Originally Posted by loveskiing
I guess your reply illustrated the problem we are having today in this country; where labels are plastered about to shut down intelligent dialogue. The author of this piece is a resident fellow at the The American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research (AEI) which is an American conservative think tank founded in 1943. Its stated mission is "to defend the principles and improve the institutions of American freedom and democratic capitalism—limited government, private enterprise, individual liberty and responsibility, vigilant and effective defense and foreign policies, political accountability, and open debate". AEI is an independent nonprofit organization supported primarily by grants and contributions from foundations, corporations, and individuals. It is headquartered in Washington, D.C.
Some AEI scholars are considered to be some of the leading architects of the second Bush administration's public policy. More than twenty AEI scholars and fellows served either in a Bush administration policy post or on one of the government's many panels and commissions. Among the prominent former government officials now affiliated with AEI are former U.S. ambassador to the U.N. John Bolton, now an AEI senior fellow; former chairman of the National Endowment for the Humanities Lynne Cheney, a longtime AEI senior fellow; former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, now an AEI senior fellow; former Dutch member of parliament Ayaan Hirsi Ali, an AEI visiting fellow; and former deputy secretary of defense Paul Wolfowitz.
I welcome intelligent commentary that is meant to be thought provoking in a serious attempt to facilitate dialogue and humbly ask that if your comment seeks to do otherwise, to respectfully post otherwise. Thanks in advance for your understanding and cooperation.
All true and having nothing to do with his opinion piece. Most conservative think tanks have a couple of resident liberals to try to balance the offerings. He's a believer in obamacare and he assembles a simplistic and superficial argument that satisfies no one. He parrots administration comments to perfection. And a healthcare expert is not necessarily a healthcare legislation expert. His agenda becomes very clear in the last few paragraphs of his "article" when he refers to the conservative's "holy war", war on women and portrays Romney with disparaging terms. Of course the NYT printed this, it perfectly satisfies their political agenda. You asked for opinions and you will get them.