Anybody notice all of the Liberals don't DEFEND
- Thread starter Skulnik
- Start date
do you defend your vote for Romney the billionaire ?
nuff said
too bad gop voters stayed home , we would have romneycare by now
nuff said
too bad gop voters stayed home , we would have romneycare by now
I will defend my vote for Romney any day of the week over what we have now, Romney would be a million times better than Obama, I believe the voting machines were fixed so Obama would win
A crucial difference between RomneyCare and ObamaCare is that the two healthcare plans, while similar in some ways, present vast differences in the essential origins and motives that separate Barack Obama and Mitt Romney. One author summarized it this way:
We know what Romney?s goal was when he passed his health care plan. His goal was to involve the private sector of Massachusetts in insuring a small percentage of the Massachusetts? residents [who didn't have health insurance and who were receiving free health care from the government.]
Obama?s goal prior to signing Obamacare into law was much, much bigger.
In 2003, he said, ?I happen to be a proponent of a single-payer universal health care plan.?
The fact is, Obamacare was originally going to be single payer. It was going to be European ? as close to it as Congress would allow. But that was curbed. What they got, instead ? what we got, instead ? was the first step. Obamacare. The first step toward single-payer, universal healthcare coverage.
And that is the crucial difference. Romney never said, never touted, never promised that ?we may not get [single-payer] immediately? or even a little later than immediately. Romneycare is not Obamacare because Obamacare is just getting started. One was an end in and of itself. The other is (still) a means to an end.
In 2006 when RomneyCare was passed, most conservatives praised Romney?s plan. The Bush administration sent a letter praising the passage of the new law. An often overlooked fact is that without the support of the Bush administration, Romney?s health care law never would have become a reality.
One of Romney?s main goals in passing healthcare legislation was to counter many much more liberal attempts within Massachusetts to take over the healthcare system. The Boston Globe newspaper discusses in detail one plan that Romney feared would become law if action was not taken. That plan was the imposition of a payroll tax of up to $1,700 per employee on all businesses that did not offer health insurance to their employees. It was a serious threat. The plan had been voted on in the year 2000 and the law barely failed by 3%. In 2006 the employer mandate coupled with a heavy payroll tax was to be voted on again.
In regard to ObamaCare, Romney firmly believes that each state should have the right to craft its own health care program. Health care has traditionally been a state issue, not a federal issue, and Romney wants to keep it that way. In his book, No Apology, Romney states:
?My own preference is to let each state fashion its own program to meet the distinct needs of its citizens. States could follow the Massachusetts model if they choose, or they could develop plans of their own. These plans, tested in the state ?laboratories of democracy,? could be evaluated, compared, improved upon, and adopted by others.?
In keeping with the belief that states should be able to craft their own programs, Romney has said that on his first day as president, he would issue a waiver to all 50 states allowing them to opt out of ObamaCare. This waiver would allow states to postpone the implementation of ObamaCare while Romney works with congress to formally repeal the bill.
In conclusion, a recent article in The New Yorker magazine states that ?Romney had accomplished a longstanding Democratic goal ? universal health insurance ? by combining three conservative policies.? In other words, Romney had beaten Democrats at their own goal of providing universal health insurance ? but Romney?s novel approach accomplished this goal not with a government takeover, but with conservative principles. The success of Romney?s healthcare law led many Democrats to consider adopting a similar approach to achieving universal health insurance. However, the end result from the Democrats under President Obama was a plan with a much larger government, much greater spending, increased taxes, and less power to the states and individuals to determine their own health care goals.
We know what Romney?s goal was when he passed his health care plan. His goal was to involve the private sector of Massachusetts in insuring a small percentage of the Massachusetts? residents [who didn't have health insurance and who were receiving free health care from the government.]
Obama?s goal prior to signing Obamacare into law was much, much bigger.
In 2003, he said, ?I happen to be a proponent of a single-payer universal health care plan.?
The fact is, Obamacare was originally going to be single payer. It was going to be European ? as close to it as Congress would allow. But that was curbed. What they got, instead ? what we got, instead ? was the first step. Obamacare. The first step toward single-payer, universal healthcare coverage.
And that is the crucial difference. Romney never said, never touted, never promised that ?we may not get [single-payer] immediately? or even a little later than immediately. Romneycare is not Obamacare because Obamacare is just getting started. One was an end in and of itself. The other is (still) a means to an end.
In 2006 when RomneyCare was passed, most conservatives praised Romney?s plan. The Bush administration sent a letter praising the passage of the new law. An often overlooked fact is that without the support of the Bush administration, Romney?s health care law never would have become a reality.
One of Romney?s main goals in passing healthcare legislation was to counter many much more liberal attempts within Massachusetts to take over the healthcare system. The Boston Globe newspaper discusses in detail one plan that Romney feared would become law if action was not taken. That plan was the imposition of a payroll tax of up to $1,700 per employee on all businesses that did not offer health insurance to their employees. It was a serious threat. The plan had been voted on in the year 2000 and the law barely failed by 3%. In 2006 the employer mandate coupled with a heavy payroll tax was to be voted on again.
In regard to ObamaCare, Romney firmly believes that each state should have the right to craft its own health care program. Health care has traditionally been a state issue, not a federal issue, and Romney wants to keep it that way. In his book, No Apology, Romney states:
?My own preference is to let each state fashion its own program to meet the distinct needs of its citizens. States could follow the Massachusetts model if they choose, or they could develop plans of their own. These plans, tested in the state ?laboratories of democracy,? could be evaluated, compared, improved upon, and adopted by others.?
In keeping with the belief that states should be able to craft their own programs, Romney has said that on his first day as president, he would issue a waiver to all 50 states allowing them to opt out of ObamaCare. This waiver would allow states to postpone the implementation of ObamaCare while Romney works with congress to formally repeal the bill.
In conclusion, a recent article in The New Yorker magazine states that ?Romney had accomplished a longstanding Democratic goal ? universal health insurance ? by combining three conservative policies.? In other words, Romney had beaten Democrats at their own goal of providing universal health insurance ? but Romney?s novel approach accomplished this goal not with a government takeover, but with conservative principles. The success of Romney?s healthcare law led many Democrats to consider adopting a similar approach to achieving universal health insurance. However, the end result from the Democrats under President Obama was a plan with a much larger government, much greater spending, increased taxes, and less power to the states and individuals to determine their own health care goals.
- Feb 26, 2001
- 13,593
- 164
- 63
- Feb 26, 2001
- 13,593
- 164
- 63
Obama screwed up when he didn't go for single payer, Medicare for everyone. He didn't get a single Republican vote for the ACA, so why did he try to compromise with them? He should have said: "Fuck you, I don't need your votes."
BY now every person in the USA would be covered, the insurance company leeches would be out of work, and Medicare would be controlling costs at half the present costs.
And don't give me that "doctors would quit practicing medicine." What's the neurosurgeon going to do if he's cut from $600K to $300K, flip burgers on the night shift? No....he's going to work longer hours and see more patients so he can make the payments on his Ferrari.
Obama screwed up, but he's still a better President than Romney would have been, and the best thing about him is that he's BLACK. That's right, a young black man from Chicago beat the Great White War Hero, and four years later beat The Great White Wallstreeter. That makes the bigots like hedge gag on their triple cheeseburgers. I love it.
BY now every person in the USA would be covered, the insurance company leeches would be out of work, and Medicare would be controlling costs at half the present costs.
And don't give me that "doctors would quit practicing medicine." What's the neurosurgeon going to do if he's cut from $600K to $300K, flip burgers on the night shift? No....he's going to work longer hours and see more patients so he can make the payments on his Ferrari.
Obama screwed up, but he's still a better President than Romney would have been, and the best thing about him is that he's BLACK. That's right, a young black man from Chicago beat the Great White War Hero, and four years later beat The Great White Wallstreeter. That makes the bigots like hedge gag on their triple cheeseburgers. I love it.
I'm not so sure about that. Have you have a genetic decoding done?
I suspect some simian genes.
