Replies

Ok, when judging something, you always need to test against something. In medicine,you test against a placebo.

I could say “unemployment in Texas and Alaska are up over the last two years, therefore republicans and/or conservatives stink”.

That is quite wrong because if compare the rise in unemployment in TX and AK compared to the other states, the result is quite good.

Saying under romneycare, things got worse doesn’t cut it.

It has to be under romneycare, things got worse compared to other states and I don’t see the proof here.

Hate to burst the rhetorical bubble for you, but this comparison has already been made. Insurance premiums for MA residents rose at nearly twice the national rate last year. I’m not going to take the time to google the article and track it down, because I don’t think you’d read it anyway.

Same thing happened with auto insurance after it became compulsory. When you mandate something, demand is artificially increased and pricess WILL go up. It’s as basic as economics gets.

Plus, staytrue, it's NOT Romneycare. His 8 vetoes were overidden by the liberal legislature. So the plan he originally envisioned was never put into practice. He's the first to admit, that while they got everyone insured (which means taxpayers are no longer left paying for everyone's ER visits), the result is far from perfect given those overidden vetoes.

Also, fair-minded individuals realize that many changes were made after Romney left office as well. Had he remained governor, it is safe to say he would have attempted to enact the 2nd part of the reform which would have addressed cost cutting measures similar to the ones he lists here in his health care reform platform(i.e. tort reform, deregulation etc).

It's still good to point out to the dems that they did get everyone insured without resorting to the "public option" that the libs keep trying to push. That has nothing to do with getting everyone insured, but is only a thinly veiled attempt to expand government power.