Sunday, October 31, 2004
CAVEAT EMPTOR
Billions Squandered Ahead of November Surprise
Is the "November Surprise" in store from the Republicans an announcement, just one day before the election, that the Bush administration has flip-flopped on the issue of reimporting prescription drugs from Canada?
Atrios is hearing that, or possibly that, from what he terms "a realiable source."
If true, this desperate ploy should make it obvious that with Sen. John F. Kerry breaking away from President Two More Days in nationwide and swing-state polls, the Republicans are running scared -- very scared.
But, really, what a total failure of leadership, what a display of sheer incompetence that the president can find no alternative but stealing one of the most popular planks of the Kerry-Edwards campaign: allowing the reimportation of prescription drugs from Canada.
A couple of points:
This is a proposal the White House and Republicans in Congress have been fighting for years, with all their might and with misleading claims and outright falsehoods about "safety" and "security." In fact, it's all about money, it's always been about money: the pharmaceutical industry's money. Why the sudden change of heart? How cynical a move is this? How stupid do they think we are?
And what of the much-ballyhooed "safety" and "security" concerns? Have they been addressed overnight? How and by whom? Or were the Republicans lying about these alleged concerns all along? If the Republicans were lying then, why should you trust them now? How many billions of working families' and senior citizens' dollars have these people squandered by blocking, until November 1, so reasonable, rational, and necessary a change in policy?
Finally, be careful of what they're selling, it's probably not what you think you're buying. As Atrios notes, "I'm sure that, if this happens, it'll be a big 'read the fine print' bait and switch." Absolutely. Don't doubt for a minute that the pharmaceutical industry, a major source of funding for the Republican Party, will have a giant apoplexy and immediately deploy all its resources to weaken any measure offered, carve out exceptions, add new tax advantages, tack on onerous conditions, and the like. Why do you think the drug industry's donations have been so heavily slanted toward Republicans? Count on the giant pharmaceutical companies calling in their favors. Count on the Republicans listening with open palms.
[Post-publication addendum (November 1): Looks like the source to Atrios was misinformed. Even I didn't think the Bush campaign would be that transparent. But you never know. Sorry if I scared you.]
| HOME |
The Rittenhouse Review |
Copyright 2002-2006 | PERMALINK |
|
|
|
CONTACT |
|
Send E-Mail
JAMES MARTIN CAPOZZOLA
|
|
BIO & STUFF |
|
James Martin (Jim) Capozzola launched The Rittenhouse Review in April 2002, TRR: The Lighter Side of Rittenhouse, HorowitzWatch, and Smarter Andrew Sullivan in July 2002, and Bulldogs for Kerry-Edwards in October 2004. He is also a contributing member of President Boxer.
He received the 2002 Koufax Award for Best Post> for "Al Gore and the Alpha Girls" (published November 25, 2002). Capozzola's record in the Koufax Awards includes two additional nominations for 2002 (Best Blog and Best Writing), three nominations for 2003 (Best Blog, Best Series, and Best Writing), and two finalist nominations in 2004 (Best Blog and Best Writing).
Capozzola’s experience beyond the blogosphere includes a lengthy career in financial journalism, securities analysis, and investment research, and in freelance writing, editing, ghost-writing, and writing instruction.
He earned his bachelor's degree in political science from the University at Albany and a master's in foreign affairs from the University of Virginia.
Capozzola lives in Philadelphia with his bulldog, Mildred.
|
PUBLICATION NOTES |
|
Posts pertaining to site developments, news, and updates are subject to deletion and to withdrawal, and with respect thereto, without notice.
~~~~~
Access to linked articles may require registration or subscription.
~~~~~
Linked articles are subject to expiration at the sole discretion of the original publisher.
~~~~~
Letters received by The Rittenhouse Review are subject to publication in full and with complete citation and attribution, including the sender's mailing and/or e-mail address and/or addresses, unless otherwise specifically requested in writing and at the time of submission.
~~~~~
The publisher reserves the right to confirm the identity and/or identities of each, any, and all correspondents through and by whatever means legal and necessary.
~~~~~
Any and all correspondence received and published hereat is subject to editing by the publisher for content, particularly but with no limitations implied thereto, with respect to vulgarity and other offensive language, and length, at the complete, full, and unhindered discretion of same.
~~~~~
The decision to publish each or any correspondence, if at all, rests solely with the publisher of this site.
~~~~~
The publisher retains copyrights to all original material here published and any submissions here received, including correspondence directed hereto, whether or not published hereat, unless otherwise specified.
~~~~~
Obviously, no provision is here made for immediate comments from readers.
~~~~~
All rights reserved and all that.
|
|
|
LINKS |
|
|
|
|