labeling the Democrats socialists.
Do you think that 100% of Dane’s spend all of their lives in the US, more specifically in California, more specifically still in emergency rooms, waiting to receive health care?
I’ve got to give you two credit; that’s about the dumbest straw man argument I’ve ever read hear at HA.
FloatingRock on May 13, 2009 at 10:00 PM
I’m saying that you make very little sense . . . But, since you are threadjacking while doing so, I will give you credit for multi-tasking.
califcon on May 13, 2009 at 10:02 PM
Medical refugees from nations with socialized health care don’t come to our emergency rooms, they make appointments with specialists for treatment that they’d have to wait an inordinate amount of time for in their own nations, if the treatments are available to them at all. For example, in the UK, some of the best chemotherapy drugs aren’t available because they’re too expensive. They’re available in the US, though, and that’s one of the reasons our survival rates are higher.
Canada only has a few MRI’s so the waiting list is extremely long. People can die waiting to find out what their problem is. MRI’s are all over in the US, though, so many of them come here for MRI’s.
Many of the best Canadian doctors practice in the US because the compensation is better.
FloatingRock on May 13, 2009 at 10:06 PM
Talking about socialized health care in a thread about socialism is thread jacking, now?
Keep on keepin’ the “hope and change” alive, Califcon.
FloatingRock on May 13, 2009 at 10:08 PM
For those arguing for the Euro socislist health care systems, you should know that they draft off the US system, which is the one that just about all of the drugs, procedures, and research are directed at (because we are the only ones who pay enough to encourage people to do that). When the US takes health care socialist, all of that stops dead.
The same way that the Euros have drafted/leeched off of the US on defense (we spent all the money to defend them, only to have the leeches start dictating to us how defense works(LOL)) they draft off our health care system and the advances that are forthcoming only because WE PAY FOR THEM!
The world will see. And all will suffer – as that is socialism’s specialty.
progressoverpeace on May 13, 2009 at 10:09 PM
After 500 comments, there’s no such thing as “threadjacking”.
progressoverpeace on May 13, 2009 at 10:10 PM
And there’s that, too. :)
progressoverpeace on May 13, 2009 at 10:14 PM
‘Stupid’? Sounds like a good idea to me. They just need to be consistent in using it though.
Dr. ZhivBlago on May 13, 2009 at 10:23 PM
I propose the “Democrat Commie Bastards party”.
Axeman on May 13, 2009 at 10:42 PM
Great, Comedy Central’s most popular libtard news hour will devote time to this instead of focusing on Botoxy or Obama flip flopping.
Speedwagon82 on May 13, 2009 at 10:43 PM
What could he possibly say, “duh”?
FloatingRock on May 13, 2009 at 10:46 PM
Somehow this thread degraded into health care. That’s cool.
Part of my job … I travel all over the world. I’ve had the opportunity to observe their health care up close a few times for myself and some folks I traveled with. I’ll spend months overseas in places like Norway, Denmark, Germany, France, and the UK. I have friends in all those places.
They generally like their socialized health care over there – but they’re paying, on the low end … about 40% of their income in taxes. That’s not the “rich tax bracket” either – that’s pretty much your normal junior Engineer’s salary bracket. And that doesn’t count all the “other” taxes they pay either. For instance … taxes on alcohol are punitive. Taxes on everything are punitive. They can’t tell you how much of their income actually goes to the government – because truth be told – well over 50 percent of what they make goes to the government.
Did I mention they are bitching because most of the governments over there DO NOT cover Dental at all? They will eventually – but there will be the obligatory taxes to pay for it.
Hehe … seems like every doctor I saw overseas was an Indian, or a Pakistani, or Chinese or something. Funny thing is – when Doctors become “government employees” – most of the natives go “John Gault” on the medical business and this results in a flood of immigrant doctors from third world countries to supply the nations health care needs. Not sure we want that here?
Someone says that their life expectancy is the same as ours? That’s pretty astounding to me – considering the wealth that Europeans give up for their health care – they should live MUCH LONGER than we do. I’m surprised our chaotic system is that good. If you listen to the news media and the socialists – ours sucks – but clearly it doesn’t.
And someone else mentioned that THEY come to the U.S. when they are really sick and need care? I don’t doubt that one bit – but their governments don’t give them tax vouchers to do that – it comes out of their own wallet. Seems a bit weird to abandon the system you pay for regardless if you use it or not … for another one you’ll just have to throw more money into. But I guess you’d do it too if your life was on the line.
I don’t know any of my American friends who’ve gone to Russia, or Iran, or England … for treatment. Do you? There may be some but I don’t personally know anyone. So it must be pretty rare (I know a lot of people).
And I must say – that health care costs are like certain physical laws of nature. You will recall in elementary school they taught you that “matter cannot be created nor destroyed”. It’s the same thing with health care costs. They aren’t any cheaper when you put them into the government’s hands – they are only more inefficient.
There is no such thing as “free health care” – unless you’re someone on the low end of the income scale and pay no taxes – or you’re an illegal alien – which by the way is the reason most liberals really want nationalized healthcare.
They frequently quote as many as fifty million in the U.S. as uninsured. About half those, maybe more, are illegals.
HondaV65 on May 13, 2009 at 10:49 PM
LOL, what? Life expectancy in the US or Denmark is around 78 years. What “mountain primitives” live longer than that?
radiofreevillage on May 13, 2009 at 10:56 PM
There’s some truth in the labeling, but the Donkey party will turn around and accuse the Elephant party of being name-callers. Unfortunately, that’s the label that will be believed and, er, reported.
flutejpl on May 13, 2009 at 11:07 PM
This woman?
If our health care is so bad … why do U.S. citizens make up half of the top ten list of longest living people?
You’re pinning your entire argument on “average life expectancy” … and you say that since Europeans have a life expectancy equal to ours – they have superior health care. Uhm … that’s nonsense.
Fact is – Europeans pay punitive income tax rates to pay for their healthcare – over 40 percent in Norway – and that doesn’t even count the hellacious taxes they pay for groceries and other goods. God help you if buy a bottle of booze or a pack of cigarettes. All that is necessary to pay for health care.
But they don’t get Dental :)
Fact is – with all the wealth their governments confiscate from them – they should be living MUCH LONGER than us schlubs here in the U.S. who are “on our own” (sniff).
HondaV65 on May 13, 2009 at 11:08 PM
I’m the base, and I don’t love it. Things are what they are, regardless of what they are called. Yeah, they’re socialists and worse, but the important thing is that the American people come to understand that the false virtue of socialism is, in reality, a prison for everyone. I knew Obama for what he was last summer, but I never could have imagined the reckless path of destruction he would forge with the help of the Dem majorities in Congress. I’m really frightened of an American administration for the first time in my life. The left pretended to be afraid of the Bush administration, but no one was intimidated by them – no one.
disa on May 13, 2009 at 11:12 PM
OK, this is dumb.
IMO, this is the equivalent of libs calling Republicans “nazis”.
Just don’t go there – attack the (stupid) ideas.
BD57 on May 13, 2009 at 11:12 PM
I don’t get it. By “mountain primitives” you mean blacks in LA?
Who said that?
radiofreevillage on May 13, 2009 at 11:14 PM
Quote me.
radiofreevillage on May 13, 2009 at 11:15 PM
Well … what is your point then? I’m at a loss – unless your point is that we need to chuck our current healthcare – which is AT LEAST as good as the nationalized care in Europe – and start paying over half our incomes to the government to get what we already have.
Maybe I missed something. Have you found a way to make healthcare FREE if we turn it over to the government? I’m all ears.
HondaV65 on May 13, 2009 at 11:17 PM
Vilcabamba, Ecuadorthough (though, these folks are valley dwellers)
And there are groups in the Caucuses with the same reputation.
But, then, I guess you would say that Ethiopia has better distance running coaches than anyone else …
Get a brain, man.
progressoverpeace on May 13, 2009 at 11:17 PM
Honda, you are so right. I lived in Sweden for over a decade (1987-1996). At that time, gas was over $4/gallon, a pack of cigs even more (remember, this was in the early 90s), a cheap bottle of vodka was $30. All electronics had the old VAT of 25%+ on them. It cost $8 to rent a video. People waited a year or more for procedures, dental isn’t covered, even though dental health is a big part of overall health. Fatherless children ran rampant everywhere (marriage was “just a piece of paper” and sooooo square). Women were encouraged to get pregnant by the government so they could safely be placed in a category other than “jobless.” Oh, I could tell horror stories. The only “elite” in Sweden were sports professionals, since that seems to be one thing that you can’t pretend about.
disa on May 13, 2009 at 11:20 PM
I really don’t know what radiofreevillage is trying to say. What’s his point? How does nationalizing health care make us better if he himself admits that European nationalized health care is no better than ours?
HondaV65 on May 13, 2009 at 11:20 PM
He likes chasing his tail. It’s the only thing he’s good at, it seems.
progressoverpeace on May 13, 2009 at 11:22 PM
My point was to refute stupid propaganda that American healthcare is the best. It isn’t. It’s pretty good but there’s no evidence that it’s the best.
As I have said repeatedly, and what many morons (not talking about you) conveniently ignore, American healthcare definitely needs improvement, and that must be done through market forces. Clearly, I’m against any attempts to use government to solve this problem.
P.S. No, it’s not “AT LEAST” as good. Life expectancy in the US is 30th in the world.
radiofreevillage on May 13, 2009 at 11:24 PM
Thanks .. I spend a lot of time in Norway and Europe every year – at least two months out of the year and your observations match mine.
In addition – once the government starts giving you health care – they become your “mom”. You know – in Norway you can’t even buy a bottle of booze after like 7pm. And there are days when it isn’t allowed to be sold in stores at all – and not for any religious reasons mind you.
The Norwegian government has decided that people who buy booze and drink alone in their houses commit suicide. So you can drink in a bar with others – but the government doesn’t want you drinking alone in your house.
I say “no thanks” to that kind of government intervention in my life.
HondaV65 on May 13, 2009 at 11:24 PM
I don’t know. Ask someone who claims that. Because I haven’t. Try this game. It’s called “two thoughts in one head”.
1. The US healthcare isn’t the best in the world
2. The best way to improve American healthcare is through more of free market.
Difficult?
radiofreevillage on May 13, 2009 at 11:26 PM
Well you said that their life expectancy was the same as ours on average – so I concluded that you were saying we were on a par with them.
But whatever … glad you aren’t for nationalized health care – we can agree on that. The only people who will benefit from nationalized health are illegal aliens imo.
HondaV65 on May 13, 2009 at 11:26 PM
So are you for or against it?
FloatingRock on May 13, 2009 at 11:29 PM
Really—so the Democrats are no more socialist than we are Nazi’s? Do you even know what socialism is?
FloatingRock on May 13, 2009 at 11:30 PM
The US health care system is, hands down, the best. All other health care systems leech off of ours.
Says who? I am happy with my health care. The problem our system has comes mostly from the government forcing everyone to get care, even if they are illegals who have no right to be in this country. Even if they decide not to buy health insurance.
The market for health insurance needs work, but our health care system would be fine if the government would get out of it and stop demanding that so many of our dollars (my dollars) be wasted.
That’s good to hear. I am in agreement with this. But why are you pointing out socialist health care systems that you claim are better (which they are not – not even close)?
Again, life expectancy is not the measure of a health care system. The availability and delivery of services is. Why is that so difficult for you to understand?
progressoverpeace on May 13, 2009 at 11:31 PM
Denmark, yes. France has a higher life expectancy. And they smoke!
Just to provide context, which is usually easily obtained by reading my posts and not relying on morons to paraphrase my thoughts.
We began by talking about whether the charge of “socialism” would work. I’m against implementing European style socialism in the US. However, it is simply ridiculous in my view to argue as some have in this very thread, that “socialism” means poverty etc. People are saying this work politically. I’m saying it won’t. Because saying that the Europeans lead a horrible life is insane. They have a fairly good standard of living.
Again (because I can’t count on people here getting it the first time), I don’t want European lifestyle. Not only are they worse off overall, socialism also means abandoning things the the liberals claim to like. Like immigration, for example. You can’t have a welfare state and immigration. There’s a reason for why you have to be a permanent resident of Switzerland for 25(!!) years before you can apply for citizenship. If they didn’t have that, they’d be feeding 70% of the world and collapse.
There’re plenty of smart arguments against European style socialism implemented in the US. Phony patriotism, which is clearly at odds with facts isn’t one of them.
radiofreevillage on May 13, 2009 at 11:35 PM
15% of Americans don’t have health insurance. At most half of them, according to Reason.tv’s recent episode, could afford it if they wanted. That still leaves 7%.
You’re now free to raise your big foam number one finger and waive it in the air.
radiofreevillage on May 13, 2009 at 11:41 PM
Socialism means stagnation. Call it whatever you want, but it is anti-growth. And I’ve lived in the most purely socialist communities this world has ever seen (Israeli kibbutzim).
The Europeans have the American economy to thank for allowing them to have their systems after WWII. If the US decides to become like the Euros, then we will have our standard of living drastically reduced (along with the stagnation of socialism) and the Euros will fall back into the dark ages.
You know, one runner must cut the wind for the rest, who are drafting off of him. The US has been that leader for a long time. People in the US are trying to argue that everyone in the field can draft, with no one paying the price of leading and cutting the wind. It is pure silliness. I’m glad to hear that you are not one of those, though you seem to be adopting that same attitude in your argument about health care and how the Euro systems are actually supported.
progressoverpeace on May 13, 2009 at 11:44 PM
You’re oversimplifying the relevance of life expencancy numbers. For example, we drive far more than people in other nations and traffic fatalities shorten American life expectancy numbers. Europe has been sitting on their butts for many decades now, badmouthing the US while we put our lives at risk protecting them, and the losses in our armed forces shortens our life expectancy. There are a number of factors other than the quality of health care that are an issue in those numbers.
And as somebody else already pointed out, many of the drugs and procedures available in other countries that have increased their life expectancy wouldn’t even be available if they hadn’t been developed in the US in the first place.
If you want to do a direct comparison of the quality of our health care to theirs, one example would be the survival rate for various cancers, or the length of time it takes for somebody suffering pain to receive treatment for their condition, such as a hip replacement; or whether they can get the hip replaced at all since socialized medicine results in rationing.
FloatingRock on May 13, 2009 at 11:46 PM
It is not the federal government’s job to pay for everyone’s health insurance. In fact, the federal government is not allowed, Constitutionally, to do that. Health care is a state issue.
progressoverpeace on May 13, 2009 at 11:48 PM
Except remember, the Europeans “routinely come to the US” for treatment. They pay for it with their own money. Isn’t that what you said?
radiofreevillage on May 13, 2009 at 11:54 PM
Did I say anything to the contrary? I was remarking on accessibility of healthcare.
radiofreevillage on May 13, 2009 at 11:54 PM
Getting back to my original point, which was:
Regardless of our debate over health care, there’s no question that history proves that capitalism is far stronger than socialism. So much so that European socialism probably wouldn’t even exist today if it hadn’t been preserved by Capitalist America.
FloatingRock on May 13, 2009 at 11:56 PM
Yes, and many others are developed in Europe, and yet other are developed in Japan. The US isn’t the only place where pharmaceutical research is taking place.
radiofreevillage on May 13, 2009 at 11:57 PM
I can’t believe you’re not aware of that fact.
FloatingRock on May 13, 2009 at 11:57 PM
No, that’s true, it’s only just the predominant place.
FloatingRock on May 13, 2009 at 11:58 PM
Your statement about the 7% was along those lines, but it’s not a big deal. I was just emphasizing the fact that talk about health care at the federal level has no business going on, at all. It wasn’t really directed at you. Just a comment, since we are talking about “national” solutions to health care.
And the accessibility I was talking about was for those who pay for their own care, not for every person who happens to be on US soil.
progressoverpeace on May 13, 2009 at 11:58 PM
He has shut the eyes of his mind and is keeping them shut by force. Or, they may just not get very good radio reception in his village.
MB4 on May 13, 2009 at 11:59 PM
Almost all Euro medical research is DIRECTED at the US market, because that’s where the money is. The Euro companies won’t even bother with anything for the Euro market, since that is a recipe for financial disaster. The Euros are ticked that their own pharma industry basically ignores them. But they benefit on the backside, after the US market pays for the R+D costs and then the Euros get the product at low cost, as the rest of the world benefits the same.
progressoverpeace on May 14, 2009 at 12:01 AM
OK, but since it’s already largely involved in healthcare, it needs to do something. If if something means removing previously enacted policies.
Alright, nice talking everyone. I gotta head home. I’m so into European socialism, I’m still at work and it’s 12:02AM here.
radiofreevillage on May 14, 2009 at 12:03 AM
I don’t have an issue with an accurate description of a party that most definitely has adopted the political principles of Marx and the Federal Reserve, but only if the accuser hasn’t also displayed both socialism and crony “capitalism,” then it rings a little hollow.
In America we haven’t had a free market in a long time.
True_King on May 14, 2009 at 12:03 AM
I didn’t read the first two or three pages, but I didn’t see anybody claim that socialism is equivalent to poverty. However, it’s a fact that Capitalism is a far more powerful economic force, and that it has carried European socialism over the decades. This is indisputable. Our economy is more powerful even with the expense of protecting Europe all this time while they’ve sat on their collective rear ends.
Europe does.
I’ve read that there are a lot of radical Muslims collecting welfare in Europe. I don’t know about Switzerland specifically.
Feel free to chime in with your contributions…. So far you’ve spent all your time arguing that we should keep the fact that the Democrats are socialists a secret while you’ve elected to defend one aspect of socialism, explaining that there’s nothing wrong with it; that it’s at least as good. This was apparently an effort on your part to explain why we shouldn’t call the Democrats socialists even though they are.
FloatingRock on May 14, 2009 at 12:16 AM
They are angry because even Obama and his gang aren’t socialist enough for them.
Speedwagon82 on May 14, 2009 at 12:18 AM
So, are you now saying that you support socialized medicine, or am I misreading your point? You aren’t exactly clear. Are you against socialized medicine but in favor of universal health care, pretending that there is a difference?
And if you are in favor of socialized medicine, is there any wonder why you appose labeling the Democrats as Socialist when you’re possibly one yourself?
FloatingRock on May 14, 2009 at 12:21 AM
When many people look at the rich in this country, they see many undeserving, like mediocre musicians, mediocre actors, and mediocre athletes. Then they look at themselves and the are found lacking. At least in socialist Europe, everyone is the same. Thats why they prefer Socialism.
Speedwagon82 on May 14, 2009 at 12:22 AM
You know, the REAL way to fight fire with fire would be to take the Alinsky approach — pick the target, personalize it, and polarize.
Just adding “socialist” to the party name doesn’t personalize the attack.
I’m not advocating personal attacks – just pointing out that this may fail because it doesn’t address or fight back with the tactics they use.
Daggett on May 14, 2009 at 12:29 AM
Yeah, that’s right, you don’t support socialized medicine, you just defend it at every turn and claim that it’s at least equivalent if not greatly superior.
Whatever. I’m not really a conservative, myself. I actually prefer socialism in most regards. I’m only criticizing it to illustrate that false patriotism is… whatever. (I’m not as good at this as you are and really need to work on my astroturfing material.)
FloatingRock on May 14, 2009 at 12:30 AM
Hugh Hewitt and Mark Steyn (I love Mark Steyn, and he puts it in a nutshell here):
This is exactly what it was like, experiencing an election in Sweden. The “right-wing” party was called the Moderates. That would be like placing David Frum in the Rush Limbaugh position.
disa on May 14, 2009 at 12:44 AM
I don’t know if this is such bad politics or not. It is certainly not stupid in the sense of inaccuracies. But I implore those of you who think it might be a bad idea for reasons similar to the above quote to give a thought to the following:
I believe a large problem of what is happening, better yet, what we are allowing to happen is that lately the GOP in DC has hardly offered a clear cut difference in governance. Growing the federal government, spending like crazy, establishing new and absurd programs, etc. did not start on January 20th of this year. Hell, it should be noteworthy that a Democrat was owning the tax issue during the campaign. Think about that for a moment. The political climate of both Parties have been on a slide to the left. But that is natural and expected for Democrats. The dissapointment lies for what should be the alternative, Republicans.
In any area I can think of, competition is healthy and promotes progress, efficiency, overall better systems. There is no reason for politics to be exempt. The GOP has not been engaged in competing ideas. It stands to reason that that creates a balance shift.
Politics is fluid. The McCains, Specters, Snowes, Grahams, Powells, and Collins’ etc. of the Party are/were incapable of pulling the middle back to were it should be…the middle. Too top-heavy on the left side. Thus the middle moved left. Powell and Specter were clearly not interested in balance. Fine. Get in where you fit in. The others just happen to have an (R) after their name. Their interests are questionable still.
I think what is starting to happen with the Tea Parties, RINO defections, and now this; is lines are finally being drawn. Competition and opposition are gaining momentum and choices will be clearer. It seems to me that this is part of a healthy process. This sliding to the left is being addressed before our eyes.
Clearly defining competing principles might purge some but only the left of center (at least what the center used to be). It does not only have to be a challenge or name calling as some will charge but a call to define why socialism is a) bad and b) un American (un instead of anti is an important distinction). Offering the alternative will follow naturally.
For what it’s worth anyway…
anuts on May 14, 2009 at 12:45 AM
I suppose I should have used bold to say that *I* don’t love it, to counter AP’s assumption. I figured my meaning was clear, apparently it wasn’t. I laughed out loud when I saw the article, because it was funny and it sounds like the Repubs are growing a few pair. But let’s not waste them on silliness, guys.
disa on May 14, 2009 at 12:49 AM
Right, but you’re forgetting about tort reform. In Sweden, there are no huge malpractice lawsuits. If they leave a sponge in you, they’ll go in again and take it out for free and that’s about it.
If Obama wants to cut costs, he’ll have to do something about tort reform. One of the biggest contributors to wasted resources is that doctors fear missing anything, and therefore run superfluous diagnostics to cover their asses.
Trial lawyers are Obama’s guys. For now. I wonder how long it will take before he throws them under the bus. Sure, Michelle and Barry badmouthed the financial sector (did he actually get a job offer to turn down, or was that more b.s.?) But most Americans have heard and laughed at the joke: “What do you call a dozen lawyers at the bottom of the ocean?” “A good start.” I can see him turning his red laser eyes on the trial lawyers next…here come the pitchforks.
disa on May 14, 2009 at 1:00 AM
I also take issue with this kind of logic. With all the variables involved in life expectancy it would be near impossible to solve the correlation not causation problem.
Suppose one would say, “if they had our exact system and resources in every aspect of the medical field, their life expexctancy would/could be even higher.”
You would be logically sound and justified to respond, “health care quality is in no way an accurate prognosticator of life expectancy.”
Unless of course, a formula can be ascertained without knowing what would have been the life expectancy of all individuals between the two countries’ with and without same health care system.
anuts on May 14, 2009 at 1:02 AM
(I’m not as good at this as you are and really need to work on my astroturfing material.)
FloatingRock on May 14, 2009 at 12:30 AM
I wish to point out that I wouldn’t have insinuated that RadioFreeVilliage is an astroturfer had I known at the time that s/he wasn’t here to defend him/herself.
FloatingRock on May 14, 2009 at 1:08 AM
progressoverpeace on May 14, 2009 at 12:01 AM
well said!
disa on May 14, 2009 at 1:10 AM
And I still have to ask why we accept the premise that life expectancy is the be-all and end-all of the human condition. Quality of life counts much more than length of life, IMO. The Swedes are a joyless bunch, and at least at one point had a scary suicide rate.
This is another thing that the left fusses about way too much: money. Money doesn’t buy happiness, cradle-to-grave welfare doesn’t buy happiness. Obama is most certainly not going to provide a bit of happiness beyond the fevered imaginings of Democrats who are drooling in anticipation of the power they’re going to have over….everybody.
disa on May 14, 2009 at 1:17 AM
I am strongly tempted to wander over to GuardianTalk and find out if they love us yet.
NOT!
disa on May 14, 2009 at 1:18 AM
Big time. Thanks for bringing it up. It is too often that I forget to stress the courts’ complicity (all the courts, frankly). The courts are all over everything, these days, and they rule like blind elephants in heat. Until they can have some sense put back into them, which doesn’t look likely, everything else is unstable and at risk to their whims of fancy.
progressoverpeace on May 14, 2009 at 2:01 AM
Indeed this is poor branding and you’re 100% right by implying that stronger leadership is lacking to improve it.
I’m no marketing wiz, but we must distinguish the dem’s (socialist) behavior from the ignoramuses (er, I mean well-intentioned heroes) that are forcing it down our throat.
That is where our wrath and fury (read contribution $$$), not to mention loyalty, must be placed.
This is the kind of “big tent” approach I want to see.
We conservatives must deftly insist that calling those bills anything less than Socialist is not only demonstrably inacurate, but F-ing dangerous.
..of course the master stroke would be to do it with humor. (..where the hell’s Dave Zucker when we need him??)
Quetzal on May 14, 2009 at 3:20 AM
oh nooooo!!! Who’ll save us nowwwww!!!
Seriously, Stewart is a proud socialist. He admitted it publicly on some TV news journal program back in 1999 or 2000. He will likely be making fun of Democrats for hiding in the socialist closet.
The last thing the Democrats want to do, or can do, is make a convincing argument that they aren’t marxists. Howard Dean even publicly trashed capitalism a few days ago and said we shouldn’t have any trace of it in the US. Do you think Dean is going to take issue with the socialist label?
I just wish the Republicans would reconsider and call them “Marxists” instead of “Socialists”. Flood the zone on ‘em.
Buddahpundit on May 14, 2009 at 3:48 AM
sooo many trolls…
Kaptain Amerika on May 14, 2009 at 6:32 AM
It really doesn’t matter what anyone calls modern Dems. Shortly, they will be the only legal political party in the US.
The morons have reached critical mass nationally and have elected a moronic meglomaniac in their image who just happens to also be a thug.
This regime will only end when it crashs of it’s own weight. No one will be enlightened along they way, nor will anyone take up arms against it.
If there is any armed conflict around the regime it will be internal between factions. Names applied now will inly serve to heighten the silliness of the opposition.
Since it is already too late, all we can do is endure until all those who are willing to fight for the regime are gone – one way or another. As it always is.
Friendly21 on May 14, 2009 at 6:42 AM
Can someone please tell me what’s wrong with calling something what it is?
The Democrat party IS SOCIALIST!
Absolutely the right move here. Time to draw lines in the sand and let everyone pick a side.
CAPITALISM v. SOCIALISM. PERIOD. If you’re the former, you believe in the Constitution. If you’re the latter, you want to tear it up. Why would Republicans want a tent big enough to include usurpers?
Besides, It’s about time for those socialists to lose a few word games. Go figure, they’ll lose this one by being labeled what they really are.
Barrack on May 14, 2009 at 7:16 AM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 … 4 5 6 7 Next »