In her latest statement posted on her Facebook page, former State Treasurer Sarah Steelman is critical of the record of the person she is opposing, Sen. Claire McCaskill, D-Mo. on the federal health care program:
Don’t get between Senator McCaskill and the “political center” or you could get run over and have serious injuries. In her pell mell run to the right, Senator McCaskill now says she is seeking ways to "modify" the individual mandate. Yes, that Senator McCaskill who was the loyal supporter of Obamacare for two years of gut wretching, heated debate about the individual mandate, its desirability and constitutionality. Republicans and Tea Party activists consistently said it was neither desirable nor constitutional. And Claire's fellow Democrats, and the MSM called us “crazy”, "extreme", and “out of the mainstream.”
Even after Obamacare was turned back by 71% of Missourians, Claire didn't openly question the mandate until after the November election- guess she was hoping the conservative revolution would not materialize at the ballot box. In fact, back in August 2010, after Missourians resoundingly registered their opposition to “Obamacare” and the individual mandate, McCaskill said that this overwhelming defeat for “Obamacare” was due to “a lack of education about the bill” and “people. . .don’t realize there’s going to be more access and affordability and more choices.” In other words, we Missourians are just not very bright and are uneducated about these complicated matters. She just sort of patted Missourians on the head and urged us to get back to our guns and religion.
Now, and because it seems to fit her re-election needs, she is "moderating" her position and "moving to the center". This is exactly what is wrong with politicians. If you believe in something, believe in it and fight for it; don't sway in the political breeze. I am very comfortable being the candidate the Democratic politicians call out of the mainstream and extreme, who has, and will, oppose the individual mandate-- period.
4 comments:
She said she was comfortable being called extreme by democrats and the msm. Randy did you not catch that or would accuracy have messed up your narrative.
I assumed anyone would know that. My readers, contrary to what you appear to think, are intelligent and do not have to have things spoonfed to them. I put in her entire op-ed without changing a word, so it's not only accurate, but it is fair.
Steelman said, "Even after Obamacare was turned back by 71% of Missourians,"
What was it? 25% of eligible voters voted in the August election and 71% of that 25% voted against health care.
Does Sarah support the compromise forced by Republicans in D.C. who signed and sent a letter to Obama saying they would basically hold up everything until the rich got their tax cut.
That tax cut cost $30 billion MORE than the entire Obama stimulus!!! It would have paid for the stimulus.
But those who pushed it and those who supported those who pushed it basically said they didn't care about the deficit.
So, does SHE care about the deficit? Or does she care about the rich getting their tax cuts?
And does she care that the Healthcare Act will SAVE the U.S. hundreds of billions of dollars in the next decade?
What parts of the Healthcare Act would she support keeping? Let's hear details.
Post a Comment