Murkowski: GOP should focus on Economy and Jobs, not Health Care Repeal

[exopolitician]

Murkowksi is the only Republican that gets it....kinda:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/01/21/lisa-murkowski-gop-health-care-repeal_n_812158.html

[tpfkaw]

Her status as worst GOPher increases.

[DrScholl]

It's not as if they'll listen to her, but at least she said it.

[Free Palestine]

Her status as worst GOPher increases.

[phk]

Her status as worst GOPher increases.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

The only thing she gets is how to whore herself to the media for attention.


The GOP can't just forget the health care repeal now. "That ship has sailed, doctor".  Secondly, she is up and conceding that somehow if you work to repeal healthcare, you aren't focused on the economy which is just pure BS all the way. If that were true, we are all screwed anyway because there is no way Congress can just sit around and do only economy related things (of which there are very few that can be done at this point). That is not why they were elected (multi-tasking is part of the job discription, hence all the damn committees), which of course is why it is done. It is an open invitation to buy praise and end criticisms in exchange for the GOP "focusing on the economy" alone. I know how it ends. The GOP congress will be a do nothing congress that violated their promises. Pelosi couldn't have designed a better bait and switch, with her as the beneficiary, even if she had done it herself . Finally, on the economic front itself, repealing health care or atleast substantially modifying it will be essential for the economy.

[Lief 🗽]

Yes, it's more important that we prevent tens of millions of Americans from getting health insurance than it is we help millions of Americans find employment. Good job, libtards.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Yes, it's more important that we prevent tens of millions of Americans from getting health insurance than it is we help millions of Americans find employment. Good job, libtards.

Cease with the hyperbolistic talking points. Points for the creative false dichotomy.


Simple facts
1. There will still be a large number of uninsured people with this bill.
2. This bill does nothing to really controll costs, just pays lip service to it, which even if your intentions are just to insure the uninsured you have to address this regardless, and it wasn't practically at all.
3. There is nothing that could be done for the economy, that can't be done because of the focus on repeal. Even one of your precious worthless stimulus bills could just as easily be passed if there was the need or even the faint belief that it would be worth making our finances that much worse. If our congress people are that freakin lazy and stupid that they can only "focus on one thing at a time" then we need to replace every damn last incumbent. But you see, it is a talking point. Congress can easily address more than one thing at a time. Its whether the media and the power players want them too. I would think you would agree with me here. After all, Obama was hurt by this ridiculous nonsense too.   

[Phony Moderate]

Good for her.

[Lief 🗽]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Tens of millions less than if the act is repealed.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Again, it does significantly more to control costs than repealing the act would. Is the argument here really that because the Affordable Care Act is not perfect we should repeal it and return to the much worse status quo?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

The GOP isn't even talking about jobs, unless it's in regard to the "job-killing" healthcare act. The next thing on their agenda is amending the clean air act!

[Landslide Lyndon]

Actually the next thing on GOP's agenda is banning individuals from using their own money for abortions.
I'm sure this will create millions of jobs, someway.

[DrScholl]

Simple facts
1. There will still be a large number of uninsured people with this bill.
2. This bill does nothing to really controll costs, just pays lip service to it, which even if your intentions are just to insure the uninsured you have to address this regardless, and it wasn't practically at all.
3. There is nothing that could be done for the economy, that can't be done because of the focus on repeal. Even one of your precious worthless stimulus bills could just as easily be passed if there was the need or even the faint belief that it would be worth making our finances that much worse. If our congress people are that freakin lazy and stupid that they can only "focus on one thing at a time" then we need to replace every damn last incumbent. But you see, it is a talking point. Congress can easily address more than one thing at a time. Its whether the media and the power players want them too. I would think you would agree with me here. After all, Obama was hurt by this ridiculous nonsense too.   

The basic points of the bill change many things. Pre-existing conditions are gone and you can't be drop from coverage if you get sick, those are important improvements.

Multi-tasking isn't the issue. The Republicans wasted hours of debate and votes on something that will fail, that doesn't make a whole lot of sense.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Simple facts
1. There will still be a large number of uninsured people with this bill.
2. This bill does nothing to really controll costs, just pays lip service to it, which even if your intentions are just to insure the uninsured you have to address this regardless, and it wasn't practically at all.
3. There is nothing that could be done for the economy, that can't be done because of the focus on repeal. Even one of your precious worthless stimulus bills could just as easily be passed if there was the need or even the faint belief that it would be worth making our finances that much worse. If our congress people are that freakin lazy and stupid that they can only "focus on one thing at a time" then we need to replace every damn last incumbent. But you see, it is a talking point. Congress can easily address more than one thing at a time. Its whether the media and the power players want them too. I would think you would agree with me here. After all, Obama was hurt by this ridiculous nonsense too.   

The basic points of the bill change many things. Pre-existing conditions are gone and you can't be drop from coverage if you get sick, those are important improvements.

Multi-tasking isn't the issue. The Republicans wasted hours of debate and votes on something that will fail, that doesn't make a whole lot of sense.

Both of which will be in the Republican replacement bill. I won't get into all the practical promises those areas of bipartisan agreement cause in reality.
 
And how many damn hours are waisted anyway in every congress? Atleast in my opinion its on something productive.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Tens of millions less than if the act is repealed.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Again, it does significantly more to control costs than repealing the act would. Is the argument here really that because the Affordable Care Act is not perfect we should repeal it and return to the much worse status quo?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

The GOP isn't even talking about jobs, unless it's in regard to the "job-killing" healthcare act. The next thing on their agenda is amending the clean air act!

Could have sworn it was "Repeal and Replace".


Actually that is a very important, pro-jobs measure, if they amend the clean air act so that the EPA can't regulate carbon emissions, something which no one ever intended to give them.

[Landslide Lyndon]

Both of which will be in the Republican replacement bill.

I heard that the Republicans plan to unveil this bill along with the Bigfoot video and Jimmy Hoffa's body.

[Lief 🗽]

Yeah, once the Republicans actually come up with a replacement bill, then we can compare the two and virtue of repealing Obamacare, but at the moment there's no evidence that they've even given much thought to a replacement.

[DrScholl]

Both of which will be in the Republican replacement bill. I won't get into all the practical promises those areas of bipartisan agreement cause in reality.
 
And how many damn hours are waisted anyway in every congress? Atleast in my opinion its on something productive.

A replacement bill doesn't exist. If it does, why haven't we heard anything about? Facts not fiction, please.

[Brittain33]

Murkowski is behaving a little like Lieberman, but not to the same degree. This is what it's like, Republicans. Prepare for all kinds of spite cloaked in sanctimony about your failure to listen to America.

[MyRescueKittehRocks]

She needs to go back to Alaska. We want Joe Miller. She should've been a good little primary loser and concede and act with some decency. Lisa is not a Republican. We are


Sincerely

The Tea Party

[krazen1211]

Who cares what she thinks?

The Democrats prioritized health care for their base over the economy and jobs; that's partially why the economy and jobs performed so miserably over their tenure and they got railroaded in 2010.

[Lunar]

Murkowski is behaving a little like Lieberman, but not to the same degree. This is what it's like, Republicans. Prepare for all kinds of spite cloaked in sanctimony about your failure to listen to America.

I never realized that before, but her overarching position is almost perfectly parallel to Lieberman's in 2007.  The only thing which would complete it is if she gets a convention speaking spot endorsing Obama's reelection.

[Franzl]

She needs to go back to Alaska. We want Joe Miller. She should've been a good little primary loser and concede and act with some decency. Lisa is not a Republican. We are


Sincerely

The Tea Party

The primary has nothing to do with anything but the nomination of a particular party.

[Associate Justice PiT]

     The odds of a health care repeal ever passing are pretty small (doubly so if they push for a clean repeal without a packaged replacement bill), & completely nonexistent in this Congress. Murkowski is just being rational in suggesting the GOP focus on other things. Not to say that I agree with said rationality.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

Both of which will be in the Republican replacement bill. I won't get into all the practical promises those areas of bipartisan agreement cause in reality.
 
And how many damn hours are waisted anyway in every congress? Atleast in my opinion its on something productive.

A replacement bill doesn't exist. If it does, why haven't we heard anything about? Facts not fiction, please.

No, but we can be pretty sure what will be in it.

As for that second sentence in my post, some went wrong. It should have been either "impractical promises" or "practical problems". hmm, can't remember which.

     The odds of a health care repeal ever passing are pretty small (doubly so if they push for a clean repeal without a packaged replacement bill), & completely nonexistent in this Congress. Murkowski is just being rational in suggesting the GOP focus on other things. Not to say that I agree with said rationality.

Its rational to view it as a "distraction from the economy". Boehner could pass 100 jobs bills inspite of them "waisting time on repeal". Its simply ridiculous what she is suggesting. Its not like there is a damn thing that congress can do short term to fix the problem and all long term solutions are just that, long term. Hence spending time on repeal does nothing to take away from dealing with the economy. Its rational only from the perspective that its rational for her to use such spin out of spite.

[Sbane]

Dude Yank, the Democrats got slammed for focusing on health care when they should have focused on the economy. The same thing will happen to the Republicans. Fair is fair (although whether it's fair to either Republicans or Democrats is a matter of debate, the public's perception is what is important here).

[krazen1211]

Dude Yank, the Democrats got slammed for focusing on health care when they should have focused on the economy. The same thing will happen to the Republicans. Fair is fair (although whether it's fair to either Republicans or Democrats is a matter of debate, the public's perception is what is important here).

Where did you get the idea that Republicans are focused on healthcare? The Democrats spent almost a year on it. The GOP has spent 2 weeks.

Kind of funny how people are writing the fate of the 112th congress 700 days before it ends.