McCain: Don't expect GOP cooperation on legislation for the rest of this year

Dav said:

Tell that to Scott Brown.

Click to expand...

Gina said:

No, they wasted an opportunity to shape a major piece of legislation with their stunt. They had a year in which to join in, but at every juncture, they pulled a stunt. Remember their plan for health care turned out to be a pamphlet? What about all the years they were in power and could have put forth health care reform in any shape they desired? They would have even had some Democrats join them, but no, they don't care about the issue and never have. This is price you pay for their stubborn refusal to become part of the process. They did not serve you well at all.

Click to expand...

I'm drawing an analogy. Democrats were just as angry in 2000 as the GOP is now at having lost the presidency and the congress. They however did not pull the stunts we have seen coming from the GOP.

Click to expand...

Refusing to engage in their jobs,

Click to expand...

as was stated earlier in this thread, is not mitigation.

Click to expand...

A day after strengthening the Republican Party's majority in the House, Speaker Dennis Hastert called on Democrats to assist GOP efforts to fight the war on terror, create jobs and expand health insurance to more Americans. "I pledge to work with those Democrats who want to work with me to get good things done for the American people," Hastert said Wednesday.

But House Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi of California, stung by her party's losses on Election Day, seemed unlikely to accept the offer. "The Republicans did not have an election about jobs, health care, education, environment, national security. They had an election about wedge issues in our country, and you know what they are," she said. "They exploited the loveliness of the American people, the devoutness of people of faith for a political end."

Click to expand...

President Bush, dogged by low poll ratings, faced with growing public unease about the war in Iraq and frustrated by a Democratic minority bent on blocking his agenda, has taken to the offensive in hope of regaining some momentum. He has chosen to embark on a strategy of labeling the Democrats as obstructionists, unwilling to join with Republicans to solve problems, and taking his case to the American people.

It appears that the Democrats have a strategy too. Merle Black, a political scientist at Emory University in Atlanta, says the short-term goal of the Democrats is to block the Republicans, show that they didn't get anything accomplished with control of Congress and the presidency. "Very few Democrats are willing to make common cause with him. The Democrats feel they can take the issue of Republican failure and win back Congress and the presidency. They have no incentive to compromise," Black said.

...

Hardly the language of compromise.

Donna Brazile, a Democratic strategist and manager of Al Gore's 2000 presidential campaign, says the Bush tactic to blame the Democrats for his inability to pass his agenda is a diversion to mask how badly things are going in the country. "Democrats are not in a mood to play the game the Republicans want us to play," she said. "We've been burned before trying to work with them only to have the president come back and say in election campaigns that we haven't done enough."

Click to expand...

Gina said:

I don't see your point. What has Scott Brown to do with accepting the outcome of an election.

Democrats have. They moved on and passed health care.

Click to expand...

jallman said:

You're kidding, right? So it wasn't democrats trying to call the war in Iraq a loss at every turn just to smear Republican victory? Wow, you sure do have a selective memory when it comes to "stunts".

Click to expand...

Gipper said:

You can thank Obama for that. One of the few words from his mouth during his campaign platform, other than "hope" and "change", was talking about ending bipartisanship. The irony is that this is the most polarized Congress ever, by far. Hell, even the Contract with America has a grass-roots Democratic support.

As Gina hinted on, though, this really was a partial ball-drop for the Republicans who had ample amount of time to adjust health care in the country. When I saw a few GOP pundits talk about "oh we had no problem with A B and C, it was X Y and Z that ruins everything", I think to myself that A B and C weren't exactly important in the past - just now, when it's a power play.

Click to expand...

Dav said:

Look at this comment again. Think about Scott Brown, and the circumstances under which he became Senator. Now think about it harder.

Click to expand...

jallman said:

No, no...they are serving me quite well, thank you. The only price I see is the cost of allowing this turd from the democrats to go through.

You're kidding, right? So it wasn't democrats trying to call the war in Iraq a loss at every turn just to smear Republican victory? Wow, you sure do have a selective memory when it comes to "stunts".

Click to expand...

Gina said:

They allowed a "turd" rather than accepting the numerous invitations they were given to join in shaping the legislation.

They made no serious effort to shape policy. A pamphlet is not a plan.

So you got what they allowed and if that is a "turd", you can thank them.


No I don't. Of course Democrats vociferously objected to the war in Iraq and I won't rehash the whys and wherefores so we may stick to the topic. They did, but the war was funded. The Democrats engaged in the process to influence where they could and it was done.

Smearing, does not impede the process. You're saying they should sabotage. That's more than smearing.

Click to expand...

(CNSNews.com) – President Barack Obama and Democrats in Congress -- while pushing their own health care overhauls -- have criticized Republicans as offering only opposition and no ideas for reform, but the GOP, despite the lack of media attention, has introduced three health care bills.

The three Republican bills total almost 400 pages and have been on the table since May and June.

Click to expand...

Gina said:

They allowed a "turd" rather than accepting the numerous invitations they were given to join in shaping the legislation.

Click to expand...

They made no serious effort to shape policy. A pamphlet is not a plan.

Click to expand...

So you got what they allowed and if that is a "turd", you can thank them.

Click to expand...

No I don't. Of course Democrats vociferously objected to the war in Iraq and I won't rehash the whys and wherefores so we may stick to the topic. They did, but the war was funded. The Democrats engaged in the process to influence where they could and it was done.

Click to expand...

Smearing, does not impede the process. You're saying they should sabotage. That's more than smearing.

Click to expand...

Fiddytree said:

It's the next step toward becoming the party of ideas again. They have the impulse, but now we will wait and see how long it takes them to provide ideas of their own.

The usual pendulum swing of party politics, folks

Click to expand...

Republicans’ Common-Sense Reforms Will LOWER HEALTH CARE COSTS
Americans want a step-by-step, common-sense approach to health care reform, not Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s costly, 1,990-page government takeover of our nation’s health care system. Republicans’ alternative solution focuses on lowering health care premiums for families and small businesses, increasing access to affordable, high-quality care, and promoting healthier lifestyles – without adding to the crushing debt Washington has placed on our children and grandchildren. Following are the key elements of Republicans’ alternative plan:
• Lowering health care premiums. The GOP plan will lower health care premiums for American families and small businesses, addressing Americans’ number-one priority for health care reform.
• Establishing Universal Access Programs to guarantee access to affordable health care for those with pre-existing conditions. The GOP plan creates Universal Access Programs that expand and reform high-risk pools and reinsurance programs to guarantee that all Americans, regardless of pre-existing conditions or past illnesses, have access to affordable care – while lowering costs for all Americans.
• Ending junk lawsuits. The GOP plan would help end costly junk lawsuits and curb defensive medicine by enacting medical liability reforms modeled after the successful state laws of California and Texas.
• Prevents insurers from unjustly cancelling a policy. The GOP plan prohibits an insurer from cancelling a policy unless a person commits fraud or conceals material facts about a health condition.
• Encouraging Small Business Health Plans. The GOP plan gives small businesses the power to pool together and offer health care at lower prices, just as corporations and labor unions do.
• Encouraging innovative state programs. The GOP plan rewards innovation by providing incentive payments to states that reduce premiums and the number of uninsured.
• Allowing Americans to buy insurance across state lines. The GOP plan allows Americans to shop for coverage from coast to coast by allowing Americans living in one state to purchase insurance in another.
• Promoting healthier lifestyles. The GOP plan promotes prevention & wellness by giving employers greater flexibility to financially reward employees who adopt healthier lifestyles.
• Enhancing Health Savings Accounts (HSAs). The GOP plan creates new incentives to save for current and future health care needs by allowing qualified participants to use HSA funds to pay premiums for high deductible health insurance.
• Allowing dependents to remain on their parents’ policies. The GOP plan encourages coverage of young adults on their parents’ insurance through age 25.

Click to expand...

disneydude said:

The party of NO hasn't made any effort at cooperation for over a year. Why would McCain think that anyone would expect otherwise.

The GOP has a strategy to oppose everything and hope that things do not improve so that they can point to their unanimous opposition to Obama as a reason to vote for the GOP.

Its a dangerous political game that the GOP is playing and it could reap big dividends for them. However, it could backfire as well.

But don't let anyone kid themselves. The Party of No has made it clear that they have no intent to cooperate or in good faith negotiate. Its not part of their strategy.

Click to expand...

Crunch said:

Do you people believe everything the MSM tells you? Have any of you ever thought to just do a quick Google search before showing your bias and ignorance?



http://gopleader.gov/UploadedFiles/...rnative_Health_Care_plan_Updated_11-04-09.pdf

:roll:

Click to expand...

Crunch said:

Your idea of cooperation and bi-partisanship is really called capitulation..... just a thought for you...... there was bi-partisanship in this health care legislation..... in opposition to it.

Click to expand...

disneydude said:

The party of NO hasn't made any effort at cooperation for over a year. Why would McCain think that anyone would expect otherwise.

The GOP has a strategy to oppose everything and hope that things do not improve so that they can point to their unanimous opposition to Obama as a reason to vote for the GOP.

Its a dangerous political game that the GOP is playing and it could reap big dividends for them. However, it could backfire as well.

But don't let anyone kid themselves. The Party of No has made it clear that they have no intent to cooperate or in good faith negotiate. Its not part of their strategy.

Click to expand...

RightinNYC said:

So when the tables were turned, were you labeling the Democrats as the party of no? Do you think they were unjustified in their actions? Do you think Bush was right to paint them as obstructionists?

Click to expand...

disneydude said:

The Democrats were obstructionists as well...especially in blocking confirmation of judges.
However, the Democratic party never stood in unanimous opposition to everything that Bush tried to do. In fact, much to my dismay, they pretty much capitulated and gave him everything that he wanted.

Click to expand...

jallman said:

Well that's because democrats don't have the balls or the cohesion that Republicans do. :lol:

Click to expand...

jallman said:

Well that's because democrats don't have the balls or the cohesion that Republicans do. :lol:

Click to expand...

Dav said:

"Cohesion" is key. Self-described liberals make up only 20-25% of the country, as opposed to 40% for conservatives. So the Democratic Party has to be much broader in ideology than the Republicans have to be... and so it's much harder for them to stand together so often.

The talk about balls is silly. If Democrats had balls, they'd lose every election.

Click to expand...

disneydude said:

I agree 100%. The Democrats could learn something from the Republicans and grow a spine. Standing in opposition is good. However, when it is on every single issue you lose credibility and simply become the party of NO.

The Republicans would garner a little more respect if they would pick and choose their battles rather than simply opposing everything.

Click to expand...

Republicans on the Senate banking committee said financial regulation reform has a “100 per cent chance” of passing this year in the most positive sign yet for a bipartisan bill.

Judd Gregg, the senator from New Hampshire who has been trying to cut a deal on derivatives, said the bill was certain to pass while Bob Corker, his colleague from Tennessee, said it was “difficult to see a scenario” where it failed.

Click to expand...

But after meeting Mr Obama, Chris Dodd, the Democratic chairman of the Senate banking committee, and Barney Frank, the chairman of the House financial services committee, also gave optimistic predictions.

“We’re going to get a bill done,” said Mr Dodd. Mr Frank said: “We’re not talking now about whether to deal with these things – whether to regulate derivatives more, whether to have a consumer agency – but how. How is still an important set of questions, but it’s very different from whether.”

Click to expand...

disneydude said:

I doubt seriously that 40% of the country is conservative or that 25% of the Country is liberal.

Click to expand...