Subscriber Login

Forgot Your Username?
Forgot Your Password?
Spend time Googling ‘satire’ PDF Print E-mail

Dear Editor:

Rather than defending “the most consequential document in American history” (Dec. 11 opinion page), Mr. Gabl’s time might be better spent Googling “satire;” nevertheless, in his defending arguments there is a point worth reviewing.

Unfortunately, the “American Dream,” where individuals determine their own destiny, has been outsourced to Europe. In America today, you are likely to be born into wealth or born into poverty with a vanishing middle class and little opportunity for upward mobility. Of course, many with the sacred birthright of wealth think that after being born on third base they had hit a triple, a quote variously attributed to Jim Hightower, Barry Switzer, Ann Richards, Martin Sheen and others.

Following the Great Depression, and as a direct result of it, unfettered laissez-faire capitalism was harnessed. Prudent regulations were put into place to restore confidence in the banking system (FDIC), regulate the stock market (Securities and Exchange Commission) and separate commercial from investment banking (Glass-Steagall). The gold standard was abandoned, providing capital for investment. These actions did not constitute socialism. Industrial and financial institutions were not nationalized. Private property was protected.

As the pendulum has swung back, many of the New Deal regulations that stabilized the economy have been repealed, notably Glass-Steagall, paving the way for another “gilded age” of staggering poverty in the shadow of enormous economic growth.

Now the “S” word is being applied to ObamaCare, odd when you consider that the basic premise of marketplace solutions for the health care crisis was originally conceived in that hotbed of radical socialism, the Heritage Foundation (more sarcasm), and piloted by comrade Romney in Massachusetts. Conservatives supported the idea until President Obama co-opted it, forcing Republicans to attempt to obstruct, repeal, scuttle and disavow the whole project.

Terrance Moe

Three Lakes

Tuesday, December 31, 2013 9:44 AM


-7 #4 Frank Gabl 2014-01-09 09:49

It’s kind of obvious that if Obamacare was not on the brink of crashing and burning leftists wouldn’t be giving
Republicans any credit whatsoever, nor would comrade Reich be “begging” so embarrassingly in his column this week.

By the way, did Romney lie and deceive the people of Massachusetts in order to get it passed, as well as not get one solitary Democrat to sign on to it?

Did Romney go around his state legislature like Obama did Congress to make myriad changes, rendering the law unconstitutiona l?

Is Romneycare 2100 pages of bill and 15,000 pages of regulations that are still being written as I write, or incredibly less in scope, even when divided by 50?

Here is a comprehensive list of the differences that you are well aware off.
+6 #3 2014-01-08 10:16
Scott, it's not the Left that rewrites history, your side is fully entrenched doing just that. Romneycare might not be the exact thing Romney wanted but after it was passed and it showed what a success it was Mitt sure used every opportunity to tout it as his own legislation! Various fact check sites can verify just how similar they are: and And the Heritage foundation as well as Newt were Big proponents of mandates
-4 #2 2014-01-01 15:59
Once again Dr. Moe is trying to rewrite history. Liberals always try to deflect criticism of Obamacare by saying it was fashioned after the misnamed Romneycare. A 5 second fact check will show that Romney vetoed 8 key provisions of Massachusett's plan and all were overridden by the supermajority Democrats in the Legislature. What emerged is not anything like Romney wanted which is why the plan is slowly but surely driving that State into insolvency. A little intellectual honesty in the New Year please.
-3 #1 Denny Erardi 2013-12-31 11:34
There are some critical differences between what was put forth in Massachusetts and the federal healthcare plan. Starting with simple basics...the Romney plan was 70 pages; Obamacare is nearly 2,100 pages.

The Massachusetts state budget was balanced prior to the implementation of the market-based healthcare plan, and didn't require new discrete taxes. Obamacare will result in billions of dollars in new taxation.

Furthermore, Massachusetts' population is 6.5 million and both per capita income and median income figures are 25% than the national average. This speaks to the "one size fits all" issue that Obamacare owns.

While leaving the discussion of the socialistic aspects (or not) of Obamacare to a different thread, the argument that Romneycare equals Obamacare is not accurate.

Add comment

Comments exceeding 1,000 characters will not be accepted. Please refrain from using texting language and spell out all words. All comments are reviewed and must be approved before they are posted.

Security code