Newt Gingrich, Semper Fidelis !

So Newt was for Romneycare before he was against it? In several debates Newt Gingrich has defended his support of the individual mandate present in both Romneycare and Obamacare as a 1990's clever ploy the Heritage Foundation devised to battle Hillarycare. It was just a transitory endeavor that served him well at the time, something like marriages number one and two. Who could have guessed that Newt's ardor for the individual mandate contained in Romneycare unlike marriages number one and two had stood the test of time and apparently beat passionately in his political heart. Now with all the embarrassment of a an infidelity, a true fidelity sustained in the caring environment of an internet archive leaps at Newt's political jugular. From Newt's Notes:

We agree entirely with Governor Romney and Massachusetts legislators that our goal should be 100% insurance coverage for all Americans. Individuals without coverage often do not receive quality medical attention on par with those who do have insurance. We also believe strongly that personal responsibility is vital to creating a 21st Century Intelligent Health System. Individuals who can afford to purchase health insurance and simply choose not to place an unnecessary burden on a system that is on the verge of collapse; these free-riders undermine the entire health system by placing the onus of responsibility on taxpayers. The Romney plan attempts to bring everyone into the system. The individual mandate requires those who earn enough to afford insurance to purchase coverage, and subsidies will be made available to those individuals who cannot afford insurance on their own. We agree strongly with this principle, but the details are crucial when it comes to the structure of this plan. Under the new bill, Massachusetts residents earning more than 300% of the federal poverty level (approximately $30,000 for an individual) will not be eligible for any subsidies. State House officials had originally promised that there would be new plans available at about $200 a month, but industry experts are now predicting that the cheapest plan will likely cost at least $325 a month. This estimate totals about $4000 per year, or about 1/5 of a $30,000 annual take-home income.

That was written in 2006. Having been caught up in an act of public deception Gingrich has, like Paul, denied authorship of all the damaging newsletters that do not mesh with contemporaneous political thought will continuing to cite warnings, pronouncements, and witticisms that do. Gingrich displays unquestionable loyalty to ideas if not wives. Semper Fidelis!