Saturday, June 30, 2012


The New York Times says that, yes, Republicans might be able to repeal some of the Obama health care law if they control the White House and both houses of Congress after the November elections -- but a number of provisions will be hard to overturn:
In essence, the Republicans could not muster sufficient votes by themselves to undo most of the regulations and benefits of the law, but could for the parts that pay for them.

"You can't get everywhere with reconciliation," said Senator Rob Portman, Republican of Ohio, referring to the Congressional process that Democrats used, which allows certain budget measures to pass with 51 votes instead of the 60 that would be required to block a filibuster vote on a full repeal. "You will need to use other procedures," he said.
The Times presents a possible alternate procedure:
While some Republicans fantasize about a bipartisan solution to undoing the elements of the law, Representative Tom Price of Georgia, a physician who is the Republican leadership’s point man on health care, said Friday that a health and human services secretary under a Romney administration would dismantle other parts of the law through fiat.
You know who's coming to mind as a possible Romney pick for that job?

Rand Paul.

Now, of course, it could be the obstetrician father rather than the ophthalmologist son. But I think Romney has cut a deal with Ron Paul to do right by Rand, in return for Ron's people not making trouble at this year's Republican convention. Giving Rand a cabinet position carrying out Romney's #1 campaign promise would certainly qualify as "doing right" by Rand.

Just a hunch....


Victor said...

Somehow, the thought of an absolute "moran," and epic feckin' idjit like Rand Paul as HHS Tzar, ruling by fiat, would make me long for the days of more enlightened Tzars - like Ivan the Terrible.

On the other hand, purely for entertainment purposes only, I look forward to Press Secretary Michelle Malkin's spittle-flecked rage-alicious meetings with the MSM.
HazMat suits with face-shields, will be required for anyone attending her press briefings.

Victor said...

Oh yeah, that's IF the stupid witch survives the fires raging, like Malkin herself, around her Galtian City on the Burning Hill, that Conservative model city, where her home is - Colorado Springs.

I love the smell of Schadenfreude in the morning: It smells... - like your feckin' city of "Moran's on the Hill," while it's burning all around you!

Michelle, can you and the other Conservatives of Colorado Spring say, "Pyrrhic Victory?"

Better go grab some Galtian buckets, find them "springs" in Colorado Springs, and get some like-minded Conservatives to help you.
I'm assuming, of course, that The Austrian and Chicago Schools of Economics taught "The Ludwig von MisesTtheory of Ffficient fire Brigade Formation.

And, of course, to that feckin' idjit Wicked Witch of the Mountain West, this is all Obama's fault.

I swear, you can't make shit like Modern Conservatism up!

Never Ben Better said...

Why SWAT (ORLY? hahahahahahahahaha) you, or even swat you like the midge you are? PALATR is more like it.

Look, if you had an honestly held and reasoned out opposing viewpoint it would be useful to engage you, DeeDee, but you're just a fount of tired talking points and snide Mallard-Fillmore-level caricatures. In other words, your schtick is BORING.

So go ahead and type away, but you're not persuading anyone, nor are you upsetting and enraging the liberals you poke at (your prime directive, I daresay); you're just too ineffectual to pull it off.

Victor said...


Steve M. said...

Sorry, Douglas, your comment has been been reported as spam.

Victor said...

You just proved that we lefties are just like Stalin and the USSR - you "disappeared" the lame Donald Douglas.

Victor said...

I forgot to add - THANKS!

DD makes spam look like a nice, thick, rare, Kobe porterhouse.

Steve M. said...

This is my house. I make the rules. He's not welcome here.

Never Ben Better said...

Thanks, Steve; mocking him was fun, but his entire absence is preferable.

I really do mean it about being happy to engage in disputing opposing viewpoints, if they're reality-based and politely, cogently argued; but that ain't DD.