Coffee Shop

[pollyannaish]

Something just occurred to me. I tend to ponder things down the road quite a ways when I think about political strategy. And something has REALLY been bothering me.

 

Why would Obama take on the Catholic church in this healthcare case, and why would he get help from the press like he did with Stephanopolis? What is the game he is playing, what are the traps he is setting?

 

The short answers are that he can win on contraception issues in a big way. That is very clear from polling. And he can shore up his liberal base by attacking a powerful religious institution. But what does that get him long term?

 

The more I've thought about this, the more I wonder a couple of things:

 

1. Short term, it gives him powerful leverage against both Romney and Santorum. He can distract Romney from the economy by conflating Romneycare and Obamacare, and distract Santorum by getting him off on the theological aspects of contraception, rather than a focus on the first amendment.

 

2. But long term, he is setting up the PERFECT excuse for completely socialized medicine. It's perfect. He can say, that by centralizing the multi-payer system into a single-payer government system they can avoid personal mandates, interference with religious institutions and reduce the burden on business which will help the economy. It's really the trifecta of arguments that would be perfect in snookering the American Public. The public, confused and distracted by irritants will fall for this hook line and sinker with nearly no outcry.

 

It convinces me that there are much, much smarter people at work for President Obama and that he is just a mouthpiece. This has been hinted to for years by those on the left as a transition step, and I can see how it could work.

 

We MUST, MUST be ready for this strategically. If we are not, we will be playing dominoes while the left dismantles our country. We've got to win this election.

 

Or...I'm crazy. Which is not too hard to believe. Ha.

[Rheo]

New Thread

[Valin]

 

2. But long term, he is setting up the PERFECT excuse for completely socialized medicine. It's perfect. He can say, that by centralizing the multi-payer system into a single-payer government system they can avoid personal mandates, interference with religious institutions and reduce the burden on business which will help the economy. It's really the trifecta of arguments that would be perfect in snookering the American Public. The public, confused and distracted by irritants will fall for this hook line and sinker with nearly no outcry.

 

Here we see the constant refrain from the stateists (as The Great One calls them), by centralizing the system, we can make it more efficient (Riiiiight), and you won't have to make these decisions yourself (besides we are so much smarter more caring than you little people).

 

It convinces me that there are much, much smarter people at work for President Obama and that he is just a mouthpiece. This has been hinted to for years by those on the left as a transition step, and I can see how it could work.

 

I don't think anyone has ever doubted that "The One" has some very sharp people working for him. (the same should be said about all previous administrations). Wrong is not the same as stupid. It would be very nice if our opponents were stupid...but they are not.

 

[Rheo]

Something just occurred to me. I tend to ponder things down the road quite a ways when I think about political strategy. And something has REALLY been bothering me.

 

Why would Obama take on the Catholic church in this healthcare case, and why would he get help from the press like he did with Stephanopolis? What is the game he is playing, what are the traps he is setting?

 

The short answers are that he can win on contraception issues in a big way. That is very clear from polling. And he can shore up his liberal base by attacking a powerful religious institution. But what does that get him long term?

 

The more I've thought about this, the more I wonder a couple of things:

 

1. Short term, it gives him powerful leverage against both Romney and Santorum. He can distract Romney from the economy by conflating Romneycare and Obamacare, and distract Santorum by getting him off on the theological aspects of contraception, rather than a focus on the first amendment.

 

2. But long term, he is setting up the PERFECT excuse for completely socialized medicine. It's perfect. He can say, that by centralizing the multi-payer system into a single-payer government system they can avoid personal mandates, interference with religious institutions and reduce the burden on business which will help the economy. It's really the trifecta of arguments that would be perfect in snookering the American Public. The public, confused and distracted by irritants will fall for this hook line and sinker with nearly no outcry.

 

It convinces me that there are much, much smarter people at work for President Obama and that he is just a mouthpiece. This has been hinted to for years by those on the left as a transition step, and I can see how it could work.

 

We MUST, MUST be ready for this strategically. If we are not, we will be playing dominoes while the left dismantles our country. We've got to win this election.

 

Or...I'm crazy. Which is not too hard to believe. Ha.

Wanted to bring this over from the previous thread to ponder some more.

Morris is right on the short term goal.

You are right on the long term goal. Everything is to be nationalized. End game.

This a long term coordinated effort to achieve this result. Every player has his part. They are placing people in positions that have not been vetted into positions for a reason.

Rahm Emanuel went back to Illinois to rewrite the laws about ethics. What?

 

Scares me that so many would still vote for this man.

Will ponder more later.

 

 

Liberals, Media Try to Shift Debate from Abortion to Contraception

 

 

Morris: Obama did not make a mistake in this mandate. It’s a deliberately calculated move on his part.

 

The Democrats realize that abortion is no longer a winner for them. It used to be ten points more pro-choice than pro-Life, now it’s ten points more pro-Life than pro-choice possibly because of the publicity of the anti-abortion people, possibly because of the aging of the population. But the point is that it’s a loser issue.

 

So what they’re trying to do now is replace it with contraception. So the first piece of evidence was after Santorum won Iowa, the first controversy was, “Do you think states should have the right to ban contraception?” Where did that come from?

[NCTexan]

Joseph P. Kennedy III is officially entering the race to replace retiring Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.), two Democratic sources confirmed Wednesday.

Kennedy will formally announce his campaign on Thursday.

 

RFK grandson to run for Rep. Frank's seat

 

Here's the Washington Post article... Both of these publications should rethink their headlines...

 

Joe Kennedy III announces run for Barney Frank’s seat

 

... just saying.

 

WAPO Article