Note To Candidates Who are “Outraged”

Yeah, we get it.

You’re a Republican running for office (a state office) who is against Health Care Reform.

And thus, you all have a press release.

If you’re not currently elected, and you’re not currently in a place to do anything about it (i.e, being the sitting Attorney General or in a Congressional Office), it’s not news. You’re not getting a front page post.

You want your press release posted, post it below.


    • Part-Time Atlanta says:

      I will say all the emails from every GOP candidate running for office are getting a little ridiculous.

    • rugby says:

      How dare democracy work. What do those folks in D.C. think the people OVERWHELMINGLY ELECTED DEMOCRATS for? A right-of-center government?

      It is an outrage I say! The losers ought to be the ones setting policy!

      • You’re absolutely right – the American People elected a Democrat majority, and I have absolutely no problem with the Majority representing its constituency.

        But when over 60% of Americans oppose legislation, and the House passes it, that means that a significant portion of that majority FAILED to accurately represent its constituency.

        The problem is not that the Democrats were in the majority and that Democrats across the country desired this bill. This Bill was passed against the will of the American People as a whole.

        • rugby says:

          “But when over 60% of Americans oppose legislation”

          False. Look through

          Ignoring the Fox News poll support/not support is around 45/40ish percent.

          Even more interesting when you look at the individual aspects of the reform bill, people strongly support them (that may be because people want to sound like they know about policy, they actually like those individual changes but not the entire bill, or whatever).

          Point is, your echo chamber =! reality.

          Should also mention just for the record, I don’t support this bill at all.

        • stimpsonjkatz says:

          “But when over 60% of Americans oppose legislation, and the House passes it”…”This Bill was passed against the will of the American People as a whole.”

          Pollster has disapproval of the bill at 49% (poll of polls). Keep in mind, a fraction of that disapproval comes from liberals who think the bill is too weak. As far as individual portions of the bill, around 70% support ending annual caps, prohibiting dropping people after they get sick and regulating pre-existing conditions policies.

        • benevolus says:

          That’s because a lot of people have believed that there were “death panels” in there, and that it wasn’t paid for, and that Harry Reid made it so that it can never be altered.
          Congress followed the will of the people, not the will of the liars.

          • GOPGeorgia says:

            debate on c-span = fail
            time to read the bill = fail
            consitutional = fail
            Dem majority re-elected = we’ll see.

    • A candidate for office basically saying out loud that “leadership” is about little more than going by current poll numbers? Meh… if that were true, we’d have been out of Iraq and Afghanistan five or six years ago. Either way, it’s lousy campaign slogan.

  1. brander says:

    URGENT RELEASE March 21, 2010
    Media Contact: Allen Hardage 678-977-0896 [email protected]
    Candidate for Congress Rupert Parchment condemns Representative David Scott’s vote for government run health care as an attack on jobs, businesses and families in Georgia’s District 13.
    Bill will force small businesses from Mableton to Stockbridge to layoff, close or pay huge fines for not being able to pay into the government’s health plan.
    (Atlanta, GA) Rupert Parchment, Conservative candidate for Georgia’s thirteenth congressional district, strongly condemns Representative David Scott for voting in favor of the Senate health care bill that will impose huge financial burdens on small businesses and an extension of unemployment throughout the district.
    “Scott’s vote today places yet another financial choke-hold on already struggling businesses in Georgia’s thirteenth by mandating that they pay into a health care system that 79% of the American people have been screaming their dislike for over the last year,” Parchment said.
    The bill will force small businesses with more than ten employees to provide health coverage through an approved plan that must meet federal mandates. Most insurance experts agree this mandate will raise insurance premiums dramatically making it even more costly than the insurance plans already on the market. This provision alone, Parchment says, will make the ability for people in the 13th to get a job even more difficult while, at the same time companies will continue to lay-off or hire people as contractors thereby passing the additional health-care costs onto the individual.
    “Scott has cast a vote today to kill small businesses, bankrupt the self employed and create insurmountable obstacles to growing businesses from Mableton to South Fulton and on up to Dekalb. He has ignored the will of his former neighbors here in Georgia in favor of his new neighbors, the lobbyist of K Street up in Washington. We will not forget in November!” Parchment promised.
    “It is unconscionable to me that a sitting US Representative would be so completely out of touch with his constituents that he would ignore the will of his constituents by subjecting the healthy, the sick and the poor to additional costs and diminished care. Scott has once again proven that he serves himself and not the hard working families of the 13th.” Parchment said.
    Allen Hardage
    Campaign Director
    Parchment for Congress (GA 13) (R)
    [email protected]

  2. Baker says:

    Unintended Consequences. Harry nails it. Every bill that has ever been passed has unintended consequences. Legislators are not fortune tellers, despite what they may believe, and the behaviour of businesses and cititzens post-legislation can never really be predicted. Most bills don’t directly effect that many people (relatively) and so the unintended consequences often go unseen by the media and the rest of the country. This bill however effects Everyone; we will be unraveling what this one has really done for the rest of my life (I am a relative youngster so that’s a long time)

    Unfortunately, I do have to give rugby some credit in that although he mislabeled us a “democracy”, politicians should not just follow polls, and if this bill is what this Congress really believe should be passed, well, we put them there. If polls dictated all legislation I believe that is what is referred to as “Mob Rule”, and that is something that would be far worse than this health care bill.

  3. ByteMe says:

    Harry actually uses the right term “unintended consequences” but it also applies to the angry folks looking to remove mandates from the legislation.

    What could be the unintended consequences of that?

    Do you really understand how HCR works enough to understand what comes after you remove the mandates? Do you get what health insurance costs will look like for those who can afford it? Do you understand who actually pays the costs of the uninsured now?

    And do you understand the possible replacement for mandates that will be enacted once everyone sees how expensive health insurance becomes?

    Unintended consequences.

  4. My Facebook inbox has been blowing up over the past 24-48 hours with messages from “outraged candidates” (cough) about H.R. 1086. Based on who is sending me the messages, and the style with which they’re written, I assume this is an election-year ploy to work the rubes.

    However, for anyone who actually takes this seriously, what (if anything) is supposed to be the endgame or point of the bill? Is the A.G. or some class action group supposed to sue the U.S. on a theory that their Georgia civil rights are being violated? My memory of original jurisdiction is a bit rusty… would they want to file such a suit at the 11th Circuit, or directly at the Supreme Court (or perhaps a 19th century court where they might actually win)? Is there a game plan, or is this pretty much just “Gay Marriage Amendment 2010” for the GOP election year field?

      • et tu Perkins? Actually, the language has been pretty much the same across the states that are passing it. VA, which has its state elections in off years has already passed similar language.

        If you want to have a claim to have the federal legislation possibly struck down based on the 10th Amendment, i.e. the state rather than the federal government has this type of AUTHORITY (I don’t like the phrase “States’ Rights. People have rights, government, state or otherwise, has authority), you need a cause of action. HR 1086 would give a cause of action through conflicting laws.

  5. I’m outraged at a party that associates itself with people who call congressmen “nigger,” “faggot” and “weback.” Between that and the hystrionics that have taken place demeaning the House floor, and it’s clear the Republican Party has lost all moral authority to speak on ANY issue. Enjoy your fear and hate — it’s all your party has left.

    • polisavvy says:

      According to a report last night, it appears as though some of those “choice” words were never spoken. I do feel that IF such words were spoken that they have absolutely no place in today’s dialogue. Hateful words should never be spoken regardless of party affiliation. As far as the behavior displayed throughout the day yesterday, well, in my opinion, that was a two-way street in that both parties behaved badly. Neither have any room to talk and both should be ashamed. I expect more of both parties than what I saw yesterday.

    • I Am Jacks Post says:

      Progressive Peach,

      You’ve clearly never been within earshot of an antiwar rally or had the displeasure of being around members of Code Pink.

    • GOPGeorgia says:


      Are you implying that no member of the Dem party has ever said those words? You are quite the hypocrite.

      • Icarus says:

        I think a flat statement of “those words are wrong, and have no place in the Republican Party, political discourse, or even public conversation” is a better response from party leaders than “you do it too”.

          • GOPGeorgia says:

            Instead of just the saying it has no place in the GOP, how about saying it has no place in any organized party that desires respect from the American people? In order to get respect, you have to give some.

        • Lawton Sack says:

          As a Republican leader, I will say it:

          Derogatory statements of any kind, even in jest, have no place at anytime in the Republican Party, either by its members, its leaders, or by those who are elected as Republicans. Further, Republicans should not define themselves or base its actions based on what the Democrat Party is or not doing. The Republican Party should be committed to its core principles at all times in all circumstances and elect people that will uphold those principles.

          • GOPGeorgia says:

            Good job Lawton,

            As I said before, I didn’t sleep a wink last night. Today was spent on a funeral for a friend, and I am just not up to being 100% statesman-like 100% of the time.

            My comment was not meant as a “you do it too,” but for more of a “let ye without sin cast the first stone.” People say things that they don’t mean especially in the heat of a moment that’s been building over a year. Saying that no one in the GOP had any credibility to say anything because of fringe haters just rubbed me the wrong way. The left has their fringe haters too.

            In a more colloquial way, let me try to express what I was attempting to say: “Don’t be a hater.”

    • Progressive Dem says:

      Add “baby killer” to the list. Rep. Obey who was presiding at the time, saw who said it, but “doesn’t see any point” in identifying who it is.

      Asked if the member should be admonished, Obey said “I think people have a right to make a fool out of themselves every once in awhile without causing armageddon.”

    • Mozart says:

      What’s a “web back?” A person who spends all their time sitting on the back of a chair while surfing the Web?

  6. Progressive Dem says:

    Driving the GOP off the cliff, or the dangers of Rush, Beck, Hannity

    GOP leadership made a strategic blunder with healthcare by radicalizing the discussion. This bill isn’t going to be repealed. The GOP isn’t going to put the hole back in the donut. They aren’t going to vote to allow insurance companies to recind coverage, and they aren’t going to vote to remove young adults from their parents coverage.

    The bill, soon to be law, includes many Republican ideas including those that John McCain campaigned for like taxing Cadilac plans. The Democrats never allowed the progressives to promote single-payer and the leadership in the Senate removed the pubic option. Clearly the Democrats were willing to deal. Instead the GOP leadership chose a recalcitrant role and abandoned positions they had previously endorsed. (Not surprisingly, Mitt Rominey looks like the biggest hypocrite since the senate bill is a close reflection of a measure he implemented in Massachusetts.)

    Now that the GOP has let the Genie of extreme rhetoric out of the bottle, it will be difficult for them to ever compromise or reach agreement with the Democratic majority. Any GOP elected official that agrees with a Democrat will be labeled and targeted by the red meat crowd. Have you seen Charlie Crist recently? After all, according to GOP doctrine President Obama is a radical Marxist and the Democrats are Socialist and their agenda is to destroy free markets and personal liberties. So of course, the GOP can’t negotiate.

    The radical rhetoric is great for the entertainment wing of the GOP (Rush, Fox, Red State), but it’s a terrible way to participate in the legislative branch.

    Don’t take my word for it; here’s David Frum President Bush’s speechwriter quote:

    “Those of us who said there was a deal to be done, that there are a lot of parts of this bill that look familiar, that look like Mitt Romney’s plan, that look like plans Republicans proposed in 1993 and 1994, they look like things that were drafted at the Heritage foundation in 1990 and 1991, we can work with this, there are things we don’t like, [but] President Obama will pay a lot maybe for 20 or 30 Republican votes, let’s deal — that was shut down, we went the radical way, looking for Waterloo, and it looks like we arrived at Waterloo.

    …Some of the Republican leadership like Jim DeMint, I think did play a very hard-line role. Some of our leaders were trapped. They were trapped by voices in the media that revved the Republican base into a frenzy that made dealing impossible. I mean, you can’t negotiate with Adolf Hitler, and if the President is Adolf Hitler, then obviously you can’t negotiate with him. So some of the blame has has got to go to those who said, who got the psychology of the party to a point where a lot of good people, reasonable people were trapped.

    …We are encouraging a mood of radicalism in the party that is not just uncivil, that’s not the problem, the problem is it makes you stupid. It makes you make bad decisions, it leads you to think that President Obama with 53% of the vote is as beatable in 2009 as President Clinton with 42% of the vote in 1993, and that’s obviously not true.”

  7. Progressive Dem says:

    It will be interesting to see if Lindsey Graham works his deal about closing Quantanamo and having military tribunals. Or if he continues to work with Schumer on immigration reform. And where will the GOP come down on financial reform? If they can’t compromise with Democrats are they going to be on the same side as big banks and Wall Street in opposing financial reform? These are all big issues and the GOP has painted themselves in a corner. To independents and folks in the middle, they’ll look like the party of no and the party with no ideas if they simply oppose these issues.

  8. ZazaPachulia says:

    Instead of just having an outrage battle (the political equivalent of the Zoolander v. Hansel Walk-off), why don’t the Republicans in Congress propose some cost-cutting reform measures?… like say, a malpractice award cap or a heavy tax on prescription drug advertisements — two aspects not in the big bill, but clearly two areas needing common-sense reform.

    I get, I get. The sky is falling already. That’s still not going to get me to think ‘Governor John Oxendine’ or ‘Governor Nathan Deal’ without feeling nauseous.

    It takes more than noise to impress me. Bunning’s filabuster was good (and it was squelched by G.O.P. leadership). Boehner and McConnell (and everyone else’s) outrage: not so much.

    • rugby says:

      Because the Republican leadership is completely devoid of any substantive policy ideas and can only affect change via procedure.

    • benevolus says:

      How and why can one support an award cap for victims without a comparable cap on defendants profits?

    • MSBassSinger says:

      The GOP did. They had reasonable alternatives as proposed legislation when all this started. They were ignored and shelved by the Democrat majority.

      • ByteMe says:

        Yep, and they had the CBO “score” their legislation based on their own assumptions.

        The results? Almost no money saved relative to the current deficit projects and very few additional people covered. What would be the point?

        Now I do think some of their ideas need inclusion in follow-up bills, including the idea of having people “test” Medicare providers for fraud, and money to states to help test ideas for malpractice liability reform, expansion of HSAs, but the rest of the “big” ideas were just worthless.

  9. Provocateur says:

    “If you’re not currently elected, and you’re not currently in a place to do anything about it (i.e, being the sitting Attorney General or in a Congressional Office), it’s not news. You’re not getting a front page post.”

    WHAT? No front-page post from even the Red State/Karen Handel campaign?

    • Icarus says:

      I don’t think I’m the voice you’re looking for. I’ve long said (often when I first started blogging over at Redstate) that the American people see a broken system and want change. And that if Republicans didn’t put together a system of market based reforms, we would eventually have to live with the “fix” that is forced upon us.

      Ta-da! I hate being right.

      • ByteMe says:

        The problem is that they had their chance and wasted it on Terri Schiavo and other misadventures. Anyone that wants to give the guns back to the same gang-that-couldn’t-shoot-straight has lost their mind.

        • MSBassSinger says:

          I agree with Icarus and ByteMe.

          The Republican’t Congressional Majority under Bush had plenty of opportunity to make real, workable, beneficial change in health care financing (that is the issue, not health care, per se). They could have extended Health Savings Accounts (HSAs) to everyone who wanted them, but chose to restrict them. They could have covered the 12 million or so who really needed coverage, but chose to ignore it. They could have been honest about the excesses of the insurance companies, largely caused by government regulation, but they chose not to disturb the campaign financing pot. They could have taken a reasonable case over the heads of the obstructionist liberals in Congress to the American people, and won the day.

          We are where we are in the Eurotrashing of America because Rockefeller Republican’ts had their opportunity to serve America and failed.

          As for the Terri Schiavo thing, ByteMe is right. I am 100% pro-life. But it was objectively clear that Terri Schiavo was brain dead. Taking her off life support was an act of mercy, and if God wanted her to live through a miracle, she would have. The folks who chose Terri Schiavo as their pro-life stand were behaving like liberals (feeling over reason) rather than conservatives (reason informed by feeling).

  10. chefdavid says:

    SCOTUS says corpoations can have a voice in elections.
    POTUS beats down SCOTUS at SOTUS.
    Congress Passes Obamacare.
    12-13 states sue on authority.
    Roberts and SOTUS have the last laugh.

    • Chris says:

      “Roberts and SOTUS have the last laugh.”

      Obama’s teleprompter is laughing at him? That explains a lot.

    • rugby says:

      Glad to see you have virtually no knowledge of how the SCOTUS works.

      I trust however,that if the SCOTUS automatically declares the bill unconstitutional, regardless of the merits of the case before it, you will denounce such appalling judicial activism and flagrant disregard for how the system is supposed to work?

      • seenbetrdayz says:

        How does it work again?

        Congress proposes and passes a bill, the president promises to amend it after it is passed with an executive order, and the Supreme Court enforces it onto the people?

        No, that’s not quite right. How did it go again?

            • rugby says:

              I’m really referring to chefdavid’s post that the SCOTUS is going to immediately strike down Obama’s bill because of his SOTUS and that it is clear he doesn’t know the machinations of the SCOTUS or that that would go against the styles of almost all of the current Justices. Anyway I expect him to be appropriately outraged over that judicial activism.

  11. GOPGrassroots says:

    Christoper Cates (R-Atlanta) fired out his press release on the topic yesterday.

    I wonder if Tom Perdue gets a cut on press release “production costs”? Probably. lol

  12. B Balz says:

    Good job at cleaning up this thread and not posting replies
    Counter to the Cause” in the Recent Comments section.

  13. MSBassSinger says:

    First of all, those opposing this health care reform bill do not oppose health care reform, and the correct term is health care financing reform. They want health care financing reform in a different way that, having long been proposed in the House and Senate, would very likely work better, cost less, and still provide the opportunity for affordable coverage to all. Too bad the Rockefeller Republican’ts under Bush didn’t take care of this years ago.

    Second, the people elected to office voted this law in, and the person elected to the Presidency signed it. It is the law. It is a disaster-in-progress, but it is the law. Let it be an albatross around every Democrat official’s neck.

    Third, if this health care reform really is so distasteful to the majority (and I believe it is), the only rightful remedy is in November. Forget the posturing and political silliness, and using it as an excuse to scare people into donating money.

    The sad thing is, to me, that the Rockefeller Republican’ts (like Hannity, the Heritage Foundation, Romney, McCain, Isakson, Chambliss, etc.) will use their pretense to conservatism to mislead voters into electing Rockefeller Republican’ts in November 2010 and 2012, and we’ll still have a big government, big spending, mess – and government controlled health care – and the Republican party will likely not recover to become a majority again after that for decades.

    Those of you who are for Obamacare, you deserve your day to gloat. I hope you are man enough to eat crow in November, and that the voters choose real conservatives. Until November, I congratulate you on your win. If we don’t have a repeat of 1994 in November, then I guess I’ll settle in for a long winter of America’s demise under the Democrats.

    P.S. Here is the first new ObamaCare tax of many to come, effective today.

  14. GOPGeorgia says:

    Here is what we said in the Ninth:

    Passage of Health Insurance Bill a “Slap in the Face” to Americans

    Georgia’s Ninth District GOP today issued a strong denouncement of the Democrat-controlled U.S. House of Representatives’ 219 – 212 passage of Health Insurance Reform at its March 21st late night session. In its statement, the District also thanked its Congressman, Nathan Deal, and the six other Georgia Republicans who voted against the bill.

    “There are several constitutional issues with this bill. We expect it to go to the Supreme Court,” said Doug Grammer, Ninth District Chairman. “The interstate commerce clause does not apply
    because it was meant to regulate commerce between the states and we currently cannot buy insurance across state lines,” Grammer said.

    Anna McManus, First Vice-Chairman of the Ninth District said, “We’ve overhauled a system that was working for 85% of Americans, and replaced it with a new bill that will cost over 1
    trillion dollars over 10 years, and lacks serious cost controls.” McManus added she looks forward to GOP controlled Congress that will follow the will of the people and not think that
    Congress’s will is superior to that of the people.

    “An overwhelming majority of Americans opposed this bill over and over again—and still do,” said Andrew Turnage, Second Vice Chairman of the Ninth District. “The price of the healthcare
    bill is simply unaffordable. The [new] required Medicaid extensions alone will cost Georgians over one billion dollars. Medicare tax increases mean small businesses will see a top rate increase of 20 percent on non-wage income, and investment income taxes increase by 60 percent. The bottom line is that Georgia cannot balance its budget without sacrificing public safety and education. There were, and are, better ideas.”

    Turnage is not alone in expressing outrage and disappointment. Between now and November, members of his party are sending pink slips to Democrats. “I understand some local Tea Party
    groups are organizing this,” he added. “Americans must courageously demonstrate the character of democracy in November. Together, we will succeed at restoring responsive leadership.”

    Grammer also praised Congressman Nathan Deal for postponing his resignation in order to vote on the Health Care bill. “He fought the good fight. Now we, as voters, have to do what we need to do. Electing Republicans in November is the key to defending our Constitution and restoring our freedom in this country.”

    Congressman Deal, and Georgia’s six other Republican Representatives all voted against the bill. With the exception of Jim Marshall (D-8), and John Barrow (D-12), Georgia’s Democrat Representatives voted for the bill.

    The Ninth District, which includes the counties of Catoosa, Dade, Dawson, Fannin, Forsyth, Gilmer, Gordon, Hall, Lumpkin, Murray, Pickens, Union, Walker, Whitfield, and White, is the most conservative district in the state, and third most conservative in the nation.

  15. ByteMe says:

    Manufactured “outrage”.

    “The truth is this is a Republican idea,” said Linda Quick, president of the South Florida Hospital and Healthcare Association. She said she first heard the concept of the “individual mandate” in a Miami speech in the early 1990s by Sen. John McCain, a conservative Republican from Arizona, to counter the “Hillarycare” the Clintons were proposing.

    Read more:


  16. polisavvy says:

    Since everyone is outrage over the health care debacle, I found a quote today that seems most appropriate. It seems to apply since we appear to be one step closer to socialism with the passing of health care “reform”:

    “The problem with Socialism is, soon or later, you run out of other people’s money.” Margaret Thatcher

    • ByteMe says:

      This is sooo not socialism. It’s naked corporatism. If it was socialism, the government would be giving you the health plan.

      • polisavvy says:

        Isn’t that there ultimate plan, Byte? It certainly does appear that way to me. One step closer to government control. That’s just the way I’m viewing it.

        • benevolus says:

          Mandating that everyone in the country buy a policy from a private insurance company is socialism?

          By the way, the current head of the IMF is a socialist, and yet, when he was Finance minister in France he implemented a privatization program. His name is Dominique Strauss-Kahn.

          I don’t think modern socialists are what you think they are.

Comments are closed.