Unfortunately for you TDS won't be covered...
Posted on 01/31/2016 10:18:08 AM PST by Behind Liberal Lines
In an interview this morning on This Week, Donald Trump cited his desire to "help people" as the reason he favors government-funded universal health coverage. Unlike Ted Cruz, Trump said, "I have a heart."
"If somebody has no money and they're lying in the middle of the street and they're dying, I'm going to take care of that person," Trump said.
(Excerpt) Read more at nationalreview.com ...
So, you’re perfectly ok with Trump issueing Executive Orders, as Obama has, to do whatever HE feels is necessary, Congress be damned?
You do know how the Constitution works, don’t you? And you do know that the President does not make or create legislation?
For all the times I’ve seen people up in arms about Obama usurping his authority, and now to see some of these same people praising Trump, for admitting he’s going to do the same things, is unbelievable. I can’t believe this is where we are in this country....
Not so glad you don’t understand.
I'm not nearly the health expert you believe yourself to be. I read and comment. Good luck on your career reforming the system.
Right, so... advising W against Prop 187 was sound? Okay.
He voted for cloture on TPA, and that was the vote that mattered.
As for HB-1, now you’re saying that he’s flip-flopped? Or perhaps the correct term is that he evolved, or that he came around to the right side from his previous 500% increase stance.
Well, good. So if we assume that everything you are saying is true, then we have ‘conservative.’ But that doesn’t mean that he’s ‘consistent.’
Unfortunately for you TDS won't be covered...
The vote that mattered, btw.
The link between Trump's mouth and Trump's brain doesn't seem to keep the two in sync very often.
But if he’s poor, Trump’s got his back. With your money.
The worst part is that we would lose even if he win, at least on a bunch of issues that used to mean something to conservatives.
It could mean a bullet.
Has the Donald given a speech to ammunition makers yet?
That's not why you're being called those things. I am not, in fact, a Cruz supporter. The opposition to Trump is being raised because there is every reason to believe he's an opportunistic phony. He has never been a conservative before. Never. He has, for most of his career -- even when he was a Republican -- been a New York Republican. As a ex-New Yorker whose kids still live in NYC, I know what that means. Do you? [Hint: It means NOT conservative.]
Trump has said what he's said. Every other candidate has been asked to defend the record of his past statements. Cruz, Rubio, Bush have taken past positions which are not savory to conservative tastes. They have been savaged by various bloggers and media people for that. Yet when anyone points out The Donald's® past positions we are being told that we're hateful and "won't be forgiven."
Oh. OK.
It's not surprising that a mean spirited candidate would attract the same following. What is surprising is that positions which were heretofore anathema in conservative circles are now acceptable. And el Supremo has freely admitted that his healthcare position is "un-Republican" and he "doesn't care if it costs [him] votes."
Oh. OK. Un-Republican. [But he didn't say what we heard him say.]
is not something anyone should be required to put up with.
Politics aint beanbags. Put up with it, or GTFO.
Actually that isnt what he said,
Yeah. It is.
so I'll advise you to not threaten me like that in the future.
Or you'll do what?
You arent going to hold a gun to my head and demand compliance like some sniveling thug.
That's hilarious coming from a Trumpbot. I've been threatened with ZOT's by Trumpbots on more threads in the last month than in 16 previous years on FR combined.
And I have never ONCE written: "I won't vote for Trump if he's the nominee." Or "you won't be forgiven."
Trump is awful. But I've held my nose before -- I held my nose and voted for Bob Dole fer cryin' out loud. But what I will not do is allow members of a cult of personality to tell me that their maximum leader has not said the things that he's said, or that he said them -- in exactly the words quoted -- but didn't mean them, or that he meant them, and that's now what constitutes conservatism.
BS.
Conservatism isn't defined by what Humpty Trumpty believes today, this minute, and then something else tomorrow.
Finally, I expect Cruz people who say they won't support the nominee of a conservative party to be disciplined in some manner on a conservative site, and I expect that to be true of the supporters of other candidates as well. That's not a threat; that's a promise that you will be held to the same standards as everyone else, and do NOT get a pass just because your Messiah has arrived.
That bears repeating.
But...But...he made the DEAL!
That IS EXACTLY the position taken by NR since the 1960's, and it has NEVER changed.
>> . . . the notion that (some) Trump supporters have that trade, and TPA for that matter, are not conservative . . . well, perhaps those people need to brush-up on Ronald Reagan.<<
Reagan had other fish to fry, namely the Evil Empire and reforming the tax code. The evils of GATT, WTO and NAFTA occurred much later, as did the mass migrations across borders. I would like to believe he would have dealt with all such issues appropriately, but we cannot rely on this great President to solve our problems today.
So you can see that Trump said out loud that it’s not single payer.
Well, looks like that puts the lie to what’s been posted above. Whether he’s SEEECRETLY in favor of single-payer or not, he’s not campaigning on it.
Scrap Obamacare and from his other speeches on the subject, his position is to increase competition across state lines from insurance companies.
...yep, that’s a step in the right direction. That’s kind of what we here on FR were promoting as an alternative back in 2009, right?
Sure, the Medicaid-style ‘safety net’ is not perfect or good, but it’s hella lot better than the mess we’re stuck with now.
What is so bad about taking a step back in the right direction?
Which has worked SO well...
Hey, you reply with sarcasm, I reply with sarcasm.
Except that I wasn’t replying with sarcasm. lol
He pledged to use the EPA to enforce ethanol mandates. The EPA has done all in its power and some things that aren't to try to shut down energy production in the USA from the coal industry to coal fired power plants to the war on hydraulic fracturing of oil and gas wells.
How are small businesses going to navigate regulations on everything from filling in mud holes to carbon dioxide emissions and "Make America Great again" without the energy to run factories and deliver goods?
Wake up and smell the coffee.
Either he LIED to the folks in Iowa to get the support of the Governor whose son is an ethanol Lobbyist, or he is lying now.
Open your eyes, people. He isn't what he says he is. he's just 'making deals'.
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.