The Right Scoop
If that plays out, I will make sure it plays out publicly. I wouldn't be the first nor the last martyr to American liberty. Because that's what's at stake here.
Although that was an entertaining moment, Dick Sanatorium was wrong on most of what he said. Santorum is a dufus and he's wrong on most of what he said because Romney isn't solely responsible for MA healthcare reform. Romney's plan is only one of four that were put forth to the MA legislature. The other three were socialized medicine plans put forth by ultra liberal politicians and a liberal coalition that got 75,000 signatures from MA residents to put a referendum for massive Medicaid and SCHIP expansion on the 2006 ballot if healthcare reform legislation wasn't passed by then. Romney is the reason MA ended up with a market-based system and not socialized medicine. Romney vetoed 8 parts of the bill, but the 85% filibuster proof Democrat majority in the MA state legislature overrode all 8 vetoes. Romney's Democrat successor to the governorship also made changes that jacked up costs. Those are the facts. Romney isn't wasting him time correcting dufus Dick Sanatorium because Romney is saving the heavy artillery for the general election.
Actually, history shows that the moniker "Romneycare" is a misnomer. Despite the spin in the media, it's pretty well documented that Mitt stepped in to stop the ultra liberal MA house speaker and senate president and a liberal coalition that wanted massive expansion of MassHealth (Medicaid and SCHIP) from passing socialized medicine plans. The coalition got 75,000 signatures from MA residents to put its socialized medicine proposal on the ballot as a referendum if healthcare reform legislation wasn't passed by then. As such, MA lawmakers were under intense pressure to pass healthcare legislation. The three plans put forth by house speaker DiMasi, senate president Travaglini, and the ultra liberal coalition were essentially socialized medicine plans that would have destroy MA's free market healthcare system and MA's budget. That's when Mitt quickly stepped in. Amid the intense pressure and the inevitability that healthcare legislation would be passed, Romney proposed a free market plan and worked with the 85% Democrat legislature to pass as much of it as possible. The legislature passed an amalgamation of all four bills that kept components of Romney's market based plan. Romney vetoed eight provisions that he didn't want, and the overwhelmingly Democrat legislature overrode all eight of Romney's vetoes. After Romney left office, his Democrat successor Deval Patrick made additional changes that jacked up the cost. So, that's the well documented story of MA healthcare reform. Romney was only a small part of it, and he was the reason it became a market based plan rather than socialized medicine. So, "Romneycare" is a misnomer.
No, but passing legislation for the health, safety, and welfare of the state population is (i.e. a state's police power). What happened in MA wasn't tyranny. The liberal MA state senate president proposed basically a socialized medicine plan. The liberal speaker of the MA house proposed a socialized medicine plan. A liberal coalition that proposed a massive expansion of Medicaid and SCHIP got 75,000 signatures from MA residents to ad their plan as a referendum to the MA 2006 ballot is healthcare legislation wasn't passed by then. There was intense pressure in MA to pass healthcare legislation, and now way or another is was going to happen. Romney stepped in with market based plan. The legislature passed parts of all four plans, with parts of Romney's market based plan. Romney vetoed 8 parts of the bill, but he 85% filibuster proof Democrat majority in the MA state legislature overrode all 8 vetoes. That's what happened in MA.
Yeah, Little Lord Fauntleroy bothers me with that stupid smile of his, too. No wonder he and his family were unsuitable for military service; no drill sergeant I know of would tolerate that for 5 seconds, much less 5 debates.
NSFW:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nAZI4ydY6R8
I can definitely see smarmy Romney, or his other draft dodging kids getting caught up in this position, real quick. Probably would've made a more honest political candidate out of him.
He not only had a very strong night, it proves that these debates aren't a waste of time. With each debate we're learning that Romney will not be able to stand up to O.
Go back up the thread. This is a false claim. There are audio links of Santorum's debate in 1994, in his own voice , that refute this.
This is where the animosity of "the rich" comes in, even within the GOP.
Few despise honestly earned wealth, but it is the dishonest acquisition of money that most have a problem with. And guess what? The well-connected have earned it just as dishonestly as the welfare recipient. In fact I have more compassion for the welfare recipient because there are many legitimate cases of need. The insiders who have no need but cheat the system invite scorn upon themselves.
This is not a political problem that will be solved by an election. It is a deeply engrained cultural problem. When people cannot be self-governed they invite more external government upon themselves. It is why our Founders warned that our form of government would only work with a self-governed people.
American Spectator this morning, reminds us of this bit of Romneyesque deception in the debate last night:
"Early in Thursday's Republican presidential debate, CNN moderator Wolf Blitzer caught Mitt Romney flatfooted on one of his anti-Gingrich ads. The ad accuses Newt of calling Spanish a "language of the ghetto." What, Blitzer asked Romney, did you mean by that? "I haven't seen the ad, so I'm sorry, I don't get to see all the TV ads," replied Romney. "I doubt that's my ad."
But it is his ad. "We did double check, just now, Governor, that ad that we talked about," said Blitzer. "We double checked. It was one of your ads. It is running here in Florida on the radio, and at the end you say 'I'm Mitt Romney and I approved this ad.'"
Weasel. He did the same thing in the other debates.
Last night (Thurs), he also denied he had questioned Newt's Reagan credentials on Monday night.
Romney has waged the nastiest, ugliest campaign, not through his ads or his lies on camera, but through a smear/lies campaign by the so-called conservative media: commentators, pundits and websites like Drudge and Beck.
Mr. Romney looks picture-perfect, pretty, pristine, principled, prosperous, powerful on the outside, but inside, he's anything but.
I was so glad when Wolf called him out on this.
So did Mitt really not know about the ad yet it had his approval on it? Or was he lying to Wolf? Either way, he is lying.
"...why couldn't the State of Massachusetts also take away citizens rights to bear arms there?"
THE CITY OF NY ALREADY DOES. A number of citizens, including a woman and a Navy SEAL have been arrested for honest attempts to check or declare their guns...for which they had valid permits.
The states, like Hawaii, are taking away our right to religious freedom by forcing ALL churches in Hawaii to permit same-sex marriages on their premises.
So much for the Constitution and civil liberties under this regime. It is not an administration in any way, shape, form or fashion.
Obama and all his agenda groups, including Islam are being backed and orchestrated by Soros to destroy our Constitution, laws and liberties as well as our prosperity, morality and security.
Make no mistake about that. LINK: http://sorosfiles.com/soros/2011/10/obamas-master-george-soros-supporting-americas-enemies-at-home-and-abroad.html
You're absolutely right,Dave. I pulled the trigger before vetting the 'source'. It looks like a newspaper said that another newspaper said.
Scoop, you can pull down this post.
I totally agree w your last statement. When someone gets a job they should have to sign a waiver if they are offered health insurance and refuse to enroll they will not be treated at a hospital unless they can put up a bond like a lien on their home or business.
Illegals are a big problem too but I think all of this is federal law and needs to be changed. People who can't afford it of course should be given some options. Those options should include maintaining their health w a healthy weight, exercise, no smoking and preventive check ups and testing. If the taxpayers are footing the bill we have a right to ask that the cost be kept to a minimum.
The GOP race should, if it was based solely on being a conservative, between Santorum and Newt. Romney the closet democrat and Paul the isolationist should not even be in this race. Does anyone ever notice how Paul never actually says what he is going to do? He just criticizes American history or the other candidates platforms then goes on and says I will just get rid of this and that....Really, how? You cannot just walk in and say, okay, as of today the department of education is gone. What will fill that vacuum? Everyone knows that these programs need to be phased out, just like Freddy Mac. The tentacles are so far reaching you cannot just dump it as it would cause an even bigger mortgage problem, so it has to be phased out like Newt and Santorum say they would do it.
Where as Paul and Romney just talk nonsense to score political points.
Yes, I agree that the debate was a huge waste of time. Wolf spent the whole night trying to get Newt and Romney to attack each other asking the most ridiculous questions. Mr. Speaker, how do you feel about Romney being rich? Mr. Governor, how do you feel about Newt being a career politician? There was very little substance to his questions. The questions from the audience and internet were more thoughtful and spoke to the issues in America. But what I did see was Newt trying hard to stay away from the attacks and Romney more then happy to make stupid, passive agressive, comments. Romney, like Obama, is very good at making an initial talking point that has no substance but then when pushed on a topic, like Santorum just did, he falls apart. He actually acts (body language and speech) he is insulted that anyone would push him on an issue and his voice sounds like a whinny, irritating, child.
Sorry no, stabilized does not include surgery even where trauma is concerned, only in the rarest occasions when emergency surgery is the only option. In over 90% of cases stabilizing a patient means bandaging and possibly oxygen, more often than not, that's it. Some hospitals (usually Catholic ones) will go beyond stabilizing the patient, but only because they have a charitable charter as well as the charitable trusts to back them financially.
There are a myriad of things wrong with the healthcare industry and not all are a result of government. People insist on exhaustive trials for medicines and medical equipment, most aren't willing, unless driven by extreme desperation, to be guinea pigs for unproven drugs or procedures. As for what comes out of the average person's pay for SSI, well at current market prices you won't be buying a lot of gold with it. At around $1900 an ounce, well I think you can do the math on that, and it is likely that speculation and fearmongering will drive the price even higher. As for the SSI system, that is another very complex and thorny animal to tackle, there are some workable systems out there, like the Chilean model, but the transition to that type of system will be a tricky one. I don't think anyone really wants to push Grandma off the cliff or hurl Grandpa under the bus, that does not alter the fact that it needs to be addressed.
There is no viable way to just throw a lever and switch this nation into a L. Niel Smith or Aaron Zelman Libertarian pipe dream of a world. The constant demagoguing about our "Socialist System" and how we are under some "jack booted tyranny" is precisely what drove me away from Libertarianism ( aside from the Rand Objectivists and the loony Anarchists) , listening to people droning on about tyranny that have never felt it, much less even seen it. I found most Libertarians as nonsensical and fantastical in their ideology as the Campus Communists I have had the displeasure of dealing with.
Is the Federal government too large and in its tendencies too over reaching? Yes. Is it beyond repair with some hard work? No, not yet. But be careful, in what you wish for, Revolutions are as a rule, bloody and heartless affairs and in my experience the ones calling for them the loudest are those who have never dealt with the realities of Revolution up close and personal. You should fervently hope that your children never witness the horrors of Revolution.
I really don't feel like writing a "book" on this tonight, so I will just leave this where it sits for tonight, perhaps later but for now fini.
To continually accuse the other candidates when he did the same, is dishonest and disgusting.
santorum totally won the entire debate. I like newt but santorum has been listening to bill whittle I can tell that from the point he made about natural law vs. political law in the constitution.
Face it, folks. Unless Santorum drops out and endorses Gingrich, this is Romney's. He is too well-organized, he'll take FL momentum, kill in Feb., and it's all over. I say Santorum bowing out to endorse Newt because a) Rick is out of money, and b) Newt's ego would never have him play second fiddle to anyone. lol.
Gingrich needs to make a deal with Santorum. Fast.
Between 1/31 and 2/28, Nevada is the only state with an event that binds delegates, and that's proportional. Plenty of time in Feb for Santorum to recharge, raise money, and campaign for some Super Tuesday wins. All of the March primaries are proportionally allocated, too. April 24 is the earliest date that anyone could sew up the nomination, and that's unlikely.
I hope you're right. As I just posted elsewhere, I'm starting to think Santorum is the best choice. Too many problems with both Romney and Gingrich. I'm not a social con, and I don't like social con big govt (e.g. Huckabee), but at least I get a sense that Santorum actually believes what he says. There's something very courageous about Santorum. Newt and Mitt are both so full of sh*t. I know Santorum is a politician, but I almost trust the guy.
Santorum's attack displays clearly for all what Mitt's problem will be against Obama if Mitt wins the nomination. There's no way he will be able to attack Obamacare. He has no defense. Trying to explain subtle differences won't matter. The nuance won't register with voters. Romney is damn lucky there are THREE other candidates splitting the votes the way they are.
Santorum may not be able to win the general and I'm not sure that he is POTUS material. (I get the sense that he is out of his league). However, I think he is the most logical choice for CONSERVATIVES if they want to be able to look themselves in the mirror regardless of the outcome of 2012. I'm not what you would call a social conservative, but I really don't understand why he isn't the obvious choice for those who claim they are. With Bachmann, Cain, and Perry out of the race - Santorum should be the choice for those voters. You won't have to vote for Newt, a DC insider, ideas all over the map, low character; not for Mitt, who will say and do anything to win (and will sell out the base if he wins the general - you can count on that) and has the RomneyCare problem; nor Paul.
To me, this should have been a two-man race: Romney vs. Santorum.
The Hypocrisy of Santorum is Shocking. After attacking Newt and Romney about individual mandate, It turns out that Santorum also supported the individual mandate for health care.
It is really interesting because you can see the look on Rick Santorum's face as he cannot believe what is coming out of RINO Romney's mouth. He (Mittens) is saying he is against Obamacare but at the same time is for mandating healthcare insurance requirements just like Obamacare.
Sorry Mittie ol boy you can't have it both ways you twit! Mitt Romney is such a two faced liar and all the RomneyBots applauded....unbelievable!
Rick Santorum....YOU RULED tonight!
Too bad all these establishment types are so one sided that they cannot see the HUGE mistake they are making by supporting this lying, two-faced, double crossing, sack of progressive S_ _ _! as the GOP nominee. It just boggles the mind how STUPID some REPUBLICANS can act and think.
I got news for you Marko Rubio....Romney is not a Conservative...he is a progressive and he (Mittens) even says so himself.
Sorry... Won't follow u there... I don't like waiting to play defense till the baddies are in my living room... But I do support u'r not-Romney choice...
They are only required to stabilize your condition, at that point they can transfer you or send you on your way. In other words all they are required to do is staunch the blood flow.
Santorum did alright tonight. Although it seemed he was getting a bit lost towards the end. One of his better debates all in all.
Vote for value, principle!! Don't vote for "whoever can beat Obama Care".The principle logic will win every time, with rational, logical thinkers. If the question is whether there are enough people who can think in bare minimum terms of logical assessments, so be it. America will crash if there aren't enough anyway.
No it won't-you are talking to a very small group of people compared to the number that live in America and don't chat on blogs or listen to talk radio-this isn't how the game is played. Unfortunately America has lost her way morally and the founding fathers made it quite clear our Constitution was crafted for moral people-you can try but the game being played is to win-and it is about ELECTABILITY! It grieves me as well as you that value and principle isn't the priority! But we left that along time ago!
Rick looked like the adult in the room... Newt, not so much.
http://www.redstate.com/leon_h_wolf/2012/01/26/a-bad-night-for-newt-gingrich/
Republicans in Congress took action to repeal Obamacare a year ago. Did they repeal it? No. 'Taking action' to repeal is not the same thing as repealing it. Weasel words.
As usual, Romney lies. Federal Law does not require that if you go to the hospital and you do not have insurance that you be treated for free. What Federal Law does do is prohibit the hospital from turning you away and requires the hospital to treat you. Afterwards, one of two things will happen. If you are poor, you will have the opportunity to apply for Medicaid and Medicaid will cover the bill. If you don't qualify for Medicaid, you will get a bill and if you fail to pay it, the hospital will take you court. If the rich were getting free rides at the Mass hospitals, its the hospitals fault.
Pretty good, Rick. But there's THIS in your history: http://campaign2012.washingtonexaminer.com/blogs/beltway-confidential/1994-report-santorum-supported-individual-mandate/343086
No Mike, he doesn't.... it is another Romney lie. Here is the proof that Santorum did not support the individual mandate.... in his own words.
Talk about being consistent.... Something that Romney & even Newt can not say...
http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/61219-1
WATCH IT!!! In the first 5 minutes he kills Hillary Care & MANDATES!!!
The Rick Santorum of 1994 is the same Rick Santorum we saw last night in the debate...
Nice try... But I am still waiting to find an quote from Santorum... All the reporter says is that Santorum along with another candidate supports a plan... But neither of Santorum or the other guy gets quoted...
"The Morning Call does not quote Santorum making comments supportive of an individual mandate, or quote any other candidates in the piece, which attempts to summarize several candidates' positions on health care." - From the post about the original article...
What the reporter quotes can easily be interpreted multiple ways...
""Santorum and [his opponent] would require individuals to buy health insurance rather than forcing employers to pay for employee benefits," The Morning Call (Pa.) reported in 1994. The Morning Call noted that Santorum had also called for a MediSave account and had opposed so-called "sin" taxes." - NOT A SANTORUM QUOTE but a reporter Quote...
And what does "rather than forcing" means... Does it mean all residents have to buy insurance like in Massachusetts... Or does it just mean that Employers are not gonna be forced to provide it... And if an individual wants to buy insurance then they will need to choose it... Seems Santorum is more in favor of MadiSave Accounts then Mandated RomneyCare..
All the Mandate parts of the full article talks about others with some direct quotes... Mandate and Santorum never come together in the whole article... But nice try RomneyRINOMachine...
Santorum had one of his best performances (when it probably doesn't matter).
Newt had one of his worst performances (when probably he needed a great one).
It's pretty depressing. A setback to the rebellion.
Unfortunately the empire struck back hard after Newt blew-up their death star in SC. It's been an all out imperial assault in FL. Mitt basically said to Newt "Who's your daddy?" while viciously hacking away at him. Han Solo has been frozen in carbonite. Etc. etc.
Maybe Newt has a twin sister with the "force" to lead the rebellion against the empire. Possibly some Ewoks will endorse Newt and he can turn Mitt away from the dark side?
Sorry...I got carried away.
Comment Policy: Please read our new comment policy before making a comment. In short, please be respectful of others and do not engage in personal attacks. Otherwise we will revoke your comment privileges.