Skip to comments.THREE CHEERS FOR ROMNEYCARE! (Coulter Finally Officially Signs Ownership of Soul Over to Mittens)
Posted on 02/01/2012 4:41:10 PM PST by KentTrappedInLiberalSeattle
click here to read article
Make. It. Stop.
I don’t think anyone is going to argue that Coulter has jumped the shark this time.
I can’t stomach reading that.
Mark Levin just intellectually eviscerated this article of Anns` on his radio program.
Prediction: Her next book, immediate discount bin flop.
Sprinting towards irrelevance.
Apparently she wasn’t paying attention to Peggy Noonan who embraced the dark side.
Methinks Ann has become part of the problem. It’s like hearing a woman explain why she’s staying with a guy who treats her like crap. Sad. Very sad.
PS: Heritage has back-tracked from their position
This was the plan of the GOP-e to take over Obamacare from the beginning. Damn them all. And screw Coulter for going along with this crap.
I hear Mark Levin ripped her mercilessly for this during his first hour. I missed most of it, but I think you can download it for free at his site.
I’m beginning to think this is some kind of real-life “Invasion of the Body Snatchers.” What is going on??
Ronald Reagans 1961 Coffeecup speech on socialized healthcare
Now back in 1927 an American socialist, Norman Thomas, six times candidate for president on the Socialist Party ticket, said the American people would never vote for socialism. But he said under the name of liberalism the American people will adopt every fragment of the socialist program.
There are many ways in which our government has invaded the precincts of private citizens, the method of earning a living. Our government is in business to the extent over owning more than 19,000 businesses covering different lines of activity. This amounts to a fifth of the total industrial capacity of the United States.
But at the moment Id like to talk about another way. Because this threat is with us and at the moment is more imminent.
One of the traditional methods of imposing statism or socialism on a people has been by way of medicine. Its very easy to disguise a medical program as a humanitarian project. Most people are a little reluctant to oppose anything that suggests medical care for people who possibly cant afford it.
Now, the American people, if you put it to them about socialized medicine and gave them a chance to choose, would unhesitatingly vote against it. We had an example of this. Under the Truman administration it was proposed that we have a compulsory health insurance program for all people in the United States, and, of course, the American people unhesitatingly rejected this.
So, with the American people on record as not wanting socialized medicine, Congressman Ferrand introduced the Ferrand Bill. This was the idea that all people of social security age should be brought under a program of compulsory health insurance. Now this would not only be our senior citizens, this would be the dependents and those who are disabled, this would be young people if they are dependents of someone eligible for Social Security.
Now, Congressman Ferrand brought the program out on that idea of just for that group of people. But Congressman Ferrand was subscribing to this foot in the door philosophy, because he said if we can only break through and get our foot inside the door, then we can expand the progam after that.
Walter Ruther said Its no secret that the United Automobile Workers is officially on record as backing a program of national health insurance. And by national health insurance, he meant socialized medicine for every American. Well, lets see what the socialists themselves have to say about it.
They say: Once the Ferrrand bill is passed, this nation will be provided with a mechanism for socialized medicince. Capable of indefinite expansion in every direction until it includes the entire population. Well, we cant say we havent been warned.
Now, Congressman Ferrand is no longer a congressman of the United States government. He has been replaced, not in his particular assignment, but in his backing of such a bill, by Congressman King of California. It is presented in the idea of a great emergency that millions of our senior citizens are unable to provide needed medical care. But this ignores the fact that in the last decade a hundred and twenty seven million of our citicizens in just ten years, have come under the protection of some form of privately owned medical or hospital insurance.
Now the advocates of this bill, when you try to oppose it, challenge you on an emotional basis. They say What would you do, throw these poor old people out to die with no medical attention? Thats ridiculous and of course no ones has advocated it. As a matter of fact, in the last session of Congress a bill was adopted known as the Kerr-Mills Bill. Now without even allowing this bill to be tried, to see if it works, they have introduced this King Bill which is really the Ferrand Bill.
What is the Kerr-Mills Bill? It is a frank recognition of the medical need or problem of the senior citizens that I have mentioned. And it is provided from the federal government money to the states and the local communities that can be used at the discretion of the state to help those people who need it. Now what reason could the other people have for backing a bill which says we insist on compulsory health insurance for senior citizens on the basis of age alone; regardless of whether theyre worth millions of dollars, whether they have an income, whether theyre protected by their own insurance, whether they have savings.
I think we can be excused for believing that as ex-c0ngressman Ferrand said, this was simply an excuse to bring about what they wanted all the time socialized medicine.
James Madison in 1788, speaking to the Virginia Convention said: Since the general civilization of mankind, I believe there are more instances of the abridgment of the freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroachment of those in power, than by violent and sudden usurpations.
They want to attach this bill to Social Security. And they say here is a great insurance program now instituted, now working.
Lets take a look at social security itself. Again, very few of us disagree with the original premise that there should be some form of saving that would keep destitution from following unemployment by reason of death, disability or old age. And to this end Social Security was adopted. But it was never intended to supplant private savings, private insurance, pension programs of unions and industries.
Now in our country under our free enterprise system, we have seen medicine reach the greatest heights that it has in any country in the world. Today, the relationship between patient and doctor in this country is something to be envied any place. The privacy, the care that is given to a person, the right to chose a doctor, the right to go from one doctor to the other.
But lets also look from the other side, at the freedom the doctor loses. A doctor would be reluctant to say this. Well, like you, I am only a patient, so I can say it in his behalf. The doctor begins to lose freedoms; its like telling a lie, and one leads to another. First you decide that the doctor can have so many patients. They are equally divided among the various doctors by the government. But then the doctors arent equally divided geographically, so a doctor decides he wants to practice in one town and the government has to say to him you cant live in that town, they already have enough doctors. You have to go someplace else. And from here it is only a short step to dictating where he will go.
This is a freedom that I wonder whether any of us have the right to take from any human being.
I know how Id feel, if you my fellow citizens decided that to be an actor, I had to become a government employee and work in a national theater. Take it into your own occupation or that of your husband, all of us can see what happens once you establish the precedent that the government can determine a mans working place and his working methods, determine his employment. From here it is a short step to all the rest of socialism, to determining his pay and pretty soon your son wont decide when hes in school, where he will go or what they will do for a living. He will wait for the government to tell them where he will go to work and what he will do.
In this country of ours, took place the greatest revolution that has ever taken place in worlds history. The only true revolution. Every other revolution simply exchanged one set of rulers for another. But here for the first time in all the thousands of years of mans relation to man, a little group of the men, the founding fathers - for the first time established the idea that you and I had within ourselves the God given right and ability to determine our own destiny.
This freedom was built into our government with safeguards. We talk democracy today. And strangely we let democracy begin to assume the aspect of majority rule is all that is needed. Well, majority rule is a fine aspect of democracy, provided there are guarantees written in to our government concerning the rights of the individual and of the minorities.
What can we do about this? Well, you and I can do a great deal. We can write to our congressmen and our senators. We can say right now that we want no further encroachment on these individual liberties and freedoms. And at the moment, the key issue is, we do not want socialized medicine.
In Washington today, 40,000 letters, less than a hundred per congressman, are evidence of a trend in public thinking.
Representative Halleck of Indiana has said, When the American people want something from Congress, regardless of its political complexion, if they make their wants known, Congress does what the people want.
So write, and if your this man writes back to you and tells you that he too is for free enterprise, that we have these great services and so forth, that must be performed by government, dont let him get away with it. Show that you have not been convinced. Write a letter right back and tell him that you believe in government economy and fiscal responsibility; that you know governments dont tax to get the money the need; governments will always find a need for the money they get and that you demand the continuation of our traditional free enterprise system. You and I can do this. The only way we can do it is by writing to our congressmen even we believe that he is on our side to begin with. Write to strengthen his hand. Give him the ability to stand before his colleagues in Congress and say I have heard from my constituents and this is what they want.
Write those letters now; call your friends and tell them to write them. If you dont, this program I promise you will pass just as surely as the sun will come up tomorrow and behind it will come other federal programs that will invade every area of freedom as we have known it in this country. Until, one day, as Normal Thomas said we will awake to find that we have socialism. And if you dont do this and if I dont do it, one of these days you and I are going to spend our sunset years telling our children and our childrens children, what it once was like in America when men were free.
She's embraced the dark side with open arms and legs....
So she’s making fun of Newt’s name now? What about MITT?
She jumped ship when she insisted that her nominee was Chris Christie - another New England liberal with minimal conservative attributes. Romney is very similar - another repeat of the last election.
Maybe those that say we actually have one party control are right! Our choices are limited to those that the establishment selects for us.
Wow! Talk about jumping the shark. One of Ann’s points is that Romneycare is preferable to Obamacare because it’s at the state level.
It’s still a government compulsion to buy something.
Keep digging deeper Ann, we just about totally lost sight of you, bye-bye.
She's now Coulterann, to me.
Heritage did back track - which is important but is only half the point. The other half of the point is that Heritage’s mandate was based on self responsibility and Obama Care’s is based on control. Heritages gave a lot of options, including Heath Savings Accounts and high deductible plans or simple proof of ability to pay - Obama Care (and probably Romney Care) gives very few options.
So there’s two huge points there.
Yep. The first hour of Mark Levin is done to educate Ann Coulter tonight on her cheering of Romneycare. Don’t miss it!
One of the biggest problems in health care today is the state-by-state Balkanization of insurance plans. Obamacare does nothing to fix that but if I had to choose between a national approach and a state-by-state approach to health care, I might actually choose the national. But I am opposed to either.
"Mitt"? Try Willard.
Good Lord. If Romney ever needs to give a stool specimen, all they’ll need to do is take a scraping of Ann Coulter’s nose.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.