When Newt Was for the Individual Mandate

American Spectator ^ | 112911 | Joseph Lawler

[cripplecreek]

But then, not everyone who posts at FR is a conservative; lots of establishment Republicans are running around,

Yeah, I've noticed that we have a lot of prolific seasonal posters. They don't post for a year or so, then suddenly find time to post 24/7 to trash the conservative candidates. We regular posters fight like cats and dogs but we recognize one another and hold a certain degree of respect for each other. These seasonal posters are vicious

We got RINOs inside the wire.

[kabar]

Newt is just another Big Government RINO who believes that government is the answer to all of our problems. Newt never mentions the Constitution in this screed with Hillary looking on. We just force the people to behave like we want them to.

[kabar]

Where Newt stands on an issue depends on the audience. He will say whatever the audience wants to hear in order to gain a plitical advantage. He will change his position on anything. He lacks principle and a real vision.

[mgstarr]

Excellent research!

And yet Cain and Perry have plummeted like rocks and there's zero reason to believe that will change, apart from wishful thinking.

Who's left that has a realistic shot at defeating Romney and then Obama?

[kabar]

You left out some things that Gingrich said during his "love-in" with Kerry in 2007, an event I watched at the time.

KERRY: I’m excited to hear you talk about the urgency — I really am. And given that — albeit you still sort of have a different approach — what would you say to Sen. Inhofe and to others in the Senate who are resisting even the science? What’s your message to them here today?

GINGRICH: My message I think is that the evidence is sufficient that we should move towards the most effective possible steps to reduce carbon-loading of the atmosphere.

KERRY: And to it urgently — and now…

GINGRICH: And do it urgently. Yes.

In a 2007 debate with Senator Kerry, Congressman Gingrich stated that the evidence was sufficient that global warming existed and that action needed to be taken immediately. The obvious implication being that if action can address the issue, then it was man made. That same year, he introduced a "Contract with the Earth" and spoke about the concept of "Green Conservatism" as a method of winning the environmental debate against the left. In 2008, Congressman Gingrich made a public service announcement with House Speaker Pelosi noting the dangers of global warming and the need to take action to solve the problem.

[newzjunkey]

Herman Cain's record:

[crz]

Facts? They dont need no stinking facts!

Tell you what Creek, there are a ton of liberals coming out of the woodwork that are posting on here these days.

[cripplecreek]

Tell you what Creek, there are a ton of liberals coming out of the woodwork that are posting on here these days.

Over the last few days I've been called a klansman, neo nazi, thug, xenophobe, and a few other names that usually aren't thrown at other FReepers.

[crz]

LOL! Well..at least you aint been called a C sucker yet..or have you?

Tell you what creek..there is one candidate I will not vote for...The rest I can and would vote for.

[nonamer]

The argument Newt is putting forward is not simply requiring all citizens to purchase insurance. Under Newt's plan, it is up to the individual to either purchase insurance or provide proof of his ability to pay for his own healthcare by posting a bond or some other proof of financial sufficiency. How else do we deal with what Newt calls a "free rider?" Liberals are right (occasionally they stumble across the truth), every time an uninsured person goes to an emergency room for treatment and is unable to pay and has no insurance, everybody else gets stuck with the bill. It's a fact of life.

Well, at least someone else is actually listening to what is said because I too didn't hear where Newt specifically advocated the individual mandate.

You're also correct that the law requiring emergency rooms to treat a person regardless of their ability to pay needs to be rescinded. If it was, those irresponsible people who don't buy insurance would suddenly look for a plan and many of those people who misuse emergency rooms for cases of the sniffles would disappear. I also have to believe there would be an impact on illegal immigration as well.

Rescinding the law probably can't happen in today's political climate so we are stuck with finding another solution however. I don't remember where I heard it, but there was a good suggestion about clinics staffed with RN's and Nurse Practitioners to replace ER visits by the poor and working poor.

[crz]

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/29/us/politics/cain-accused-of-affair-by-ginger-white.html?_r=1&partner=MYWAY&ei=5065

Have fun..

[thatdewd]

Perhaps it’s not a question of who’s left, but rather a question of ‘who’...

[newzjunkey]

He's not "stuck in the past" and has used that criticism against Romney. You can find out his current views directly at newt.org.

He testified against Obama's cap and trade for what that's worth.

But let's remember details matter. Not all programs are equal even if they fall under the same broad umbrella. For that reason I am leery of attacks *on any candidate* based on claims he or she was for this type of program on this date without knowing more than a blanket assertion or a random quote.

[BillyBoy]

>> If it is Newt vs Romney, I choose Newt. <<

I loathe both of those two-faced backstabbers (though I have to concede both do a good job at sounding conservative on a debate stage). However, if you put a gun to my head and forced me to pick one, I guess I'd have to pick Romney. If Newt is the nominee is pretty much guarantees Obama a second term, and Romney looks like a choir boy compared to Newt's "personal life"

[Rick_Michael]

BS thread and BS link.

[Impy]

If it’s Newt versus Romney then I choose gin.

As for Ricky S he’s about the only one who hasn’t had a moment in the Sun yet. I’d gladly take him over Newt/Mitt/Perry.