December 21st, 2009 • 8:06 amBen’s Last Big Vote?
It’s apparent that Ben Nelson doesn’t have a spine. The notion that he’s a courageous moderate just got torched. Now that he’s been outed as just another spineless politician, it’s time for him to go. According to this article, the Nebraska GOP is getting started with defeating him:
The chairman of Nebraska’s Republican Party predicts that Sen. Ben Nelson’s decision to back sweeping health care legislation will be his downfall.
Mark Fahleson says, “I think this is the end of his political career in the state of Nebraska.”
On Saturday, the state party launched a Web site, Give Ben The Boot, to collect funds to oust the Democrat in the 2010 election.
Nelson said earlier Saturday that he decided to support the measure after winning concessions to limit the availability of abortions in insurance sold in newly created exchanges, as well as tens of million in federal Medicaid funds for Nebraska.
Fahleson says Americans are outraged by the legislation and “they’re going to punish politicians at the polls.”
I’d be wrong in saying that Ben Nelson is a wild-eyed hardline progressive. The facts don’t bear that out. What the facts do tell us is that he’s spineless, unprincipled and willing to sell out his constituents when his puppetmaster starts pulling the strings. Sen. Nelson’s lack of principles is apparent. What it isn’t is flattering.
What we desperately need in Washington are politicians (a) with spines, (b) with wisdom and (c) with the courage to say no to bad legislation. Sen. Nelson is missing these three things.
It won’t be difficult talking Nebraska AG Jon Bruning to run against Nelson. He was prepared to challenge Chuck Hagel in a GOP primary because Hagel was a spineless politician who marched to the beat of a different drummer. If he jumps in, Bruning would be immediately competitive. In fact, he might be the immediate favorite.
If the elections were held today, the GOP would pick up seats in Arkansas, Colorado, Connecticut, Illinois, Nebraska, Nevada and Pennsylvania, with California, Indiana, New York, Oregon and Washington being possibilities. North Dakota will flip, too, if Gov. Hoeven runs against Sen. Dorgan.
The thing that this debate has done is that it’s exposed to the nation that supposed Democratic moderates are nothing of the sort. It’ll be difficult for Evan Bayh to sell himself as a moderate in Indiana. The only question left there is whether the Indiana GOP can recruit a high quality candidate. If they do, then they’ll put Bayh in a difficult position of defending voting for this health care monstrosity.
While the initial topic of this post was Sen. Nelson, it’s really about all Democratic senators. Each of them cast the vote that imposed the tax increases contained in this health care legislation on the American people. Because it was a straight party-line vote, the American people will know that the Democrats are the politicians to blame.
Sen. Nelson will undoubtedly attempt to rebuild his moderate image with other votes. People in Nebraska won’t buy it the minute their tax increases and their higher premiums hit their wallets.
Only in Washington, DC would they call a bill that increases health insurance premiums, hikes taxes and leaves 25,000,000 people uninsured health care reform.
Technorati: Payoffs, Tax Increases, Health Insurance, Premiums, Uninsured, Ben Nelson, Mary Landrieu, Evan Bayh, Moderates, Democrats, Jon Bruning, Mark Fahleson, Republicans, Election 2010
Cross-posted at California Conservative
Entries RSS2 Feed
[...] Cross-posted at LetFreedomRingBlog [...]
Pingback by California Conservative » Blog Archive » Ben’s Last Big Vote? • 21Dec2009 @ 8:15 am
Gary, Ben doesn’t have a heart.
He wants to force unwanted children on people. That’s sick.
He and Lieberman ought to have progressives challenging them in primaries, although Lieberman should run as a Republican. It’s where he lives, insurance love and all.
I think if three or even one of the GOP Senators had a spine, and would have broken rank then a much better result would have been attained. Ditto for the GOP House members. They are impediments to progress. They are not part of any solution - indeed, they are not part of the problem, they are the problem.
If people nationwide realized that Michele Bachmann is not really out of step with the others of them, as some have off-the-record said, then their minority would shrink.
They delude people, as do the Liebermans of the world.
Dayton was right. DC is a cesspool.
Comment by eric z. • 21Dec2009 @ 8:18 am
Hey Gary:
I got two more persons who we can target not on your list. Here’s the commercial:
Show a plane where people are sitting and there’s a bald man about fifty talking on the phone.
The stewardess walks over and tells him to turn off the phone because we’re about to take off.
The man stays on the phone and says, “You can’t tell me what to do you bitch”
Then put a message on the screen.
If you thinks that rude that’s what Senator Charles Schummer recently did and Senator Gilbrand who was on the plane never demanded that Senator Schummer resign.
Lets resign them November 2010 with our votes.
Walter Hanson
Minneapolis, MN
Comment by walter hanson • 21Dec2009 @ 9:16 am
Hey Eric:
Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi wrote their bills in private and ignored Republican imput such as real tort reform which the CBO scored will save money unlike this lie which the Democrats claim this is paid for.
They weren’t looking for real reform ideas just government control of health care. DC is cesspool because the politicans you like want to control our lifes.
They’ll tell us what to eat!
They’ll tell us what to drive!
They’ll tell us how much of our hardearned money we’re allowed to have.
People like Michele Bachmann because she doesn’t support that nonsense!
Walter Hanson
Minneapolis, MN
Comment by walter hanson • 21Dec2009 @ 9:20 am
Eric, STFU. Who appointed you God??? “Forcing unwanted children” on people??? Maybe we should get rid of adults who rail against unwanted children instead. The world would be a better place without hatemongers that think that human life isn’t precious.
As for the delusion that GOP senators breaking with their party producing a better result, I cna’t believe you’re that gullible. The product wouldn’t have changed much at all.
Comment by Gary Gross • 21Dec2009 @ 10:15 am
Careful now. This year’s “impediments” will be 2011’s majority party.
Comment by Gary Gross • 21Dec2009 @ 10:17 am
Walter - The problem with tort reform is that the doctors do not police their own. What weeds out the hacks is the litigation, but only at extreme costs. The insurance industry loves the existing tort law. They write the errors and omisions policies, and the underwriters are well aware of any particular individual’s litigation history and prior cost record. It is like the bonding companies being relied upon to weed out the inept or crooked contractors.
Walter, how can you have tort reform without a mechanism to weed out the incompetent doctors? And, what mechanism would you propose given that self-regulation has been a farce - the reason that the errors and omissions rates are sky high and that unneeded CYA tests and procedures get done?
I am serious, how Gary or Walter, would you police out bad medicine if you curbed the plaintiffs’ bar?
…….
Gary, whichever of the GOP people, you might remember, said that healthcare would be Obama’s Waterloo, may have been prescient.
Do you see any chance he can sell the mess as progress and meeting the desires the polls showed people wanting?
Surely the insurance companies will be funding the same politicians they’ve been funding; you buy and the goods are delivered, you tend to keep the ongoing business relationships.
I’d be interested on a perspective of what timeframe the mop-up will take, I say at least a decade and a half; and that’s being hopeful.
I understand we disagree on what will be needed in a mop up, and that in part is why I think two and a half decades might also be a sound guess.
Any thoughts, beyond what appears to be general agreement that Ben Nelson is worthless and that Nebraskans might recognize that despite pork amounts.
Finally, Walter, Pelosi and Ried, I have not a single word in defense of either. Both were deficient. The only thing is the GOP had Bush-Cheney, and that majority during Clinton’s time, and did not do jack for the nation. Two costly wars, and an Af-Pak situation where the US is being laughed at, is not Obama’s fault - but for the surge decision.
And, GOP guys, the Turkmenistan pipeline, the Chinese got the pipeline, and the US oil firms did not get the lion’s share of Iraqi oil contracts, so Bush’s constituency lost big time.
Any words, Walter or Gary, in defense of Bush-Cheney? I know Gary’s done some disavowing that way, but vaguely.
Comment by eric z. • 21Dec2009 @ 10:21 am
Gary if human life is precious, why do you oppose social programs aimed at making it better for real people, instead of this embryo nonsense?
Comment by eric z. • 21Dec2009 @ 10:22 am
The GOP senator that talked about HCR as Obama’s waterloo is Jim Demint, one of the most decent people in the Senate. His statement wasn’t a vindictive statement, just a political observation.
Lawsuit Abuse Reform:
The lawsuit abuse reform enacted in Texas & other states simply limits ‘Pain & Suffering’ awards & nothing else. It doesn’t have anything to do with income loss damages. It doesn’t have anything to do with capping payments for doctor treatments, either.
Comment by Gary Gross • 21Dec2009 @ 10:29 am
Because embryos are the start of human life. Besides, you talked about forcing “unwanted children” on parents. There’s a difference.
Comment by Gary Gross • 21Dec2009 @ 10:44 am
Eric:
Where do I begin. George Bush 43 proved to be a much better president than Obama. George Bush cared about protecting the United States of the America in the real world. Obama wants people to praise him and love him so bad he wants to destroy the country. After all why tell the enemy what tatics we might use on them and attack the agency whose job it is to find Bin Laden and stop their possible future terrorist attacks. Last time I looked Bin Laden wasn’t working in the CIA in the United State of America.
You said Bush got us into two wars. One war was Iraq where Richard Clark (a Bush critic if you don’t remember) had basically admitted that Iraq was just months from having the atom bomb in the early 1990’s. Thus using that as basis alone Bush never lied to go to war with Iraq which Democrats claim. As for Afghanistan are you saying that after 9-11 that we shouldn’t have even made an effort to go after Bin Laden.
If you want to blame somebody there was this man by the name of President Bill Clinton who cared more about being at a golf tournament than killing Bin Laden.
As for tort reform you’re dead wrong!
I had a doctor who ordered me to the hospital this year. That I can live with it. So even though I had driven from my office to see him and my house was just a couple of minutes away he ordered an ambulance. Why? He made the medical judgement that I couldn’t drive a car. He didn’t give me a say in that. Oh but what if something happened to you on the way to the hospital you needed that ambulance. That same doctor if I had come with somebody would’ve let that person drive me to the hospital thus proving my claim that my health wasn’t in immediate danger.
This same doctor ordered me to take two tests which cost the insurance company thousands of dollars because he thought that I was bleeding to death. This despite the fact that a blood test indicated I might have a virsus which he immediately ordered medication.
What started this mess was because I had a low iron level in my blood test. I actually had to write him a letter pointing out that my eating habbits had changed since he had ordered me to lose weight about a year and half earlier and I wasn’t probably eating the dail amount of iron. I suggested shouldn’t I be taking an iron supplement. After the expense of these tests and apparently the virsus going away the doctor seeing that I wasn’t bleeding to death ordered me to take an iron supplement.
This same doctor had ordered his nurse to call me after 5 and wanted me in the next day to tell me about taking the two tests.
After writing a letter to the clinic pointing out what I thought was bad conduct we had a much better and detailed talk about what he was worried about. It’s quite obvious based on the talk he had lost at least one patient who had bled to death. He ordered these tests because of a low iron level which was obviously caused by my eatting and by the virsus. In the process thousands of dollars had to be spent. Now multiply that out by millions of people and you’re talking lots of money.
A major problem with health care and this bill will do nothing to solve it is people aren’t forced to think much at all about how their health care dollars are spent.
If you need a car and there’s a small compact and a fancy convertible to drive everybody will take the fancy convertible especially if they don’t think they have to pay for it.
In my case the doctor litterally shoved these tests down my throat in part because we’re suppose to trust the doctor. He shoved them down my throat because he was afraid of being sue for malpractice.
And one other point about weeding out doctors. Years ago I actually served as a juror for a medical malpractice lawsuit. The doctor was given what you could say was a not guilty verdict for malpractice because two doctors said the patient would’ve died anyway and the lawyer for the family did a poor job! One thing she did to show the jury her case was to give us the death certificate, but the jury got a copy of the death certificate which wasn’t certified. Technically it was useless as evidence!
I hope that doctor learned his lesson because he had treated his patiently very badly, but I doubt it. The lawsuit here I don’t think weeded out this bad doctor.
In short I have a better understanding of tort reform than you do. I’ve seen the doctors who
order tests to say in case something bad happens that they were trying to figure out what was wrong and shouldn’t be sued.
Walter Hanson
Minneapolis, MN
Comment by walter hanson • 22Dec2009 @ 10:49 am