Posted on 02/01/2016 12:32:54 PM PST by dangus
Republicans have always specialized in running candidates that accept the most important premises of liberal governance and make themselves indistinguishable from their Democrat counterparts. They should patent their pale pastels, which blend in so effectively there is no discernable ink contrasting their talking points to Democrat policies.
In 2012, Republicans concocted a brilliant electoral plan. In a race fought over healthcare, they managed to nominate the only human being in America who implemented Obamacare before President Obama did. Now that the Democrat front-runner is Hillary Clinton, the original god-mother of single-payer healthcare, Republicans are on the cusp of nominating the one man in the GOP who has long championed Marxist healthcare policies.
In case anyone thought Donald Trump has indeed undergone a cathartic change since deciding to run for president and is no longer promoting New York values, he wants everyone to know if you oppose universal healthcare, you don’t have a heart. Here is what he told ABC’s George Stephanopoulos this morning:
We’re going to work with our hospitals. We’re going to work with our doctors. We’ve got to do something. You can’t have a — a small percentage of our economy, because they’re down and out, have absolutely no protection so they end up dying from, you know, what you could have a simple procedure or even a pill. You can’t do that. We’ll work something out. That doesn’t mean single payer. And I mean, maybe he’s got no heart. And if this means I lose an election, that’s fine, because, frankly, we have to take care of the people in our country. We can’t let them die on the sidewalks of New York or the sidewalks of Iowa or anywhere else.
Somehow Trump “opposes†Obamacare, but believes that if you don’t champion something similar to it you have no heart. He declined to defend “single-payer,†which he championed for years, but left out the fact that he praised Canada and Scotland’s dysfunctional Marxist system during one of the early presidential debates.
What’s worse than Trump’s support for the Democrat position on healthcare (wait, how is he going to debate Hillary again?) is the way he articulates this position. He uses the most antiquated tool in the Marxist/Alinsky shed, which is to play on emotions over intelligence, thereby achieving neither sound policy nor compassionate outcomes. Let’s not even discuss the constitutional powers of government; evidently that is never a factor with Trump.
Had Trump spent more time studying the government he seeks to run instead of pandering for the endorsements of Bob Dole and his less charismatic mini-me, Terry Branstad, The Donald would understand that we already spend hundreds of billions on Medicaid, S-Chip, and an array of state programs for those who would “die on the sidewalks†because they have no money. Medicaid alone will cost us $350 billion this year. The “dying on the sidewalk†Alinsky argument is a non-sequitur. The real question is what happens with the rest of us. Either we are all forced into single-payer, which has been Trump’s long-standing position. Or we are forced into something similar to Obamacare’s coverage mandates that he won’t specify. Here are the results of such a plan from my personal experience:
This is the outcome of a liberal “heart†in which no middle class family will be able to afford health insurance with dignity. When you pursue increased coverage at the expense of reducing costs you achieve neither objective. I can’t wait to see the premiums under Trump-care. Then again, under single-payer the problems will go much further than health insurance but will spill over to healthcare itself. Perhaps he will then take his rode show onto universal housing, college, and transportation.
Doesn’t Trump’s Alinsky thought process on healthcare sound awfully similar to his immigration views he harbored prior to running for president?
Many of us who believe immigration is the single most important issue have tolerated Trump’s New York values on many critical issues so that we could engage in the long-overdue discussion of national sovereignty. But as Trump devotes less time to immigration (shocker!) and promotes one left-wing idea and talking point after another, the circus has come full circle. Moreover, doesn’t Trump’s Alinsky thought process on healthcare sound awfully similar to his immigration views he harbored prior to running for president?
“You have to give them a path and you have to make it possible for them to succeed…“You have to do that.†“How do you throw somebody out that’s lived in the country for 20 years?...You just can’t throw them out.â€
Again, it’s not just the positions he took in recent years that are problematic, it’s the way he expressed them. Trump’s comments are not taken out of context; they are clearly coming from a deep-rooted liberal intuition on the most critical issues facing our nation. You might even say they come from the “heart.â€
As someone who has fought for national sovereignty over the past decade I can tell you there is no such thing as a politician who is to the left of Susan Collins on most issues but is somehow aligned with Jeff Sessions on immigration. If you believe that in your heart I have some property to sell you in Ciudad Juárez.
No, the candidate who stands with Zero is Trump.
It was through the COBRA program that they wanted to charge my 18 year old son $3000 a MONTH! (PLUS co-pays and deductibles that were insane.)
So, no. He couldn’t be *denied*, but dammit, they denied him by charging more than he could ever EARN as an 18 year old high school graduate.
He actually gave UP on going to college in a desperate bid to make enough money to afford the medications and treatments that he needed to LIVE hour-by-hour.
THAT was the conservative solution? That failed us horribly!
Think about it! That was the alternative for those who were denied any insurance? To charge the young and the very poor outrageous rates that 75% of American could never be able to afford?
THINK.
There is NO conservative solution to the chronically or previously ill. NONE.
$3,000 a month sucks, but COBRA is not HIPAA. It was a first step. And in 1986, it was a good first step. Since then, the costs have exploded. More needs to be done. Socialized medicine means that there are no limits on cost growth, no competition.
Yawn..................................zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz!
Please, then, explain to Marie and others even on this site, who seem convinced that Trump WILL provide them with liberal health-care solutions.
Everybody’s got to be covered. This is an un-Republican thing for me to say because a lot of times they say, “No, no, the lower 25 percent that can’t afford private. But–â€
Scott Pelley: Universal health care.
Donald Trump: I am going to take care of everybody. I don’t care if it costs me votes or not. Everybody’s going to be taken care of much better than they’re taken care of now.
Scott Pelley: The uninsured person is going to be taken care of. How? How?
Donald Trump: They’re going to be taken care of. I would make a deal with existing hospitals to take care of people. And, you know what, if this is probably–
Scott Pelley: Make a deal? Who pays for it?
Donald Trump: —the government’s gonna pay for it.
WAIT FOR IT... WAIT FOR IT....
Donald Trump: — But we’re going to save so much money on the other side.
THERE HE GOES!!! FULL BLOWN OBAMA CRAP!!!
Because we all know that government mandates and socialism reduce costs, right ?!!!!
I continue saying prayers he (Cruz) can be our next POTUS.
Trump:
We are going to work with our hospitals. We are going to work with our doctors. We've got to do something. You can't have a small percentage of our economy, because they're down and out, have absolutely no protection so they end up dying from, you know, what you could have a simple procedure or even a pill. You can'tt do that. We'll work something out. That doesn't mean single payer. And I mean, maybe hes got no heart. And if this means I lose an election, that's fine, because, frankly, we have to take care of the people in our country. We can't let them die on the sidewalks of New York or the sidewalks of Iowa or anywhere else"
This is the same sort of sleazy lying by omission, misrepresentation and innuendo that the Leftist media has used against Conservatives for decades. When did "Conservatives" decide adopting the Leftist PR tactics was going to work for them?
Truth is true even if you live in denial of it.
Not only did I not take Trump out of context, I included that entire context (and so did Horowitz). The context argued for his socialist plan, but in no way contradicted or explained away his call for socialized, mandatory healthcare insurance. In fact, he didn’t say anything Obama didn’t say.
I’ve listened to many of Trump’s rallies and interviews, read his 2011 book, and read his positions on his website.
Trump hating “Conservatives” always twist, distort and even make up out of whole cloth quotes from him. “Quotes”. Out of context is SOP.
All these conservatives that hate Trump can choke on their bile not soon enough for me.
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.