SodaHead Brief: GOP Try to RecaptureTown Hall Anger

Blogs Edward Barrera's

SodaHead Brief: GOP Try to RecaptureTown Hall Anger

Posted November 11, 2009 17:13:38
Read all 21 comments
+2 raves

Recommend This

Senate Republican Conference Chairman Lamar Alexander said the GOP are “quietly” planning in-person and telephone town hall gatherings to drum up opposition to Democratic health care bills. But despite 'astroturfing' accusations from the left, is the anger that erupted in Town Hall meetings really something the GOP has any control over? Isn't it an external phenomenon?

Elsewhere, in the no good legislative deed goes unpunished department, Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla, wants to fully debate a veterans care bill because it will cost taxpayers more than $3 billion over the next five years. Wha, wha, whaaaat? Debate a funding bill? The esteemed Democrat Senator from Nevada, Harry Reid, was shocked, simply shocked, accusing the fiscal conservative of hating mom, country and apple pie.

Of course, Reid might be preoccupied with members from his own party pushing back on any health bill that looks like the $1 trillion one passed by the House. Senator Ben Nelson joined a list of Democrats seemingly committed to a filibuster of any health reform bill that contains a public option. This doesn't include a growing anger from senators about the limits to abortion funding.

Meanwhile, President Obama's speech at Ft. Hood yesterday was touching and well received, though the hyperbole, the 'chill-running-up-my-leg' and best speech ever , seems a tad overdone.

Here's part 2 and part 3. Here's the text of the speech.

Top Comment

+4 raves Jackie G - Poker Playing Pa... November 11, 2009 18:25:12

Fact is that it has never been a GOP movement - I do not blame them for trying to tap into the group and gain support there. They may be successful - Gawd knows the democrats hate anyone who isn't a lemming - Pelosi has called these loyal peaceful Americans - astro turf, nazis, brown shirts, fools, disloyal, unAmerican etc - the dems obviously do not want them even in the country. So the group that hears them will probably get their support.
View thread

Sort By

Most Raves
Least Raves
Oldest
Newest

text size

Comments

+1 raves
DADDYFATS 4 days ago

Its absolutely amazing the elite DNC and others can't believe America could be very upset with BHO's agenda without being bought and paid for.People of any party phone,write,email,fax, your rep's and let them know our disdain for doing nothing to protect "WE THE PEOPLE".
+1 raves
leantom - Extremist November 11, 2009 22:12:09

This movement isn't confined to the GOP, despite what the media wants us to believe. It's a grassroots movement - largely comprised of tax-payers - that does not want the government to destroy free-market health care.

This health care bill isn't about providing health insurance to the poor. It's about the government wanting to subsidize a large portion of the U.S. economy. If the government really wanted to provide health care to the poor, then all they would have to do is redistribute large portions of collected income taxes. This superfluous, 1900-paged bill isn't necessary to give the 12,000,000 people who lack health insurance such insurance.
Captain Tobias. The Liberal... November 11, 2009 21:38:09

Wow, thats sad.
Jeremiah November 11, 2009 21:22:11

I'm sure all that “spontaneity” will be easy to re-create. Freedom Works will make certain of this new outpouring of “grassroots” support for the cause of the downtrodden insurance companies.

Obama did as well as could be expected, given the emotional nature of the circumstances. He hit the right notes and displayed proper dignity of his office while addressing some very distraught people.

So Tom Coburn is distressed over spending $3 billion for the care of the veterans? Is the same Tom Coburn who has no problem with spending $2 billion per month to sustain Bush's wars?
+3 raves
FitzRoger November 11, 2009 19:42:16 (edited)

It's a Conservative movement of accountability to GOD, family, country, and reality itself.
jackolantyrn356 November 11, 2009 19:10:32

No one can re-capyture that again, but their time would be best spent doubling thr=e ANGER , We were ignored by the peoiple who are supposed to be ourservents. You need to make it where the people of the America to get on it all over again. Do they want these peoople in place now???? Then lets get rid of themm now. Forget the elections. It's time now. Ys=es, I know what this may involve, but that happening you'll get a whole world down their necks.
Doodlebug November 11, 2009 18:57:51

All of Obama's speeches are good. He's like Bill Clinton in that respect. I don't know why people think the 1900 + bill is going to become law. Reid just announced that he will present an opt-out public option and with no Stupak amendment next week in the Senate. The combined bills after conference and debating will not look like the House bill.
+3 raves
Nate November 11, 2009 18:49:10

The speech was touching and obama did well. The anger at the town halls was genuine - we are very concerned about this 1900 page bill which it seems none who voted the other day actually had read. I am working on reading it now, and seeing how they addressed the problems I had with the previous bill. I am not optimistic.
stormdog to Nate November 11, 2009 19:19:40

Nate be optimistic but be critical also. unfortunately the party of NO was so forceful and aggressive about not changing a thing with health care .the democrats were pushed into being hasty and weren't given time for a proper study of health care systems around the world. I blame the republicans for not being cooperative to the determent of Americans .
+4 raves
Nate to stormdog November 11, 2009 19:33:46

bullspit - they had every opportunity for forty years to do something and failed. Then the repubs came in with a narrow majority in the nineties and fixed a bunch of stuff, then the dems came back in and screwed it up again - look, the dems have had congress for most of the last fifty years and all of their progressive programs have done nothing but hold down poor people and minorities.
+1 raves
kevjon to Nate November 11, 2009 20:30:59

Well put Nate, more research needs to be done by individuals. Our news media are so one sided that they will tell us what they want us to hear. Liberalism has extended freedom of speech well beyond accountability. In this day and age we can only trust what we see and experience. Our most visible and influential mistakes were human rights for illegals that are bankrupting this nation and the mortgage fiasco. I'm sorry to say that supporting the democrats is like running your car off a cliff to spite the manufacturer. Most of the people on SH despite the damaging policies will support this President for the sake of proving republicans wrong.
Nate to kevjon November 11, 2009 20:32:39

Human rights for illegals is good - not deporting them after they receive their dose of human rights is bad. I am all for emergency care for ANYONE AND EVERYONE - than escort them home. Good with the rest of your post.
kevjon to Nate November 11, 2009 21:02:53

In severe cases I support it but it has become overwhelmed and damaging to a point where it is affecting our care. Mexico is the tenth wealthiest nation in the world and we can help more people by enforcing human rights in Mexico than in America. Thanks for the reply and opinion.
+1 raves
Nate to kevjon November 11, 2009 21:06:28

thanks - yeah, we shouldn't take them on as wards of the state - just emergency care then a bus ticket (in handcuffs) home. We need immigration - just knock first.
kevjon to Nate November 11, 2009 21:15:02

If there ever was a case where I would support spread the wealth policy it would be Latin America that is an example of keeping the people down to benefit from the spoils of their efforts.
stormdog to Nate November 11, 2009 22:48:18

if your going to lie tell it to another idiot. of the last 10 presidents 7 have been republicans .and since it just stupid to research the last fifty years on congress we'll say that Bush had the majority in congress for 6 years also GW used veto more than any other president ,. and lets be clear both old Bush and Reagan did all they could to kill any health care other than or profit .and to have a little project to stop you from your business of BS . when was the last bill those freaks from the right helped not only the poor but the working guy. start about fifty years ago . plus they were the first in line to make life rougher for the returning vets .take a long hike nater
+1 raves
Nate to stormdog November 12, 2009 01:48:45 (edited)

hey, if you don't like what I have to say don't lie and try and insult me - I am above being insulted by you. Bush DID NOT use the veto more than any president, that is simply not true. Bush Vetoed 12 bills in his entire 8 year presidency. You flat out *repeated incorrect information which you didn't fact check*, he used the veto less than 23 presidents. FDR vetoed over 600 times. You are a *misinformed liberal who just repeated the DNC party line of lies*. Obviously you are a bad *fact checker*.

*edit
stormdog to Nate November 12, 2009 10:02:53 (edited)

OK not lying just uninformed .shows your intolerance doesn't it conservative. .I at the very least am tolerant of nasty name callers to a point . and you sir are close to that point.Still Reagan and Bush both insufferable men did kill health care bills . showing they cared more for coporate masters than the people of the USA.and thats it for you nate .
+2 raves
Nate to stormdog November 12, 2009 13:48:18

you use the word 'health care bill' as if it is always a good thing - I am arguing that, in this case as in many others, the devil's in the details. Just because it sounds nice, like 'oh, lets help all the poor people' it is not always a good bill. I'll retract calling you a liar and a cheat if you start fact checking your posts before you make the same mistake like listening to the national democrats baseless propaganda...and just because something gets vetoed does not mean that the president is doing a disservice to us - remember, it is the specific job of the executive branch to enforce the constitution.
+3 raves
dublin9 November 11, 2009 18:25:20

The only tingle I get up my leg when hearing Obama speak is that of a rattle snake.