Column:
Liberals make me laugh
Senators made a shocking decision concerning a health care "bill."
Published Oct. 16, 2009
Depending on my mood, encountering liberals and their views can sometimes frustrate me, but more often than not, I find myself laughing.
The perfect example is found in the health care debate. On the eve of the Senate Finance Committee's vote on the health care plan of Sen. Max Baucus, D-Mont., there was a Residence Halls Association forum on campus where each side presented its case.
What became clear from the debate is each side is set in its position. As blindly as many liberals have followed President Barack Obama, it should be no surprise such a faulty plan would find such strong support.
On Tuesday, the Senate Finance Committee voted 14-9 in favor of its version of health care reform. The mind-numbing thing isn't how these Democrats (along with pseudo-Republican Olympia Snowe) voted for committee chairman Baucus' plan, but rather that there is no bill for them to vote on.
Read that again. Fourteen senators voted in favor of concepts they assume would be put into a bill. Right now though, the only version of the bill available is a document called the chairman's mark, which is a draft with Baucus' revisions.
One of the major points Democrats touted in the plan was $81 billion they said would be cut from the deficit in 10 years, but the Congressional Budget Office report said differently.
"CBO and (the Joint Committee on Taxation's) analysis is preliminary in large part because the chairman's mark, as amended, has not yet been embodied in legislative language," the report stated.
What does this mean? Simply put, no official legislation exists to base that estimate on. The CBO report also makes a point to note, "Those estimates are all subject to substantial uncertainty."
It's tough to be a bigger Kool-Aid drinker than a Democrat voting for a health care overhaul without having an actual bill to examine.
When discussing the health care issue, Rep. Alan Grayson, D-Fla., made a complete fool of himself by making placards for a speech on the house floor. One of these placards stated the Republicans' version of health care was to "die quickly."
Think of any Republican you know. Now ask yourself if you really believe those people want people to "die quickly" to save the government money.
If you said "yes," go to a psychiatrist right now.
In Missouri, Democratic Secretary of State Robin Carnahan is tied with Rep. Roy Blunt, R-Mo., in recent 2010 Senate election polls after having a double-digit lead earlier this year.
Besides her refusal to publicly comment on anything, the discovery of her close ties to the liberal criminal organization Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now is not helping her cause.
I can only sit back and laugh when I see e-mails from ACORN workers to Carnahan calling working with her a "great team effort."
It seems curious the state's chief election official has never criticized ACORN despite all the trouble it has gotten into. It's enough of a problem for Missouri's Republican State Committee to take the time and energy — not to mention the money — to create the Web site www.acorncarnahan.com to bring these facts to light.
Liberal Democrats have total power in Washington and hold much of the power in Missouri. Yet, their plans have failed, and Republicans need only to stand out of the way as the liberals self-destruct. As for me, I'll stand there and laugh at them.
Eric Hobbs is a senior and vice chairman of the MU College Republicans. He can be reached at emhn75@mail.missouri.edu.
Comments (10)
11:41 a.m., Oct. 16, 2009
Brandon said:
And I was denied after applying for the political columnist WHY? Clearly my application was far more qualified than this typical Republican party hack. Why do you guys keep hiring people who are just party hacks to do these political columns? Do you REALLY believe they're SOO much more 'informed' and better at political writing than someone who's an Independent and can see both sides of an issue and not be quite as partisan? Seriously... You keep buying into this silly American notion that there are only 2 sides, 2 parties. But Americans are a BROAD swath of people, and we can't define ourselves by just 2 options. I mean, where's the libertarian viewpoint, for christ sake? And don't say it's not important. The Ron Paul Revolution and Paul's support in 2008 as well as the tea parties have shown libertarianism is becoming increasingly popular and relevant.
1:28 p.m., Oct. 16, 2009
Brian said:
Laughter is sometimes the best medicine. Unfortunately, there's nothing funny about the Obama economy, his health care nationalization plans, or his corrupt electioneering allies at ACORN.
2:44 p.m., Oct. 17, 2009
Anonymous said:
Wow, what a ridiculous article. Few basic points... 1. You said that the Carnahan/Blunt race has recently narrowed, and that Carnahan had, at one point, a double digit lead. Can you show me an actual poll with her having a double digit lead? That race has been close from the start. 2. You called ACORN a "criminal organization." I'm sorry, what have they actually been convicted of? There are certainly allegations, but generally in order for something to be deemed "criminal," they have to have a fair trial, which they haven't gotten yet. 3. You said that "liberal Democrats" hold much of the power in Missouri... I forgot, who controls both state legislatures in Missouri? Pretty sure that the GOP has a 15+ seat majority in the state house and almost double the Democrats in the state Senate. Those are just 3 instances where this column skates lightly on the facts. The Maneater should really fact check these columns on a more regular basis, and not allow Hobbs to regurgitate GOP talking points without some sort of filter.
2:14 a.m., Oct. 18, 2009
Taylor said:
Besides the fact that I strongly disagree with you politically, there’s a few things I would like to point out: For one, Carnahan has NEVER had a double-digit lead in the polls like you claim she has (http://bit.ly/31rAGz). The largest lead she ever had was in a Democracy Corps poll from late April where she was up by 9 points. But you should know as well as I do that Democracy corps is a liberal polling group, so it should be taken with a grain of salt. Wilson Research, a conservative polling group, found Carnahan’s lead at 3 points. Momentum Analysis also had her up by 3 points. Rasmussen just recently put the race at dead even with 5% undecided and 2% other. The first poll of the race from Public Policy Polling back in January had the race at Carnahan-45, Blunt-44. So, she never had a double-digit lead. And any politico would be smart enough to know to not put that much weight on the Democracy Corps poll. And any student who has passed basic math in elementary school knows 9 is not a double-digit number. As for ACORN, they certainly have some bad seeds in their organization, but get your facts right; they haven’t actually been convicted of any crimes, so to call them a “criminal organization” is again, just factually flat out wrong. Also, their problems lie with the volunteers they have hired, not the upper management, per say, of the organization. I guess it would be like me accusing the whole College Republicans of being a bunch of “birthers” just because one of their hacks asked me “WHERES THE BIRTH CERTIFICATE?” Now you wouldn’t like me stereotyping you all like that now would you? I give no excuses for ACORN’s “mickey mouse” voter registration and prostitution shenanigans, but still, they haven’t been convicted. Therefore, they aren’t a criminal organization. And how do Democrats hold “much of the power in Missouri?” The governor’s mansion is only as powerful as his legislature, and right now, Republicans have 23 senate seats to Democrats’ 10, and are 16 seats up in the house. A Republican holds the basically useless lieutenant governor’s position. And yes, Democrats have the state auditor and Secretary of State. But still, come on. Being from Virginia, I’ve witnessed first hand what a Republican agenda can do to a Democratic governor’s agenda. The legislature is where the laws are made Mr. Hobbs.
6:45 p.m., Oct. 18, 2009
Larry said:
Thanks for the great article Eric. It is nice to find someone that shares the same political views as myself and to also discover another person that wasn't blinded by Obama's "shock and awe" style of campaigning. Obama's "fix it quick" view of health care has him losing support for the once faithful following. When has anything the government has gotten control of flourished? Never.... Other than F.D.R's fix of Great Depression which Obama is trying to use as a model for fixing the economy, would have never worked if it wasn't for WWII. The main difference between Obama's view on the economy and F.D.R's is that F.D.R had people working rather than bailout plans and government gifts to the people. America was founded on capitalistic beliefs and that is the way it should stay. Let the market fix itself. If a company fails, like G.M or Chrysler, let them fail. The reason they failed is because they made poor buisness decisions so why save them.... When it comes to government less means more. The less amount of governmental control the better. I'm with Adam Smith on this one. I will just sit back and watch the Democratic Liberal party go up in flames....... Maybe people will realize that Obama's views on government belongs in Cuba and not America because socialism doesn't work, it never has and it never will.
9:12 p.m., Oct. 18, 2009
Hilary said:
Keep putting rich people first and we'll wake up soon a bunch of peasants.
11:02 p.m., Oct. 18, 2009
Nate said:
Rep. Alan Grayson, D-Fla, is my new favorite congressman. Not only did he not back down from his statement that the GOP's health care plan is for "sick people to die quickly," but he said recently in a podcast with Salon.com's Glenn Greenwald that ACORN, an organization that has NOT been convicted, has been wronged by the recent bill that stripped it of its funding and defended funding for defense contractors who have been convicted like KBR and Halliburton who spends more money in Iraq in ONE DAY than ACORN has received in TWENTY YEARS!
3:04 a.m., Oct. 19, 2009
Daneil said:
You make me laugh. By not supporting health care reform, many Americans go without it. Thus, the point of view that Republicans want Americans to "die quickly" is a valid comment. Quite frankly, all of the Republicans I know are fools, blinded by hate and unwilling to learn, listen, and care about anyone except themselves. You are no exception. The worst part of your article is that you say liberal plans have "failed." It hasn't even been a year yet. Health care reform is coming. Republicans don't have a choice. There will be health care reform. You quote, "One of the major points Democrats touted in the plan was $81 billion they said would be cut from the deficit in 10 years, but the Congressional Budget Office report said differently." Actually that wasn't in the report. That is in an analysis of a report. Further, your argument is NOT TRUE. It is a blatant LIE. The very next paragraph says, "According to CBO and JCT’s assessment, enacting the Chairman’s mark, as amended, would result in a net reduction in federal budget deficits of $81 billion over the 2010–2019 period." You also claim that the democrats voted on a bill that doesn't exist. That's NOT TRUE either. There is a bill, the finance committee has additions that need to be added, but there is a bill. I can't believe your editor would allow such garbage to be published. I wrote better articles in middle school. Frankly, you're an idiot.
6:29 p.m., Oct. 19, 2009
Eapen Thampy said:
Eric, If I recall the debate correctly, Brett or Sam at one point made the claim that the CBO was clearly a bad source for budget estimates because the CBO was responsible for our immense national debt and cited the Washington Examiner as a source for statistics. Does your citing of CBO data reflect a difference with either Sam or Brett about the credibility of the CBO or a different understanding about the CBO's purpose within the Congressional bureaucratic structure? Clarification would be great. Thanks Eapen
11:38 a.m., Oct. 16, 2009
Brandon said:
Yet again, here comes the typical Republican bitching about ACORN and how "evil" it is. Look, I'm no ACORN apologist, but for god sake, is ACORN REALLY worse than, say, Halliburton in Iraq, for christ sake? I don't see the GOP making a big stink about them, despite all the abuses of law and money they've engaged in since getting their no-bid contracts. What did ACORN do? Sure, they engaged in 'voter fraud', although it wasn't true voter fraud like you'd imagine (one party or candidate's people manipulating election results) but simply (supposedly) registering a lot of false names. And the other big thing is that supposedly ACORN promotes prostitution, although there's no real evidence that it's an official policy. The only 'evidence' so far is some conservative woman videotaping a few renegade ACORN workers telling her, thinking she's a prostitue, "to lie about it." Other than that, I'd hardly call them "criminal." There's far worse things than ACORN, for christ sake. Like how John McCain wouldn't disavow the support of radical fundies John Hagee and Rod Parsley until months after they endorsed him.