Does the republican party need to get into bed with gays if they want to get rid of obamacare?

Discussion in 'Archive: The Senate Floor' started by beezel26, Jul 2, 2011.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. beezel26 Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    May 11, 2003
    star 7
    Well do they? Because they can't have it both ways. You can't say states rights over federal govt without giving acknowledgement to NY state, and abandon the federal marriage act? Are they gonna let Obamacare go and let the gay rights go the wayside?
  2. Alpha-Red Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Apr 25, 2004
    star 5
    The Republicans are not going to embrace gays. After pushing their anti-gay agenda, turning around and going the opposite way would be a humiliating flip-flop of epic proportions, and the GOP knows it. Public opinion is shifting towards greater acceptance of gays, so mainstream Republicans will just silently take this issue off the table. The religious right however will double down on their anti-gay rhetoric, you can count on that.
  3. DarthIktomi Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    May 11, 2009
    star 4
    Am I the only one who thought of Jeff Gannon and Larry Craig when I read this?
  4. Darth_Tim Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    Feb 26, 2002
    star 4
    Only if the Republican party could divorce itself from the Religious Right. Would be nice, but I'll wait for hell to freeze over.

    Personally, I despise gov't interference in personal matters by either the Right or the Left.
  5. J-Rod Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jul 28, 2004
    star 5
    And then we can also get the Feds out of Education. If you want to do this, then let's do this!
  6. Quixotic-Sith Manager Emeritus

    Member Since:
    Jun 22, 2001
    star 6
    So, if the goal is to make us stupid and sick, we should vote Republican. ;)

    Meanwhile, the UPMC vs. Highmark conflict in Pittsburgh right now is a case study in why health care shouldn't be treated as a market good. I couldn't have asked for a better example of why genuine health care reform requires making private insurance supplemental to a single-payer plan (like it is in Canada).
  7. Lowbacca_1977 Force Ghost

    Member Since:
    Jun 28, 2006
    star 6
    A divorce would undermine the sanctity of marriage.
  8. DarthIktomi Jedi Master

    Member Since:
    May 11, 2009
    star 4
    And then we can mandate all states teach some story written in the Bronze Age rather than the basis of all modern biology. Nice.
  9. anakinfansince1983 Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Mar 4, 2011
    star 7
    That's exactly the system that I support. Sadly Obamacare is not even really in the same ball park.
  10. Ghost Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Oct 13, 2003
    star 6
    I have a feeling that the Supreme Court is going to rule that the individual mandate is unconstitutional, so maybe single-payer is going to be what we get after all.
  11. Fire_Ice_Death Chosen One

    Member Since:
    Feb 15, 2001
    star 7
    No. The Republican spin machine will go like so: "We support state's rights but only inasmuch as they're supported by the constitution. Therefore gay marriage is not okay to us."

    Pathetic, but true.

    Also, Obamacare is a misnomer. It should be called 'Dolecare' because that's what it was originally.
  12. Vaderize03 Manager Emeritus

    Member Since:
    Oct 25, 1999
    star 5
    ....or even better: rule that it is constitutional, but that the fine imposed for not following it isn't.

    Wouldn't that be an interesting pickle? The government can require you to purchase insurance, but can't penalize you if you don't?

    It's exactly the kind of decision-making cowardice I've come to expect from the Roberts court.

    Peace,

    V-03
  13. DorkmanScott Manager Emeritus

    Member Since:
    Mar 26, 2001
    star 6
    As I recall, that language -- that the penalty will basically not be enforced by anyone at any time -- is already in the bill. Er, law.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.