Snowe: I Am Against a Public Option

Thursday, October 15, 2009

"The public option would be problematic. As I've said, I'm against a public option because I think the government would be another vast bureaucracy, and also create a disproportionate advantage in the marketplace. And inevitably, government's not going to do it better and it's going to be more costly."

Posted by LIVE_OR_DIE at 08:30 AM | 13 COMMENTS | permalink | Comment on This Entry |

Front Page
News Weblog
Comments
Flagged Comments
User Blogs
Write a Blog Entry
Create a Poll
Edit Account
Weekly Digest
Stats Page
RSS Feed
Back Page

Subscriptions

Author Info

LIVE_OR_DIE

If this asshole would never engages in any argument.

Private E-mail
No Home Page

Joined 2006/07/28
Visited 2012/02/13

Status: user

Women, children killed in Syrian massacre (22 comments) ...

Occasional Pot Smoking Won't Harm Lungs: Study (19 comments) ...

Retort User Turns 30, Best Years Over (123 comments) ...

Fox Christmas Card - Sheep Race (18 comments) ...

Special Features

Daily Nooner

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in the discussion of this weblog entry should note the site's moderation policy.

Regardless of her stance on the P.O., I wish more republicans would be like her and at least try working with the dems.

Posted by LIVE_OR_DIE at 2009-10-15 08:59 AM | Reply | Flag:

"And inevitably, government's not going to do it better and it's going to be more costly."

Her mind is closed ideologically. Great.

Posted by Hagbard_Celine at 2009-10-15 09:05 AM | Reply | Flag:

Regardless of her stance on the P.O., I wish more republicans would be like her and at least try working with the dems.

#1 | Posted by LIVE_OR_DIE

The GOP is full of shit.

However, to what extent do you want them to 'work with' the DNC?

How much input have they had with the Stimulus bill?

Cap and trade?

Health care?

Bush's first major piece of legislation was 'No Child Left Behind'.

Senator Kennedy (D) authored a substantial portion of the bill - and it passed as a bi-partisan effort.

The Dems are trying to ram-through their agenda. After how many years of Tom 'the Hammer' Delay, I don't blame them.

However, be honest about this. The GOP is being almost completely shut-out.

If bi-partisanship is the goal, the Dems are currently the problem.

Posted by JeffJ at 2009-10-15 09:13 AM | Reply | Flag:

However, to what extent do you want them to 'work with' the DNC?

How much input have they had with the Stimulus bill?

Cap and trade?

Health care?

Bush's first major piece of legislation was 'No Child Left Behind'.

Senator Kennedy (D) authored a substantial portion of the bill - and it passed as a bi-partisan effort.

The Dems are trying to ram-through their agenda. After how many years of Tom 'the Hammer' Delay, I don't blame them.

However, be honest about this. The GOP is being almost completely shut-out.

If bi-partisanship is the goal, the Dems are currently the problem.

#3 | Posted by JeffJ at 2009-10-15 09:13 AM

I'm not defending the Dems in any way, but many republicans are content to just sit there throwing shit at the wall hoping something will stick. Snowe may not be my favorite politician but at least she tries to move past that. Think about it, if more republicans came to the table, without the anger, name calling, spite, etc., they could do like her and try to implement conservative ideas within the construct of the health care bill. Snowe is anti-public option and she's not being shut out, because she's coming to the table and not acting like a blithering idiot about everything Obama.

Posted by LIVE_OR_DIE at 2009-10-15 09:20 AM | Reply | Flag:

LoD,

You raise a fair point, but it's a 2-way street.

True comprimise comes from both sides.

If the GOP believes itself to be re-invented as the party of limited government, then it HAS to oppose the monstrosity that comprises these various health-care bills. Their input isn't being regarded in any meaningful way whatsoever.

Now, are they over-the-top with some of their opposition? Absoultely! In some cases, pathetically so.

However, EVERYTHING the Dems are pushing results in a massive expansion of centralized state power.

Currently, the Dems don't need to GOP and they don't give a shit regarding GOP input as it pertains to their agenda. Their problem lies with the blue-dogs. The fact is a substantial majority of the public is opposed to government-run healthcare, regardless of how the Dems attempt to package it as something that it's not.

Posted by JeffJ at 2009-10-15 09:30 AM | Reply | Flag:

"The fact is a substantial majority of the public is opposed to government-run healthcare."

The un-silent ones maybe.

Posted by Hagbard_Celine at 2009-10-15 09:35 AM | Reply | Flag:

You raise a fair point, but it's a 2-way street.

True comprimise comes from both sides.

#5 | Posted by JeffJ at 2009-10-15 09:30 AM

Yes, but understand that I'm harping on the GOP here largely because I want them, specifically, to step up to the plate. Know what I mean? When I decide who to vote for in '16, I'm not going to be looking at how low the bar is set and pick the lesser of two evils; I want someone that meets a real standard (and conservative) to vote for.

If that made any sense at all, haha, I'm running on fumes today.

Posted by LIVE_OR_DIE at 2009-10-15 09:49 AM | Reply | Flag:

In other words, I can't vote for the GOP as they are, and feel good about it, so I want them to improve, and whether or not they choose to continue the divisiveness, regardless of what the Dems are doing, plays a big role in that for me.

Posted by LIVE_OR_DIE at 2009-10-15 09:51 AM | Reply | Flag:

I want someone that meets a real standard (and conservative) to vote for.

If that made any sense at all, haha, I'm running on fumes today.

#7 | Posted by LIVE_OR_DIE

You and me both, LOD.

I bet our votes cancel one another out though.

Posted by Hagbard_Celine at 2009-10-15 09:52 AM | Reply | Flag:

Completely understood, LoD.

I have been contemplating 3rd party for awhile now.

Maybe losing my vote is what the GOP deserves for all of their bullshit.

Until they shape-up...perhaps my pragmatic voting pattern should be replaced with a more principled stance.

In the last couple of years I have come to truly despise the GOP.

Posted by JeffJ at 2009-10-15 09:55 AM | Reply | Flag:

I bet our votes cancel one another out though.

#9 | Posted by Hagbard_Celine at 2009-10-15 09:52 AM

For what it's worth, I'd have no problem voting for an honest liberal. It's the corrupt liberals / conservatives in office that cause most of the wreckage imo.

Posted by LIVE_OR_DIE at 2009-10-15 09:55 AM | Reply | Flag:

"It's the corrupt liberals / conservatives in office that cause most of the wreckage imo."

When we're talking about the corrupt, terms like democrat or republican are just cover used to distract us. Their party is Corruption.

Posted by Hagbard_Celine at 2009-10-15 09:58 AM | Reply | Flag:

Completely understood, LoD.

I have been contemplating 3rd party for awhile now.

Maybe losing my vote is what the GOP deserves for all of their bullshit.

Until they shape-up...perhaps my pragmatic voting pattern should be replaced with a more principled stance.

In the last couple of years I have come to truly despise the GOP.

#10 | Posted by JeffJ at 2009-10-15 09:55 AM

Yep, make them earn it.

Posted by LIVE_OR_DIE at 2009-10-15 10:01 AM | Reply | Flag: