PALIN, PRIMARIES AND THE PRESIDENCY

The comment, "Pawlenty saying he's for universal healthcare might not be that bad", was your comment and not mine.

In your reply to me, you put that comment in italics, which would attribute that comment to me.

Please don't do that.

And again I ask you why YOU think "universal healthcare might not be a bad thing"?

101 posted on 07/28/2010 10:58:51 AM PDT by FreeReign

I answered you already in post #96. "Universal Healthcare" is a great goal for any system. I bet if Palin was asked "Are you for universal healthcare?" she'd say "You betcha!". It's like universal literacy. The alternative hardcore Conservative position would be: "End Medicare an all other Government involvement in Healthcae because it's going broke, and is unconstitutional.

No one saying that can win the POTUS. Ron Paul might say that. He'll get 5% of the GOP primary vote again, too.

So, given those realities Pawlenty saying that he is "for Universal Healthcare" is not necessarily a bad thing. If he is for providing it via a single-payer, British style govet system, taking over all hospitals, and employing all doctors, that's a bad thing. If he wanted to provide it with something like "Public Clinics" for those unable to afford private care, or vouchers, or tax credits ... etc.

The American people do not, and will not support a system that allows sick people to be turned away from hospitals.

THe current system is broken and driving the entire country bankrupt and needs to be changed, njust not to Obamacare.

Please respond to the points I made in #96.

PS: Your comment was in BOLD ITALIC, ie: the most recent, but I take your point. Sorry.

102 posted on 07/28/2010 3:43:28 PM PDT by Jack Black ( Whatever is left of American patriotism is now identical with counter-revolution.)

To: reasonisfaith

How did we get John McCain for our nominee in 2008? How did we get W as our POTUS. How did we get the collection of losers in the House and Senate who fail to do what they should?

One part of it, in my opinion, is we took everyone’s claim that they were “conservative” at face value. Michael Savage and William Kristol both claim to be conservatives, and infact are both respected leaders for the Conservative movemnet. Do you think their administrations would produce similar results?

I don’t.

103 posted on 07/28/2010 4:18:29 PM PDT by Jack Black ( Whatever is left of American patriotism is now identical with counter-revolution.)

We got these people in office because voters believed labels which turned out to be fake. As you just described.

Forget the labels.

Look at a candidate’s history of supporting the Constitution (and not just in speeches).

It’s that easy.

104 posted on 07/28/2010 8:18:39 PM PDT by reasonisfaith (Rules will never work for radicals because they seek chaos. And don't even know it.)

105 posted on 07/29/2010 8:00:40 AM PDT by gogeo ("Every one has a right to be an idiot. He abuses the privilege!" Groucho Marx)

106 posted on 07/29/2010 8:01:14 AM PDT by gogeo ("Every one has a right to be an idiot. He abuses the privilege!" Groucho Marx)

The ability to communicate independently of the media is her strong point and is the #1 requirement for a Republican candidate...

That should be written on a large stick. Anyone who forgets it should be whacked with said stick.

107 posted on 07/29/2010 8:04:52 AM PDT by gogeo ("Every one has a right to be an idiot. He abuses the privilege!" Groucho Marx)

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794