Posted on 03/23/2010 2:09:54 PM PDT by Recovering_Democrat
"There is non-controversial stuff here like the preexisting conditions exclusion and those sorts of things," the Texas Republican said. "Now we are not interested in repealing that. And that is frankly a distraction."
(Excerpt) Read more at corner.nationalreview.com ...
Several Republicans are talking about full repeal by January 2013. It is beyond stupid for any Republican to even begin nitpicking about this part or that part of Obamacare this soon. And besides everything else that’s been said about him, he is strongly tempted to become pro-amnesty if he thought he could pander to a few more Latinos in Texas.
The republican moron’s will cave at every chance, term limits is the only solution to turn over congress. The voters are dumb as dirt.
Both parties are owned. Neither party is the solution.
And they have rigged the political system that you only really have two choices, both evil, both of which are impoverishing and destroying what used to be the the American middle class.
Well, I just contacted his office to say as a TEXAN, I want a repeal of this atrocity.
No more money to the RNC or RINOS from me.
“There is non-controversial stuff here like the preexisting conditions exclusion and those sorts of things”
If it’s true that covering preexisting conditions is non-controversial, God help us all, because Republicans are then no better than Democrats, insofar as both are willing to throw money away to buy votes.
These idiots. They don’t know how to win to save their ass.
I think you’re on the wrong forum with your Commie babbling.
C’mon now, at least he offers you an option. You can go to hell in a hand-basket with him instead of the current shortcut, off a cliff.
I've been trying to maintain some optimism about all this and I've even had a few words with some around here about waxing unnecessarily pessimistic about things while the fight is still on.
This kind of stuff has got to stop. How in the hell does this guy expect to rally the troops and do something about it? Or does he really not even find it all that objectionable?
Whose in the hell's interests is he looking out for with a statement like this?
This is about the same thing as McCain saying "He'd make a perfectly fine President."
Surrender. Cornyn is willing to protect the status quo like he thinks a good Republican should even when the status quo is socialism.
How many more sons does McLame have in the Senate besides Grahmesty?
I guess Cornyn is for rationing and long waiting lines.
Not only that, but this jackass is even more radical than the Dims who passed this turd if he’d ban pre-existing conditions without a requirement that everyone buy insurance.
The pre-existing condition exclusion will not bankrupt the insurance industry. It will require insurance companies to raise everyone else’s rates to compensate for the high risk insureds they must take onto the rolls. It’s a societal safety net, plain and simple.
I agree, this is difficult to implement without also requiring everyone to purchase insurance, otherwise people will just wait until they get sick and then buy it. It’s a tough problem no doubt, but there is certainly a better solution than we have today.
He’ll regret saying that. This is the kind of statement you get from Republicans who have been inside the Beltway too long.
I need pre-existing exclusion for auto insurance. I don't want to buy it until after I have a crash.
If you have a pre-existing condition, there's a way to deal with it. It's called "make a budget".
LOVE THE PIC !!!!!
Grow a pair Cornyn.
You are absolutely right. As others have said, if you let someone buy a fire insurance policy when their house is already on fire, then they are insuring against risk, they are just shifting their costs.
The “HIP” in “HIPAA” is for Health Insurance Portability. That means that, if you lose your insurance, and if you buy new insurance within a set period of time, you can’t be excluded because of pre-existing conditions. There is already a law that prevents those who have been conscientious about maintaining insurance from being excluded when their coverage with one company ends.
Amen bro’. Why is this pre-existent exclusion so hard for the public (and rinos) to understand. It is so obvious that you cannot cover pre-existent coverage for individual plans. And for group plans, you can only tolerate limited exposure to enrollees to pre-existent conditions (there is typically a waiting period). That risk tolerance decision can only be made by the insurance company.
The dumbing down of America is quite evident.
I’m telling you: Cornyn is a backroom play-along inside-the-beltway RINO.
Cornyn is NOT!! a conservative.
He wouldn’t know a conservative principle if it bit him on his ass.
“That is utter ignorance, is it not?”
Wilful ignorance. They know dumping claims on preexisting grounds is unpopular. At least as it’s thus far been explained; the general public, obviously, hasn’t paused to consider what would happen if everyone waited to buy “insurance” until they were sick. They know they can buy votes if everyone feels safe and thinks they can get care whenever they want because someone else (preferably Fat Cats) will pay for it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.