by Smitty
Breitbart.tv has said “NEWT DENIED ADVOCATING INDIVIDUAL MANDATE DURING THURSDAY’S DEBATE, 2009 AUDIO PROVES HE DID”
At Legal Insurrection:
This is wrong. I have listened to the entire audio recording, and Newt does not endorse the Obamacare mandate, in part because the speech took place before even the earliest draft of Obamacare had been proposed.
The actual discussion in the recording is nothing new, listen for yourself, it shows Newt saying what he has said before about not allowing free riders at hospitals including either having insurance or showing that you have the ability to pay. You can like it or not, but it’s not new or news, as Verum Serum acknowledges in its post.
The recording does not support the conclusion that Newt supported Obama’s federal mandate, which uses the police powers of the state to force people to buy insurance or face penalties.
At the time of Newt’s presentation, in May 2009, the earliest versions of Obamacare had not yet been released. Newt specifically notes that the details of what would be proposed were unknown and (at 27:00) the process was still in the “wish list press conference stage.”
The initial version of Obamacare was not released until early June 2009. My first blog post about the early draft (the Senate HELP Committee version) of Obamacare was on June 16 regarding the CBO assessment. Various iterations of Obamacare were proposed throughout June -August. The Obamacare legislation and mandate eventually focused on using the IRS as the enforcer.
I’d have listened to the audio myself, but the page requires SilverLight, and I’m booted on a Mac at the moment.
Irrespective of the audio content, I (a) favor Prof. Jacobson’s opinion by default, and (b) can’t figure out what the devil is going wrong with the conservative blogosphere. The candidates all suck: get over it. There is no reasonable way this audio proves two contradictory conclusions. There are a lot of unreasonable ways that people could be spreading hasty propaganda in an effort to skew results.
Don’t be hasty! Even if the intent is not evil, crapflooding has evil results. We expect that from the Left. Have your preferred candidates, but understand that, post-convention, we still have to coalesce as a team.
Hopefully the facts will shake out, and we can have a jolly round of kum-bah-yah at CPAC.
Later. . .
Via Althouse, Politico (my elbiB) has “Newt expressed support for Obama health care plan in ’09”
He also discussed the concept of a mandate:
We believe that there should be must carry – that is, everybody should either have health insurance or if you’re an absolute libertarian, we would allow you to post a bond, but we would not allow people to be free riders failing to insure themselves and then showing up at the emergency room with no means of payment.
So, in defense of Newt, as Jacobson notes: “At the time of Newt’s presentation, in May 2009, the earliest versions of Obamacare had not yet been released. Newt specifically notes that the details of what would be proposed were unknown and (at 27:00) the process was still in the “wish list press conference stage.””
Has Newt Gingrich sinned against the Holy Spirit? Will conservatives eschew Newt at the ballot box, only to fall into the warm embrace of CthulhuRomBamaCare?
If we’re that dumb, we deserve #OccupyResoluteDesk. Go, Rick Santorum!
In other can-we-please-think-about-what-we-are-saying news, Maggie’s Notebook has a detailed look at the Allen West redistricting saga. Districts are some of the most sausage-y things going, as parties gerrymander for fun and lock-in to maximize political power. To contend that a former governor and POTUS candidate from another state is having any direct affect on the Florida redistricting is just a little far out there.
I have no facts, but a couple of points to ponder are that West may have the best chance to raise funds to go for some of that blue territory, or West may secretly not be interested in swimming in the political septic tank any longer; or this was seen as the most likely means of maximizing GOP seats; or West lost a golf bet.
Political parties suck. Given the opportunity to be radical, I would have a mapping algorithm contest to see who can publish the shortest and most elegant algorithm for calculating the most even districts in each state. Let there be as many useful inputs for the calculation as desired, but let it be Open Source and the data freely available.
The more we do to make politics transparent and freely accessible to all, the more participation we are likely to enjoy, and the less of a godforsaken, graft-driven racket we’ll endure.
More at Legal Insurrection, mostly blowing away my speculation.
And, just when you thought the suction had hit hard vacuum, via Daily Pundit, none less than The World’s Most Tired Warhorse drops a few more road apples:
“We’ve got to stop the debates. Enough with the debates because they are driving up our candidates, all of them, unfavorabilities.”
Buzz off and go park in the jacuzzi, man (a completely watered-down version of my actual sentiment). We don’t need less debates, we need more! We need actual moderators (say, conservative bloggers) and substantive debate on the issues like the Federal Reserve.
Not needed: the Ruling Class Overlords who kinda created this mess telling us to sit down and shut up. The “we may be incompetent, but we’re all you’ve got” argument belongs in Brussells, Senator McCain. Why don’t you consider going there. Permanently. With the rest of your ilk.
