Rove is truly a sort of evil genius at political tactics. He makes Richard Nixon look like a piker.

I am not convinced that Ron Paul is all that honest. He speaks the truth about a number of things, but then he also said this:To suggest that those without means had adequate health care before Medicare and Medicaid is factually untrue, and I'm pretty sure he knows it. He makes equally questionable claims about Social Security. On those issues he seems to state the "facts" in a way that supports his ideology. That his ideology goes against the establishment position makes him appear honest, but I don't think he is.

Was he referring to Hill - Burton?

I don't think so. He was talking about the supposedly rosy state of the law in 1961 when he started practicing medicine. Hill-Burton is much older than that. What did you have in mind?

The perpetual motion engine thing didn't turn out so a new tack was needed . . .

BTW, it's widely known that Mao, normally disdainful of English words, at times of tumult would stand and point to the road ahead, proclaiming "FORWARD!"

Nothing special but as you probably know many think there is no HC available for those who can't afford it. I was thinking he was referring to that and some other programs.

I thought Paul was arguing that the medical community took care of things just fine without government programs. Maybe I missed his point. There are plenty of other good reasons to ignore him, IMHO, so I can't say I have read extensively about his views on Medicare or Medicaid.

AFAIK, no medical facility can deny life-saving care due to a lack of the injured party having insurance, or the ability to pay. The argument I have always heard is that the present system is too expensive; not that the present system leaves people w/o care.

The key distinction is emergency care. If you need a non emergency service, such as a transplant or diagnostic test, the facility can require assurance of payment.

Did you mean that the key distinction is NON emergency care?
That would seem to make sense, and be the distinction.

You said "no medical facility" but that only applies to the ER.

Both are true. One reason our system is too expensive is that it leaves people without preventive care. People with inadequate preventive care and no other options tend to show up in emergency rooms where they receive care at a much higher cost. I believe that is one reason why some people say that Obama Care will save money in the long run. A stitch in time saves nine, and all that.

In principle, I can see how that can be true. With all the pork and increased bureaucracy in the thousands of pages in the Obama Care, I seriously doubt that it is true with that Bill.
I sincerely hope the Supreme Court overturns the whole thing, AND then a new Congress and administration can develop a better, more rational, legal, and less costly Health Care Bill. IMO, simply overturning the Obama Care Bill is not sufficient--they must replace it with a superior Bill.

I agree. A single payer bill, like the original Republican proposed idea, in response to the Clinton plan.