Michelle Malkin » The K Street tax cheat who’s lobbying to save Obamacare
Tom Daschle is a busy, busy bee. He and fellow swamp creatures Bob Dole and Howard Baker — his colleagues at law and lobbying firm Alston & Bird — will “debate” the SEIU’s Andy Stern and others at a joint health care conference. Then it’s off to another speaking gig in L.A. The Sunlight Foundation exposes Daschle’s conflicts of interest that Team Obama doesn’t care about anymore. And my column today reminds readers about the K Street tax cheat who’s lobbying to save Obamcare.
Note the juxtaposition: Daschle, Dole, and Baker. Dole and Baker, of course, are perfect examples of the sort of Repubicans Kim du Toit wants to see in office rather than democrats. Because they will do so much less damage.


Yeah…. a President Dole or President Baker would have been SO MUCH worse than, say, President Obama is or President Jimmy Carter was.
Bill, it depresses me that you would think we’d be in as bad (or worse) a position if President McCain were in the Oval Office at the moment.
Hell, I didn’t like the choice in 2008 (or 1996, for that matter) either. But no one can deny that this preening socialist has made matters immeasurably worse than anything McCain might ever have done.
And if you know me at all, you’d have to know that the words “President McCain” caused me to throw up in my mouth, a little.
Why? Don’t you think he would have sold us out over socialized medicine, amnesty, spending, and a host of other issues, and in so doing, would have guaranteed their passage rather than stirring up some actual GOP opposition, as Obama has done?
Anyway, that was why I didn’t vote for him, expecting exactly this to happen - your way is just slow death for liberty. Although if McCain had won, it might actually have ended up being a faster death for liberty.
Kim, Bush41’s loss in 1992 led to the overthrow of the Dem lock on Congress in 1994. That’s what a bunch of us are hoping for in 2010.
(Sure, the newly-elected Republican outsiders quickly became insiders and a lot of them turned out to be RINOs. But at least it was some movement.)
The problem with McCain, Dole, and Baker is that they’re… erm.. part of the problem. They see nothing wrong with the federal government controlling your speech (McCain-Feingold), monitoring your garage sale (CPSIA), telling you which light bulbs you can use, what appliances you can buy, how fast you can drive, etc., etc. They don’t respect average citizens, having no problem stealing their money and property in the name of the greater good, or their liberties in the name of political expediency. (They do respect… other politicians.)
These guys will not lift one finger to roll back the government’s encroachments on our freedoms. The best we can hope for under their rule is smaller steps: For them “bipartisan compromise” means “giving the progressives only half of what they asked for.” We still get to hell, it’s just via slow train instead of SST.
So I go along with Bill: IMO the election of Obama + the Democrats running wild in congress has (finally) begun to awaken enough of the “rationally ignorant” to the reality that not only have we allowed the government to accumulate the power to ruin their lives, but this government is actually out to do just that.
Would this have happened under a President McCain? No. At best we would have settled for a couple more clicks on the ratchet (rather than a dozen or so), and the ignorant would have remained asleep.
And just think of all the fired-up Tea Party protests we’d've seen if the statist-business-as-usual McCain had gotten in, and continued the long, slow slide he’s done so much to help advance all these years — instead of the same old enervated, what’s-the-use apathy we’re seeing now.
I’ve said it before, I’ll say it again: Obama just might turn out to be the best thing that ever happened to this country in the long run. He’s waking people up who would otherwise have been perfectly content to roll over and hit the snooze button yet again, while Juanny Mav rolled over himself — for the Left.
Or, uhh, y’know, what OG said.
;-)
I’m with Bill too, especially now that Obama is visibly faltering.
This man is a godsend for the right, IF he fails. Still a big if. But with McCain, we were screwed for sure. His presidency, at best, would have thoroughly greased the skids for socialism. And THEN, with the economy in the toilet and the right more demoralized than ever, we’d get Obama.
What founding father said something along the lines of “if there will be trouble, let it come in my time”?
Obama is expected to double down on his worst bet (the public option) in his speech tonight. Please God let it be true. I read somewhere that Snowe is saying the public option is “off the table” for her. Let it be true.
Sometimes it makes sense to give an alcoholic a full case of booze, instead of feeding him a few of drinks everyday. It is risky, you may end up killing him, but he is pretty worthless until he faces the problem.
With America’s current long slow slide into statist socialism, the time is right for ‘the full case of booze’ treatment. Now let’s pray that America begins recovery.
I’ve long favored electing a genuine leftist who shows what leftism is really all about rather than another squishy Republican who simultaneously loses ground for freedom and demoralizes those who support freedom. Way back in early 2008, in trying to explain why I would never vote for McCain, I said:
So far, Obama has exceeded my wildest expectations on showing just what the left is all about. If he keeps going at the current pace, by 2012 the electorate will be repulsed by leftism for a generation.
President Jimmy Carter led directly to Ronald Reagan. Had Ford won, it is unlikely Reagan would ever have been President.
I was a proponent of the ‘lesser of two evils’ vote.
I don’t think a President McCain would have been much better than Obama.
But the ‘worse’ may have been the same rout that we just had in 2012–with a nation even more blinkered by the MSM after four years of McCain’s not-quite-democrat policies.
There has clearly been a wakeup call sent–if only to the people–and we might get some relief in 2010.
But…and it’s the fear I had before–how fast can the left consolidate a hold on power? It looks as if they’re overreaching–but they’re not. Everything they want IS within their grasp. They can pass Obamacare NOW. And any other lefty horror they want–they have the votes.
A McCain presidency might’ve staved that off four four years–but at what cost? With the same apathetic electorate four years hence we’d be in a worse state.
I just hope there are enough people paying attention now to avoid the worst of this leftist attempt to impose eurosoc on us.
Bill was right–this last election made the left think it could nakedly grab power. But we are not yet proles.
Lemme see if I’m getting this right: WTQ asserts that, by turning up the heat on the frog, it jumps from the pot before the water boils.
Billy Hollis agrees. And Haverwilde.
But to hitchhike on Haverwilde’s concerns, I hope to hell the alcoholic lives through that case long enough to sober up.
AMEN! (That’s my religious background coming out again.)
Rather than simply electing RINOs and staying stumbling, but not knee-walking, drunk until his liver dissolves in the guaranteed finale?
Old Grouch:
IMHO, OG, they’re near the whole of the problem. With actual conservative opposition Obama would likely not be POTUS now.
The key is not only to discredit/destroy the D’s but even more importantly to discredit/destroy the statist R’s.
“Rather than simply electing RINOs and staying stumbling drunk . . . ”
Bill, Bill O Bill,
I was for Fred Thompson.
Fuz, what were you trying to say in your original comment?
It seemed to me that you were saying you didn’t like the option of not voting for RINOs because “it might kill the drunk.”
That was what I was responding to. Apparently that wasn’t the message you were trying to convey, though?
I supported Fred, too. But when he failed, I didn’t switch my vote to John McCain. How about you? I’m not trying to be confrontational, but I am curious.