One Thing The Nominee Must Do

Nominee Must Oppose This

I have been discussing what sort of nominee the Republican party must now find.  Given what we are now seeing, it is imperative that the nominee of the Republican party commit to one thing above all others: The program known as Obamacare must be repealed, and stripped from the law, in every possible, conceivable way.  It must be pulled out by the roots.  Even now, the government is beginning to fashion health-care plans for the rest of us who now have our own health-care, because they know they will be driving private health insurance out of the business.  Any of the Republican candidates who wish to obtain my support will be required to commit to the complete repeal of the Affordable Care Act, and if the candidate will not pledge to do this, I will have no part of his or her support.  Obamacare must be overturned.

The program known as Obamacare is tyranny packaged up as a benefit.  Let me be clear for the sake of any who had misunderstood the nature of Obamacare: It’s not going to provide “benefits” to anybody.  Instead, it’s going to provide a death sentence to millions.  If a given candidate will not commit to its repeal, it is symptomatic of an unwillingness to seriously confront the crisis this country now faces in a run-amok set of entitlement programs that have become the overwhelming burden on those who produce wealth.  I need no such candidate.  I will support no such candidate.  In watching the various debates, among the alleged front-runners, one of them has not, to my memory, committed to that repeal.

Health-care isn’t a right.  Health-care insurance cannot be a right.  One cannot have a right that must be borne into actualization by the efforts of others.  If we examine this  idea carefully, we must recognize that what Obamacare promises to implement is a “right” to health-care to be financed by every working person to the benefit of all persons.  This is Marxism.  It’s also a guarantee that we will have a reduction in the kind of health-care that will be available, in terms of its advancement, its technical sophistication, and the competence of those who will administer it, as well as the conditions under which it will be administered.

We are confronted with a serious assault upon the lives and liberties of every American, except perhaps those wealthy enough to escape all of this.  I don’t blame anybody who would use their wealth to escape the plague of Obamacare, unless they also simultaneously stiff the rest of us to suffer under it.  That is an inexcusable state of hypocrisy that characterizes the leadership of the left, in Congress, and in the executive branch, but also in Hollywood and in other leftist social circles.  There are also a number of people on the elite side of the GOP who fit this mold:  They express tepid support for undoing Obamacare, at best, while knowing they have the means to flee its oppression.

Ladies and gentlemen, I think it’s clear. We can begin to tally all the characteristics a Republican nominee must bring to the game, but an undaunted commitment to the eradication of the Obamacare law must be among them, and if it isn’t, there is no way on Earth that I will support that nominee.  I would prefer to have four more years of open tyranny than the pretense of opposition while it becomes the officially endorsed position of the GOP, and thereby, the country.

Leave a comment ?

15 Responses to One Thing The Nominee Must Do

  1. sedeuce says:

    I believe that this was one of Sarah's major considerations in her decision whether or not to run for president. For more insight make sure you listen to her talk to Hannity at:…. In order to repeal Obamacare – and Dodd-Frank for that matter, which is killing the mortgage industry, we need the Presidency, the House, and a filibuster-proof Senate. WIth 33 Dems up for reelection, we need a net pickup of 13 seats. A challenging task but, based on the results of the 2010 election, I happen to know one person who is up to it. And, by the way, with Sarah not totally focused on her own presidential campaign, if I were a squishy Progressive Republican, I'd be shakin' in ma boots about getting primaried.

  2. SkyShark says:

    I agree 100%! All 9 candidates will be receiving coorespondence from me asking the qustion "Will you repeal Obama care?" This is not a question of trying, it is a statement. I WILL SUCCEED is the only acceptable answer.

    • They all say they will repeal Obamacare. Words. Suppose the Supreme Court finds it constitutional. I think Romney would tweak the bill as opposed to repealing it. I don't know about the others.
      Constitutional or not, the law can and must be repealed…period!

  3. pil says:

    Its not a right the government is extending to us but a forced fed mandate that in and of itsself is self sentencing.

    Great article Mark.

  4. jerseyflash says:

    This is a fact about the direction that Obamacare is taking this country.
    My wife's personal insurance has been raised $$$ 73.60 per MONTH on her re-newal date ( 8 months ago ) and my supplement to Medicare has gone up $$$ 25.45. WHY ???? I asked the insurance company's
    BECAUSE OF OBAMACARE !!!!! That is $$$ 11,886.00 increase for one year AND there will be an additional increase next year and the year after. WHY because of the projected cost of OBAMACARE.
    As one person in the insurance business has said " THIS EXPENSE WILL CAUSE DOOM FOR THE INSURANCE COMPANY'S "

  5. Anne says:

    Since I don't get any warm fuzzies off any of the candidates, I'm not sure that even if they promised, that in fact, they would deliver.

  6. iizthatiiz says:

    there are two .. possibly three GOP contenders that I would consider voting for. none of them are likely to be the nominee

    for 32 years, i have been a registered independent .. Dem/Rep = Beige/Tan .. don't distinguish much difference between either establishment

    i will not vote for obama .. i will not vote for 'anybody but obama' .. there are certain candidates i will not pull the lever for. There are 'some' things i like about Ron Paul, but I would NEVER vote for him. I would never vote for Romney .. . just couldn't

    I am left … 'The Unrepresented" .. nothing has changed

    things are now as they were

  7. PalinSupporter2012 says:

    "The panel's rough estimate put annual premiums for individual coverage under the plan at $5,500 to $7,000 in 2014, comparable to what employers pay now."

    $450 – $600 per month per person and mandated that you must have if your employer does not provide? Family of 4 cost $2400 per month?

    Read more:

    • MarkAmerica says:

      Yep, that's correct. That's the nonsense we're about to have thrust upon our backs.

      • PalinSupporter2012 says:

        I am self employed so I would be required to purchase the insurance since I am the employer. So, to cover the "affordable" cost, I will give up my car, not purchase new appliances or do maintenance to my house, not buy anything extra but just food and 2nd hand clothes to be able to pay my insurance. Then other small businesses, furniture stores, car dealers, clothing stores, lawn care, etc will not receive any of my money or money from others that are doing the same. Then they will close their doors and fire employees. They wonder why no one is hiring and businesses are afraid to commit to spending their money.

        I cannot wrap my head around how anyone can believe in the logic and the logic (or lack of) as the people protesting wall street.

        I guess they dont want us to worry about it. Everyone can get a "free living wage" from the government and we can live in our cardboard boxes in utopia. WAIT … who is going to pay for the free living wage?

      • PalinSupporter2012 says:

        I forgot to add that one of the issues is that the insurance premiums I pay for already are high. However, with the mandates from the "affordiable" insurance as per this article, it states:

        "Most existing workplace plans won't be required to adopt the federal model, but employers and consumer advocates alike predict it will become the nation's benchmark for health insurance over time."

        So my costs are guaranteed to increase because the insurance companies are going to use this as a benchmark and also charge more to be in the same price range as defined by the government. As a consumer I will not have a say in the price and will not have a say if I want the product or not.

  8. Greg says:

    I agree with the premise and with all of your comments regarding the "HEALTH CARE" part of the bill. Significant? Yep. Everything we must worry about in that bill? HAIL NO! Folks, we MUST NOT FORGET that well more than half of those 2X00 pages (I've heard a bunch of diff numbers) had NOTHING to do with "health care". This bill is the blueprint for, and much of the mechanism to GROW every area of the gub'mint AND slyly move MUCH of the power in thei country to the Executive branch. That's why we CANNOT let our RINOs or anybody "compromise" – and not REPEAL THE WHOLE DAYUM THING! WE must drive this thing! G

    • MarkAmerica says:

      I agree with that Greg. A one page bill repealing the whole thing is the only appropriate answer. Might add in a line to repeal that entire financial reform bill too.

  9. Rogue Rose says:

    This is off Newt's campaign website. I hope people find this helpful. I have many problems with him, but looks like he's in the right place on this issue.

    "We must repeal and replace the left's big government health bill with real solutions that will lower costs and improve health outcomes." – Newt Gingrich

    The big government Obamacare approach does not address the root causes of America's health care crisis. Instead, it creates layers of new taxes, regulations, and bureaucracies that will ultimately make our problems worse, not better. Newt proposes a "Patient Power" plan that will save lives and save money.

Trackbacks and Pingbacks: