Trump accused the Freedom Caucus of 'saving' Obamacare. Its leader said it's not over.

[Emjay]

If that's not moving to the left I don't know what is.

That's a headline. 

[Smokin Joe]

   From Ted Poes official web site:

Healthcare: Patient-Centered, not Government-Driven

I will continue to fight to repeal this expensive, government takeover of health care and replace it with a patient-centered, cost-effective system that keeps the federal government out of our doctor’s office and out of our private lives.[/i]
 

But how can the Federal Government do this without a Government takeover of Health Care?

His statement is self-contradictory.

By what Constitutional Authority is Congress even messing with the doctor/patient relationship at all?

[Right_in_Virginia]

Yeah, well.... making conservatives out to be the problem

Like it or not @XenaLee === sometimes conservatives are the problem.

Lately conservatives are the faction of "no" ... content to wait for the impossible, no matter the consequences.

This is not helpful or productive in an environment requiring strategic thinking and compromise.   

[Smokin Joe]

They kinda are.  Do you think it is better for conservatives and the country if Trump gets laughed out of office? 

Or driven out some other way?

I do not see how this is good for the country or conservatives.  I think we should .... well, if you can't support him because you are too dam noble ... then at least back off and give him a chance for say 120 days instead of 60.

If Trump is right I will support him, if he is wrong, I won't. It is that simple, and that is as it should be.
 It isn't a question of how I perceive myself, or some sense of 'nobility', it is a simple question of supporting what is right vs what is wrong.

[Smokin Joe]

Like it or not @XenaLee === sometimes conservatives are the problem.

Lately conservatives are the faction of "no" ... content to wait for the impossible, no matter the consequences.

This is not helpful or productive in an environment requiring strategic thinking and compromise.

How many Republicans voted for the ACA?

Right.

Now Republicans won't vote against it?

Dust off the 2015 bill and call for question. We'll see who is who.

[Emjay]

@Emjay

No, my friend told me what he knew about Rush, and he's in more of a position to do so than you or I.  All I know about Limbaugh is that he's a boring, stale, repetitive old gasbag.

Honestly, I think I've tried to be pretty polite with you, but you continue to try and assign false motivations and do your little snark thing, so I'm sick of making the effort.  So you think what you want and defend that fraud who couldn't care less about you or any of us, but don't expect it from me.

I mention Rush Limbaugh and you decide it's a good time to bring up how you know this guy who knows this guy who heard that Rush was not a popular kid or some psychobabble blah, blah, blah.

So ... I'm not sure how you call that being 'pretty polite' but if it's the best you can do then, okay.

[DB]

But how can the Federal Government do this without a Government takeover of Health Care?

His statement is self-contradictory.

By what Constitutional Authority is Congress even messing with the doctor/patient relationship at all?

And there lies the contradiction...

[DB]

How many Republicans voted for the ACA?

Right.

Now Republicans won't vote against it?

Dust off the 2015 bill and call for question. We'll see who is who.

And after they fiddle with Obamacare around the edges and then vote for it they are voting to affirm the bulk of Obamacare which they rejected entirely before... The Democrats are laughing all right...

[INVAR]

Like it or not sometimes conservatives are the problem.

Lately conservatives are the faction of "no" ... content to wait for the impossible, no matter the consequences.

This is not helpful or productive in an environment requiring strategic thinking and compromise.

Just another bloviating miasma of  bullshit to insist that we must surrender to Socialism and be content with a slight decrease in the speed to oblivion while the GOP and Trump take ownership of tyranny on our behalf so they can rename it 'progress'.

The problem is self-identifying Conservatives and Establishment party hacks like yourself.

[Emjay]

What in the world is inane about this truth GtHawk posted?

Nothing he posted there was either inane or insulting unless you are a Party Hack cheerleader, which in that case I could imagine your feathers getting ruffled.

Because the principles of liberty as imbued within the principles of Conservatism are no longer part of any discussion or policy on this people's minds, hearts or lips.

The only principles being argued about is how much Socialism/Marxism and Leftism we are supposed to swallow and get along with and call it good.

I know I'm probably the only person still up so I should get the last word.  I wasn't talking about Hawk or anyone in particular.  I was making a general remark about TBR.

[Emjay]

Which will magically end up being demanded that we give him 1460 days before we are 'permitted' to hold Trump to account and stop giving him a 'chance'.

You can hold Trump "to account" today if you want to.  Or you can give him a few months.  You are permitted to have any opinion you want to have.

I'm not sure exactly what you can do if Trump doesn't notice that you are holding him to account but maybe we can figure that out later.

[Emjay]

Riiiight.  You don't see him moving Left at all.

White House looks past conservatives on tax reform - to Democrats

Here we go: Trump now ready to work with Democrats on health-care fix

That's media talk...Trump has not moved left in real life.  At least not yet.

[Maj. Bill Martin]

I thought he started out pretty well, but failing to repeal obamacare is one of the biggest lies ever. I thought it was going well when he met with the Freedom Caucus, but now I find out he wouldn't discuss any particulars of the bill. He met with them to tell them they must vote for the bill as is.

That's misleading. 

He met with them, heard their complaints, and the bill was adjusted a few times.  One example was the incorporation of the conservative demand for elimination of minimal essential coverages.  But it got to the point where they would be losing too many moderate votes if they gave any more, so they said no more - this is it.  That was based on headcounting votes and knowing what could pass.

The FC said "no" at that point, at which time there weren't enough votes for passage.  So some moderates who had been convinced to vote yes then backed off as well, because they weren't willing to cast a controversial vote in a losing cause.

The problem for Trump and congressional leadership is that when they give too much on the right, they lose votes on the left, and vice-versa.

[Smokin Joe]

The problem for Trump and congressional leadership is that when they give too much on the right, they lose votes on the left, and vice-versa.

Actually, those votes on the Democrat side of the Republican Party were ever sham votes when it came to other Bills for repeal of the ACA, Kabuki for the rubes back home so those Representatives could keep their seats.

Whether Congressional leadership considers the Liberal Republicans or the Conservative Republicans a problem remains to be seen. Mr. Trump has made his position apparent, and it is much as anticipated.

[Maj. Bill Martin]

@corbe

@Emjay @Maj. Bill Martin

   Ted Poe is from Texas, not Germany or Russia, that's why I used the Alamo analogy. 
   Granted my analogy is weak but he's still a wuss for skipping out, but so be it now it's up to his constituents to do something about it, as I'm sure he campaigned on Repeal & Replace not as another member so brilliantly put it, rename and resuscitate.

I understand and appreciate that.  I was simply using a different analogy -- that of the "no retreat for any reason" order issued by Hitler later in the war.  That kind of rigidity absolutely doomed the Germans, forcing them to lose huge numbers of men, and making them unable to gather reserves for effective counter attacks. 

ObamaCare is a terrible law, and we'd be much better off without it.  But the reality is that we have it, and we can't magically blink it away like Jeanie because we don't have the votes.  Insist on total victory, and we'll lose.  But if we're willing to grab the best deal possible, we can weaken it and maybe do better later.

[Smokin Joe]

@corbe

I understand and appreciate that.  I was simply using a different analogy -- that of the "no retreat for any reason" order issued by Hitler later in the war.  That kind of rigidity absolutely doomed the Germans, forcing them to lose huge numbers of men, and making them unable to gather reserves for effective counter attacks. 

ObamaCare is a terrible law, and we'd be much better off without it.  But the reality is that we have it, and we can't magically blink it away like Jeanie because we don't have the votes.  Insist on total victory, and we'll lose.  But if we're willing to grab the best deal possible, we can weaken it and maybe do better later.

Every battle is a learning opportunity. For Conservatives, it's time to learn who stands where, and that takes a call for question, win, lose, or draw. Many of those we had been told were allies in this have turned coat, and it would be nice to have a roster of who stands where--we won't get that without a vote.
I have no idea how much astroturf went on in contacting Representatives one way or the other, but I'd bet there has been some of that. This is a call to arms for any Conservatives who did not make their wishes plainly known to their Representatives in Congress. Call, e-mail, and snail mail them, if you want a prayer of having your voice heard. Those in opposition to you are doing this, and even those who are just trying to protect their seats will listen if enough of us do this. We can never count on Congress to do the right thing.

[Maj. Bill Martin]

Every battle is a learning opportunity. For Conservatives, it's time to learn who stands where, and that takes a call for question, win, lose, or draw. Many of those we had been told were allies in this have turned coat, and it would be nice to have a roster of who stands where--we won't get that without a vote.

I understand that and can appreciate it to some extent.  But I do think the value of "taking names" is being over-estimated by those who believe that people "went back on their word."  LIke I've been saying, the truth is that the moderates didn't run on a full repeal without replacement, and their refusal to give up some things they liked in ObamaCare actually is consistent with where they've been.  Those people generally are not in conservative districts/states, and won't "pay a price" for not getting rid of ObamaCare entirely.

And as you note, we didn't even get a vote.  I go back and forth on this -- I think that holding a vote on just a straight repeal may be a good way to demonstrate that the votes aren't there for it.  But the reality is that we'll never get that vote in the Senate.  Even if the House managed to pass it, it would go over to the Senate and just sit there.  Conservatives would keep insisting that it be voted on, McConnell won't hold a vote he knows he's going to lose, and we'd spend the next 18 months arguing about giving that bill a vote rather than passing something.  I think it might become the ultimate red herring that would prevent anything from being passed, which would be a massive victory for the Democrats.

To put it differently, I think that if the GOP doesn't pass significant legislation regarding ObamaCare by the midterms, we'll lose the House.  I think this vote made it more likely that no such bill will pass.  And when that happens, we will have lost any ability to pass anything that doesn't move ObamaCare even more to the left. 

[Smokin Joe]

I understand that and can appreciate it to some extent.  But I do think the value of "taking names" is being over-estimated by those who believe that people "went back on their word."  LIke I've been saying, the truth is that the moderates didn't run on a full repeal without replacement, and their refusal to give up some things they liked in ObamaCare actually is consistent with where they've been.  Those people generally are not in conservative districts/states, and won't "pay a price" for not getting rid of ObamaCare entirely.

And as you note, we didn't even get a vote.  I go back and forth on this -- I think that holding a vote on just a straight repeal may be a good way to demonstrate that the votes aren't there for it.  But the reality is that we'll never get that vote in the Senate.  Even if the House managed to pass it, it would go over to the Senate and just sit there.  Conservatives would keep insisting that it be voted on, McConnell won't hold a vote he knows he's going to lose, and we'd spend the next 18 months arguing about giving that bill a vote rather than passing something.  I think it might become the ultimate red herring that would prevent anything from being passed, which would be a massive victory for the Democrats.

Just knowing where Conservatives needed to push, and who had promised but backed down would be a plus. As for the ones who made no such promise, compare that vote to the 2015 act and ask the inevitable "why change now?" question. We don't even know who to fight if we don't know who backed down, and we will never make any progress that way.

[catfish1957]

Like it or not @XenaLee === sometimes conservatives are the problem.

Lately conservatives are the faction of "no" ... content to wait for the impossible, no matter the consequences.

This is not helpful or productive in an environment requiring strategic thinking and compromise.

@Right_in_Virginia

Do you realize how much this sound like the unprincipled left, and that it could ripped from the cyber-pages of du?


We've been comprising with the left zealots and RINO's for decades now.  Look where it has got us.

[Cripplecreek]

@Right_in_Virginia

Do you realize how much this sound like the unprincipled left, and that it could ripped from the cyber-pages of du?


We've been comprising with the left zealots and RINO's for decades now.  Look where it has got us.

This who election is Teddy Roosevelt all over again. The only difference is that Teddy Roosevelt didn't get the nomination so he formed the Progressive party. Trump is just forming a new progressive party from within over not getting his way.

[Maj. Bill Martin]

@Right_in_Virginia

We've been comprising with the left zealots and RINO's for decades now.  Look where it has got us.

Seriously, when have conservatives done that?  Conservatives have lost because the left, sometimes aided by RINO's, have passed new legislation over the objection of conservatives.  We haven't lost because conservatives have comprised with the left in passing leftist legislation.  They don't need our votes anyway if they've got the RINO's.

I think it's offensive to accuse those who differ on strategy as not having principles.  I think the winning strategy is to never compromise to help advance liberalism when you're in the minority, but don't be afraid to compromise to advance conservatism if you're in the majority.  What a lot of us worry about with the defeat of this bill is that any reform that does get passed now is likely to be even less conservative than the one that just got rejected.  I'll take 50% of ObamaCare over 100% of it every time.

[catfish1957]

Seriously, when have conservatives done that? 

Much of the Reagan and Clinton  administration's legislative agenda for one.  Secondly the Orange fool himself wouldn't have gotten elected without a major faction of "duped" conservatives.

[Maj. Bill Martin]

Much of the Reagan and Clinton  administration's legislative agenda for one.

Such as, specifically?

[txradioguy]

Like it or not @XenaLee === sometimes conservatives are the problem.

Lately conservatives are the faction of "no" ... content to wait for the impossible, no matter the consequences.

This is not helpful or productive in an environment requiring strategic thinking and compromise.

Thank you for proving that besides being overly emotional where Trump is concerned...you like most Trump supporters just want vengeance and “winning” no matter what that means.

[txradioguy]

Such as, specifically?

@Maj. Bill Martin @catfish1957

Well let's see you can start with the reforms to Social Security and Medicare that Newt and Billy Jeff worked on together

Then there's W letting Ted Kennedy write NCLB...having to put a sunset on the tax cuts he implemented.

Is that a good start for specifics?