I saw this early today...Jindal was excellent.

Roberts didn't know when to quit digging his own grave...Jindal just helped throw some dirt on it.

Wonder if Roberts along with his arrogance has realized that yet.

As a quick aside, I just heard DeMint on Cavuto....I love that guy, he is not one to back down regarding this issue, along with other things, I am so glad conservatives are speaking out...all over the place...it is about time!!

Keep up the good work for us out here...some people are finally getting the message..do not back down.

Like DeMint said...O has met his Waterloo!

Doubling down on stupid is not a particularly good idea. ~Andrew Breitbart

Need to tell granny some one is coming by to check on her.  They will ask her why she isn't dead yet.

The problem with making an argument based on lies, half-truths, and made-up facts is that you tend to keep tripping over your own arguments. Roberts says "Private plans that offer better services and greater access to providers, even at somewhat higher costs than the public plans, would survive the competition in this environment.” But the main Liberal argument for the government option is to INCREASE competition. Roberts is acknowledging that the government option is going to eliminate a lot of plans and there will be less choice, and less competition, when all is said and done. Roberts seems to have missed the concept that going from the current 1,700+ health insurance choices, to the government option and a few cadillac plan survivors is going to kill competition.

He is also trampling on his argument by saying that “Private plans that offer better services and greater access to providers, even at somewhat higher costs than the public plans, would survive the competition in this environment.” These plans will only be available to The Rich... so what will be left for everyone else... the government option.

You also pointed out in your editorial, you said someone other than patients and doctors would make the decision on treatments and medicines that we can have. Doesn’t that already happen under private plans?

I'm not certain how much this "already happens" with private plans. It's true that HMO's have restrictions, and PPO's have limits on amounts paid for certain testing and treatments, but that's a far cry from the restrictions that would be in place with goverment funded single payor health insurance.

I hate this "already happens" tactic. I've had discussions with friends and family who think that nationalized health care is the only way to go and they use this same argument.  Well, we already pay for this or that, so why not just make it official..  or some such BS.  They have no idea just how controlling the Feds will be if nationalized health care is enacted.

you should know that the bloom is off his rose for many Louisiana voters.  Jindal has had several missteps in his first year/legislative session, and he needs to climb back on the bull to prove he's presidential material:

1.  Our legislature, in its infinite wisdom, decided to give itself a salary hike.  Jindal explicitly campaigned on vetoing any sudden increases of this sort.  Unfortunately, he also proimsed to leave internal legislative matters to the legislature.  He had to welch on one of them, and he initially chose to pass the salary increase.  This sparked statewide outrage, and it wasn't until recall petitions were started in earnest that he realized the magnitude of his mistake and vetoed the bill.  This is not a good sign of executive decision-making and honestly comes off as amateurish, and had the effect of turning off voters and legislators he needed to pass his ambitious ethics reforms.

2.  In the course of a year, our oil and gas-based economy went from a huge surplus--that legislators went on record saying how they didn't know how to spend it all--to devastating deficits, while our immediate neighbors are faring much better.  Because of the arcane structure of the La. constitution, most of the state budget is protected from large budget cuts, which means that higher education and health care, which are the only unprotected items, receive virtually all the cuts.  LSU's state budget has been so devastated it will take many years to recover the extremely hard-fought academic gains it's earned over the past few years.  Jindal was quick to point out there was little he could do about it, but he is still seen as presiding over the state budget mess.

3.  He has spent a large amount of time out of state on GOP fundraising activities.  In a poor state with a floundering economy, most people--myself included--believe he needs to stay here to address the myriad problems.  I would have loved to see him propose some sort of state economic recovery plan, but that didn't happen.

4.  The ethics reform he campaigned heavily on has been veeerrry slow in coming, with a single laughable law passed.  He also signed a bill which would allow high school students unable to pass the state graduation tests to graduate with a watered-down degree.  Disappointing to say the least.

IMO, before Jindal even considers a presidential run, he needs to show his commitment to fixing the state economy and the ethics reform upon which he campaigned so vigorously.  If he doesn't rebound soon, his reelection is far from guaranteed, and the more it will appear that he's only using the governor's seat as a springboard to national politics.  He needs a successful full term under his belt and reelection, and then make a 2016 run.

Why go for Mitt when you know he's not very conservative. Wasn't Bush bad enough? Lets get a guy/lady we can feel good about on all the issues. Mitt created a mini Obama care which should disqualify him. I tire of the excusses about him being in MA so we should just forget about it. I could go with he did nothing because he was in a ultra-lib state, but not he caved and went socialist. Do no harm is a Dr.'s creed. Mitt did a lot of harm. No to Mitt. He was horrid in the debates as well. He was non-specific and boring. Only compared to the Huckster and McCain could he be considered acceptable. We need a guy like Jindal or someone new that is fast on his feet and has specifics to talk about. Why go back to the weak field of '08. The same group that lost to McCain. Let me say that again. The same guys who lost to McCain!  

Mike,

I noticed you emphasized Jindal's Rhodes Scholar status.

Just curious.  Why is that academic achievement is considered valid when obtained by someone on the right, but not by someone on the left?

Why is it that Obama's position as the editor of the Harvard Law Review is just affirmative action (as so many around here love to claim), while Jindal's Rhodes Scholarship is a result of merit?

"It’s actually not the government that would be running the health care
system. That would still be private, it would just be providing
insurance."

Excuse me, but hasn't the liberals been pointing out, for decades , the pitfalls of private insurance "plans?"  I can distinctly remember Hillary Clinton  moaning excessively about how the health insurance system has failed ordinary  Americas with "managed health care," and "indifference" to patents wishes and need.  Now she's jumping on the Obamacare bandwagon and promoting that the US Government actually SUPPORT those same insurances companies and HMO's by offering a tax beak to every company who buys private insurance coverage for their employees?  That IS what they are offering, correct? 

Don't be fooled.  Hillary and Obama WANT "private" insurance to disappear altogether, for the "ordinary" Americans, anyways.  They, like the rest of the wealthy Liberals, are happy with private insurance for themselves and their children, just not for anyone else.  They want US to be a victim of Government controlled health care while exempting themsel;ves for this burden.  They want US to suffer so they don't have to.

The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States.
The US Constitution

Unless you're a fetus.
The US Supreme Court