Gingrich On the Daily Show
 

During last nights interview, two interesting exchanges occured which could use some airing out on this august body . . .

1) Is the administration really the most socialist one in US history given the governments investment and management of private indusdries (Newt's view), or is it merely reacting in a temporary manner to address an unprecidented economic situtation, much like the use of enhanced interrogation techniques following 9/11 (Stewart's view) by the Bush administration?

2) Government should not socialize healthcare in this country since it is inherently incapable of running such an operation and the resulting taxes to support it would hurt the nation (Newt) or . . By removing healthcare costs from business balance sheets, there will be a "hiring bonanza" by small and large business which will generate the taxes and how is it that government is the choice to run large operations like the military and wars, but can't be trusted with health care?

I find Gingrich a cartoonish character. He was cheating on his wife while he was going after Clinton for cheating on his wife, that and serving his wife divorce papers in the cancer ward so he could marry some other bimbo (who became cheated-upon wife #2) are simply things he will never live down, he's like the GOP's Ed Kennedy, forever prevented by Chappaquidick from becoming POTUS, yet always treated by the press as if he could be, we have Gingrich, forever tainted by his rank hypocrisy, chasing Clinton's sexual indiscretions while he hornballed it up, all the while playing Christian Boy to Jerry Falwell and Pat Robinson - in the end a man morally equivalent to the meth-snorting gay preacher. I really wish the GOP would get this clown and the other 90's retreads off the stage so we can start having real discussions on what to do for this nation. Get out of the AM Radio time warp, maybe they would find an audience.

But surprisingly, I agree with Newt somewhat on point#2 - the only real solution is a single national health insurance company that holds a government chartered monopoly like the old ATT. A government bureau thing or any solution that keeps the current mish mash of competing insurance providers in the loop are both stupid solutions.

I'll take a crack at them:
The current situation is not socialism. And it is not impossible for government to act temporarily. The government has stepped in and out of the private sector many times before.

The resulting taxes IMO would not hurt the nation, though 'hurt the nation' is vague enough to render it meaningless. As to whether the government is inherently incapable, I say no. But, I do think it is incapable. There is nothing inherent in our government that makes it operate the way it does. It works the way it does because the people in it work that way and the people out of it don't care or don't exert their will to change it.

Employee costs are the biggest cost an employer faces. Health care costs are the biggest employee related costs. It absolutely will help businesses to not have employee health care on their books. Employees absolutely cannot afford the kind of coverage they have with employer sponsorship. That means that in order for Americans to have 1st world standards of care, either their employer must cover it, the government must, some combination of government/business/employee must - or that health care costs need to be lowered and controlled. There is a vast ocean of possibility in those options that can be accessed if and only if people stop thinking that their opponents are either looking for a free ride or are privateer health industry lackeys.

I really wish the Dems would get these clowns (Clinton,Pelosi, Biden, O, etal) and other 90s retreads off the stage so we can have start having real discussions on what to do for this nation. Get out of the NPR time warp, maybe they would find an audience. God knows their attempt at talk radio crashed and burned miserably. Jealous crybabies.

You're right, it was about as sucessful as FNC's satire news show. Crybabies on both sides.

?
The government doesn't run the war they need Haliburton to do that and they still can't get it right.

The least the govt does the better.

Obama is a 90's retread? Tell us how you came to this conclusion?

> Gingrich [is] a cartoonish character

Yes but the right has proven it doesn’t care about integrity.

When you pit one group of professional politicians against another side of professional politicians . . . the expectation of different behavior is likely to leave one disappointed. Which makes pointing out character flaws dangerous waters.

Same way you came to yours.

Even though it seems like he is constantly in an excited state of some sort, Kirk's points made perfect sense to me, and I agree with both of them as having basis in fact from observing history.

Your inclusion of "O" as a '90s retread strikes me as something you just made up because you are pissed of a Democrat won the election.

I didn't vote for Obama, but think he is doing a hell of a job, given what he has inherited (and I am placing no blame on who was responsible for what he inherited).

Exactly, although I wouldn't limit the statement to politicians.

I doubt that. No one had even heard of Obama then, you got your butts whipped by a 21st Century guy. Keep your retreads comin'

You really shouldn't have been so vague as to what you wanted people to talk about.:P

:D As if there's any means of directing or controlling . . . ;)