Dear Gregg Keller
For officially deciding that GOProud can’t take part in an “official” capacity at CPAC, I would like to say to you the following:
A shame. I was actually hoping to attend this year.
Recent Comment
- DRJ: Repsect, or as Aretha would say, R-E-P-S-E-C-T.
- DRJ: Does anyone at the White House know how to spell and proofread?
- Arizona CJ: Scaramucci seemed okay to me, until I read this post. Now, I see him very differently. He trusted a reporter. He is therefor an utter moron. As for Prebius, I was delighted to see him go. It's rather hard to drain a swamp when the swamp thing is your chief of staff.
- aphrael: Given the number of people on the record as saying they didn't want to pass a skinny repeal because the House might pass it rather than going to conference, it's looking a lot like, on this bill at least, Sen. McCain was the chosen fall guy - he'll take the 'no' vote *for* these other people so they don't have to pay the political price of doing so, because what does he care about political prices now?
- Andrew: There were three substantive votes on Obamacare this week: (1) the McConnell-backed overhaul; (2) the repeal without replace effective in two years; and, (3) the "skinny repeal" that would have tossed everything into a conference committee that might have generated something both houses could support. Any of these three would have been better than what we ended up with, which is a dysfunctional and collapsing health care system without much hope for improvement. It's still possible that "regular order" might produce something successful from the pertinent Senate committees, and that the actual collapse of Obamacare might galvanize Senate Republicans. Anyway, instead of picking and choosing which of these three votes to criticize, I would blame any Senator who voted against any of the three. Voting for all three was the only way to ensure that one of them would succeed, and that's what the majority of Republican Senators did. Good for them. In terms of policy, it's unfortunate that the Senate didn't vote on the Graham-Cassidy proposal to turn Obamacare into a block grant letting each state decide the best way to spend that money on healthcare. There is a federal interest in raising and providing that money to states, so that no state suffers economic harm (relative to other states) by imposing taxes necessary to provide healthcare. But the federal interest stops there, IMHO.
-
Purchases made through this search function benefit this site, at no extra cost to you.
- About Patterico
-
Pronounced "Patter-EE-koh"
E-mail: Just use my moniker Patterico, followed by the @ symbol, followed by gmail.com
Profile
Frequently Unasked Questions (FUQs)
Contributor:
Oh, That Liberal Media
CaliforniaRepublic.org
Linked by:
Best of the Web
The Corner
How Appealing
Hugh Hewitt
InstaPundit
Kausfiles
Power Line
The Volokh Conspiracy
The statements made on this web site reflect the personal opinions of the author. They are not made in any official capacity, and do not represent the opinions of the author's employer.
-
- Categories:
-
Archives:
- July 2017
- June 2017
- May 2017
- April 2017
- March 2017
- February 2017
- January 2017
- July 2011
- June 2011
- April 2011
- March 2011
- February 2011
- January 2011
- December 2010
- November 2010
- October 2010
- September 2010
- August 2010
- July 2010
- June 2010
- May 2010
- April 2010
- March 2010
- February 2010
- January 2010
- December 2009
- November 2009
- October 2009
- September 2009
- August 2009
- July 2009
- June 2009
- May 2009
- April 2009
- March 2009
- February 2009
- January 2009
- December 2008
- November 2008
-
July 2011 M T W T F S S « Jun Jan » 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 Blogroll
- Bear Flag League
-
- Homespun Bloggers
- Meta:
View My Stats
- About Patterico
Powered by WordPress.