Newt Gingrich! for President! 2012 !

[Riot]

Originally Posted by dellinger63

When he said he agreed americans should be 'forced' to buy health insurance he was done.

When he made a fool of himself by trashing Paul Ryan he just finished digging the hole.

American's being "forced" to buy health insurance was a huge Republican plan in the 1990's. Nearly all Republicans supported this until Obama was elected. Not wanting all Americans to have health care is a "new" GOP position, just in the past couple-three years. They always strongly pushed for it, and health care for all was always a part of the Republican platform.

He never had a chance, but I wish he was around for nostalgia's and counterpoint's sake. He will be until Iowa, I think. I agree, it shows how much the Republican party has changed in the past 15 years. I could not believe how fast they ate him alive. That is scary for this country.

[dellinger63]

Originally Posted by Riot

American's being "forced" to buy health insurance was a huge Republican plan in the 1990's. Nearly all Republicans supported this until Obama was elected. Not wanting all Americans to have health care is a "new" GOP position, just in the past couple-three years. They always strongly pushed for it, and health care for all was always a part of the Republican platform..

Look I like Republicans want all Americans to have health insurance. In fact I want everyone to have a home and job as well. I'm just a realist and know this is impossible unless some Americans are 'forced' to pay for others. Stop listening to Huffingon. It was Hillarycare in the 90's and she is no republican.

A person right now can go into an ER room with a broken leg, have it set, get a few pain pills, and he's gone. Yes we pick it up in inflated bills. Wth Obamacare that same person now with an insurance card paid for by you and I will go in, maybe have a second opinion, possibly a scan, be prescribed therapy, more pain pills and a second x-ray to make sure the bone has healed. 2K v. maybe 8K. And that's a minor scenario. Also should you or I have a broken bone at the same time we'll have the chance to wait in line behind this newly insured person. Sorry many are able to see this is not a way to right the ship instead it's akin to pulling the drain plug.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by dellinger63

Look I like Republicans want all Americans to have health insurance. In fact I want everyone to have a home and job as well. I'm just a realist and know this is impossible unless some Americans are 'forced' to pay for others. Stop listening to Huffingon. It was Hillarycare in the 90's and she is no republican.

No. Republicans in the 1990's (and before) were always in favor of universal health care. Check out their party platforms. They were strongly for it right up until the time a Democrat beat them to it and got something passed in 2010.

And yes, Dell, we all pay for others now - can you simply not understand this reality?

A person right now can go into an ER room with a broken leg, have it set, get a few pain pills, and he's gone. Yes we pick it up in inflated bills. Wth Obamacare that same person now with an insurance card paid for by you and I will go in, maybe have a second opinion, possibly a scan, be prescribed therapy, more pain pills and a second x-ray to make sure the bone has healed. 2K v. maybe 8K.

No. That is a ridiculous, imaginary scenario. That is not how our health care system works now.

Also should you or I have a broken bone at the same time we'll have the chance to wait in line behind this newly insured person.

To say nothing of the unbelievable statement that you want to begrudge another human health insurance because you might be inconvenienced.

"Obamacare" is in effect now. Tell me how you've suffered.

[dellinger63]

Originally Posted by Riot

"Obamacare" is in effect now. Tell me how you've suffered.

As I said my insurance went up not down not to mention I've been prejudiced against, as I have no waiver.

[miraja2]

Originally Posted by Riot

Republicans in the 1990's (and before) were always in favor of universal health care.

If that's true, how do you explain 1993?

[Riot]

Originally Posted by miraja2

If that's true, how do you explain 1993?

Politics. And Hilary's involvement. None of them can stand the other parties success. If Teddy Kennedy hadn't freaked out about it not being aggressive enough, we'd all have had Richard Nixon's mandated health care from our employers years ago. As it is, much of what ended up in the PPACA has plenty of Republican history and previous recommendation. They can't stand that a Dem finally gets credit for passing something (because most of us realize the PPACA isn't any aggressive or major "socalized medicine" overhaul. It's some tweeks to administration by private companies, in an effort to simply better provide consumer protections to people within the current system)

It's strange, what the GOP has turned into, in the past 5-6 years. Very bizzaro.

[miraja2]

Originally Posted by Riot

Politics. And Hilary's involvement. None of them can stand the other parties success. If Teddy Kennedy hadn't freaked out about it not being aggressive enough, we'd all have had Richard Nixon's mandated health care from our employers years ago. As it is, much of what ended up in the PPACA has plenty of Republican history and previous recommendation. They can't stand that a Dem finally gets credit for passing something (because most of us realize the PPACA isn't any aggressive or major "socalized medicine" overhaul. It's some tweeks to administration by private companies, in an effort to simply better provide consumer protections to people within the current system)

It's strange, what the GOP has turned into, in the past 5-6 years. Very bizzaro.

I think the conservative counterrevolution goes back a bit further, and I think you may be underestimating how ideologically opposed many Republicans in Congress were to health care reform by 1993.
You are surely correct that the Republican "conservatism" of the Nixon/Goldwater/Rockefeller era was a whole lot different than it is today, but I don't think it just suddenly changed in the W era. The Post-Regan Republicans of the 90s were already pretty set in their anti-government (by the standards of the 60s and 70s) ways.

[Danzig]

i don't think it has so much to do with who comes up with the idea-it's how citizens react to ideas, and the pols need for re-election.
look at the defense of marriage act. who signed it? and why? it all comes down to political points. at the time, the majority was against gay marriage. now, that's changed, and so has the govt in response.
the govt. doesn't change the people, it's the opposite.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by miraja2

I think the conservative counterrevolution goes back a bit further, and I think you may be underestimating how ideologically opposed many Republicans in Congress were to health care reform by 1993.
You are surely correct that the Republican "conservatism" of the Nixon/Goldwater/Rockefeller era was a whole lot different than it is today, but I don't think it just suddenly changed in the W era. The Post-Regan Republicans of the 90s were already pretty set in their anti-government (by the standards of the 60s and 70s) ways.

I do think that most of the fight against health care was that Clinton put Hilary - a non-elected official - in charge of it. Even in the Bush HR years, Republicans had a social conciousness, consideration for the old and poor and needy.

I think that's a good point, the negative influence Reagan had on the party. Yeah, he was the turning point, after Nixon ... I think that, after the night of Watergate, the country was so happy to get "such a nice guy", who "tore down that wall", they didn't care - or simply didn't notice - that he brought the financial policy disasters and the evangelicals with him. We all loved the man, nearly no matter what he did.

The financial policies that remain are what continue to astound me, the years of viewing the bad results, yet the blind adherence to completely ineffective "Reaganomics". But, when you are only interested in making good policy for the wealthy, not the entire country, it's a good thing.