G.O.P Debate

After watching Haile Gebrselassie break the half-marathan record I watched the spectacle that was the G.O.P "Debate". I put "debate" in quotes because, to be honest I didn't see much of what I would call a debate with the exception of Rep. Ron Paul, who, in my opinion was the most honest and real Republican I've heard. It is unfortunate that his "old school" mannerisms doesn't play too well to the camera, but he was the most truthful of the bunch. But anyway, what was most bothersome about this group was the repeated reference to "socialized medicine".

I think it was Tancredo (I could be mistaken) who said that it was not the government's job to provide health care for everyone. Also, it may have been him but it could have been another candidate who said that the primary job of the president is to "protect" America. Let's be clear that the constitutionally defined job of the president is to uphold the Constitution. Not to wage war. But that's not my biggest issue.
The problem I had was when the issue of "single payer" healthcare came up no one asked the next obvious question: What is government supposed to do?

Guiliani said something that the "middle class" ought to pay attention to. He explained how he raised money in NYC. He "relieved" taxes on the rich and as he put it "raised more money further down the tax base". So understand that Guiliani, like the rest of these people will stick it to those who have the highest tax burden already. The reason why they don't tax the rich is because they know that the rich, who can afford tax advisors who will put the money in tax deferred or offshore accounts. In other words, as admitted to by one of the richest men on earth, the rich have a lower tax burden (as a percentage of income) than the "middle class" and the GOP will do anything they can to continue to reduce that tax "burden". But back to the Health care issue.

Guiliani said that we 'don't want the English system". Now no one asked why we don't want it. No one asked that question. Someone needs to ask Guiliani and co, why the English or French system sucks other than their supposed ideological opposition to government run (or at least financed) health care. There is one reason they will point out which was the so called "$100 wrist brace". They made it appear that if the government was running the health care system, that the tax payer would be soaked for items such as those. The problem with that example is that the reason such prices exist is because the immorality of the American capitalist who clearly has an incentive to get rich: low taxes. I would like to know what the UK government is paying for various medical hardware in comparison to US institutions.

Guiliani thinks we should "take personal responsibility" for our healthcare. It's a nice line coming from someone who can afford the premiums and medication. How is it not responsible for the citizens to agree to being taxed in order to ensure they can get healthcare whenever they need it? How is that not "responsible".