How Should Democrats run against the Party of No! in the 2010 mid-term elections?

It’s pretty hard to be against something without being at the same time for its opposite. If you are against healthcare reform, they you are for the system we had till it became law. If you are against any regulation of corporations, then you are for letting companies like Enron and Worldcom run amok and letting Wall Street suck another $17 trillion out of the US economy any time they think it’s there.

So as the parties jockey for the mid-term elections of 2010, I propose that Democrats don’t run against a party of No, but instead run against what Republicans are saying Yes! to when they say No! to the things they oppose.

Republicans said No! to healthcare reform. That means Republicans are:
1—For 47 million Americans being uninsured, and 1 million more joining them each year.
2—For 45,000 Americans dying every year because they don’t have healthcare insurance.
3—For costs going up at 2–5 times the rate of inflation for the next decade like they did over the last several decades.
4—For Medicare cost bankrupting the US Government by 2020.
5—For marinating the Medicare doughnut hole in prescription drug coverage.
6—For annual and lifetime caps on health insurance benefits.
7—For excluding everyone from coverage who has any preexisting condition
8—For insurers collecting premiums for years then cancelling a policy rather than paying if a customer becomes ill with an expensive, long-term condition.
9—For small businesses not being able to afford coverage because each is considered as a single tiny group instead of all being lumped into one large pool to spread the risk.

Republicans say No! to regulations of Wall-street banks and brokerages. That means Republicans are:
1—For more massive meltdowns like we saw in 2007
2—For predatory lending practices of mortgage lenders.
3—For fine print and unreadable terms that change every month on credit cards.
4—For the rights of PayDay lenders to charge interest rates of 140% per year to poor borrowers who don’t know any better.
5—For credit default swaps, hedge funds, collateralized debt obligations, and other practices that make enormous profits for banks, add nothing of value to the public, and transfer all risks to the taxpayer.
6—For corporations being able to buy life insurance on every employee with themselves as the beneficiary, receive a tax write-off on the purchase, get tax-free loans on the cash value of the policy, and receive the payout tax free when the employee finally dies.

I could carry on and on. The Party of No! didn’t win that name just opposing one or two issues. But I don’t want to hog the stage. I am sure each of you can add to the list. What other things can you think of that the Party of No! is saying Yes! to by opposing its opposite?