It is actually something I’ve noticed repeatedly, such as when I bought and read his “catastrophe” book in which he effectively fights the left although he does so in a liberal fashion-compassionate and emotional.
In the first article which I have issue with, titled Newt’s right, he attacked Paul Ryan and his Medicare plan. His defense of Newt Gingrich’s attack on the plan is actually understandable because Dick had always supported and defended Newt and was attempting to put out damage control on Newt’s comment.
What’s non-defendable is the reasoning Dick used to exonerate Newt. Dick Morris’s called the Paul Ryan’s plan suicidal and agreeing to the term “right wing engineering” because it will be implemented only in ten years and it doesn’t bring back cuts to Medicare Obama has made. He also compared it to Obamacare which brought to the defeat of many in the Democrat party in 2010, and is under the belief that the same will happen to those that support the Ryan’s plan. He also believes that Obama will use the fact that Paul Ryan didn’t overturn his 500 billion dollars Medicare cuts he enforced in his health care bill against any candidate supporting the plan. This will scare seniors just as they had been scared of Obamacare and cause them to turn their backs at the Republicans.
Why does Dick declare his plan as so extreme and suicidal? Dick is wrong in his entire reasoning. Here’s why. We can’t wait until Medicare has collapsed and bankrupted completely to begin brainstorming how to solve the problem. On the other hand, any drastic change will scare and confuse our seniors already on Medicare. Ryan’s plan brilliantly resolves both issues, because he proposes Medicare reforms only for those under 55 years so our current seniors and those retiring in the next ten years won’t be affected at all thereby having nothing to worry about, while ensuring the future generations won’t be left without any coverage.
If Dick is truly concerned seniors might reject the Republican Party because of misinformation spread by the left regarding the Paul Ryan Plan (henceforth referred to in this article as the PRP) Dick should spend his time fighting such lies rather than allowing them to sentence our candidates to the gallows.
For those under 55, PRP proposes giving vouchers to each individual which will allow them to choose an insurance policy that will work best for them. This will lead to greater competition between insurance companies to provide better service for less in order to receive more customers and will result in more affordable health insurance with higher quality service. His plan is actually something that has been tried and implemented successfully with the prescription drug benefit for seniors, and is also how the government provides for all federal employees, including congress, insurance.
What the left and some on the right are trying to forget, or at least pretend to forget, is that Medicare is a system on the verge of bankruptcy and will collapse if left as is. We can’t just bury our heads in sand and hope the problem will disappear on its own. Doing so would leave future seniors in the not-so-distant future without any health insurance and can have devastating effects on our entire country and economy. By putting out a plan, and the best one yet, the Republicans are seen as acting responsibly towards the future generations who will be facing retirement sooner than later.
Dick Morris claims his main issue with the PRP is the cutting of 500 billion dollars which is just as Obama did, and that Obama will use it against us in 2012.
Firstly, Ryan isn’t cutting anything. Obama already removed those funds from Medicare and PRP simply didn’t reenter it into the budget. It has nothing to do with its removal. Additionally, how can Obama denounce something that will be thrown right back into his face? Dick’s issues with PRP appear like the typical liberal talking points. I’m not necessarily saying Ryan’s plan is the only way to go and must be implemented or else; however something definitely must be done and so far this is the best solution that has been offered. Does Dick have a better plan? We don’t need a contest between the establishments over who can better destroy the conservatives; we need concrete solutions to real problems.
And by the way, can someone tell Dick that Newt already apologized to Ryan for speaking out against his plan?
In a separate article titled Who’s left on the right? Dick Morris starts off by mentioning the Democratic convention of 1960 at which Adlai Stevenson responded to reporters’ questionings who he thinks would win the nomination that it would be “The Last Survivor.”
Dick then suggests that the Republicans might face a similar standoff and explained it with the following theory. He mentions Romney, Huntsman, and Pawlenty as representing the moderate Republicans and predicts Romney as the frontrunner of the moderate republican voters. He then lists Bachmann, Newt, and Cain as the tea party and conservatives candidates, predicting Bachmann to lead that part of the party. (For any of you wondering why he put Bachmann instead of Newt as the frontrunner for the conservative fraction, the second article has been written almost a week after the first and Newt’s poll numbers have plummeted.) He then wonders whether it will be Romney or Bachmann who will emerge as “The last survivor.” His only vision of a different outcome is if Christie joins the race.
His article has been written 5/23, and even now – a few weeks later the field of candidates is still murky. So many potential candidates have yet announced their decisions whether or not they’ll jump into the primary. Rick Perry, Rudy Giuliani, Thaddeus McCotter, Sarah Palin, who else has been skipped over? And what if one of those he did mention but decided will be defeated will emerge as the leading candidate? The primary is barely beginning and he’s up to the last survivor? There are way too many scenarios that might still occur, and 2008 has proven all original predictions wrong – who remembers Hillary vs. Rudy?
What does he plan to accomplish by attempting to spread gloom and doom in playing the “last survivor game”? On what has he based his predictions before any ads, debates, or official campaigning has begun? And why does he repeatedly join the leftist attack dogs in his attacks against conservatives such as Ryan and Palin? In my opinion Palin has great chances of winning not only the primary but also the general election, and everybody else seems to believe she has a shot in the primary, so why doesn’t Dick Morris even count her as someone that should be mentioned when discussing the Republican primary?
Just a few days before the 2008 elections he repeatedly said John McCain has pretty strong chances to win the election. In 2010, he was convinced the Republicans would take control of the senate in addition to the house. As Ann Coulter pointed out after the 2010 election, while the likes of Dick Morris were on interview after interview with their latest predictions, the candidates who needed every bit of publicity to spread their message and beliefs were rarely given the opportunity. This resulted in some candidates losing the election by extremely tight margins while we gained nothing from Dick Morris trying to guess each day anew how many jelly beans were in the jar, I mean, how many seats we were going to win.
Perhaps Dick wants to be the lone voice of opposition against common-sense thinking so that in case by some off chance the unexpected happens, he will be crowned as the only one with the foresight and knowledge to predict the events correctly. Here and there I guess he’ll land lucky, sort of like the guy that plays daily several lottery tickets and wins a couple of bucks here and there, and maybe even a nice sum once in his lifetime. However, that shouldn’t mean we need to promote a guy that’s lucking his way around in order to build his own image. He says whatever is necessary to get him on as many shows and interviews as possible, and I have no problem with someone focusing on their own success. However, conservatives should remember that he has his own agenda and it doesn’t always coincide with the conservative agenda. It’s therefore time to get rid of so called conservatives who have focused on attacking conservatives rather than spreading the conservative voice.
I understand Dick has to churn out articles on a steady basis and the wackier and more original his analysis will seem the more attention it will garner, but why should we conservatives and conservative talk show hosts be the ones to build up his image? What service is he doing for the conservative movement anyways?
Here’s an excerpt from the third article in which he clashes with conservatism by trashing a candidate who personifies conservatism.
In any case, Sarah Palin is doing a disservice to her party. There are many good candidates wanting to nurture their infant campaigns who cannot grow in Palin’s shadow. How are Michele Bachmann, Herman Cain, Tim Pawlenty, Rick Santorum, or Jon Huntsman to attract national attention when Sarah is breathing in all the oxygen? And how can good potential candidates like South Carolina Senator Jim DeMint or Texas Governor Rick Perry to test the waters when Palin’s bus is on the highway?
Perhaps she’s testing the waters herself? I know you don’t want her to run, but she is probably considering it anyways and doesn’t give a hoot to your opinion, as any conservative should. Besides, a campaign is meant to weed out the weak candidates and emerge with someone ready to take on the opposition. If she is truly sucking the oxygen out of the room now, she’ll do the same to Obama. And if someone is gasping for breath in her presence, they’ll be blue in their face when facing Obama and the mainstream media.
Sarah needs to get into the race or stay out. What she should not do is attract the attention just because she can.
She will be getting in or out because what’s the third option? However, she will make the decision when she decides and not when you or anyone else decides. And let’s not forget that the actual decision of who will face Obama in November 2012 lies solely in the hands of the voters.
This article has been cross-posted at Red State