Posted on 04/19/2010 8:43:55 AM PDT by Behind Liberal Lines
I asked Gov. Romney if I could ask him a question. After he told me that this was OK, I posed the following question to him:
“You have stated your intention to spearhead the effort to repeal the ‘worst aspects’ of Obamacare, does this include the repeal of the individual mandate and pre-existing exclusion?”
The Governor’s answer: “No.”
Gov. Romney went on to explain that he does not wish to repeal these aspects because of the deleterious effect it would have on those with pre-existing conditions in obtaining health insurance.
(Excerpt) Read more at spectator.org ...
I applaud him for his candor and condemn him for his judgment.
“...let people die on the street in front of the emergency room...”
I watch NBC, and I thought that was the Republican platform.
No, their platform is for you to get medical care, but you have to pay for it later. That’s the Democratic platform is you have to thousands of dollars for health care insurance (or two years from now when it is government health care, tax you to death), that you cannot access because the government will be too busy spending the money for your health care on the study of pig smell and expensive airplanes for Pelosi to be able to reimburse your doctor.
The conservative platform is to decrease the cost of health care by getting rid of junk lawsuits and other factors that rise health care. When cost of health care lowers, health insurance lowers. If that doesn’t happen, we will get rid of their monopolies by being able to purchase insurance over state lines. Also, medical saving accounts may help decrease the need for insurance companies. Plus, all of this will encourage doctors to get into the business and guess what, more doctors means more access. So you don’t have to die in waiting rooms anymore.
The one thing I don’t understand (actually I do because they are liberals) is the same people complaining about health insurance monopolies are the same people who want single payer. Isn’t single payer a monopoly? Doesn’t single and mono both mean one?
Back to Romney. He shouldn’t even run. He lost the nomination last time and next time he won’t have a chance. We need to pick a conservative to be the GOP nomination. We didn’t hear about Obama until after the 2006 mid-terms so I am hopeful that someone will come out next year that will make this country better.
He’s pretty much destroyed any chance he has of winning an election against Owe-bama in my view.
That stated, for those thinking he cannot win the GOP nomination...two words:
John
McCain.
Because there is a very, very, very high liklihood that Romney will be the GOP nominee. The GOP still insists on having liberals in flamingly blue states get first dibs on choosing the nominee.
The only good thing about oBamaCare is that those with pre-existing conditions can obtain health insurance. I don't want Romney anywhere near politics, but I don't think this statement is way out of line. Folks with pre-existing conditions should be able to obtain affordable insurance. But we just didn't need Reid, Pelosi and Obama to accomplish this their way. They bungled the entire healthcare bill, against the will of the People. It needs to be re-written in it's entirety.
It’s all about ambition. How do you get the jerks to sit out a race in which they don’t belong, when it is their very jerkiness that impels them to get into the race in the first place?
So I think its up to us, the conservative voters of America, to build some kind of pre-primary, pre-election network to pre-select our best candidate. All the various conservative “tribes” have to set aside their differences and come together for this one great task. We must vote together, or we will surely hang separately.
Treacherous Mitt Romney:
” Now that my Romneycare (funded 50% by US taxpayers) is national, ready to hurt
three hundred million, a little self examination is in order for you Republicans.
You may want to ask yourself “if I had spent my time promoting
RomneyCare and Mitt Romney, could not I have garnered more support
of both Obama and the newest iteration of Mitt Romney?
And remember, if I did not believe in RomneyCARE, myself,
I would have left Massachusetts to avoid the citizens
and flee to La Jolla or San Diego.“
A Romney run for President would be CATASTROPHIC.
America needs a Saviour, not a catalyst for more Marxism.
A Romney Presidency, would he win - which is probable - would initiate a new cycle of Bush-like liberal policies which would further deteriorate the economy and lead to ANOTHER Democrat victory and take over down the road.
The solution to Marxism isn’t Liberal Light.
I was joking. I haven’t watched NBC in thirty years.
OK, Jr., tell us how, if Romney wishes to seek the GOP nomination, how people with intelligence could "disqualify" him other than with their vote(s).
“OK, Jr., tell us how, if Romney wishes to seek the GOP nomination, how people with intelligence could “disqualify” him other than with their vote(s).”
LOL, I’m talking about people disqualifying Romney from their prospective voting possibilities.
Try to keep up.
Quite possibly. However, you can’t cover pre-existing conditions without it, for the reason given #32.
No, I see your point.
But do we really want to debate the viability of a health care system that will compel businesses and people to behave a certain way?
This debate is irrelevant because this entire ObamaCare needs to be expunged.
“The one thing I don’t understand (actually I do because they are liberals) is the same people complaining about health insurance monopolies are the same people who want single payer. Isn’t single payer a monopoly? Doesn’t single and mono both mean one?”
Easy to explain. A private-sector monopoly is bad because everyone involved in it is there just to collect dividends or a paycheck. OTOH, a single-payer government program is good because everyone involved in it is there just to serve the common good and make people happy.
IA and SC are liberals in flaming blue states?
IA was 88% conservative in the 2008 GOP caucus. 45% very conservative.
SC was slightly less so, but still very conservative.
Nonsense.
Even IF you INSIST on the federal government’s UNCONSTITUTIONALLY getting into health care, you can do it with the traditional unconstitutional taxes, instead of the unconstitutional mandate.
It is a compound statement, and you can't just ignore the 2nd part. "If someone asks, do you like Chocolate cake with bird droppings", you are likely to say "no", even if you happen to love Chocolate cake.
It’s irrelevant because I don’t want the cake or the droppings.
The entire bill needs to be scrapped.
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.