Skip to comments.Gingrich Applauded Romney's Health Plan [headline is a lie]
Posted on 12/26/2011 10:01:00 PM PST by Steelfish
DECEMBER 27, 2011 Gingrich Applauded Romney's Health Plan
BY BRODY MULLINS AND JANET ADAMY
Newt Gingrich voiced enthusiasm for Mitt Romney's Massachusetts health-care law when it was passed five years ago, the same plan he has been denouncing over the past few months as he campaigned for the Republican presidential nomination.
"The health bill that Governor Romney signed into law this month has tremendous potential to effect major change in the American health system," said an April 2006 newsletter published by Mr. Gingrich's former consulting company, the Center for Health Transformation.
(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...
The letter supports hillarycare, right? Thats the lie.
The letter speaks for itself. Perry described Hillary's efforts on healthcare as commendable and worthy. He was also clearly pitching to the feds about the "rural populations" who have a "high proportion of uninsured people, rising health care costs, and often experience lack of services".
Some Perrybots have the nasty habit of throwing around the word "lie" when they disagree with something. In that respect, your post doesn't disappoint.
Romney would be an unmitigated disaster. Gingrich is bold, and assertive but the question in everyone’s mind is whether he is electable in the general. If we need a fresh face, someone with less baggage, telegenic like Reagan, who can be assured of the evangelical vote and is capable of picking up the crucial female 29-49 demographic, it is hard to pass up Santorum as the last one who is both conservative and viable. Santorum himself makes this point in doing the rounds in Iowa that we have the establishment candidates (Romney, Perry and Gingrich),the libertarian in Ron Paul, and then the true conservatives in him and Bachmann. If Santorum fails to make it, then either Gingrich or Perry is the preferred choice of those of us who believe in a 180 degree reversal of the Obama policies, foreign and domestic.
Santorum is nice. A good conservative. Would be something if he or Bachmann or even Perry could suddenly set the world on fire.
Absolutely true! Plus if as favorite son, he peels of PA, it’s curtains for Obama.
saw FOX running with this and doing a great hit piece, weird how they don’t go after Romney or the nutty Paul.
Romney will do and say anything to get elected or at least the nomination and that does include paying staffers to come on sites like these and attack others.
Hell the social liberal network called FOX has been running hit pieces against all candidates except Paul and Romney, ah I know why , they’re frigging liberals and sadly some on the right actually defend Romney or Paula and do their dirty work for them.
I’ve not been on here for some time just because I was fed up of seeing the same names doing the attacks.
The artifice of lumping Rick Perry in with the others as if they were one, and saying they’re all establishment candidates, doesn’t make Rick Perry anything other than what he is. An outsider, looking in on DC, definitely anything BUT the establishment choice.
The Rovians and Bushies are most definitely for Mitt, but would’ve taken Huntsman or Christie or Daniels or just about anybody else if that had panned out. Ditto even for Dick Cheney.
These same people were for Kay Bailey Hutchison to unseat Rick Perry as Governor.
KBH, a DC insider and creature of Congress if there ever was one.
R.C. Hammond, a spokesman for Gingrich, said the April 2006 essay shouldn’t be read as an endorsement of Romney’s health plan. He noted that it raised several questions about the Massachusetts effort, including whether the plan would work in the state. “Being critical isn’t endorsing it”
Hammond said the Newt Notes essay wasn’t written by Gingrich himself. The Journal was able to view a copy using a web search engine that archives old and even deleted versions of web pages.
This was at the very end of the article.
Please tell me what is conservative about forcing hospitals to give medical care to anyone who shows up without finding a way to pay for it when those people are uninsured and can’t pay? What’s conservative about shifting those costs onto the people who do have insurance and onto the taxpayers who fund Medicare? You have to realize the status quo in health care was not working. Newt and others tried to come up with a solution, especially when Hilary and Obama were both pushing for single-payer socialized medicine. The individual mandate is far better compared to those. We certainly hope now we can come up with a better solution yet.
Electability in the general election presidential race always seems to go to the “toughest” candidate. Not necessarily the most aggressive, but the one who looks like he knows how to fight and is most willing to fight. I believe it transcends politics, because the squishy middle doesn’t understand politics, and ends up being a gut reaction to which candidate would be the STRONGEST DEFENDER of the country and its people. Both the will to defend and the ability to defend are considered. Consider these races...
If you literally put those candidates in a boxing ring instead of a debate, all things considered, the winner of the general election is probably the same one who would’ve won the fight. Wimpiness doesn’t sell.
I think Romney has serious deficits in his willingness to fight. Look up Dukakis’ famous gaffe answer in the debate about what he would do if his wife got raped. The steady, unemotional presence with which he gave that answer is very similar to the presence Romney has. People hated that answer because they thought Dukakis should have showed some fight in him at that question.
Newt, by contrast, is as aggressive a fighter and defender of his beliefs as we’ve ever seen in Washington. That comes across clearly in the debates and in his general conversation. When it comes right down to it, I believe would trust Newt to guard the border of this country more than they would trust Obama to do it. My armchair psychological analysis indicates that Newt therefore is more electable than Romney and is likely to beat him.
I meant that Newt is likely to beat Obama. I think he’d beat Romney in a head-to-head too, but in a multi-candidate race, there’s too much vote-splitting to predict anything. Primary voters are also more ideological and vote less based on these primal factors.
How old is the photo of Gore? He just gets fatter and fatter. LOL. We really got stuck with some useless candidates.
There are other candidates on the ballot besides Gingrich and Romney. Some are even conservative.
“Voting for telegenic candidates is what got us Obama.’
Thank God you realize that unfortunate fact. We need to do the same IF we want to get rid of O. When you realize that the average-uninformed-legal-to-vote-American-public DOES NOT CARE about politics, and DOES NOT FOLLOW THE ISSUES, we will stop deluding ourselves into supporting an issues oriented candidate. It won’t work. And the nonsense of believing otherwise will return Obama right back to the White House. Depressing, yes. But it’s reality in this culture.
For the record, I want a CONSERVATIVE to run and defeat Obozo.
That means I don’t want Mittens or Newt or Nutty Ron Paul.
The perfect situation would be Sarah Palin - but that’s not going to happen.
Here is Newt supporting Romneycare/Obamacare way back in 2008. /s
I find that I’m warming to the same view. I love Rick Santorum as a proper conservative, but he just can’t achieve lift-off. That leaves only two alternatives. Romney is absolutely unacceptable, while Gingrich can be kept in line. I’ll take Newt.
The title says this headline is a lie.Where is the link that this is a lie?
its a lie...its a lie!!!! the mean people lying on newt reagan again...um ya ok