Fun With Repeal Rhetoric
What's wrong with this picture?
In deference to the new vows of civility, the tone of the debate may be a bit more restrained. But Republicans have already said that they will not strip the word “killing” from the bill — which is titled, “Repealing the Job-Killing Health Care Law Act.” Civility apparently goes only so far. -- The New York Times
No, it's not the word "killing." (Heaven knows it's an empyrean act of civility to say "Job-Annihilating" instead of "Job-Killing.") It's the word "Job." The number one problem with Obamacare isn't its impact on jobs -- even if we discount the federal jobs it helps 'create'. The Republican leadership's insistence on framing the health care reform debate in this way is an error both philosophically speaking, and, I'd like to think, politically.
- Comment (19)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (2)
Comments :
Aug '10
Re: Fun With Repeal Rhetoric
Maybe they don't mean "job", but "Job", as in the biblical geezer, because under the bill more people will suffer like Job and die.
Sep '10
Re: Fun With Repeal Rhetoric
Maybe (we hope?) the Repubs. assume that everyone already knows what else is wrong with the Health Care Law Act, besides the job-killing part of it.
Or maybe that's just wishful thinking on my part...
Oct '10
Re: Fun With Repeal Rhetoric
Perhaps they could rename it the "Repealing the Death Panel-Creating Health Care Law Act."
May '10
Re: Fun With Repeal Rhetoric
I'll take the bait, James. How would you rather them frame it?
Oct '10
Re: Fun With Repeal Rhetoric
Is your grandma shovel-ready?
Jul '10
Re: Fun With Repeal Rhetoric
I love how this New Tone and Civility is going to work out...
Dem: Hey Dan, you Hateful Bigoted Mean Spirited Conservative, how ya doing today?
Rep: Hey Bob, Doing fine. How are the Kids?
Dem: Dan, how dare you? Kids are baby goats, you're defaming my character. Let's lighten up the tone here and be civil!
Rep: Sorry Bob, how are your children?
Dem: That's better Dan!
Have you ever noticed how Leftist Harsh Rhetoric is always pointed directly at the target, yet the so called Harsh Rhetoric of the Right is either Derived, or Tangiential. Yet somehow the Derived offense is Worse than the Direct line?
Edited on Jan 15, 2011 at 11:52pmDec '10
Re: Fun With Repeal Rhetoric
Precisely.
The whole debate is preposterous.
By navel gazing over this whole rhetoric mishegoss, we're doing exactly what the left wants, which is to stop working towards our goals.
They're going to call us evil racist bigoted meanie heads, regardless of what we actually do or say (unless we abandon our ideas and wholeheartedly embrace theirs). So why worry about it? If confronted directly, mock them and move on.
Otherwise, the best course of action is to simply ignore the noise and continue working toward our goal.
That is how the left operates, and that is how they get things done while we conservatives never seem to accomplish anything.
Re: Fun With Repeal Rhetoric
Are you holding the House majority overhead as a political hammer, hoping to beat conservative notions into the heads of American voters? That isn't a political nail.
House Republicans should focus on winning in 2012. If unemployment remains high, then candidates' positions on “job-killing” legislation should be decisive election issues.
The House majority’s attempt to associate Obama Democrats with “job-killing” is the correct political move. Advocates of the repeal of Obamacare already have our votes, don’t they? Plastering the words "job-killing" all over Democrat policies doesn't make you want to vote against Republicans, does it? I doubt that you disagree with the characterization, even if it's not your "number one" objection.
The strategy is correct – politically.
Oct '10
Re: Fun With Repeal Rhetoric
My objection from Day One was always with framing this as anything other than: Obamacare will destroy the world's best health-care system in the world (redundancy intended for effect). If it cost more, but made the system better, I'd be for it. If it killed jobs, but made the system better, I'd be for it.
It needs to be killed because it will ruin - RUIN - our health-care system. THAT is what needs to be said, THAT is what needs to be the argument. Cost and jobs...anyone can craft an argument or an anecdote on either side of those debates and sound plausible (heck, just cite the CBO and your job's done). Then it's just the equivalent of a he-said, she-said argument, with both sides discredited.
But NO ONE can make a rational argument that Obamacare will IMPROVE our health-care system.
Edited on Jan 16, 2011 at 6:29amJul '10
Re: Fun With Repeal Rhetoric
CoolHand: Precisely.
The whole debate is preposterous.
By navel gazing over this whole rhetoric mishegoss, we're doing exactly what the left wants, which is to stop working towards our goals.
They're going to call us evil racist bigoted meanie heads, regardless of what we actually do or say (unless we abandon our ideas and wholeheartedly embrace theirs). So why worry about it? If confronted directly, mock them and move on.
Otherwise, the best course of action is to simply ignore the noise and continue working toward our goal.
That is how the left operates, and that is how they get things done while we conservatives never seem to accomplish anything. · Jan 16 at 12:48am
And now Byron York Gets It!
Sep '10
Re: Fun With Repeal Rhetoric
I agree. Republicans often do this. It can be a trap. Much like WMD became the single reason for the Iraq War, once no WMD.... no reason.
All Dems have to do is argue (do they ever have to prove anything?) that it doesn't affect jobs, or propose some job generating amendment, and poof! ...there goes the argument.
Oct '10
Re: Fun With Repeal Rhetoric
And the answer is?
You are correct, sir.
Oct '10
Re: Fun With Repeal Rhetoric
Jaydee_007: I love how this New Tone and Civility is going to work out...
Dem: Hey Dan, you Hateful Bigoted Mean Spirited Conservative, how ya doing today?
Rep: Hey Bob, Doing fine. How are the Kids?
Dem: Dan, how dare you? Kids are baby goats, you're defaming my character. Let's lighten up the tone here and be civil!
Rep: Sorry Bob, how are your children?
Dem: That's better Dan!
Have you ever noticed how Leftist Harsh Rhetoric is always pointed directly at the target, yet the so called Harsh Rhetoric of the Right is either Derived, or Tangiential. Yet somehow the Derived offense is Worse than the Direct line? · Jan 15 at 11:48pm
Edited on Jan 15 at 11:52 pm
Great dialogue. Entirely credible. In fact, I feel a sense of deja vu while reading it.
Re: Fun With Repeal Rhetoric
I guess I can agree to disagree, but before I let it rest, I enter the lists against my windmill a last time.
The best argument is the one that wins. Learn from Clinton: IT is the economy. Without the name-calling, the point gets through. We were distracted by the insult at the end of the slogan in 1992. Let's win in 2012. The Republicans don't have to convince us, just the other hundred million voters.
dittoheadadt, my new-on-line-acquaintance-whom-I-hope-to-befriend:
With our debts and unfunded liabilities, would you really be for government health-care reform that costs more than what we spend now?
With 16% real unemployment, would you really be for government health-care reform that kills jobs?
With so many other nations governed with such ... mediocrity, is having the best government-muddled health care system really good enough? First is often just a nose ahead of second.
As far as politicians and rational arguments are concerned: poll a sample of convenience of twenty likely voters on any American street corner requesting the criteria for determining whether an argument is valid.
:-)
Edited on Jan 16, 2011 at 5:11pmRe: Fun With Repeal Rhetoric
Louie's rejoinder is smart, but dittoheadadt is onto something, isn't he?
Jul '10
Re: Fun With Repeal Rhetoric
dittoheadadt: My objection from Day One was always with framing this as anything other than: Obamacare will destroy the world's best health-care system in the world (redundancy intended for effect). If it cost more, but made the system better, I'd be for it. If it killed jobs, but made the system better, I'd be for it.
It needs to be killed because it will ruin - RUIN - our health-care system. THAT is what needs to be said, THAT is what needs to be the argument. Cost and jobs...anyone can craft an argument or an anecdote on either side of those debates and sound plausible (heck, just cite the CBO and your job's done). Then it's just the equivalent of a he-said, she-said argument, with both sides discredited.
But NO ONE can make a rational argument that Obamacare will IMPROVE our health-care system.
Seems to me Sarah did a pretty good job of doing just that when she said "Death Panels."
Unfortunatly there were many on the right who were too hung up on the fact that Sarah said it to make it work like "It's the Economy Stupid!" did.
Oct '10
Re: Fun With Repeal Rhetoric
I agree, Jaydee, but the problem with Obamacare is far more systemic than just the death panels ("just"!). The Right needs to skewer Obamacare on substance, health-care substance, and not just on jobs or budget concerns...if at all on jobs or budget concerns. After all, if our economy were healthy and robust, and/or if unemployment were 5%, would that validate Obamacare? Of course not. Obamacare will destroy our health care system, and all of the reasons why, including but not limited to death panels, need to be argued consistently and forcefully.
Jul '10
Re: Fun With Repeal Rhetoric
Nothing you've said I can disagree with.
My point was that Republicans never miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity. When Sarah uttered Death Panels, it resonated and had an effect, but it was those on the Right who prevented it from doing far more damage than it did.
As long as we have people who are willing to sacrifice principle and attaining objectives to thier annimosities we're going to be facing an uphill battle all the time.
Jul '10
Re: Fun With Repeal Rhetoric
Jaydee_007
When Sarah uttered Death Panels, it resonated and had an effect, but it was those on the Right who prevented it from doing far more damage than it did.
Where's your evidence for that assertion? Name names....