Newt Gingrich Announces His Candidacy

[av8torntn]

I wont ever accuse you of comprehension, but what he is talking about is PREMIUMS and not the cost of health care. There is a difference between the cost of a service and a cost of a health plan. What he said was the cost of services is down, however, and its a BIG however, the cost of PREMIUMS contunues to rise despite the lower costs of service.

They have classes in your local JR college in case you need a refresher course.

Peace.

Thanks for this reply. I'll be able to get a good laugh out of this for weeks.

 

[The Other Side]

FOX news decidedly turned on NEWT GINGRICH today, and every effort to make him appear weak is under way! FOX even brought out there resident relic Brit Hume to blast Newt !

Its so much fun to watch the republicans eat each others lunch, and the best part is I got 10 more months of it to watch!!

WOOoooo HOOOoooo!!

Peace,

 

[moreluck]

Newt hasn't a snowball's chance in hell to win.....but he could still get B.O. stammering in a debate.
I said awhile back that Newt hasn't an unspoken thought.......his demise.

 

[moreluck]

Also 10 months in which Obama can drive this economy down, down and make a few blithering idiot mistakes himself. I'll keep my eyes peeled for the mishaps.

 

[bbsam]

Also 10 months in which Obama can drive this economy down, down and make a few blithering idiot mistakes himself. I'll keep my eyes peeled for the mishaps.

Give over9 back his eye, sicko!

 

[moreluck]

Over was busy cleaning his..........

 

[bbsam]

...after a closeup of colon polyps!

 

[brett636]

Not that I expected Newt to go anywhere, but he has already made himself a letdown by supporting the insurance mandate in the healthcare law. That is not going to get him much support from the Tea party which any serious contender for the President definitley needs. Which ever candidate can get the full backing of the tea party in the next presidential election will be the next president elect. Guess that means we can already count Obama out!

 

[wkmac]

Not that I expected Newt to go anywhere, but he has already made himself a letdown by supporting the insurance mandate in the healthcare law. That is not going to get him much support from the Tea party which any serious contender for the President definitley needs. Which ever candidate can get the full backing of the tea party in the next presidential election will be the next president elect. Guess that means we can already count Obama out!

He's always supported it. In 2005', Newt, Hillary Clinton and Patrick Kennedy (of the Kennedy Clan) broke bread and agreed on healthcare going forward so this whole idea that Obamacare is some farleft nightmare in truth is not supported by the facts. It is very much a bi-partisan effort and the only fight is over whose sitting in the driver seat to take the credit when it's enacted.

The Reformer and the Gadfly Agree on Health Care
By Dana Milbank
Friday, July 22, 2005
Midway through his breakfast panel at the National Press Club yesterday, Newt Gingrich said, by way of aside, "I risk sounding not quite as right-wing as I should to fit the billing."

Now, where would he get that idea? Maybe it was because he, architect of the 1994 Republican Revolution, was sitting down with the right's bete noire , Hillary Rodham Clinton. Possibly it was because they were agreeing on health care proposals. And it almost certainly had something to do with Gingrich saying things like "Senator Clinton is exactly right" and "I think everything she just said I agree with" and "Hillary is so correct in the direction she laid out."

In a town where the lion does not frequently lie with the lamb and swords are rarely used as plowshares, it was quite a sight to view the counterculture McGovernik making common cause with the leader of the vast right-wing conspiracy.

That last paragraph has WWE storyline written all over it. A "Face" and "Heel" form tagteam alliance but the best part is, depends on the audience as to which is which!


Oh make note of this line in the same article as who was sponsoring this whole thing. I'm sure they had no self-serving interest in all of this.

But whatever the self interest, yesterday's "Ceasefire" session, sponsored by Pfizer, coordinated by American University and moderated by former senator John Breaux (D-La.), was hopeful. If there is agreement between Clinton, who led the Democrats' doomed health care initiative in 1993, and Gingrich, who used the debacle to gain GOP control of Congress, then there may be relief yet for the 40 million uninsured Americans.

Who sez Corporate America is opposed to socialist means for profitable ends? Ayn Rand was wrong when she argued that America's Big Business is a persecuted minority. Minority yes but persecuted? More like Brer Rabbit and the briar patch!

Another example of how that stuff works!

 

[brett636]

He's always supported it. In 2005', Newt, Hillary Clinton and Patrick Kennedy (of the Kennedy Clan) broke bread and agreed on healthcare going forward so this whole idea that Obamacare is some farleft nightmare in truth is not supported by the facts. It is very much a bi-partisan effort and the only fight is over whose sitting in the driver seat to take the credit when it's enacted.
][/COLOR]

That makes no logical sense whatsoever. If that were the case then the republicans could have enacted such legislation back when they had control of all three branches of government. Not to mention the healthcare law in question received zero republican votes and required buying off some democrats to get it passed. If the republicans, as you allege, were ideologically in agreement with the law and the mandate it would have seen some republican support by those republicans who tend to waiver one way or the other. Finally, why would current sitting senators "break bread" as you state with someone who has no real power in the legislature? Newt had been out of office for sometime by 2005 and would be of no help to enact any kind of legislation on any matter.

 

[wkmac]

That makes no logical sense whatsoever. If that were the case then the republicans could have enacted such legislation back when they had control of all three branches of government. Not to mention the healthcare law in question received zero republican votes and required buying off some democrats to get it passed. If the republicans, as you allege, were ideologically in agreement with the law and the mandate it would have seen some republican support by those republicans who tend to waiver one way or the other. Finally, why would current sitting senators "break bread" as you state with someone who has no real power in the legislature? Newt had been out of office for sometime by 2005 and would be of no help to enact any kind of legislation on any matter.

Go study the record, look at how legislation comes into play, committee reports, think tank and policy foundation white papers, the lobbyists involved and who writes the legislation to begin with and it does make sense. Stop living in a world of mythology and realize these pieces of we call politicians are puppets on a sting and nothing else. Stop looking at these people as some form of God and that you need them to save you. It's all an illusion. Embrace political atheism!

 

[wkmac]

Also Brett, using your logic, explain Newt and Pelosi as one on Climate Change?

And going back to your logic, then why did Newt and the repubs. when GW came to town not make Social Security a privatized system, or end abortion, change the income tax code or all the other issues they banner about endlessly during election cycles?

 

[moreluck]

Newt & Pelosi on that sorry looking couch.............he's done !! That's part of his baggage.

 

[brett636]

Also Brett, using your logic, explain Newt and Pelosi as one on Climate Change?

And going back to your logic, then why did Newt and the repubs. when GW came to town not make Social Security a privatized system, or end abortion, change the income tax code or all the other issues they banner about endlessly during election cycles?

The problem here is while they all sport the banner "republican" they don't all agree on the same issues. They did attempt to privatize Social Security, and abortion is a topic that is usually fought against by republicans. Since not everyone in the party sees everything the exact same way on these more serious issues it makes getting the solutions in place much tougher. The democrats did not want the healthcare law they passed, at least the more far left democrats that is. They wanted a complete abolishment of our private healthcare system and to replace it with a single payer system seen in other countries. Because they could not get all of their members on board with this idea it never made it, thankfully, into law. Other problems like the income tax system is a work in progress as more and more legislators are coming on board with replacing it with a fair tax system or simplifying it completely, but its not going to happen in a day, or a year. It may take another 10 years before we see some real action. I believe there is ideological parity between the two parties, but I do not worship them or any one politician. I simply support those that believe I am the best person to make decisions for my own well being, and stand against those who think they know better than I.

 

[moreluck]

Articles: The Tea Party Case for Newt Gingrich