The idea is to gather stories of people affected by the health care law — through social media, letters from constituents, or meetings during visits back home — and use them to open a line of attack, keep it going until it enters the public discourse and forces a response, then quickly pivot to the next topic.I haven't read the whole document, but there's nothing surprising or disturbing about seeing that the party is somewhat organized and disciplined, and the topics raised are all legitimate, on-the-merits attacks on Obamacare, not any weird or scurrilous tactics.
२१ नोव्हेंबर, २०१३
NYT publishes the House Republicans' 18-page talking points memo on Obamacare.
Here is the document, and here is the front-page story about it titled "G.O.P. Maps Out Waves of Attacks Over Health Law."
याची सदस्यत्व घ्या:
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा (Atom)
पोस्ट्स
८५ टिप्पण्या:
Does this mean The Stupid Party is finally getting smarter and the NYT feels compelled to counter attack?
Looks like it.
Althouse - You obviously don't understand anything about politics. Conservatives are supposed to defend the status quo. Liberals are supposed to be for change. Since Obamacare is the law of the land, it is conservatives obligation to defend the law. It is obscene and immoral for them not to defend the law. Anything they do that is not in defense of the law is therefore dishonest.
No, I don't understand that either. Best explanation I could come up with.
The Pentagon Papers, it's not.
Perhaps I missed it, but I don't recall seeing anything in the NYT article about the fact that the Democrats used anecdotal evidence pervasively and effectively in arguing for and supporting the ACA.
Duh, Althouse. Don't you see? This memo puts the lie to the GOP's claim of being a legitimate political party. The fact that they want to damage Obama and his signature legislation is further proof that they don't care about America.
The House Republicans’ response to the Affordable Care Act is increasingly organized and orchestrated, including collections of stories about people who say they were harmed by the health care law.
The Times says I've reached the limit on free articles for the month so the above is all I can read. Interesting phraseology: "... who say they were harmed by the health care law." (emphasis mine). Sort of implies that the editors think that no one is really being harmed by the PPACA, doesn't it.
I thought that memos like this were called "politics".
But, for the NYT, any Republican attack on The Won is an attack not on merits but the same as a "Muslim, communist, born-in-Kenya, America-hating, married to a Klingon" wingnut attack, because, ya know, that's just what 90% of republicans are.
The idea is to gather stories of people affected by the health care law
Wait a minute? Isn't this the media's job?
— through social media, letters from constituents, or meetings during visits back home
Apparently not.
By all means, Democrats, trumpet the people who are finding this law a good thing.
Good luck finding them.
Instead, it appears they're just whining about the mean old Republicans.
Same old, same old. Pity the poor Democratic Party, poor poor victims.
"...and the topics raised are all legitimate, on-the-merits attacks on Obamacare, not any weird or scurrilous tactics."
Not that the average NYT reader will comprehend that.
Really, they try and try MM, and then the "success" stories turn sour. Which makes it even worse for Dems. The thing about a "tangled web" is that if you pluck at one strand, you never know how many more will spring loose.
If this is going to be successful the Republicans need to add a dose of weird AND scurrilous tactics. After all, the point is to win not to be fair about it. The Republicans, after all, don't have control of the IRS and the unemployment numbers so they had best be dreaming up some mean tricks.
I can smell Debbie Wasserman Shulz's panicsweat from here. It doesn't work to publicize the other side's talking points when they are true and don't expose deliberate fabrications
Milbank over at the WaPo said that the evil white guys are trying to scare the younguns away from the greatest legislation ever. They could like totally sabotage Obamacare by scaring the children! Just think, the racist, homophobic, old, white, Southern, male, War on Women, Republicans could completely convince young folks that they don't need health insurance.
I'm pretty sure that the 20 and 30 somethings can't get enough of Cantor, Boehner, Cruz and Lee! Obama is wasting his time using the cool kids in Hollywood, the misogynist rappers and the jocks to sell his healthcare screw-up!
For these "journalist" with them high falutin college deeeegrees and everthang, they sure act dumb sometimes.
Attacks on Obama and Obamacare are always racist.
And the left counters with this:
http://www.occupydemocrats.com/insurance-companies-facing-lawsuits-deception/
It's the scoundrel insurance companies and their GOP minions!
I mean these fucking morons buy into this crap.
Jacksonjay, I laughed about that too. If the GOP League of Ordinary Old White Gentlemen were that persuasive, Mitt Romney would be president right now.
jsut read Ezra Klein's headline for Pravda....I mean the Washington Post.
"Health Care Law's Failings Undermine Republicans"
Hahahahaha Someone recently called him and Matt Yglesias "juicebox Lenins". apt description.
I mean these fucking morons buy into this crap.
Well, the Democrats better come up with some narrative & start pushing it hard, or else they know they're looking at some years of wandering in the wilderness.
The ObamaCare roll-out is one of the biggest fuck-ups in the history of the US presidency. Aside from the damage it's doing among the never-paid attention electorate, it's now retroactively made all those administration "non-scandals" the pundits ignored for 5 years look like, well, maybe they were real after all.
So, basically, it's the Democrats' worst nightmare: having to actually look their victims in their eyes and tell them they deserved it.
I stand corrected, Klein's piece is at Izvestia...Bloomberg.
The Democrat party seems to be working on its own set of talking points:
1. Republicans were invested in the failure of the law.
2. DemocratCare aka Obamacare aka PPACA was, like the stimulus, too small to succeed, so we should totally do single payer.
3. Those were crap policies, prole, we're saving your from yourself and your stupidity for buying it in the first place. Side note to you insurance commissioners, your citizens were buying crap insurance because we say it was, but could you let people buy them for another year, even though we just backhanded you insinuating that you weren't in the business of protecting the people in your state.
Well, it's about time the Republicans get equal treatment. I mean, NYT publishes the Democrats' talking points every day.
Also jonathon capehart has a piece about how republicans are out to destroy the country.
He obviously isn't familiar with Solzhenitsyn's writings on the Engineer Purge in the mid '30s when show trials were held to expose the 'Wreckers' who derailed the Communist Party's Four- and Five- Year Plans. This strategy is old, get a new one.
Greg left a phony Republican play book out on the coffee table so Marcia's creepy new boyfriend The New York Times would find it and steal it. Now when Greg confronts The New York Times and tells them it's a fake, Democrats won't know what to do!
Perhaps I missed it, but I don't recall seeing anything in the NYT article about the fact that the Democrats used anecdotal evidence pervasively and effectively in arguing for and supporting the ACA.
Sure. It's on page A99 every single day.
Well, it's about time the Republicans get equal treatment. I mean, NYT publishes the Democrats' talking points every day.
Bwahahahaha. Close the comments.
just curious, where did the NYT get this? or did they make it up? Struck by this quote:
“Yeah, there is a method being followed here,” said Representative Michael C. Burgess, a Texas Republican involved in the effort, “but, really, these stories are creating themselves.”
ecChief said...
Also jonathon capehart has a piece about how republicans are out to destroy the country.
One of the most amusing (if you can say that with so much pain being caused by the dems against the people of the country) is the hilariously contradictory talking points being offered up by the lefties.
"The Republicans have offered no ideas EVAH on health care reform!"
"Obamacare is based on republican/conservative ideas!!"
There are so many examples of this it's impossible to list them all.
I have another theory.
It's the "ADHD Theory" of American politics, by which any scandal that breaks more than ten months before the election is completely irrelevant on election day.
The GOP has been planning on bringing up a *different* problem with Obamacare every few weeks from now until next November, keeping the story alive and relevant.
The NYT is trying to get the whole list out and talked about right now, so that they can yawn dramatically at it next year and ignore it as "old news".
Let. It. Burn.
It's a thoroughly valid strategy.
Certainly more legit than journalists conspiring to force a candidate for President answer more pressing questions on a foreign incident than they ever asked the President personally.
Are we sure this list is valid and it's not a phony list designed to sniff out the mole in the GOP?
I mean, it worked for NATSECWONK.
Here's the Democratic playbook:
The Obamacare rollout will always be botched. That's history.
If President Obama eats the botched rollout personally, he doesn't have to run for reelection, that's good party politics.
Most people don't have to sign up for Obamacare, and quickly find any discussion of health care policy tedious.
If over the next year the stock market continues to trend up, and unemployment continues to trend down, most people are going to be feeling pretty good.
All the Repubs have to do is visit my local hardware store and talk to the owner. She can give them enough horror stories, just from our small town, to keep them going for a month. I am sure that the same is probably true in every town across the country.
All the Repubs have to do is visit my local hardware store and talk to the owner. She can give them enough horror stories, just from our small town, to keep them going for a month. I am sure that the same is probably true in every town across the country.
All the Repubs have to do is visit my local hardware store and talk to the owner. She can give them enough horror stories, just from our small town, to keep them going for a month. I am sure that the same is probably true in every town across the country.
All the Repubs have to do is visit my local hardware store and talk to the owner. She can give them enough horror stories, just from our small town, to keep them going for a month. I am sure that the same is probably true in every town across the country.
All the Repubs have to do is visit my local hardware store and talk to the owner. She can give them enough horror stories, just from our small town, to keep them going for a month. I am sure that the same is probably true in every town across the country.
I can smell Debbie Wasserman Shulz's panicsweat from here.
I read this as "pantysweat" and then threw up.
I can smell Debbie Wasserman Shulz's panicsweat from here.
Ugh. Why did I suddenly smell cold cuts and vagisil when I read that?
If over the next year the stock market continues to trend up, and unemployment continues to trend down, most people are going to be feeling pretty good.
...except unemployment ISN'T trending down. Participation in the work force is trending down and bringing the fictional rate number down as well.
We're setting records, monthly, for the fewest people working in 20+ years.
This is just the NYT's way of giving the GOP equal time. After all, the NYT publishes Democrat talking points every day, only without attribution.
Bah-dum-dum.
Drago said...
hilariously contradictory talking points being offered up by the lefties
"Obamacare is based on republican/conservative ideas!!"
The mental gymnastics required to write something like this are Olympian in quality.
Who is Mitt Romney? Who was that man that the Republicans nominated for president just a few months ago? What was his signature legislative accomplishment? Such difficult questions. Memories fade so quickly.
Who is Mitt Romney? Who was that man that the Republicans nominated for president just a few months ago? What was his signature legislative accomplishment? Such difficult questions. Memories fade so quickly.
There are really 2 'Republican' parties.
"A man sees what he wants to see and disregards the rest."
A Reasonable Man quotes what he wants to quote and disregards the rest.
@ARM,
What was his signature legislative accomplishment?
You mean, signing into law a plan passed by a Democratic legislature?
The Republicans were also more deeply involved in Tennessee's TennCare initiative, also. But I fail to see how support for health care initiatives at a state level translate into ideological support for a federal/private insurance mix of astounding legal complexity.
Questions of scale & questions of federal vs state mandates are not trifles. That Republicans support one & oppose another involves no contradiction at all.
@LBoC,
If President Obama eats the botched rollout personally, he doesn't have to run for reelection, that's good party politics.
More or less agree with your points in theory, but in practice, there's no way in hell that Obama's ego will let him take the blame for the Obamacare rollout failure. When has that man EVER stood front & center and taken responsibility for anything?
Not. Gonna. Happen. And he'll take the Dems down with him.
I'm sort-of surprised that no one has resurrected the Animal House quote "You f***ed up! You trusted us!"
It is important to note that Roe v. Wade was a Catholic plan, at the beginning.
How many Catholics were on the court then?
How many Catholics have since upheld the ruling and its penumbras?
Hence, only the most foolishly foolish of all fools would consider today Roe V. Wade a liberal or leftist decision.
Who is Mitt Romney? Who was that man that the Republicans nominated for president just a few months ago? What was his signature legislative accomplishment? Such difficult questions. Memories fade so quickly.
You should read up on what happened there. You talk like Mitt came up with it all on his own and stiff-armed an 85% Democrat legislature into his "signature legislative accomplishment".
Mitt, who actually takes public service seriously, and has little regard for "optics" and politics, staved off in Massachusetts what is now going on across the country with healthcare.
The truth is that a veto-proof Democrat majority in MA was hell-bent on stuffing a healthcare shit sandwich down the throats of its constituents, and Mitt fought tooth and nail to come up with a sandwich that wasn't quite so unpalatable.
Lincoln spoke the words "new" and "deal" hence the New Deal was a Republican plan.
How much must one need medical attention to not see this?
Very sad.
The Honeymooners talked about going to "the moon" hence it was a Honeymooner plan, nothing to do with JFK as he was merely repeating what the Honeymooners inspired nationwide (thereby creating the circumstances where it was accomplished).
Hmmm, seems to me that finding stories of people who are adversely affected by a law sounds like a job a journalist might do. I guess the GOP is doing the NYT's job now, while they sit idly by reporting on it.
YoungHegelian said...
in practice, there's no way in hell that Obama's ego will let him take the blame for the Obamacare rollout failure.
Obama can't stop the avalanche, and an angry populace is an avalanche. The media is reporting it, vulnerable elected Dems are voting against it, and Hillary already broke and ran (with Bill as rearguard). Obama will fight, because it's him and there's no downside. But with everyone else looking to escape the political battle's already lost.
"Who is Mitt Romney? Who was that man that the Republicans nominated for president just a few months ago? What was his signature legislative accomplishment? Such difficult questions. Memories fade so quickly."
The left is known for memories that never happened. Romney supported the Heritage proposal for mandated HIGH DEDUCTIBLE CATASTROPHIC INSURANCE for the uninsured who cost the system so much when they fail the free rider test, ie, get sick. Heritage has since decided mandates are not essential and the free rider problem was overstated.
As noted above, the lefty Mass legislature OVERRODE Romney's veto of what came to be known, by Democrats, as "Romneycare."
God it's hard to get through you guys' tinfoil hats !
the wolf said...
Hmmm, seems to me that finding stories of people who are adversely affected by a law sounds like a job a journalist might do.
It sounds a lot like what the Administration did for their three person photo op. I don't remember the NYT denouncing the practice then.
clint said...
I have another theory.
It's the "ADHD Theory" of American politics, by which any scandal that breaks more than ten months before the election is completely irrelevant on election day.
I think to most people the ten month time limit would restart every time they write a premium check for $200 more than they used to. Plus the employer group will suffer similar drastic effects next year.
We are asked who is Mitt Romney?
He's the man the Democrats should have voted for a year ago if they had a shred of common sense. He's a "Mr. Fixit" guy who might very well have gotten something working out of the ACA legislative goulash. As it is, the Democrats are the sole owners of the legislation, the regulations that craftily killed the plans people wanted to keep per Obama's promises, and the implementation.
Next time think before you vote.
ARM: "The mental gymnastics required to write something like this are Olympian in quality."
Coming from an unreconstructed stalinist, I take that as a compliment.
ARM: "Who is Mitt Romney? Who was that man that the Republicans nominated for president just a few months ago? What was his signature legislative accomplishment?"
LOL
If a lefty is talking, then by definition they are lying.
The democrat SUPER-MAJORITIES in both the Mass House and Senate drafted and crafted the legislation that became the Massachusetts health care law.
Romney would never have initiated something like that.
The dems were going to override any veto Romney might have issued but the dems in Mass decided to let Romney add a couple of minor tweaks to the bill.
Since the bill was going to pass anyway, Romney went along with this.
That was a mistake, as we have since seen.
ARM: "Such difficult questions. Memories fade so quickly."
It looks like ARM (our very own Walter Duranty) has a very significant memory problem.....who are we kidding? ARM has an honesty problem, which makes him a perfect lefty.
It's pointless even speaking to a marxist.
Pointless.
BTW, the originally "Romneycare" bill in Massachusetts has been completely replaced by amendments passed by democrat governors/house/senate.
Completely.
So what they have in Massachusetts today, even with Romney's ill advised earlier vetoes/overrides/signings, is not what Romney was a part of.
But the lying liars of the lying left simply keep repeating the same lies in hopes they'll fool the LIV's.
And their probably right.
As a prototypical dem voter, Rachel Jeantel said it best: "Thas ol skool...we new skool..."
CWJ-that's a nice quote from Simon & Garfunkel there--"A man sees what he wants to see and disregards the rest."
I'll see you that quote, and raise you one with Kinky Friedman from "Wild Man of Borneo". It's particularly applicable to such certified long time morons as Harry Reid and Debby Ding Dong Wasserman Schultz.
"They come to see what they want to see, and never come to know."
Ignorance can be cured, but stupid is forever.
A Reasonable Man quotes what he wants to quote and disregards the rest.
Lie lie lie,
Lie lie lie-lie lie lie-lie,
Lie lie lie,
Lie lie lie-lie lie lie-lie,
Lie lie lie-lie lie.
Paul Z FTW
Skeptical V,
I'll see your kinky Friedman, but it's up to ARM to call. My money is on fold.
"We are asked who is Mitt Romney?
He's the man the Democrats should have voted for a year ago if they had a shred of common sense. He's a "Mr. Fixit" guy who might very well have gotten something working out of the ACA legislative goulash."
We really took a big hit where we live when he lost the election. Democrats may yet realize what they lost, but I doubt they're that smart.
Maybe they'll get Ted Cruz instead to ram some things down their lie holes. Romney was the guy who might have brought bipartisanship back.
"Hence, only the most foolishly foolish of all fools would consider today Roe V. Wade a liberal or leftist decision."
Laughing my ass off. I know many "devout" Catholics who support abortion and are rabid leftists.
EMD said...
There are really 2 'Republican' parties.
Finally an honest response. Yes there are principled opponents to Obamacare, none of them voted for Romney. The rest are partisan hacks looking for electoral advantage completely without principles.
ARM: "The rest are partisan hacks looking for electoral advantage completely without principles."
Complete and utter projection.
As always from our resident stalinist.
Your problem ARM, is that the dems cannot hide their culpability in this monstrosity that is only in it's infancy stage of damage-causing impacts to the personal lives of what will be easily over a 100 million people.
There is no hiding from that.
Just keep beating that "it's all the republicans/conservatives fault".
You really do have nothing else left.
Nothing.
(well, except the race and war on women cards.....but those cards are getting quite ragged...)
Truth telling is an extremely scurrilous activity to Liberals. Don't you recall the scandal that erupted when Mitch McConnell was recorded calling Ashley Judd emotionally unbalanced?
How DARE the GOPers attack the Dems on the FACTS! Unfair! Unclean!
Michael K said...
Democrats may yet realize what they lost,
A pompous 1 percenter who thought he was above the rest of the population and didn't mind letting us know about it, at least in private.
It's the only way the New York Times will publish actual facts about Obamacare.
"A pompous 1 percenter who thought he was above the rest of the population and didn't mind letting us know about it, at least in private."
No, I am not a financial analyst and do not support Obama. That pretty much eliminates me. From the 1% at least.
Obama ate dog.
Can "talking points" be "fact checked"?
Michael K said...
No, I am not a financial analyst and do not support Obama. That pretty much eliminates me. From the 1% at least.
I was referring to Romney not you. No offense intended.
Oh! I was certain you were writing about Barack Obama, Larry Summers, Tim Geithner, Nancy Pelosi, the Clintons, John Kerry, and the rest of that gang. My bad, but it's easy to see how I could have made that mistake, isn't it?
Democrat talking point:
1) Deny reality.
2) Whine.
3) When in doubt, say "children".
The rest are partisan hacks looking for electoral advantage completely without principles.
And the constant decisions to push mandatory, written-into-the-law deadlines back past election day isn't a partisan hack decision looking for electoral advantage?
Scott M said...
And the constant decisions to push mandatory, written-into-the-law deadlines back past election day isn't a partisan hack decision looking for electoral advantage?
Obviously there is a distinction between politicians, whose job it is to act politically, and the populous, whose job it is to see that we are well governed. To complain about politicians acting politically seems a particularly futile line of discussion, although that doesn't stop Althouse from being shocked, shocked, that they might do so.
In an ideal world it would be wonderful if politicians acted in a high-minded fashion in the best interests of the country but there is rarely if ever an agreement on what those interests might be so we get partisan politics. What is sad is when members of the public identify so strongly with 'their' team that they cannot distinguish partisan cant from rational argument.
Obviously there is a distinction between politicians, whose job it is to act politically
WRONG, sir. WRONG. They have a job. To GET that job and to KEEP that job, they have act politically. THAT is why Obamacare is a growing, festering, open wound of fail. Those responsible for it's implementation were more (and ARE more) focused on getting and keeping jobs that DOING the jobs.
I don't often use caps as freely, but your comment and it's complete lack of awareness really ticked me off, especially in light of what's currently going on.
Nakedly political decision disguised as "good policy" are nothing more than more of the seemingly endless stream of lies that this administration cranks out.
Scott, you forgot to have a point to your rant. Rather than use CAPS try to make a cogent point next time.
So...politicians are the only ones allowed to lie in ARM world?
They are under no obligation to not blatantly lie about the legislation they propose and vote for?
Really?
THAT is reasonable?
AReasonableMan said...
Scott, you forgot to have a point to your rant. Rather than use CAPS try to make a cogent point next time
The irony.
It fairly makes the air vibrate.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा