I was shocked when I heard that Bob Jones III, the chancellor of the university that bears his name, said that during the announcement of his support for Mitt Romney.
Who would have thought the family and the school who has been so dogged in their commitment to what they see as Christian and conservative principles no matter what the cost would be so pragmatic in their support for a presidential candidate, whose religion Bob Jones III called “erroneous.”
I imagined a certain Constitutional Savior of America proudly speaking at BJU chapel and receiving the Fundamentalist Seal of Approval. What does it say for him when he can’t even get the people as crazy as him to fall in line?
On NPR this morning, they discussed the lackluster republican fundraising, compared to hillary and obama – it doesn’t look good.
It seems that the significant anti-Bush sentiment is causing libs to reach deep, while Republicans are apathetic.
I may need to move to Canada if Hillary wins – oh wait, if she wins, we’ll get the same crappy socialized health care they’ve got, so it won’t matter ;).
I’m surprised that you guys don’t support Alan Keyes. From what I’ve heard, he’s your guy.
You misunderstand us, then. If anyone fits the evangelical mold, it’s Huckabee, with Brownback a second.
Keyes can be a good speaker, and probably agrees with evangelicals on most issues, but he is a loose canon. And I’m not sure that his implementation of ideas would be even handed or reasonable – he may swing to the extreme too much.
Au contraire, I think he’s perfect for you.
Naturally you do. But your thinking does not match reality, otherwise I would be a keys supporter.
I heard Romney’s wife on NPR today, and she was impressive. I’ll have to take another look at him.
Why don’t you vote for Romney’s wife then?
Hi Seeker:
Canada ranks several nations above the US wrt health care (says the WHO) even though it spends considerably less per capita. The US system is already crappier than Canada’s overall and dollar for dollar. The Free market doesn’t work in health care, none of the assumptions economists make when they say the market is efficient apply to health care.
And if you end up in Canada, please send a postcard:-)
your friend
keith
So, WHO is a good source, but I would have to look at their numbers. It really depends on how much weight you give to the various factors. For instance, if you compare the US and Canada on the following, you see a mixed result (from Canadian and American health care systems compared). However, in the final analysis, I think both countries have a private/government hybrid, which is what we need. It’s just the balance, coordination, and cost-limiting factors that make the differences. We could probably both learn from the other:
FACTOR: WINNER
Cost: Canada
Coverage: Canada
Access: Canada
Wait Times: US
Physician Compensation: US
Doctors per capita: US
Drug Costs: Canada
Technology: US
Outcomes: Canada, but mixed results in studies. Candada’s victory here may be an artifact of better overall health than Americans, and may not be reflective of the healthcare systems. In fact:
In fact:
So maybe we both need to come in from the extremes, without losing our strengths.
Hi Seeker:
I have to suspect that the advantages the US has over Canada is a function of our spending more per capita than Canada. There is no reason to think the free market is effective in delivering health care. The efficiency of the ideal free market depends on no barriers to entry and perfect information about the utility derived from a commodity and and the costs of choosing this commodity over another. The health care market–where most people have to depend on highly trained experts for advice, where there is a limited supply of doctors, where the costs associated with health care are so high that people have to depend on insurance to pay for them–deviate from the ideal about as far as possible. People get medical procedures because their doctors tell them they need it, not because those people have a hankering for it.
There is a huge incentive for private health insurance companies to seek out healthy people to insure, diverting a large proportion of premiums paid away from caring for sick people toward marketing and payout avoidance. This is why private systems spend less per dollar for health care than public insurance systems do. The private system promotes the exact opposite of what health insurance is supposed to be about–all of us contribute something and those who need it get it when they need it.
It’s just free market theology to think that “socialized” medicine is bad.
yuor friend
keith
I agree, but in such cases, I think we really need a hybrid model (which Canada sort of has), leveraging the strengths of each. I also think we need to reward healthy and responsible behaviors, as outlined in Christian Healthcare Alternatives?
you guys haven’t been paying attention. Romney is the Bush family favorite, and those Dobsonites like him too…they are a little bit leery of his religion, but he’s the only one of the bunch who talks about religion and Jesus a lot, so he’s their guy.
He’s also the only frontrunner who’s only been married once, and has no known wild dating in his past.
How they accept his obviously contrived switch on abortion and on gay marriage really confuses me, but they are more about power than principles anyway. This is a guy whose wife donated to Planned Parenthood and told his constituents that he was more liberal than Ted Kennedy on some social issues.
He also wants mandatory universal health care (Hillarycare with some free-market influences) which is NOT conservative, so the canonization of Romney as a “true conservative” really confuses me.
10/23/06:
First, one of Gov. Jeb Bush’s closest advisers went to work for likely 2008 Republican presidential contender Mitt Romney.
Then, two days later, Bush brought the Massachusetts governor to Florida for campaign stops in Daytona and Venice. Then, later that same day, he introduced him to some of the top political donors in the area at a private fundraiser on Casey Key.
http://www.heraldtribune.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20061023/COLUMNIST89/610230458
Posted on 11/15/2006 9:25:46 PM PST by MinorityRepublican
Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney has hired several of Jeb Bush’s top aides, leading to speculation that Romney may be courting the outgoing Florida governor for a possible Romney-Bush 2008 ticket for the White House.
After Bush’s former chief of staff and top political adviser, Sally Bradshaw, joined Romney’s Commonwealth political action committee earlier this month, Romney flew to Florida to join Bush for campaign events and fund-raisers – and to gauge Bush’s interest in being a running mate, sources told the Boston Herald.
Soon after, Bush’s chief finance director, Ann Woods Herberger, also joined Romney’s political action committee.
Bush has ruled out running for president himself. But agreeing to accept the vice presidential post would allow him to “run on the national ticket without having to run for the ticket,” since vice presidential candidates are chosen, not elected, political analyst David Mark, a former political reporter who covered Gov. Bush, told the Herald.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1739419/posts
then it sounds like you might like this article
Why Evangelicals Should Support Mitt Romney
My theory of what creates the average right-wing evangelical crazy is repressed gayness or major sexual issues. This theory has been prompted by empirical evidence (i.e. started with the fact of all these “Christian” perverts getting arrested and then came up with the theory to explain it)
Not making much money, having a chip on your shoulder and growing up poor (but envious) or in hicksville also has something to do with it.
Be that as it may, here are some questions for you “Christians” out there who give the Word a bad name:
1.) Would you have sex with a man to stop a terrorist attack?
2.) If you had a time machine, would you travel back in time and abort Bin Laden?
3.) Would you torture and kill Jesus to ensure mankind’s salvation? And how does that work again?
4.) Many of you say that the unborn of this country should have the full protection of American law. What about foreign unborn? Can we send the Mexican unborn to Guantanamo, where they will understand the language?
5.) Since you’ve taken a strong stand against socialized health care, would you also like to take this opportunity to oppose the socialized interstate highways and the socialized public schools?
p.s. seeker: remember now. no feet-tapping.
1. I wouldn’t do a lot of things, but I’m glad that some people are able to do things to protect us.
2. No, I would not, but if I had that power I would go back in time and do something to stop him and 9/11, or convince Bill Clinton to take Bin Laden from the Sudanese government.
3. Even if I wasn’t personally there, my sin (and yours) was part of his torture. Jesus said that no man takes His life, He lays it down freely.
4. I’m not sure how you can send someone unborn to Gitmo or anywhere beside their mother. But I do find it odd that you seem to be concerned about 2/3 of the God-given rights mentioned in the Declaration of Independence (liberty and the pursuit of happiness), but not to concerned that millions never get the first one (life) and therefore can’t get the others.
5. I do think the schools are screwed up, so I would take a strong stand against socialized public schools. I also think that the interstate highways may find some improvement if they are privatized a little more, but I believe interstates (so that they are out of the reach of any one state) are one thing that we need a federal government for. Things like highways, military, etc. Conservatives don’t argue for no federal government, just smaller.
But I am glad that you have everyone else’s sexuality figured out for them. Tell me how much you liked that when it happened to you. Since you seem to be concerned with the Word’s name, how does “do unto others” strike you in this instance?