You are hereForums / Why I'm a Republican for Obama / You are not republicans, get that straight.

You are not republicans, get that straight.

By Robert Gordon - Posted on 28 July 2011

Robert, your last post (about proud to be a Republican)  was excellent.  This one is just name calling and seems designed to just get an emotional response out of other posters.

I'd be more interested in hearing exactly what principles one must hold to be a Republican.

Telling people they are pathetic doesn't add jack to a serious discourse about politics.

You are right, next time  I'll try harder to control myself.

Please stop acting ugly.  I don't think you are behaving in a fashion of which Jesus would approve.

The typical knee jerk, name calling tactics of today's version of the GOP. 

We REAL Republicans consider the Tea Party types who have high-jacked the party to be the RINOs.

I will take the bait. 

>I believe in a modern version of Adam Smith's free market, which included opposition to monopolies and and a firm belief that capitalists must ensure just and fair treatment of their workers.

Alas, Smith believed that the christian upbringing of Europe's captains of industry would ensure fair treatment for their workers, but not even the most prestigious  business schools in the country try to unload that pile any more -- even in the few "business ethics" courses to which few give little more than lip service. 

So we have unions and some regulation of the market to take the place of the deficient moral sensibilities of our corporate leaders and their principal share holders.   Is there some excess in unions and government regulation?  You bet.  But can we acknowledge that the unregulated American free market -- which gave us slavery for starters -- has potential for excess as well?

>I support the Romney Massachusetts health care plan, even if Romney doesn't any longer. He was a Republican when he developed it.  I also support Richard Nixon's call for nationwide employer-based health insurance.  He was a Republican, too. (He did some other stuff I wasn't too crazy about, but I was with him on this one.)

>I support Ronald Reagan's post 1982 understanding that the government can be a terrific creator of jobs to stimulate the private sector, but the jobs have to be targeted to specific needs and to specific areas: "(Reagan's) creation of the department of veterans affairs contributed to an increase in the federal workforce of more than 60,000 people during his presidency"-- many in small town, rural, Republican areas.

(You should have seen those conservative Veterans groups in rural New York -- ROSS PEROT country, never mind Bush -- rally around Senator Hillary Clinton when she saved a local VA hospital that Rumsfeld targeted for closing in 2003. During her 2000 campaign, they wanted her extradited from the country. After 2003, they were practially asking her for dates. Slam dunk re-election in 2006 even in conservative districts; endorsed by Rupert Murdoch's NY POST for re-election).

>I support Newt Gingrich's  analysis that the Democratic Party led the way in fighting racial prejudice in America (he actually said Democrats "ended racism" so we can move on, but I won't go that far with old Newt. Besides that, the only other area where I agree with Gingrich is his self description as "a different kind of politician.")

>I support Eisenhower's view of the inherent dangers of the military-industrial complex and the threat it posed/poses to genuine freedom in America. Eisenhower was a Republican.

But never mind all that. I am a Republican because I have the freedom to declare myself as such and anyone who would state otherwise is lickin' the wrong end of the lollipop.



TomG, I echo your points. Nice post.

First off, I'm suspicious that this site is even legit in the first place.

This is the kind of thing that could simply have been set up by a Democrat in order to embarrass the eventual GOP nominee.


Having said that, assuming it is legitimate, my question is how could ANY person calling themselves a Republican vote for a man that seeks to turn our healthcare system into another government entitlement ?

If you agree with what Obama and the Dems want to do with our healtcare system, then IMO you are not a Republican. My advice would be to either become an independent, or join the Democrat Party.  

You... must not have read the most recent blog that we posted. A conservative news organization conducted a poll that said over 20% of Republicans were probably going to vote for the President this November. That's over 8 million Republicans. Do those people not exist?

Everyone behind the operation of this site is a Republican.

The answer to your question:

In 1993, Senate Republicans, including some current Sentate Republicans, proposed a healthcare overhaul that was almost identical to Obamacare:

Here's a story about how Senator Hatch supported it:

Mitt Romney supported it:

Less than a year ago, Newt Gingrich re-affirmed his support for a mandate and subsidizing low-income people so they could also purchase health insurance:


Thanks for dropping by!


Yeah yeah, I've heard it all before. Most Republicans however are not for a government mandated healthcare, if you guys are then IMO you should join the DemocratIC Party.

Mitt Romney and Newt Gingrich are. I suppose you think they should also become Democrats.

Mitt Romney is no longer for a mandated government system, Obama of course is.

The vast majority of Republican voters are against such a system. 

"Mitt Romney is no longer for a mandated government system"


LOL!   Mitt Romney is no longer for a lot of things that he used to be for... and he is now for a lot of things that he didn't use to be for.   For him, it always depends on which way the wind is blowing.

Flip... flop... flip... flop... flip... flop... flip... flop... flip... flop... flip... flop... flip... flop... flip... flop... flip... flop... flip... flop... flip... flop... flip... flop... flip... flop... flip... flop... flip... flop... flip... flop... flip... flop... flip... flop... flip... flop... flip... flop... flip... flop... flip... flop... flip... flop... flip... flop... flip... flop... flip... flop... flip... flop... flip... flop...

 "then IMO you should join the DemocratIC Party"


Whew!  Thank God you stopped by!  We have been sitting here waiting and waiting for your opinion!

Why don't you poke around and read some articles / blogs / posts on this site before you start telling us what we should do in your opinion.  We have been around for a few years now, and the level of knowledge is above par on this site, so you should be educated before you participate.

I got another one-- Santorum ALSO supported an individual mandate:


Should he also become a Democrat?

Do you believe as president he would work to maintain Obamacare ? Do you think ANY of the Republican nominees would ?

The bottom line is there is only one candidate running for president that is in favor of a mandated government system, and that is Barack Obama. 

Stop embarassing yourself. Santorum, Romney, and also Gingrich.

Gingrich supported an individual mandate in 2009:


And he supported it in 2011:

“I agree that all of us have a responsibility to pay–help pay for health care. And, and I think that there are ways to do it that make most libertarians relatively happy. I’ve said consistently we ought to have some requirement that you either have health insurance or you post a bond…”

Long time member and lurker here.

I am independent and I can assure you by my standards everyone here is very conservative.

Just because they prefer one presidental canidate over another is irrelevant.

You must be one who thinks everyone should vote along party lines, and some states agree with you including the one I live in.

However, that is not how it works.  Since the begining of voting for president everyone has had the right to vote for any canidate.  Just because their canidate is not your canidate means nothing.

The fact there are so many Republicans who are "it doesn't matter who our nominee is - it isn't Obama" will make our country worse.  Especially if someone like Santorum gets in.  Then we will go back to the 1950s!

I won't get into my issues with Santorum here - it is neither here nor there - but I hope my point is relevant.

And since independent nominees seem to never have a chance due to BIG PARTY having more money etc - what can you really do?

As for health care, the only thing I would like to see change is requiring the insurance companies to give payment plans to individuals via their income (not those with a full time job that can get insureance through the company they work for as they already get a MAJOR discount).

Whether a mandate is necessary or not is irrelevent everyone needs to be insured here.  Right now we spend millions to billions to pay for those who cannot afford insurance to go to the ER - more people go to the ER over frivilous things because they have no insurance.

Heck, I'm on a Medicaid plan via Magnolia Medical and I had to go to the ER for a VERY BAD cold instead of Urgicare because Low and Behold the Urgi centers won't take Magnolia but they take Medicaid.  At least my ER visits get covered, but those without insurance NOPE.  One of my old ER visits before I finally got registered as disabled was near 5000 USD - could I afford it - no - the hospital had to write it off.  It isn't like I WANTED that to happen either.  I paid 300 of it and the Abulance fees over the course of a year with a friend's help.  They decided to finish it at that point.

Meh, went on a tangent but I hope you get the point there.

Well said. Hope you post more here!

I will do my best.  I'm one of these people that stands up and says something infrequently.  Mostly because sometimes I feel I might say something stupid XD.

Either way it goes, I guess in this topic being independent is code word for "ignore what she says" for certain posters.

The Republican platform stands against a government mandated health care law. Whowever the nomineee is will work to kill Obamacare. You can spin the past all you like, but the facts are that as we go into the November election there will only be one candidate who is for a government mandate and that is Obama.

Obviously you guys support that, which again makes me question your Republican credentials.

Former Tennessee GOP senator Bill Frist, a noted physician, has gone on record many times in support of the Affordable Health Act (it's NOT Obamacare, by the way, since the bill Obama wanted was much different than what was actually passed and signed into law). Be that as it may your veiled assertion that no real Republican would support such a law is B.S.

Let's get one thing straight, according to polls the majority of Americans have cosistently been for a repeal of Obamacare. That's counting all Americans, do you honestly believe that if Republicans only were polled that the majority would be in favor of keeping it ?

The truth is the Republican platform regardless of who the nominee is will be for repeal.

Wrong! Quite a few Americans who were initially against health care reform were only against it because IT DID NOT GO FAR ENOUGH. To suggest that most Americans are against health care reform is just what I called it before: B.S.

P.S. I don't give a **** whether you believe me or not. It's completely immaterial to me.

So you don't think it went far enough ? You truly are a Dem then.


And by the way, most Americans want it repealed, that doesn't sound to me like they think it went far enough !!!

If the Republican platform said that men should keep their wives enslaved, I suppose you'd be right there fighting for that too? Wow-you support every single thing on the GOP platform? That's amazing. And it means you are too far gone for us to help you recover your own brain, heart and soul. Glad we could try to help but the political health care you require goes way beyond the Affordable Health Care Act. I feel sorry for people on both sides of the spectrum who refuse to be open-minded or consider a different view, perhaps a "center" view or compromise. Interesting how you went back to your talking points and refused to answer my below question of what YOU would do in terms of healthcare in this country. How dare I give you a real person example to consider? Mixing feelings into the matter is not a Republican thing to do these days. At debates, we now cheer executions and people dying without healthcare. We boo gay soldiers and birth control. Emotions are an unfair weapon! Surely, you see our health care system as unsustainable in it's current form (nevermind-how could you see that when your masters tell you to ignore that fact?) Let me just speak to the wall next to you for a moment. Without the Affordable Health Care Act, healthcare costs would skyrocket and crush any hope for normal growth for our country.  The leading candidates all say they would get rid of Obamacare. Assuming they are telling the truth, this will greatly increase our deficit. They have no Plan B. The leading candidates also have tax plans-extending the Bush tax cuts and giving even more to millionaires and billionaires-that are unpaid for and will add to the deficit. But if your Republican Gods tell you to vote straight Republican-against the best interests of this country and likely your own interests unless you are part of the 1%-and you want to be a good puppet and follow that path to destruction, be our guest.

I am all for exploring why the costs of healthcare have exploded, and am open to new ideas.

I am however like pretty much all fiscally minded Republicans and am against a government mandated program.

Social Security... Medicare... VA. H-m-m... government mandated programs? Guess not.

Yet another reason why I'm glad Bill Frist is no longer representing my state in the Senate. Frist has admitted that the individual mandate is unconstitutional but claims that the law would work just fine without it. Even the Obama administration doesn't believe that fantasy.

"according to polls >>the majority of Americans<< have consistently been for a repeal of Obamacare."

Nope. The big November 2011 Gallup  poll that bore the bad news for Obama was a tough one indeed, but it had 47% wanting repeal, 42% wanting it as is (error sampling range of +/- 4%).  It was certainly a bad report for the Affordable Care Act (which is the name of the bill), but 47% is not a majority, unless of course you were home schooled by the Santorums.

Nope Squared. A more recent (Jan 2012) Harris Poll shows the Affordable Care Act debate  gaining nuance and the bill gaining more support: only 36% want it repealed now, 21% want it left entirely in tact and a large plurality want some modifications of one kind or another w/out repealing many of the current provisions.

To be sure, Obama's messaging on the Affordable Care Act has been on life support since the  bill passed -- to the point where I was starting to wonder if all he gave a dammm about was getting the "historic" bill through the Congress and scoring a Mt Rushmore moment. It appeared as if he could hardly be bothered with whether anyone would actually live to benefit from the bill.  But somehow, some decent debate seems to be worming its way into the public's attention.


You guys are becoming comical. The facts are that Americans do not want a government mandated healthcare law.

Do you honestly believe that the reason ALL THREE, Romney, Sanctorum, and Gingrich who have all publicly said they will work to repeal Obamacare, will do so because it doesn't go far enough ?

The facts are that a repeal is part of the Republican platform, and it's because the voters want it killed.

You guys obviously want a mandated system.

Instead of having this website, have any of you considered simply joining the Democrat Party ? 


Both Newt Gingrich and Rick Santorum have supported a federal individual mandate for health insurance in the past. Gingrich supported it as late as 2009.

The legislation that Obama signed into law is almost indentical to that supported by Republicans in 1993, and which was conceived by the Heritage Foundation.
What Obama got passed is a Republican plan. They don't want you to realize that because they want you to be outraged and fool yourself into thinking Obama is a socialist rather than a moderate who takes Republican ideas and puts them into effect.

Yeah yeah, Democrat talking points.

Have you seen the latest poll on this from Gallup ?


Americans Do Not Think Individual Mandate Passes Legal Muster

The Supreme Court next month will hear legal challenges to the healthcare law, which are focused on the law's requirement that all Americans purchase health insurance or pay a fine. Americans overwhelmingly believe the "individual mandate," as it is often called, is unconstitutional, by a margin of 72% to 20%.

Even a majority of Democrats, and a majority of those who think the healthcare law is a good thing, believe that provision is unconstitutional.

As you may know, the Supreme Court will hear arguments next month concerning a requirement in the healthcare law that every American must buy health insurance or pay a fine. Regardless of whether you favor or oppose the law, do you think this requirement is constitutional or unconstitutional? Among all Americans, by party ID, and by view of healthcare law, February 2012

Did you notice that according to this poll 94% of Republicans believe the law is unconstitutional ? Does that sound to you like the majority of Republicans want the mandate ?  

Since everyone HAS to think like you (they cannot think for themselves), you obviously are not an American. We do have freedom of thought, speech, expression, belief, etc in this country. If you believed in that (the founding fathers did!) you wouldn't be on here trying to tell all of us how wrong we are.

Perhaps you ought to try it sometime, instead of blaming everyone else for not thinking in lockstep with you.

I'm just informing you and others here who "claim" you are Republicans how out of step you are with the VAST majority of Republicans on this particular issue.

Which, in case you haven't noticed, is EXACTLY why this site was set up.

So stop trying to "convert" any one on here. It won't work! And we, as American citizens, have the right to our opinions, just as you do to yours.

So go preach to the choir. It will do you more good than being on here.

You're the ones proclaiming to the world that you're "Republicans", and why you support Obama, which then of course brings out the real truth that this site was obviously set up by Democrats in order to do your part an work to drive a wedge amongst Republicans.

Right. Talking points.

Here's Gingrich on Meet the Press a short while ago:


MR. GREGORY: All right, let me ask you about another hot-button issue in the Republican primary , of course, and that's health care . Mitt Romney having to defend his proponent -- that he was a proponent of universal health care in Massachusetts , and specifically around this idea of the individual mandate where you make Americans buy insurance if they don't have it. Now, I know you've got big difference with what you call Obamacare . But back in 1993 on this program this is what you said about the individual mandate. Watch.
REP. GINGRICH: I am for people, individuals -- exactly like automobile insurance -- individuals having health insurance and being required to have health insurance . And I am prepared to vote for a voucher system which will give individuals, on a sliding scale, a government subsidy so we insure that everyone as individuals have health insurance .
MR. GREGORY: What you advocate there is precisely what President Obama did with his healthcare legislation, is it not?
REP. GINGRICH: No, it's not precisely what he did. In, in the first place , Obama basically is trying to replace the entire insurance system, creating state exchanges, building a Washington - based model, creating a federal system . I believe all of us -- and this is going to be a big debate -- I believe all of us have a responsibility to help pay for health care . I think the idea that...
MR. GREGORY: You agree with Mitt Romney on this point.
REP. GINGRICH: Well, I agree that all of us have a responsibility to pay -- help pay for health care . And, and I think that there are ways to do it that make most libertarians relatively happy. I've said consistently we ought to have some requirement that you either have health insurance or you post a bond...
MR. GREGORY: Mm-hmm.
REP. GINGRICH: ...or in some way you indicate you're going to be held accountable.
MR. GREGORY: But that is the individual mandate, is it not?
REP. GINGRICH: It's a variation on it.
REP. GINGRICH: But it's a system...
MR. GREGORY: And so you won't use that issue against Mitt Romney .
REP. GINGRICH: No. But it's a system which allows people to have a range of choices which are designed by the economy. But I think setting the precedent -- you know, there are an amazing number of people who think that they ought to be given health care . And, and so a large number of the uninsured earn $75,000 or more a year, don't buy any health insurance because they want to buy a second house or a better car or go on vacation. And then you and I and everybody else ends up picking up for them. I don't think having a free rider system in health is any more appropriate than having a free rider system in any other part of our society.

Again, all three major candidates have publicly said they will work to dismantle Obamacare as soon as they get into office.

Americans want healthcare reform, but that doesn't mean they want a mandated system. And as I posted earlier a majority of Americans do not believe it is constitutional to force citizens to purchase a product.

The comparrison to car insurance is a dishonest argument, as no one is forcing the citizenry to drive or own an automobile.


You're the perfect lacky for the GOP-- you believe everything they tell you. I just gave you a quote from Newt Gingrich from the past year where he says that he supports a mandated system, and you tell me how Newt promised to get rid of Obamacare, not acknowledging that he wants to replace it with a different mandated system that still involves mandates and subsidizing coverage for people who can't afford it.
Super. So Obamacare will give way to Newtcare. Congrats. Y
And by the way... when Republicans came up with healthcare legislation in the 90's that was almost identical to Obamacare, both Santorum and Romney at the time said they would support it. 
The ONLY reason why these three are now against this healthcare reform is because Obama got it passed and they didn't. Now you're buying their nonsense that they really want to get rid of it, despite the fact that they've supported it in the past.

You're a broken record. All's you do is bring up what a few Republican politicians have stood for in the past.

Remember Hillarycare ? The majority of Republican voters were against it then, just as they are against Obamacare now.

You are the one out of touch.

A "few" Republican politicians include 3 out of the 4 guys still trying to be the nominee. And Senators Grassley, Hatch and Dole.

And I'm glad you admit it's just a "majority" of Republicans who are against Obamacare-- and not 100%. That's a big step for you.

Oh gosh, you're right it's not 100%, it's only 94%.

And by the way, not a single Republican Senator voted for Obamacare when the bill came up, and only one Republican House member. Why ? Because Republican voters do not want it.


I wonder how many Republicans would have supported it if a Republican president proposed it. What do you think?
My guess is that it would have gotten a lot of support. Not only have many Republicans in the past publicly supported or written similar legislation (as I've gotten you to admit), but they've been perfectly willing to enact sweeping healthcare reforms that cost taxpayers a lot of money-- like the $1 trillion Medicare Part D plan Republicans passed in 2003. 
The only reason why Republicans changed their mind over a period of a few years from saying we need to replicate what Romney did all over the country, to now being against it is because they didn't want a Democrat getting credit for taking their good ideas.

Explain then why even a majority of Democrats believe the mandate is most likely unconstitutional ?

I don't care who or what party originally came up with the ideas in what is popurlarly called Obamacare but the new health care law is one of the worst pieces of legislation ever passed.

It puts 1/6 of the economy under control of the Federal government.  There is no evidence that the government can properly manage a new entitlement without adding trillions of dollars to the already unsustainable deficit.


All these complaints yet nobody complaining is offering a better idea which will be effective AND lower the deficit. Definitely not perfect but amazing that Pres. Obama overhauled our broken healthcare system in a pretty major way (which lowers the deficit-something I thought you cared about) after decades of other presidents trying. Can it be improved? Certainly and now that the foundation has been laid out, I expect it to. But getting rid of it? Going back to the status quo? That would be insane. It would be much better with a public option or Medicare for All but Republicans blocked those ideas even though they were popular in polling. I'll bet popularity for the AHA would shoot way up if they added a public option. The problem with our system stems from it being for-profit IMO. This current system seems to encourage insurance companies to set up policies which make our system inefficient and costly and they don't care too much about customer satisfaction. Obamacare is not s government take-over of healthcare. It is insurance run. The only difference is that insurance companies have to follow certain rules set up by the government. Rules to help consumers. Who is against that? If I can get off my current insurance and sign up for a government plan right now, please tell me how to do so. I think it would be better if the government could offer cheaper, better plans. If a gov't run system is so bad, why is the VA so well-liked and rated highly? And let's not forget that every state has the freedom to waive Obamacare IF they can replace it with something that serves all people and is paid for. I wonder why Republican governors aren't taking advantage of that if Obamacare is such a bad thing...

What if the mandate is not constitutional ?

Link from Covert Rationing News Blog:

Any scheme for reforming healthcare that is based on private health insurance will fail if a substantial proportion of the population declines to purchase health insurance. Whether people have chosen to acquire health insurance or not, they will still get sick. And when the uninsured get sick there are only two choices. The first choice is to refuse them care. Libertarians have no problem with this. They believe that if you want some healthcare, you should pay for it yourself. If you choose not to buy health insurance, or otherwise fail to make arrangements to pay for healthcare should it turn out that you need some (as well you might, if you engage in all the activities and abuse all the substances that libertarians say is your right), well, that’s too bad for you. Let your painful and untimely demise serve as an object lesson to everyone else, so that perhaps they will make better personal choices. Most non-libertarians, however, find this option abhorrent. The second choice is to take care of the uninsured anyway. If you do that, not only do you drive up the cost of health insurance for people who have chosen to buy it, but you also create a huge incentive for people to not buy it in the first place. This is why Republicans or conservatives who have thought deeply about healthcare reform (Gingrich, the Heritage Foundation), or who have actually instituted healthcare reform (Romney), will often settle upon a solution that incorporates something very much like President Obama’s individual mandate. Unless everyone is strongly “incented” to buy health insurance, a market-based healthcare system will collapse. More to the point, Republicans ought to recognize that, while it seems to have wound up that way, the individual mandate in Obamacare did not start out as a sneaky way to undermine the Constitution. It was, in fact, a necessary concession to the more conservative of the Democratic members of Congress. President Obama and his minions (or handlers, depending on which talk show hosts you listen to) are on record as saying that their real goal is a single-payer, government-controlled healthcare system. And there is no reason in a single-payer, government-controlled healthcare system to invoke anything like an individual mandate to purchase insurance. The President would have been quite happy without any individual mandate, if he could have gotten his way in the first place. The individual mandate was inserted into Obamacare purely as a necessary component of healthcare reforms that are ostensibly based on private health insurance, which is the only kind of reform the President could possibly get through even a Democratic Congress in 2010. If the Supreme Court declares the individual mandate to be constitutional (which will violate everything DrRich holds dear about America), then it’s a huge win for Obamacare. But if they declare it unconstitutional, that will trigger the Republican’s real problems. Republicans, Democrats and federal judges all seem to agree that without the individual mandate, Obamacare is infeasible. The moment the mandate is declared unconstitutional, Obamacare disappears. And this will create a “Graduate” moment. There the Republicans will be, sitting on the bus with the healthcare system they have just saved from the handsome-but-arrogant groom who had Big Plans for it, and heading to – where?  They can’t just go back to the old healthcare system; we’re past that. The health insurance industry has made it plain that their business model is broken, which is why they acceded to and even campaigned for Obamacare (a system under which they are to become federally-regulated public utilities) in the first place. Should Republicans institute their own market-based healthcare reforms? Good idea! But what do they do about the people who choose not to buy private insurance, now that they have had mandates to purchase declared unconstitutional? And even if they have an answer to that question (which they do not), do they have a plan ready to go, one that can be implemented quickly, before the healthcare system implodes? (Remember, Republicans, you will be dealing with a health insurance industry that has run out its string, and that will be at least angry if not panicked at the demise of its public-utility end-game.)

Wow, John, I don't think facts and real quotes are going to break through on this one. Fox News has claimed another follower who never questions or goes off the Republican script. Maybe thelibrary needs to go to the library and look up the Hillary Health Care time period. I recall it well because I was one of the anti-Hillary people at the time and I remember clearly applauding and supporting Dole's Republican alternative and guess what? It is identical to "Obamacare." I recall all Republicans being on board with that "moderate, conservative" version of Hillary's Universal Healthcare plan. So just because every Republican has flip-flopped on supporting the Dole plan (aka Obamacare) doesn't mean they are sincere or are voicing opposition for any reason other than being against anything Obama does and doing it to be popular with the GOP base (thanks to all the misinformation they spread.) Just like the GOP always saying they want to make abortion illegal (hmmm-Bush had his chance-why didn't he?) they don't really intend to get rid of Obamacare. They might tweak it and then claim credit but do you really think they'll tell parents they will be kicking their college kids off their insurance, insurance companies to resume discriminating against people with pre-existing health issues, or that seniors won't be gettting that donut hole closed anymore? What a joke and a bigger joke that you believe them!

What are their solutions, by the way? Alternative? I hear crickets when that question is asked. Please tell me what you think should happen in this case. A young man making $150,000 per year works for himself as a landscaper and refuses to buy health insurance, could use that money to buy a better car, etc. He is healthy, thinking what could ever happen to him? Suddenly he has a severe health issue which requires long-term hospitalization and expesnive medication (without which he would die.) Obviously,he can no longer work his landscaping job and has no income. He pays what he can, sells his possessions, but money quickly runs out. What should happen here? Should we let him die? Should taxpayers just foot the bill? Don't you see how the mandate helps all of us? Seems like a no-brainer unless you don't really care about saving money and empowering people to take control of their own health and potential problems. But it makes sense if your only goal is to oppose whatever Pres. Obama supports.

Follow RFO:

TwitterCafe PressFacebook




RFO Gear

Subscribe to General RFO Newsletter

General news and announcements for We will never share or sell your email address.