RP on federale "health" care
http://rawstory.com/08/ne... :
“Even though I have my ideal system I would like to see, with the government out completely — because that would be a much better system — that’s not going to happen. I’m realistic.”
But, the House rep said, “one thing we shouldn’t do is pay for it with money out of thin air,” referring to the federal government’s ballooning deficit.
“So what i would do in a transition … is cut spending somewhere and take care of the people we’re talking about.”
And to finance health reform, Paul would like to see the US end its overseas military engagements. “I would cut from overseas spending, I would cut from these trillions and trillions of dollars that we have spent over the years and bring our troops home so that we can finance it [health care].”
--------------------
SO MUCH FOR THE RP "EXCEPTION": THEY ARE **ALL** SELLOUTS !
The gov't should have NO role in health care.
I don't think that RP should have floated a compromise on this concept.
There are plenty of congressmen ready to compromise and even go full-bore into gov't health care.
I think AndyArchy is right.
RP should have stuck to "no gov't role in healthcare".
The "no compromise" position needs to be visible.
"The gov't should have NO role in health care."
Agreed. But how much direct can you get than this?: http://finance.yahoo.com/tech-ticker/article/281590/Healthca...
I think anyone would prefer nobody was hiding under their bed
=======
"The consolidation of the states into one vast republic, sure to be aggressive abroad and despotic at home, will be the certain precursor of the ruin which has overwhelmed all those that have preceded it."
- Robert E. Lee, 1866
=======
RON PAUL 2012
And now, leftist sites/papers will feature headlines like this
Ron Paul: End wars to fund health care
They already did that during the campaigns
The lefty blogs already did that. Because Ron Paul has said exactly that several times on TV during the 2008 campiagn. He said he wouldnt throw everyone out on the street that have become dependant on gov. care.. he said he would save money over seas to pay for it while a transition was done... old news.
you mean
like you are doing?
You're right
But until I saw some of these responses,
I was not aware that this could be considered a "leftist" site.
Hardly.
And the winner for the snarkiest comment of the day. ;-p
I see there are a lot of sell-outs here as well
He said that we should end the wars and use the money we saved to
pay for govt health care.
DID HE NOT ?
And as there is NO constitutional authorization for federal meddling in health care,
is he not literally recommending a direct/blatant assault on the USC ?
Spare me your schoolyard insults, and TELL ME WHERE I'M WRONG.
Oh, but he's just being "pragmatic" ??
I have heard the same crap from the NRA for years.
The Constitution gives Congress the power to do lots of things
The Constitution gives Congress the power to do lots of things that are not directly spelled out. i.e.
"To make all Laws which shall be necessary and proper for carrying into Execution the foregoing Powers, and all other Powers vested by this Constitution in the Government of the United States, or in any Department or Officer thereof."
Things like that make it so the Constitution does not have to talk about modern day things like "health care" ... or computers... or nuclear bombs...
The world and the Constitution is no where NEAR as black and white as you try to make it and as you try to hold Ron Paul to... your standard doesnt exist in reality.
that's just one snippet
you are forgetting the conflicts from the rest of the Constitution that explicitly does not allow for it.
Congress has not unlimited powers to provide for the general welfare, but only those specifically enumerated
No he didn't say that. He didn't define "it."
Suppose you are at the head of a household. You are going over your expenses and you see that you are spending too much. Amongst all your expenses, between the cat, the dog, the car, food and everything else you have identified these three major contributors to the problem: Your wife has a shoe fetish and buys a pair of heels every other week. Your kids are using their allowance to buy weed. Your neighbor is stealing electricity from your house.
If somebody asked you, how are you going to pay for "it."
If you said, you would prefer to ween off your kids and wifes dependancies on heels and weed, while immediately stopping the neighbor from stealing your electricity, this doesn't automatically mean you are in support of weed and heels.
Learn to think. The brackets were added by the author of the article.
And Dr Paul continues on by saying...
Paul said that President Obama’s decision to cancel the F-22 fighter jet program was “a first very very minor step … and I applaud Obama for that. But we don’t need one [defense project] removed, we need to change our foreign policy, then we could afford the health care that is necessary to TIDE US OVER UNTIL WE COME TO OUR SENSES and believe that FREEDOM can deliver medical care MUCH BETTER than a bureaucracy.”
So, no, he has NOT sold out!
But, the actual words spoken don't help his agenda
The anarchy, anarchy jackasses are beginning to really get to me. They all are consistent however in that the logic and the "facts" they use to reach their screwed up conclusions are apparently subject to anarchy between their brain cells.
Furthermore, it would be neat to look at where some of the post originate, I am just going out on a limb and guessing many of them originate in a federal government cubicle.
"What was taken from the boomers, it ain't there, what was taken from the X'ers it ain't there, what is being taken from their great, great, great squared grandchildren it ain't there. Some generation just has to have the guts to quit passing it on." Me
*May the only ones to touch your junk, be the ones you want to touch your junk.*
who is this shill? let this thread die
Paul is clearly saying that his priority is not to throw welfare dependants flat on their face during the transition to his proper roll of government.
"because you don't want to cut under these conditions medical care from poor people and the elderly who have been dependant."
Did you not listen to this video?
More on Ron Paul and health care.....
http://finance.yahoo.com/techticker/article/281590/Healthcar...
~~~~~~~
H.R. 2629: Coercion is Not Health Care Act
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ‘Coercion is Not Health Care Act’.
SEC. 2. NO FEDERAL REQUIREMENT FOR HEALTH INSURANCE COVERAGE.
Participation in, or access to, any program of the Federal Government or eligibility to receive any benefit under Federal law shall not be conditioned on the purchase or maintenance of health insurance coverage.
SEC. 3. LIMITATION ON FEDERAL AUTHORITY.
No individual or agency of the Federal Government shall ever require any individual to purchase health insurance coverage.
=================
H.R. 2630: Protect Patients and Physicians Privacy Act
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ‘Protect Patients and Physicians Privacy Act’.
SEC. 2. PATIENT RIGHT TO OPT OUT OF ELECTRONIC HEALTH RECORDS SYSTEM.
All individuals shall have the ability to opt out of any Federally mandated, created, or funded electronic system for maintaining health care information.
SEC. 3. REPEAL OF STANDARD UNIQUE HEALTH IDENTIFIERS.
SEC. 4. REQUIREMENT OF INFORMED CONSENT FOR SHARING INFORMATION FROM ELECTRONIC MEDICAL RECORDS.
SEC. 5. PROVIDER FREEDOM FROM REQUIRED PARTICIPATION IN AN ELECTRONIC HEALTH CARE RECORDS PROGRAM.
=== sources (now, there's a concept): ===
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=h111-2629
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/billtext.xpd?bill=h111-2630
also
http://www.opencongress.org/bill/111-h2629/text
http://www.opencongress.org/bill/111-h2630/text
You partisans are NOT followers of Ron Paul
Ron Paul has NEVER been an extremist partisan. He has NEVER said there should be NO central government. The Founding Fathers are the ones to create the central government and for good reason.
The health care system in this country is crazy and all many of you care about is partisan attacks on Obama or anything and everything related to government. Government is NOT bad. Over powerful government is bad. Violating the Constitution is bad... coordinating Americans to squeeze down the costs of health care is NOT bad ... and if the Free Market people wont do it then the government will have to.
This is similiar to the problems with America's reliance on foreign oil... the Free Market could have done something about it along time ago.. a few people like Pickens tried... the Free Market didnt back him up ... now the government is going to step in and make it happen.
"It appears we are in the waning days of the republic." Ron Paul
Everything the federal government has done has resulted in massive bureaucracy, incompetence, and the looting of the people. Your statement that "the government will have to," is fatally flawed.
~~~~~~~~
http://www.dailypaul.com/freedom-under-siege/Freedom-Under-S...
"Two hundred years ago the United States Constitution was written as a guide for America's unique experiment in freedom. Today the free society that the Founders envisaged is barely identifiable.
America is no longer a bastion of freedom. prevailing ideology, grounded in economic ignorance and careless disregard for individual liberty, is nurtured by a multitude of self-serving, power-seeking politicians spouting platitudes of compassion for the poor who are created by their own philosophy. Reelection is paramount in the minds of most of those who represent us, while freedom and constitutional restraint of power are considered old-fashioned and unwise.
The feeling of frustration prevalent in the country today is certainly
understandable. Government is so big and the bureaucracy so cumbersome that the average person has little to say about his economic destiny unless he resorts to the underground economy. In a free society, of course, individual initiative and ability are the principle factors in determining one's economic well-being.
Not surprisingly, half of the people don't register to vote and less than half of those who do rarely vote. When permitted on the ballot, "None Of The Above" is the most attractive candidate.
Something certainly has gone wrong. The role of government and the people's attitude toward government have changed dramatically since 1787, with most of the changes occurring in the twentieth century. It appears that we are in the waning days of the American Republic."
Excerpt from "Freedom Under Siege" By Ron Paul
Doing NOTHING is fataly flawed... humans dont do just nothing...
We the American People ARE going to do something to solve these problems... if the Free Market wont then the people will (and have) demand that the government do it.
Politicians don't do just nothing...
If you are talking about liberty loving Americans, they will always be opposed to the federal government's interference into our lives. Just because it may "appear" that the majority of Americans agree with this, doesn't mean that this is the case. In fact, I believe it is the politician forcing this onto the People, with no regard to the Constitution or the true will of the People.
Interference is one thing...
people do NOT oppose things like Medicaid... the rich do... but the rest of the people dont. Dont believe me? Go around asking... people do NOT want the sick and old thrown out on the street. Period.
They dont want interference... but they DO want coordination to solve the problems... and if the government is doing it without making people feel "interfered" with ... then they have no problem with it. Political junkies get all caught up in the buzz words.. but normal people dont even care about politics... they want solutions... and they dont care who brings them.
And these normal people
And these normal people think government will bring solutions? These solutions will leave almost nothing left of our paychecks...if we even have a paycheck.
Oh wait, the federal government will be everyone's employer. Maybe we can get a job counseling the elderly every 5 years on how to die. http://www.dailypaul.com/node/100497 Or maybe we can get a job spying on our neighbors for the federal government. http://www.dailypaul.com/node/100506 Then there are jobs available at the census bureau with Acorn as a partner. http://www.dailypaul.com/node/100498 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M5g14qP37RA ..............
Ron Paul didn't do anything like that
http://www.youtube.com/user/13440Patriots
That's Ron Paul right there. He's inspired a new generation of pastors and statesmen to take the mantle
Dr. Paul was just bridging the gap with the Arianna Huffington crowd saying that yes, if no matter what we're going to get some type of health care that is more invasive, lets make it good health care by cutting the spending to all these ridiculous misadventures overseas.
That's the correct way to do it, the health care does need to be saved. I think we would all demand and prefer a state backed system but guess what, that's not happening today, we only got half of what we wanted.
Nice name Anarchy
Shows his true intent. Another flame war. No precedence. No substance. Just hearsay and a half truth.
Where do this people come from and how do they find the DP?
I know his name gives it
I know his name gives it away too
These anarchy guys crack me up -- Seriously
At NO time has there been a continuous state of anarchy.
People Rule or become Ruled -- plain and simple
Patriot4Liberty1776
Nothing new here
It just isn't possible to switch these programs off in a day, week, or year. People have become dependent on government programs. For better or worse that's a fact. Dr Paul has always proposed a transition period where those who are dependent would be taken care of. The social support network of a free and prosperous society would need to be rebuilt over time. So I believe Dr Paul's ideas are the only ones which will take care of people while getting us out of the current destructive programs. This is just being realistic. It's not a perfect solution based on absolutism. It's a human plan based on reality, compassion, and correct priorities.
How is he being a sellout?
How is he being a sellout? It's not like he is going to vote for it and he is being honest about our situation and saying don't add to the deficit cut the government some where if you are going to do this.
Get honest with yourself - We have Increasingly governmental health care system and we are getting more like it or not.
So what would you say?
Just pass it and add to the deficit?
Patriot4Liberty1776
...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ATzlhLrkOLU
here is the video from the FRONT PAGE.
http://www.dailypaul.com/node/100400
sure doesn't sound like he sold "us" out.
"it's a total failure to run anything through bureaucracy."
go eat a sour egg.
I think he was just trying
I think he was just trying to make a point. He knows that will never happen.
And if a health care bill ever comes up for a vote I believe you'll see a "nay" vote from him. He's a doctor, he knows how bad centralized health care would be.
Explain
how RP is selling out here. He didn't rubber-stamp Obama's health care plan.