-
The Man With the Plan: April 2010
August 11, 2012 | 0 comments
-
A Wonk in Sheep’s Clothing
March 25, 2011 | 293 comments
-
Scapegoating Mitch Daniels
March 17, 2011 | 150 comments
-
Money Train
March 1, 2011 | 109 comments
-
The Race for Comparative Advantage
February 14, 2011 | 87 comments
Political Hay
How Romney Could Kill the ObamaCare Repeal Movement
If the former Massachusetts governor were the party’s nominee in 2012, Republicans couldn’t credibly campaign against Democrats’ national health care law.
Over the past several weeks, political observers have speculated about how passage of the national health care law modeled after the one Mitt Romney signed in Massachusetts could hurt his presidential ambitions. But more significant for conservatives is how Romney’s presidential ambitions could stymie the effort to repeal ObamaCare.
As it is, achieving a full repeal of the recently-passed health care law will be extremely difficult. Given that Obama would veto any bill to undo his signature legislative accomplishment, it means that to get rid of the law, Republicans will have to not only take back Congress, but capture the White House. It also means that conservatives will have to relentlessly campaign against ObamaCare during the next two elections and keep public outrage at an elevated level for at least the next three years. And even if they achieve all of this, they will have a short window to repeal the bill in 2013, because by 2014 the federal government will begin to dole out hundreds of billions of dollars in subsidies, which will create a whole new constituency to preserve the law.
If Romney were the Republican presidential nominee in 2012, it would make this already challenging fight even harder. Romney’s role in creating a health care program quite similar to the one that just passed nationally would allow Obama to neutralize the issue during an election that would otherwise be a prime opportunity to make the case for repeal.
The health care program Romney enacted as governor has the same basic architecture as the national health care law President Obama signed last month. Both programs rely on mandating that individuals purchase insurance and they provide government subsidies to people to buy government-designed insurance policies on a government-run exchange.
Jonathan Gruber, the MIT health care economist who advised both Romney and Obama, told the Wall Street Journal, “If any one person in the world deserves credit for where we are now [with the passage of the new federal law], it’s Mitt Romney… He designed the structure of the federal bill.”
Romney and his loyal backers have tested a number of arguments in an attempt to distinguish RomneyCare from ObamaCare. For instance, they have tried to argue that the Massachusetts plan was made worse by the state’s heavily Democratic legislature, over Romney’s objections. But Romney signed the bill in 2006 anyway, with Ted Kennedy at his side, and did so knowing that he would not be seeking reelection as governor and that the law would almost definitely be implemented by a Democratic successor.
Romneyites also argue that his was a state-based reform effort, rather than a one-size fits all federal approach. While this is true, it’s also true that 20 percent of the cost of RomneyCare is being paid by federal taxpayers as a result of its Medicaid expansion.
Even if one believes that there are genuine policy differences between the two programs, from a pure political perspective, there are clearly enough similarities for Obama to exploit over the course of a general election.
One need look no further than President Bush’s 2004 reelection bid to see how such a strategy could play out. Though the Iraq war was growing increasingly unpopular at the time, the fact that John Kerry voted for the war resolution made it difficult for Democrats to present a clear contrast on the issue, and this allowed President Bush to muddy the waters. Likewise, if Romney tries to attack Obama on the national health care law, Democrats could counter that Romney was for it before he was against it. Partisan Republicans may scramble to explain the differences, but such distinctions would likely get blurred in the minds of the typical voters. In the end, the GOP wouldn’t have a clean shot at ObamaCare.
This would have repercussions down ballot as well. For instance, any attacks Republican candidates might want to make against the individual mandate would be blunted if the party nominated somebody who is on record declaring, “I like mandates.”
The White House understands this, and it’s no surprise that Obama has been drawing parallels between the new law and the Massachusetts system at every opportunity.
“You know, you’ve got a former governor of Massachusetts who’s running around saying ‘What’s this health reform bill?’” Obama joked at recent fundraiser in Boston. “And I keep on scratching my head and I say, boy, this Massachusetts thing, who designed that?”
In an interview with CBS, Obama got a little ahead of himself, and said that the Democrats’ legislation was “the sort of plan proposed by current Republican nominee Mitt Romney.”
Romney’s response hasn’t engendered much confidence that he’d be able to lead an effective campaign against ObamaCare.
“(Obama is) saying that I was the guy that came up with the idea for what he did,” Romney said at a recent appearance in New Hampshire, according to the New York Times. “If ever again somewhere down the road I would be debating him, I would be happy to take credit for his accomplishment.”
Romney’s Free and Strong America PAC recently announced a “Prescription for Repeal” initiative to contribute to conservative candidates. But the language leaves a lot of wiggle room. The press release announcing the program says the PAC will support candidates who vow to support a repeal of “the worst aspects of Obamacare.” But it doesn’t define which aspects Romney considers “the worst” and which ones he finds acceptable. This is no trivial matter given that Romney has repeatedly defended the individual mandate on conservative grounds.
Just as John McCain was able to win the Republican nomination in 2008 despite his problems with the conservative base, Romney may be able to overcome his health care record in the primaries. And perhaps there are circumstances under which he could beat Obama by emphasizing economic and foreign policy issues. But win or lose, Romney would not be able to credibly campaign against the national health care law. And as a result, were he the Republican nominee, it would kill the movement to repeal ObamaCare.
About the Author
Philip Klein is The American Spectator’s Washington correspondent. You can follow him on Twitter at: http://twitter.com/Philipaklein
Letter to the Editor View all comments (388) | Leave a comment
More Articles by Philip Klein
More Articles From Political Hay
http://spectator.org/archives/2010/04/16/how-romney-could-kill-the-obam
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
The Spectacle Blog
Democrat Dan Maffei Blames Budget Cuts for Girl’s Rape, Mother’s Murder
Robert Stacy McCain | 6.18.13
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
ADVERTISEMENT
Ret. Marine| 4.16.10 @ 6:21AM
Yeah nothing like another RINO coming around and crapping in one's salad. For the life in me I am never able to understand how it is that the "middle road" is somehow equated to "reaching across the isle" to muck up something as clear to this man's head. This obamanation called healthcare is nothing short of a sell out of the American idea of rugged indivualism and self determination. All because of what? To make a self-serving marxist look good? Please. I can only hope the arse-kicking is sooooo bad it will make the liberals sink back to their low-life status where they belong.
The only way to make this a non-issue is to keep harping on the fact that this bill is illegal and not what the American people asked for let alone will accept. Put this kenyan (obamamma) in jail where he belongs. If not he may well get his wish, to divide this Nation into warring factions.
Dernon Ruton| 4.16.10 @ 9:45AM
Amen, brother.
Jackie| 4.16.10 @ 1:59PM
you are absolutely right- Mitt Romney cannot beat Obama, Period. I really think the backing of the Tea Partiers will NOT GO TO MITT, he is definately a RINO, when will the Republicans get their act together??? If we put Romney up as our Candidate, we will lose once again. It is a John McCain event all over again. There are so many really really good people out there for us to vote for. I only wish that the Republicans leadership would start to really listen to us, but they still don't get it!!!!
Richard H. Davis| 4.16.10 @ 11:49AM
How's that purely socialist VA health care working out for you? All of the doctors employed by the government and all of the hospitals owned by the government. You got your government health care - why should anybody else get any health care at all?
David in Ma.| 4.16.10 @ 12:09PM
The VA health system is not socialist it is part of the contract honorable people made with the government in entering the military to protect your sorry ass and your right to bad mouth people and their, in this case, earned entitlement via contract. Now, go to your corner and eat your food stamp steak! Maggot!
william | 4.16.10 @ 12:26PM
Two points, yes the VA was built on the promise to vets, who deserve to receive the benefit they were promised. However there is absolutely no reason to have created the stupid inefficient and substandard VA system. All that had to be done was for the fed to pay for private insurance for the vets and they could go to whatever hospital they wanted.
Second point, Romney can solve his problem in only ONE way. He has to say well folks listen to me I created this mess in Massachusetts and now I realize it cant work. I am better qualified to judge this than just about anyone, therefore I admit I screwed up in Mass and if elected I will make damn sure Obamacare is never implemented.
That's the absolute best card he has to play.
Personally I cant believe that Romney will be the candidate, all his rivals will kill him on healthcare during the primaries.
Therefore Romeny may very well help us win in 2012.
Wally| 4.16.10 @ 12:54PM
You are joking right? The U.S. Treasury just cuts a check? There is currently NO requirement for insurance companies to insure people with pre-existing conditions! Oh, you say, pass a law... hmmm. Isn't that EXACTLY what the just passed and demonized health care bill does? Even if the insurance companies would (or had to) insure the vets, the costs would be ASTROnomical. You, obviously, like probably 90% of the ungrateful people here, have medicare or employer (gov't subsidized) healthcare. Individual healthcare in this country is OUTrageously expensive and would bankrupt the country. Why do you support enormous subsidies for insurance company execs, which is what you proposal would do.
StargazerInSavannah| 4.16.10 @ 5:08PM
Insuring those with pre-existing conditions is the equivalent of requiring the insuring of an automobile after the car has been in an accident!
From the get-go, it is both unsustainable and idiotic! There is absolutely nothing that the U.S. Government has ever done that was not over budget. Further, there has never been a U.S. Government project that met expectation no matter what the cost!
Mr. Romney continues to support Romney-care, only alleging that others that followed him are responsible for the failure. Had it not been for the billions of Chinese dollars fed into Massachusetts by the 'stimulus' fraud, Romney-care would have collapsed a year ago.
Every current Federal entitlement was unsustainable from it's beginning and many of those that proposed the entitlements and voted for it knew it from the beginning.
Those that voted for Obama-care, Bush-care.. and every previous entitlement were guilty of a criminal activity far more egregious than the ponzi scheme that landed Bernie Madoff in the Federal Penitentiary. The President is the leader of the current criminal activity, his primary lieutenants are Pelosi and Reid.
DanMingo| 4.16.10 @ 8:05PM
There is absolutely nothing that the U.S. Government has ever done that was not over budget.
Except for President Clinton. He ran the whole country and turned a profit, which Mr. Bush quickly squandered.
Mark| 4.16.10 @ 9:07PM
Yeah Billy did that...at the barrel of a Congressional Republican gun. Believe me Billy Bob was kicking and screaming all the way to a balanced budget.
Superfly| 4.16.10 @ 11:08PM
And yet the Republicans haven't managed to balance the budget since... Stop kidding yourself.
Achilles Toejam| 4.17.10 @ 1:50AM
It's true Bill Clinton and the Democrats that were in control of Congress hiked the income tax rates to historic levels at the time, they also overreached on the ill-conceived crime bill containing gun bans for stupid cosmetic reasons and goingon a spending spree which led to the 94 elections and the Republican sweep into power.
Unfortunately after they were there for a while and became corrupted and the contract with America fell by the wayside and started pulling the same crap as the Democrats and got their keisters kicked out of power in 2006 because they lost their way and a lot of people were unhappy and disappointed, then they had the audacity to run McCain and the rest is history.
Clinton had the great fortune of riding the crest of the economic wave started in the 80s embracing the economic theories of our founders time Adam Smith's (The Wealth of Nations).
The problem is we certainly can't trust the Democrats with the socialist revolution taking place within their party and the old-line Democrats are losing to these progressives, the Republicans on the other hand blow smoke up our backs and tell us what they think we want to hear i.e. that lowlife political chameleon Romney and others get elected go to Washington and become Democrat lights.
I think all that is changing though but only time will tell but the people I talk to understand that something is going wrong with our country elected officials no longer feel bound by their oath of office to adhere to constitutional limitations all we want is for government to keep within the limitations of the enumerated powers of the Constitution instead of trying to wage class warfare steal our money, bankrupt future generations and believe they have the authority to control every aspect of our lives.
The sleeping giant is waking up rediscovering our founding principles I see it happening! There is hope as long as we don't fall into the old political fear trap and settle for less.
Judy| 4.18.10 @ 8:35AM
Yeah, hamstrung by your dumocratic congress.
South Texan| 4.17.10 @ 3:37AM
Clinton ran a deficit his whole term. He spent Social Security funds as part of the general budget. Now those funds that I paid in and that you paid in are gone. He also moved other expenses off budget to make it look like a surplus. We have had nothing but deficits for many presidents. Don't be fooled by accounting gimmicks. Republicans and Democrats alike have not controlled spending.
Possum Dearie| 4.17.10 @ 10:16AM
Clinton raided Social Security. There was never a surplus. Look at the US Treasury reports yourself.
Yes, the deficit was almost eliminated in FY2000 (ending in September 2000 with a deficit of "only" $17.9 billion), but it never reached zero--let alone a positive surplus number. And Clinton's last budget proposal for FY2001, which ended in September 2001, generated a $133.29 billion deficit. The growing deficits started in the year of the last Clinton budget, not in the first year of the Bush administration.
Keep in mind that President Bush took office in January 2001 and his first budget took effect October 1, 2001 for the year ending September 30, 2002 (FY2002). So the $133.29 billion deficit in the year ending September 2001 was Clinton's. Granted, Bush supported a tax refund where taxpayers received checks in 2001. However, the total amount refunded to taxpayers was only $38 billion . So even if we assume that $38 billion of the FY2001 deficit was due to Bush's tax refunds which were not part of Clinton's last budget, that still means that Clinton's last budget produced a deficit of 133.29 - 38 = $95.29 billion.
Sharron Lee| 4.18.10 @ 4:37PM
Mr. Clinton receives credit for an economy that was responsibly held in check by the Republican Contract with America ...
Achilles Toejam| 4.17.10 @ 2:03AM
StargazerInSavannah Damn well said! This entitlement/dependency scheme has been built on for generations.
Sharron Lee| 4.18.10 @ 4:35PM
this is absolutely correct - Mr. Romney needs to admit that it was a program that he was hopeful would cover the citizens of Mass and it has NOT worked - stressing that this should be a lesson to the Government ... why is this so hard for Mr. Romney to do ???
wodiej| 4.16.10 @ 2:21PM
good Lord, no kidding!! well said...
Lilly Maus| 4.18.10 @ 2:59PM
True, The VA is supposed to be a contracted bvenefit, but....don't fool yourself. It would cost my husband, a Korean War Vet, $32 more for his 3 medications if he were to get them every 3 mos. from the VA pharmacy than if he continues to buy them from Walmart or Kroger. A Benefit??? BELLONY!!!
NJ Mike| 4.16.10 @ 12:58PM
Well, Dick I guess the crumbling hospitals, filthy operating rooms/hospital rooms cleaned by union labor-poorly, the MIRSA and other biologicals that are flourishing in them, and the generally poor service given shoots your contention straight to heck.
Oh, BTW-Health CARE is available to EVERYONE by LAW.........health INSURANCE is different.
DanMingo| 4.16.10 @ 8:08PM
Health CARE is available to EVERYONE by LAW.
Almost right. Emergency healthcare.
You cannot schedule your annual check-ups, or well baby care or any other preventative (and thus cost-effective) care. But they will pactch you up after a car wreck, or treat the cancer you put off treating because you could not afford it.
Possum Dearie| 4.17.10 @ 10:22AM
"Treat" the cancer? You'll get a morphine drip and a hospital bed for the week it takes you to die.
That's how my grandmother went at 50 after Medicare and Blue Cross and Cobra and every program that the government could make available to her kept her alive that long.
It never works. The government is just raiding people's life savings. They've said it time and again in those Congressional hearings. "The majority of Americans spend a two thirds of their earnings in the last third of their life." You could see dollar signs in those vultures' eyes.
JmsA| 4.17.10 @ 2:00PM
Not matter how ineffective or faulty you find the VA system to be, you shouldn't badmouth those who endeavor to help or wounded troops and veterans. Although I am not a veteran, I've met and dealt some of them, and I found them to be mostly kind and earnest in their efforts. Besides, I thought the article in question was about Mr. Romney and his health care plan while governor of Massachusetts, which cannot be reasonably conflated with the VA.
danfromatlanta| 4.20.10 @ 6:13PM
If he's getting VA healthcare he either earned it getting injured in the line of duty protecting your sorry behind, or he retired and is getting what was promised him for his service to the country. Why do you think I should have to pay for your health care? You sound like a wuss who wants to be taken care of! You disgust me!
Uncle Jack| 4.16.10 @ 11:53AM
Ret. Marine_You sure got it right my friend. I'll side with your faction when the time comes.
Wally| 4.16.10 @ 12:58PM
One little factoid to ruin you people's party. That Massachusets healthcare system that is so similar to the health care reform bill? IT WORKS. Massachusets has vastly lowered costs and hugely increased numbers of insured. What is so objectionable about that? Oh, right "gubmint socialism/fascism/kenyaism." Nothing like a little hate getting in the way of insuring the lower and lower middle class people of this country against illness and bankruptcy.
Wayne| 4.16.10 @ 1:17PM
If what you say is so true why is Mess-achoo-sheeitts in such economic trouble?
KNPatriot| 4.16.10 @ 1:57PM
Wally,
If Massachusetts health care were not being subsidized by the Feds it wouldn't be working. It has NOT lowered costs, you or rather I am subsidizing it. Maybe you also need to look up the meaning of socialism and compare it to what is going on with this administration. Unless of course, you didn't learn to read in our so wonderful government run public schools.
Wally| 4.16.10 @ 2:14PM
Why is Massachusets having financial problems.? Well, Wayne, I will explain that to you. You see, the Bush Admin and the bank deregualtion DESTROYED the economy of not just Massachusets but all states.
KNPatriot - ALL of our healthcare is subsidized. From NIH, to Public Hospitals, to Medicare payments. Mass gets no more than any other state. The current healthcare system is NOT a private free market system. It is just BAD. Regarding Mass Healthcare system, this is from Wiki - "Since implementation of the reform law in 2006, according to the DHCFP, the number of people with healthcare insurance in Massachusetts--not including Medicare enrolless--has risen approximately 8% from just under 5,100,000 in June 2006 to almost 5,500,000 in June 2009." "the 2006 reform law provided free health care insurance for residents earning less than 150% of the federal poverty level federal poverty level (FPL)[1],not eligible for Mass Health, and partially-subsidized health care insurance for those earning up to 300% of the FPL, depending on an income-based sliding scale. " So, you are just blowing smoke, which is what I would expect on an anti gubmint website.
BTW, I went to private and public schools - mainly private. The public were far better.
StargazerInSavannah| 4.16.10 @ 5:21PM
Sorry Wally, you're stuck on stupid. No one deregulated the banking industry during the Bush administration.
The collapse was caused by the program to make everyone a home owner that had it's beginning under Carter, was made worse under Clinton and was protected from regulation by Criss Dodd and Barney Frank during the Bush days. Good Democrats like Franklin Raines and Jaimie Goerelich sucked millions out of the treasury working for Freddie and Fanny.
By the way, Wikipedia is not an authority an anything... Idiots like you an me can make changes at will.
The Romney-care cost rose at a faster rate that did medical costs nationally or in any other State. Medical cost in Massachusetts were the highest in the nation to begin with, they rose at the fastest rate of any state and they continue to be the highest in the nation... Romney-care is a failure, it sucks! Obama-care will just be worse!
DanMingo| 4.16.10 @ 8:17PM
No one deregulated the banking industry during the Bush administration.
It is not often you righties get your facts right, but, amazingly, this is correct.
Repeal of Glass Steagall was done in Clinton's term, but it was a republican bill which he signed into law. His economic people, unfortunately now advisers to Obama, favored the deregulation.
It is this deregulation of the industry which led to today's indictment of Goldman Sachs (in Civil court) by the SEC for manipulating this system, despite your belief that it was because were 'forced' to lend to poor people.
Read up on what Goldman Sachs (and others did) to game the system before you blame any/every Democrat you can connect however vaguely to the problem
Chris| 4.16.10 @ 10:44PM
Bob Rubin was the mechanism that allowed Glass Steagall to get repealed. Yes, Phil Graham had his hands all over it but without that inside connection being Rubin there's a chance that it wouldn't have happened. Why do you think Travelers or Citi -heck they're both one in the same - hired ole Bobby Boy right after the end of Clinton's term? Because he did their dirty work for them and made sure the deal got done...
Joe Steelman| 4.17.10 @ 12:47AM
I think you are right on target, keep it up!!!
Joe Steelman| 4.17.10 @ 12:52AM
Stargazer, I think you are right on target, keep up the good work!!
Mark| 4.16.10 @ 9:11PM
Uhhh actually it was Billy Bob Clinton, not George Bush who repealed Glass-Stegal which led to the financial services debacle. I know it is tough for a Socialist but can you at least try to get your facts straight.
Achilles Toejam | 4.17.10 @ 2:40AM
Wally sorry but you don't know what you're talking about with bank deregulation check out the link that shows the catalyst for the housing meltdown with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac starting with Carter carried on by Clinton, I'm no fan of George Bush by a long shot but he and other Republicans tried to rein in Fannie and Freddie and the Democrats on the committee even played the race card criticizing the regulators for daring to criticize Goerlich and Raines management and were trying to warn of the serious problem that were coming in the video shows the cover up.
Don't twist history! I want the truth and I don't care what side of the aisle they're on this problem is too serious for that kind of game because if you don't accept the truth of how we got here you cannot learn from it and take steps to avoid it in the future.
"Every step we take towards making the State the Caretaker of our lives, by that much we move toward making the State our Master."
Dwight D. Eisenhower
Carl Childers| 4.17.10 @ 6:30PM
Wally, you are the only person in the world that believes this. Anything "works" until it doesn't. Mass. public healthcare is a disaster waiting to happen. It will be broke in 10 years unless national healthcare supercedes it (then it will be broke in 5). Even with a socialist re-distribution of income, 10% + unemployment will make it economically not viable. There is no tax base to support it.
Jeanne| 4.17.10 @ 11:24PM
I respectfully disagree with you, Carl. There are many of use that agree with Wally.
DanMingo| 4.16.10 @ 8:11PM
Yes don't you understand how socialism works, you moron.
Socialism is when the middle class, or basically 95% of Americans, probably everyone posting here, gets a tax cut.
And socialism is when 30 million new customers get steered to insurance companies.
Do you see?
Mark| 4.16.10 @ 9:17PM
Sorry to correct more liberal dishonesty but no one has received a tax cut under the Messiah. They received a tax rebate (another Bush idea) under the Anointed One but not a tax cut. Please try to get your facts straight. You by definition can't receive an income tax cut if you paid no income tax which is the case for about 50% of those who received the rebate.
pattie| 4.20.10 @ 12:27PM
And when I filed my taxes I had to PAY BACK that tax rebate......so We where not given anything..it was a political move , and they got the money back from our taxes..slick sting huh
wodiej| 4.16.10 @ 2:25PM
WRONG. Health care costs went up, emergency room costs went up. People are waiting to buy when they get sick and when they are well they drop it. Federal gov't aka taxpayers are subsidizing Massachusetts healthcare as well as Idaho. It's a failure. If people would get off their lazy butts and work and then spend their money responsibly and quit having a bunch of illegitimate kids, they could afford health care eh?
Possum Dearie| 4.17.10 @ 10:28AM
Not according to Grace-Marie Turner of the Galen Institute:
While Massachusetts' uninsured rate has dropped to around 3%, 68% of the newly insured since 2006 receive coverage that is heavily or completely subsidized by taxpayers. While Mr. Romney insisted that everyone should pay something for coverage, that is not the way his plan has turned out. More than half of the 408,000 newly insured residents pay nothing, according to a February 2010 report by the Massachusetts Health Connector, the state's insurance exchange.
Another 140,000 remained uninsured in 2008 and were either assessed a penalty or exempted from the individual mandate because the state deemed they couldn't afford the premiums.
Mr. Romney's promise that getting everyone covered would force costs down also is far from being realized. One third of state residents polled by Harvard researchers in a study published in "Health Affairs" in 2008 said that their health costs had gone up as a result of the 2006 reforms. A typical family of four today faces total annual health costs of nearly $13,788, the highest in the country. Per capita spending is 27% higher than the national average ...
Further, insurance companies are required to sell "just-in-time" policies even if people wait until they are sick to buy coverage. That's just like the Obama plan. There is growing evidence that many people are gaming the system by purchasing health insurance when they need surgery or other expensive medical care, then dropping it a few months later.
Jay Dee| 4.17.10 @ 7:54PM
How about this little factoid - Massachusetts pays the highest insurance premiums in the USA.
sharron lee| 4.18.10 @ 4:41PM
Sir, Mr. Romney himself said that the health care costs in Mass were the highest in the nation BEFORE his health care program and that they are still the HIGHES in the nation ! no a resounding endorsement of the current Mass system ...
danfromatlanta| 4.20.10 @ 6:16PM
Oh really? Is that why the COL in Mass is too high for most people to stomach? Is that why Mass is on the verge of state financial collapse, because it saves so much money? Typical liberal, can't even get facts straight.
GavInTucson| 4.20.10 @ 11:07PM
Wally, I hate to burst your bubble but even Romney admitted on O'Reilly that costs are skyrocketing in Mass. and rationing is taking place in large scale.
See for yourself at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qot915TucLU
Robert| 4.21.10 @ 1:07AM
So Massachusetts' health care reform works, huh? Care to explain, then, why they have had to resort to rationing?
Mass Insanity as the Bay State Institutes Health Insurance Rationing
Maybe it "works" for the few who can actually GET the now-rare insurance or a visit with a doctor when they need one. I suspect all those who can't get insurance and can't get a doctor when they need one anymore are unlikely to agree with the assertion.
Quartermaster| 4.16.10 @ 5:58PM
If that happens, move the south. It will be far better there.
Greg| 4.16.10 @ 12:21PM
If only Ron Paul looked and sounded like Romney, then maybe he'd have a chance. Regardless of the negatives with Romney, Obamacare is hardly "modeled" after the MA plan, although there are a few similarities. I reject that as a merely a political positioning statement so that it doesn't seem to be the unprecedented monster that it is. It's one thing for a state to change how it handles subsidized health care and a whole different animal when the Federal Government thrusts it upon the states, businesses and every man, woman and child in America. If Romney were smart, he could easily turn this perceived negative into a weapon against Obamacare. I don't want Romney in the White House, but I do want him to nullify this ongoing comparison to his MA plan.
Possum Dearie| 4.17.10 @ 10:35AM
"Regardless of the negatives with Romney, Obamacare is hardly "modeled" after the MA plan, although there are a few similarities."
WRONG. All the elements of what is now known as RomneyCare -- the individual mandate, tax penalties for those who failed to purchase insurance as required by law, taxpayer subsidies for those who couldn't afford to purchase insurance, a government health "exchange" -- were there from the beginning. In fact, these were the central features of Romney's plan, because Romney chose to focus his health reform efforts on expanding coverage, rather than on bringing down costs.
Whether Romney likes it or not, it sure looks as if his system is the intellectual father to ObamaCare.
He needs to go away, but his ego will not allow it. He has been a party of the old boys club for so long that he has bought into their thinking. Mitt Romney feels this is his turn, rather than this is his time. He doesn't care about meeting head on the challenges of the moment. He just wants to be the President. It could turn out that he will be a gift to conservatives, as his record gets shredded to bits in the primaries and he loses... AGAIN.
Virginia R. Purvis| 4.16.10 @ 12:28PM
Amen all the way brother!!
SpiderMike| 4.16.10 @ 3:00PM
Roger that, Marine!
Purpleguy| 4.16.10 @ 11:01PM
What "rugged individualism and self determination? " ... aren't you enjoying your pension as you swig your beer and sit on the couch eating potato chips? Why should you have a pension just because you were a Marine? Oops, you forgot that pension comes from the government you hate so much - well, give it back and go be rugged and individual in the soup line. I'll bet you get VA healthcare too, but that's another topic for discussion ... hmmm?
Possum Dearie| 4.17.10 @ 10:39AM
The Marine risked his life for his pension, and that was part of the contract he entered into when he swore to defend this country from all enemies both foreign and domestic. What have you done to earn a "free" ride? There is no better example of rugged individualism and self-determination than surviving combat, you idiot.
JmsA| 4.17.10 @ 2:15PM
Right to the point, Possum Dearie. Like the good little lefty Obamaton that he is, you cannot try to reason with morons like purpleturd; he couldn't recognize selfless and honorable service to the U.S. by military personnel if it bit him in the ass. Case in point: "Oops, you forgot that pension comes from the government you hate so much..." No, as all of us with a fully functioning brain know, it is the taxpayer that provides it; the goverment just manages it, or should I say, mismanages it.
danfromatlanta| 4.20.10 @ 6:21PM
I would like to see you try to make him give it back, you liberal pus*y! Any Marine could stomp your commie behind six feet under! You obviously don't have any idea what a national treasure our valiant marines are, or you wouldn't be egging on someone that could whallop you with ease! I'm all for the marines, the closest thing to real heroes our country still has!
danfromatlanta| 4.20.10 @ 6:21PM
I would like to see you try to make him give it back, you liberal pus*y! Any Marine could stomp your commie behind six feet under! You obviously don't have any idea what a national treasure our valiant marines are, or you wouldn't be egging on someone that could whallop you with ease! I'm all for the marines, the closest thing to real heroes our country still has!
Alan Brooks| 4.16.10 @ 11:56PM
But Romney has a shot-- Palin doesn't, not until 2020.
I just don't want another Bush-- not until 2100.
Possum Dearie| 4.17.10 @ 10:41AM
You sure you're Alan and not Mel Brooks? Romney is a surefire LOSER. You'll have Obama in 2012, if Romney is the nominee, and that's worse than Bush.
Alan Brooks| 4.17.10 @ 11:32PM
But Romney has a a tiny shot because is a MAN; do you really think an unruly nation like this could possibly elect a woman in this decade?
Mike Giles| 4.17.10 @ 2:56PM
I think RINO's live for "good press". Their ego's are fulfilled when they pick up the morning paper and see how they've "grown". In any case, If Romney wants to run, he has to disavow Romney Care as a proven failure, now. He has to make it plain, it was an experiment that failed. If he doesn't he won't be able to win, beg, borrow, or steal the Republican nomination. His opponents can't be stupid enough to let him get by on "Obamcare Lite".
Liberty 4x4| 4.18.10 @ 4:55PM
If Romney is the Republican nominee, I, a hard core conservative with vote for Obama. At least, while O is in office he will be seen as a blatant anti-constitutionalist and will be opposed vehemently from every angle by conservatives.
If Romney the RINO wins the people will become complacent thinking they have a solid conservative working for them, when in actuality, they will be deceived, duped, and disappointed.
However, under the spell of their self-imposed complacency they will continue to hope for the hopeless and respond likewise. Consequently, this country will fall deeper into pathological progressive dependency.
Eric(OfConservativeMind)| 4.23.10 @ 3:24AM
Unfortunately, I do not agree with you. Romney may be an idiot, but I would avoid allowing Obama to stay in office a second term. His are the most destructive policies in regards to the Constitution that we have seen in decades, and he needs a swift boot out of office in 2012.
amakkas@alydarcapital.com| 4.16.10 @ 6:37AM
the more i learn about romney, the more i vomit. he sucks dude
Son Of Sam| 4.16.10 @ 8:10AM
Kudos my friend! Not only is he a RINO,but he has NO GUTS WHATSOEVER. He got beat up by McCain on Super Tuesday, so he drops out like a friggin wimp! Any respect I ever had for him went out the window that day.
Face facts Romney supporters, your dude is a life size Ken doll: completely plastic,with no balls whatsoever
stand strong until freedom dawns
Son Of Sam
David in Ma.| 4.16.10 @ 12:12PM
Ken has no balls, I didn't know that.
I guess that's what I get for being a booze drinking, gal chasing, gun shootin' dude and not playing with dolls.
Ken| 4.16.10 @ 8:20PM
Yes, you are soooo manly.
bc3b| 4.16.10 @ 12:49PM
You're right. Romney is like a raw steak left to sit out. At first it looks pretty good. But, the longer it's out the worse it looks and smells.
The first post-Obama president must be a man or woman who has the courage to work to undo the mess Obama is creating. The terms Mitt Romney and courage are mutually exclusive.
Purpleguy | 4.16.10 @ 11:03PM
Let's at least let Obama finish fixing the mess created by your boys, Bush and Cheney.... War, Debt, Torture, Incompetence, Financial collapse, Unemployment, Betrayal - did I miss any of their messes?
Achilles Toejam | 4.17.10 @ 3:27AM
Purple, blah blah blah strain at a gnat and swallow a camel. Obama is fixing? If you consider fixing surrounding yourself with self-avowed Communists, Marxists,lovers of Chairman Mao, haters of the free market capitalist system that gave us the highest standard of living and largest middle class in the world Cabinet members who believe that animals need lawyers and also surrounding yourself with Goldman Sachs fatcat bankers as he takes over American companies and strong arms the rest.
You want to talk about debt it's true the Republicans spent money on the war and other things and the Democrats voted Bush the authority to do the war so we can scratch that one, torture? Please give me a break you ever been water boarded? Segments of our own military go through it and while we're on the subject let's talk about Pelosi lying about being briefed by the CIA concerning enhanced interrogation techniques little miss I'm going to drain the swamp while keeping tax cheats like Rep. Wrangles, Tim Gagner etc. on the job, if you want to see incompetence check out the link I provided.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_MGT_cSi7Rs&playnext_from=TL&videos=CK0ug__TeHE
On the link will also give you the truth about what caused our financial collapse Fanny and Freddie, unemployment? You've got some nerve! When Bush left office it was about 6% Obama swore up and down we needed the stimulus so he can hold it at eight, well he got it and we went to 10% and now they're talking that this is going to be the new norm? Betrayal? The definition of that is evident when Obama moves his lips, did Obama tell the American people he was going to take over major American corporations before the elections, or increase the debt ceiling to $14 trillion after adding trillions more to the deficit and national debt? NO!
Did he tell the American people who have fought off socialized medicine for 50 years that he was going to ram it down our throats with the help of Reid and Pelosi? I think not!
You're blinded by partisanship and you couldn't see truth if it hit you between the eyes well I've got news for you hard times are coming and you're not going to be able to blame Bush at least not being honest, in a few short years the interest on our national debt will be about $800 billion a year we are on track to lose our AAA credit rating you truly grasp what that means?
I'm not saying Obama created this debt mess from zero but he has kicked in the afterburner, check out the link to an eye-opening video that puts it into perspective.
JmsA| 4.17.10 @ 3:04PM
Hey purpleturd, I guess you haven't been watching the (real) news: The Obamawonder's endeavors are not being thought of very highly by the majority of American public, not that you care very much about their opinions, or for that matter does the Obamawonder who just waxed amused about why the Tea Party members are not just bowled over by his largess with their money. I have readily acknowledge, as do many others who post herein that Bush/Cheney were far from perfect. But you're just plain obsessed, which prevents you from recognizing the considerable part played by the democrats, not least of which their acquiescence, if not active participation and support to all of the perceived wrongs by the previous administrations. These include, to name a few, the wild proclamations by democrats in 2002 about the need to remove Saddam (see Hillary Clinton, John Kerry, etc., or did you forget?). How about the Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac collapse (from funding unqualified mortgage loans) requiring bailing out by the taxpayers, not before democrat chair of the banking committee, Barney Frank claimed everything was honky dory? How about BillyBubba Clinton doing away with banking/investing regulation: Glass-Steagall (do you even know what that is?). Betrayal? What the heck are you talking about, or are you just now resorting to making more wild and unfounded accusations like your lefty brethren are accustomed to do? Of course, I don't suppose you believe granting illegal enemy combatants legal standing in our courts by the lefties in the supreme court to constitute a betrayal? I know, per your previous lame retorts, they're just talking points. Somehow I Don't believe the majority of the electorate will see it as such come 11/02/2010. I smell desperation in your part. Unemployment? It was 4.7 in the second quarter of 2007; that is, during 55 straight months of economic growth during Bush/Cheney. I guess that's not convenient to acknowledge, either. That is, of course, until the democrats assumed control of the legislative agenda after taking over congress in 11/2006. Did you also conveniently forget that, too? Again, although myself and others herein attempt impart a bit of (reality based) wisdom, you obstinately refuse to accept it. Keep it up, and buttress those beliefs in others of your kind, for it will only help maintain your detachment from reality and help our side in the coming election and rectification of the messes created by your side. 11/02/2010
Nancy| 4.17.10 @ 3:31PM
Let's see: we're still in Iraq and Afghanistan. We have much more debt now. Unemployment is higher than any time under Bush. Gitmo is still there. No transparency, lots of corruption. Exactly which mess has Obama fixed? All I see is that every situation is worse, not better.
To think otherwise is to be in denial.
pattie| 4.20.10 @ 1:32PM
If we all STOP the blame game and fight together to get term limits a flat tax and a all new Washington that we all can agree with because this is exactly what both sides want..they want us fighting between ourselves, it is ALL OF THEIR FAULTS...I am 63 yrs young and it has always been this way ..it is just worse now and that is because America was sleeping while Washington was stealing..NONE OF THEM ARE INNOCENT!!quit blaming and start cleaning up ..get them all out and then start with term limits so that none of them can stay long enough to work their corruption..We are all Americans ..we should be able to work together and stop letting them control our behavior
Val| 4.16.10 @ 2:04PM
That last sentence would benefit from a comma... or, did you intend to "out" Romney's sexual orientation? :)
Purpleguy| 4.16.10 @ 11:04PM
Got that on the brain, do ya?
jd| 4.16.10 @ 6:46AM
I totally agree with the premise of this article. No way in hell Romney could criticize Obamacare. Even putting that aspect aside, I still do not trust Romney, even though I do feel his biggest strength is economics, and he did garner my sympathy when he was attacked by the press for being a Mormon. I hate the hypocrisy of attacking Catholics or Mormons but hands off when it comes to Islam and radical fundamentalist Muslims.
Jeff| 4.16.10 @ 7:56AM
No, no, no. The article is missing a very important issue. A state acting on it's right's is not the same as the federal government acting "in the states best interests". States can make any services available to their citizenry that their constitution and the voters will allow. The federal government needs to keep out of it. And based on history, they need to get out of the healthcare business.
Old Soldier | 4.16.10 @ 9:49AM
Jeff,
I agree with your Federalist argument.
However, a Romney nomination will tear the Republican Party apart, re-elect Obama, and ensure the permanent creation of a real Conservative Party that will ultimately replace the GOP.
David in Ma.| 4.16.10 @ 12:14PM
Don't think so.
By then the Obama dictatorship will be well entrenched and America will be totally socialist/communist ... and poor as hell!
Cortillaen| 4.16.10 @ 12:29PM
A "real Conservative Party" won't matter a whit by then. Why? This, FTA: "...by 2014 the federal government will begin to dole out hundreds of billions of dollars in subsidies, which will create a whole new constituency to preserve the law."
That was, is, and always will be the purpose of statist moves like creating Obamacare. They expect to get a huge influx of people onto the government dole, people who's votes are bought and paid for with other people's money. It's the fulfillment of de Tocquville's famous quote and the end of conservatism as a viable political platform.
Repeal is all well and good, but it's a purely defensive move, just like every move the right has made against encroaching statism for over a century. What we need is offense, and the only one that will actually make a difference is terminating the voting power of the leeches. Using the surge of the next elections and public outrage to end-run Congress through the Art.5 provision for states to call a Constitutional Convention and pass an amendment restricting voting rights to those not living on government handouts is the only way to do more than slow the end of our country.
KNPatriot| 4.16.10 @ 2:06PM
I love this idea but how in the world do you build the support for a Constitutional Convention?
Gill O’Teen ✝✡| 4.16.10 @ 3:22PM
I’m sorry, but now is not the time for a Constitutional Convention. We must first get all those who believe in absolute gum’mint control out of office. Right now, I support Joe Biden to be OUR Nation’s 45th President, then for just about any non-progressive to be number 46. To bring this about we will need to elect a majority of constitutionally conservative, pro-life, God-fearing Americans to the House and 67 like-minded Senators this November who will have the courage to impeach and fire the kommie-pretender. If President Biden won’t sign a repeal of obummer-care, then he should be likewise retired. And so on. Maybe then we can think of a Constitutional Convention, but not as long as the narcissist-in-chief is in office. Keep in mind that yesterday afternoon, the Debt/GDP ratio reached 89.39%. At it's current rate of growth, OUR economy will hit the 90% point of no return around May 1. The irony of the date should not be lost in pondering the full implications of that milestone.
Gill O’Teen ✝✡
gill.Oteen07041776@gmail.com
Now is the time for all to go Galt!
Only 17 days to go!
DanMingo| 4.16.10 @ 8:24PM
pass an amendment restricting voting rights to those not living on government handouts
Senior citizen retirees and veterans would argue against that.
Nancy| 4.17.10 @ 3:42PM
What a stupid comment. I don't collect SS yet, but I did put money in the system. My husband served in the USMC for 26 years, and he gets a retirement (pension). That's not a handout, bozo. The government completely controlled his life and put him in harm's way many times for those 26 years. He sure didn't have a cushy job, and he's still working as that "pension" isn't enough to make ends meet. And his retirement is nothing like lugs turners at GM get. He has worked all his life (since he was 16 yrs. old), and for you to begrudge him his measly military retirement check is just mean spirited.
JimE| 4.18.10 @ 9:06PM
Dan,
As long as they cut out your illegal alien buddies too.
Joe Steelman| 4.17.10 @ 1:00AM
Cortillean, Very good reading, keep itup!!!!
Robert| 4.16.10 @ 10:55AM
The article is dead on. Should Romney capture the nomination, O'Bama Care will become the obscene burden of an America already standing on the precipice of bankruptcy. In addition, Mass Care is in the red and will always be in the red. Health care is not higher in Mass than any state, and rationing is already a fact.
Frankly, while Romney has a nice smile and is in a sense chrismatic, I am still not sold on his sudden conversion to conservatism shortly before he announced his run for President. Previously pro gay, pro choice, pro amnesty, what was the cause of his monumental conversion on so many issues of principle other than his desire to be president.
Eric Cartman| 4.16.10 @ 11:23AM
Jeff - do you really want to have to explain that every 10 seconds as the Obama camp peppers you with "He did it , too!" Romney is toast. Let's get a person who is a true conservative and can persuade Americans what is right. Haley Barbour, anyone?
Charles| 4.16.10 @ 12:02PM
Jeff,
Good luck explaining this point to the uneducated public. You are right, but Romney should not be the nominee for the reasons stated plus others.
Melvin| 4.16.10 @ 7:25AM
Romney is a Crist, and the Republican Party leadership and the RNC should be drawn, quartered, and dupmped in burning hot oil for them allowing to use MA as a test bed for single payer health care.
Lets not kid ourselves here the Republican Party
leadership wanted a single payer health care plan just as bad as the Democrats.
All this bluster about repeal of Demcare is slowly fading into, "Well, maybe we don't want to repeal the whole thing, just the parts that we don't like."
Bottom line don't trust a Democrat, Moderate, and sure as hell don't trust the Republican leadership.
Jim O'Brien| 4.16.10 @ 8:22AM
Romney, Crist, McCain, Snowe, Collins ..... All belong in the ashcan of conservatism. They are frauds.
GringoBob | 4.16.10 @ 7:31AM
Mr Klein - why do you refer to both McCain and Romney as "conservatives" ? - neither are, they are both "progressives" just as Obama is big P progressive, these two are small p progressives -
I don't want the cap & trade crap that McCain waffled on and I don't want RomneyCare any more than I want ObamaCare
how in the world can Massachusetts be almost $10 Billion in debt in 3 short years with RomneyCare with the Federal Government picking up half the tap - does that mean they are really $20 Billion down the toilet ?
by the way, put Gingrich right there with these two progressives - he is also NOT a conservative, just another user of their forum
Robert | 4.16.10 @ 11:01AM
Gringo Bob you have it right. McCain is a radical. The First Amendment of the Bill of Rights reads: Congress shall make no law restricting the freedom of Speech. McCain and a "conservative" Congress passed a bill that not only abridged free speech but criminalized it. Violate McCain Feingold and the Federal Government had the power to prosecute you, fine you, and throw your carcass in jail. By the way, a "conservative" President Bush signed it into law.
The Supreme Court struck it down but by only one vote. O'Bama loves the bill the way it was and is trying to find a way to bypass the Supreme Court.
Bush and McCain have so trashed the word "Conservative" that it hardly means anything anymore. True conservatives, however, know what it means. They have read the Constitution.
DanMingo| 4.16.10 @ 8:26PM
Congress passed a bill that not only abridged free speech but criminalized it.
The Supreme Court struck it down but by only one vote.
Now corporations can openly buy elections.
Ahhhh freedom.
Nancy| 4.17.10 @ 3:46PM
DanMingo, what is your problem? Corporations can only buy ads; they are still restricted as to how much they contribute to one political party or candidate. And corporations are people too.
DanMingo| 4.18.10 @ 9:08PM
My problem? I have no problem, I post only what I have been told to post. My only opinion is the one given me.
mama b| 4.16.10 @ 12:48PM
AMEN! Gingrich helped end a 40 year Congressional minority with the Contract with America. What did they do with their majority? Turned into a bunch of RINOs! I helped campaign for Steve Chabot (R, SW Ohio) because I believed in the Contract. Well, ol' Steve enjoyed a 14 year career, lost to Dem Steve Driehaus two years ago, and is campaigning to regain the seat he lost come November. Unfortunately, he will probably win because Driehaus sold out on ObamaCare at the eleventh hour, enraging his constituents in his largely conservative district. Hey, Steve, what happened to Item 10, term limits? And Gingrich abandoned his principles to sniff around the skirt of soon-to-be-wife #3 (or is it #4?) He should have the grace to just go away. This "Repeal and Replace" Republicrats are banking on for November is nothing but appeasement. True conservatives and Libertarians might not have time to field Regan Conservative candidates in 2010, but wait til 2012! It will be hunting season on RINOs!!
Jed Merrill | 4.16.10 @ 7:35AM
Neutralize?
To the contrary, Romney will have the perfect opportunity to point out the conservative values health care reform should be based on and ISN'T.
Romney is brilliant, and has already done a great job sticking it to Obama, comparing his free market, state based approach to Obama's socialist power grab approach.
Furthermore, it is going to take knowledge of both business and the law to reverse much of what Obama has done, and Romney has both, unlike any of his likely 2012 opponents.
Only someone who chooses not to understand the differences could make the argument that ObamaCare and RomneyCare are the same thing.
ObamaCare = 2,700 pages
RomneyCare = 70 pages
Which one is going to trample more on our rights, individual and state? Raise taxes? Add bureaucracy? Wipe out insurance companies?
Romney's plan focused on individual responsibility for both having health insurance and making health care choices. Obama's plan is about government control and responsibility. The two plans are as different as day and night, particularly in intent, although it is no surprise that at least some features are in common.
Bottom line, I trust Romney a whole lot more than Obama to decide health care issues, and he's said his only goal right now is to repeal ObamaCare. Don't believe me? Go to his PAC website, then read his book.
By the way, are we forgetting the importance of creating jobs? Romney is the man to do it. Healthcare is important from a budget balancing perspective, but jobs are even one step more fundamental at the moment. Let's not throw out the baby because you've misdiagnosed the bathwater.
Melvin| 4.16.10 @ 7:40AM
But Jed, is not Romney Care not also failing for not coming under or even be at what was projected that this program was to cost.
Romney Care sounded great on paper but in reality from what I have read that it to is also very, very expensive.
Curly Smith| 4.16.10 @ 7:53AM
Jed, based on the page count, Romney was just more efficient in destroying the healthcare system in Mass than Obama was in the United States, or maybe Obama just had more to destroy. How can you say that RomneyCare "focused on individual responsibility" when "20 percent of the cost of RomneyCare is being paid by federal taxpayers as a result of its Medicaid expansion." It seems that the "individual responsibility" is limited to finding somebody else to pay the tab.
Forget about repeal... let's abort ObamaCare.
Possum Dearie| 4.17.10 @ 10:48AM
"To the contrary, Romney will have the perfect opportunity to point out the conservative values health care reform should be based on and ISN'T."
Sorry, but that would be Paul Ryan, who has done a remarkable job already offering substantive, real and practical alternative solutions. Ryan was the GOP star of the show when Obama spoke to the Republican caucus and held the health-care summit. Mitt Romney was nowhere to be seen, not on the Sunday talkshow circuit, not in op eds.
Nancy| 4.17.10 @ 3:48PM
Romney, aka as Obamalite.
JonH| 4.18.10 @ 11:52PM
Our good'ole marine leads the charge of the panic stricken "Rino Callers"!! You "Rino Callers" don't take the time to really gather your facts and study things out. Are you lazy or just can't comprehend the details between the Obamacare and a program supported by AND still supported by Reagan's baby--The Heritage Foundation? Yes, they worked WITH ROMNEY on the MA HC Plan.
Instead of panicing like a bunce of old ignorant women, wise up a little, have a little faith and push your intelligence a little more....right over to The Heritage Foundation's website and see what they are doing. You can join in with the best conservative minds in America there. They will help you learn how to understand that the MA Plan with its 70 pages DOESN'T compare with the "particulars" in the other 2600+ pages of Obamacare. Even the hard to educate republicans and Tea Party conservatives can easily tell the difference. There is something brewing at The Heritage Foundation you can join and get involved with.
BE INFORMED AND STOP PANICING. There are teams of the brightest Conservatives working on these problems.
Romney and the Heritage Foundation will figure out a way to solve the problems you hardly even understand. Be a little patient, let Obama's mouth run awhile until he hangs himself out to dry. He isn't all that smart and neither are his liberal hench men ....as well as the MSM.
If the very worst fears reach anywhere near their feared potential---Romney won't run. He has too much integrity. Obviously, many of you just don't really know the guy very well. Try evangelicalsformitt.com to supplement your Heritage Foundation diet. Article6blog.com isn't too bad either.
Romney will solve the problems between now and the 2010 election or he won't run you'll see!!
Jed Merrill | 4.16.10 @ 7:44AM
God willing, ObamaCare will already be defunded sometime early in 2011! That's a long time before 2012. Jobs should continue to be the big issue, and that will be Romney's strong suit. There is no way Obama puts millions of people to work between now and 2012 with his skewed domestic priorities and lack of respect for small business. To the contrary, ObamaCare is going to kill at least another half million jobs, according to most estimates.
Jed Merrill | 4.16.10 @ 7:51AM
Melvin,
RomneyCare costs 1.5% of the State's budget. The money that is apparently coming from the federal government is money that also goes to other states to help cover emergency room visits of the uninsured. Under Romney's plan, that money is redirected to help the poor buy insurance for themselves rather than to pay hospitals directly. That is on paper. In practice, I believe Democrat Governor Duval Patrick has not enforced the requirement for those funds to be redirected. As for accusations that Massachusetts health care costs are suddenly the highest in the nation, they were also the highest at the time the law was enacted. Is RomneyCare bankrupting the State? I would argue that the liberal Congress, that likes to spend like California, is what is actually hurting Massachusetts. (Romney was elected to bring the State BACK from bankruptcy, and he did.) RomneyCare is actually one of the more reasonable bills to have passed there, and is still more popular than it is unpopular.
I'm not saying I want the bill passed in other states, but it is certainly a leaner, more effective model than ObamaCare ever will be.
The purpose is to empower the citizen, not to embolden the federal government or the state, and I respect that.
Boston12GS| 4.16.10 @ 8:43AM
I'm self-employed and live in MA. This past February my health insurance cost increased by 50%, and now costs my family (which makes very little use of health resources) $18,000 a year for a plan with a $4,000 deductible. Is this your definition of a successful reform of health care? It certainly isn't mine.
Lullaby's, Legends and Lies| 4.16.10 @ 7:51AM
Romney is only living off of name recognition from the last Election, but he stands a snowball's chance in Hell, of becoming the Republican Nominee in 2012. He's just not reading the "Tea" Leafs of the day, and is only wasting his time and money, otherwise, he'd know he's finished already!! The RINO's are dead!!
Former Republican| 4.16.10 @ 7:59AM
If we are willing to look at how we spend overseas and on foreign policy, the only true fiscal conservative that would truely veto and only allow constitutional provisions is Ron Paul or a canidate like him. The majority of Republicans are only Democrate lights and they do not fix the problem.
martin j smith| 4.16.10 @ 8:02AM
Romney should be rejected along with all of the 2008 gang. We need fresh blood ( so to speak ) someone who is not afraid of crtiicizing the Democrat Left agend and BHO in particular. That is it !!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Jocon307| 4.16.10 @ 8:28AM
Martin you are 100% correct. This is just another good reason to forget about Romney. There are a million and ten good reasons to forget about Huckabee and all the rest, including Palin. The only loser from last time I'd be willing to consider is Giuliani, but I think that point is moot.
But any new contenders should take a lesson from both Palin & Giuliani in terms of not giving a flying hoot what the NY Times and the rest of the MSM say about them.
I just hope some good person steps up. Someone we on the right can get behind so we don't end up with a it's my turn RINO like last time. And two times before that. And before that. You get my drift.
Greg| 4.16.10 @ 12:49PM
I agree, we need someone who is not currently in the conversation. If you lump all the libs and RINOs (90% of republicans) into a group called the "political class", our conservative hero must come from somewhere else. I doubt that regular folks like Palin are electable to the presidency, but they are an important part creating a national chorus towards a smaller, fiscally and legislatively-restrained government. This person will need the verbal skill to not just bash liberalism, but present the true conservative vision of America which is an inspiring, motivating, purposeful and empowering vision most people hunger for, whether or not they even fully realize it now. The mindset of many, many people must be changed by a groundswell return to the original American idea.
mama b| 4.16.10 @ 12:57PM
You are right on about the MSM. Remember when reporters tried to blindside Ronald Regan? He would just say, "Yeah, so what?" when they tried to pillory his beliefs and agenda. I agree with most of what you say, Jocon, except the part about Giuliani. He's another politician who thinks with that body part well south of his brain, along with Bill Clinton, Gary Hart and Newt Gingrich (ad nauseum). They should all take a lesson from King Edward--you can't have the woman and the kingdom, too. To them all: "Go away! You embarrass us!"
WRTolkas| 4.16.10 @ 8:20AM
Gentlemen,
Just look at that picture: you have a group of politicians grinning like apes in a zoo as Romney sticks the shiv deeper into the backs of his state's citizens. Then you have Swimmer, standing behind Romney with a grin that would have made Josef Mengele hide under the bed.
I know what is in the mind of Swimmer's rum soaked brain: "Wow, I've stuck it to the people again in a way that doesn't affect me or my family. And to the morons in the state, I look like a saint. And most importantly, I just screwed any chance for this chump of a governor to run for higher office in the Republican Party. Well my day’s work is finished here."
Have a safe weekend,
WRTolkas
Becky| 4.16.10 @ 8:24AM
The fatal flaw in Romney's defense is that he blames Democrat implementation of the bill in order for it to have been successful. That is the problem with laws like these, they depend on who is in control at the time.
I didn't vote for him in the last primary, and I am a Michigander, because of his health care law. It is much more well known and attached to him now.
Running a business and running the government are two different things. When you expand and write laws based on your ideology and the assumption you will have like minded individuals implement and run the program, you basically ignore the fact that almost certainly those with much different ideas will take over one day.
Businesses used to be destroyed by bad management, therefore most businesses have closer control, and those that do not make news (Carly vs. HP heirs). Poorly run businesses are closed or taken over. Poorly run government continues.
Cris Worth| 4.16.10 @ 8:29AM
Back in '08 Romney had the support of Limbaugh/Hannity/Coulter/Beck...you can't get more right wing then that in the media anyway. Now that all four bash Obamacare until the cows come home I just wonder if they will back Romney again in '12. If so then they are greater hypocrites then any liberal in the modern age. Interesting to see.
Old Soldier| 4.16.10 @ 9:46AM
Only after the he became the only alternative to McCain.
Jocon307| 4.17.10 @ 10:43AM
Old Soldier is completely correct. In fact, it seems to me there was NO ONE who really got a lot of support in the primaries. Fred Thomson (sp?) seemed to have the most support from the true right, but his campaign never got anywhere.
As I said above I liked Giuliani a lot, primarily because he really got the whole "War on Terror" thing.
A lot of folks seemed to like Huckabee, but it was clear to me that he was of the "compassionate conservative" mode, and that was totally played out by 2008. Too bad that gave us Obama, a true "compassionate liberal".
And I didn't understand the animus to Romney from the evangelical community due to his being a Mormon. If there was more to it than that (and the flip-flopper charge which was quite true) I don't know what it was.
In fact, it probably would have been a very good thing if Romney had prevailed and been elected Pres. this last time. But I'm afraid that day is passed. And I certainly don't see what would be different for him this time. The flip-flopper deal would be even worse. Health care "reform" is his albatross as much as it will be Obama's. And the Evangelicals won't like him any better.
Really, last time they were all dreadful or inept and that is why we got Mr. Next-in-line. Palin was the ONLY good thing to come from the pubbies last outing.
We CANNOT let this happen again in 2012.
LarryK| 4.16.10 @ 8:33AM
I will vote for a Democrat before I vote for Romney! And that includes Blowbama!
David in Ma.| 4.16.10 @ 12:18PM
Can you write in a persons name, address, etc for president on the ballot?
Nancy| 4.17.10 @ 3:50PM
That's too extreme. My dog would be better than Obama. At least she wouldn't do any harm.
Grzmlyk| 4.16.10 @ 8:44AM
Romney violated the first rule of conservatism: Government is not the solution to the problem, government is the problem.
For that reason alone, he has disqualified himself from serious contention in 2012. Not to mention the fact that he is ideologically "moderate," which means finger-in-the-wind fecklessness.
Are we going to be fooled again by putting a moderate candidate up there in hopes that the mainstream media will become enamored?
I think Bush proved, once and for all, just how popular left-wing Republicans are with the mainstream media; they'll hate you no matter how many sops you throw to Ted Kennedy and his ilk, so you might as well put a real conservative in there.
The purpose of politics today is to dish out heaps of something for nothing; it matters not whether there's an "R" or a "D" after your name. We need REAL conservatives in office - guys like Chris Christie, who appears to be putting his political money where his mouth is.
That's the kind of politician we need - not a politician at all, but a courageous leader. One whose political compass always points to freedom, liberty and shrinking government. One whose raison d'etre is not feathering his political nest.
Just like Jeb Bush has, by virtue of his DNA, eliminated himself from contention for the conservative mantle, just as Charlie Christ has been exposed as another RINO, just as Huckabee has shown his utter squishiness, Romney belongs on the "discard" pile for 2012.
Lullaby's, Legends and Lies| 4.16.10 @ 9:10AM
"We need REAL conservatives in office - guys like Chris Christie, who appears to be putting his political money where his mouth is."
Actually, that might just be another hotdog that he's putting in his mouth (Rimshot!!). Sorry Grzmlyk!! It was an easy joke, and I had to take it. But you're right, and I was just talking to Margie about this last night, Governor Christie is looking like the real deal, a fighter, that stands on his principle's, and wants to clean house. Old Romney's done already, it's just that he doesn't believe it yet, but he will soon enough. The RHINO's are dead!!
One more thing Grzmlyk, I still can't believe that you joined in with Cartman last week, like you did, I thought you always took the highroad here? But I guess I was wrong about you (hint: take the low road more often, very funny!!).
Oof, oof!!
Grzmlyk| 4.16.10 @ 10:01AM
Hey 3-L:
Well, there but for the grace of Christie's waistline go I. So I tread lightly (get it?) on the weight issue (I'm not in Christie's league yet, but give me a couple of years!)
I confess I recall an interchange with Cartman, but I forget what it was, exactly.
I do TRY to take the high road, but all too often I fail - and sometimes I just say, screw it: Liberals ONLY take the low road, and that's how they've managed to snooker an entire country.
C'est la guerre!
Lullaby's, Legends and Lies| 4.16.10 @ 4:48PM
Grzmlyk: I'll remind you of your, as you say, "interchange" on the low road recently, it was about the Jersey Shore (I think this is a TV show, huh?), dentures, and 52" TV's for everybody. You said, "After all, we have to be fair to those Americans (or whatever) who are so shallow, so vain, so solipsistic that they think other people give a furry rat's ass about their lives, can continue to be shallow, vain and solipsistic. At your expense." Solipsistic? Come on now Grz, you're making words up now!! Oh wait!! Here it is? Solipsism: the view or theory that the self is all that can be known to exist. Damn, it is a real word!! I read that whole "interchange" at least three times over, and laughed each and every time.
About Christie's waistline? I'm not laughing at him either, if it wasn't for the Army making me run several times a week, or ruck marching 20K's (12.4 miles) with 35 lbs on my back, like I just did two days ago, I'd look more like him in just a few weeks/months. I watched an interview with him this week, and he says he's in training for a upcoming 5K run (it turns out, they moved his refrigerator 5K's away from his office, rimshot!!) so he can get healthier. I wish him the best of luck on his diet, because the American People, historically, don't like to elect fat Presidents, so he's got to lose a few pounds to be a "true" serious contender. So I'm cheering him on with his diet, because I want to get behind him if he decides to run for President someday, but that's only because presently, there's no room in front of him (rimshot)!! Sorry, but I like to take the low road sometimes too. Screw it!!
Cris Worth| 4.16.10 @ 8:49AM
Romney’s main thrust in recent days is to neutralize opposition from the tea partiers, potentially his greatest threat to the GOP nomination. He’s wooing politically speaking Sarah Palin – the unofficial Tea Party leading lady and successfully so. If the tea partiers refuse to hold Romney accountable for Romneycare the blueprint for Obamacare and God forbid endorse Romney for President the Tea Party will end up like Bull Moose, an offshoot of the Republican Party a century ago and the Democrats will win again in '12.
Possum Dearie| 4.17.10 @ 10:52AM
The Tea Party will never support Mitt Romney. You can take that to the bank.
Nancy| 4.17.10 @ 3:53PM
You are 100% correct. He seems swarmy to me. And thinks government can fix anything. Just another RHINO.
Stuart Koehl| 4.16.10 @ 9:04AM
Mitt Romney could very credibly campaign on a platform to repeal Obamacare. It would, however, require a degree of honesty and humility rare in a politician. His talking points would have to be something like this:
When I was governor of Massachusetts, working with the legislature we implemented a state health care system embodying many of the salient points in the new Democratic health care law. We listened to experts and accountants, we projected the costs and benefits of our plan, and decided that this was a good way to provide health care to all the citizens of the state.
We were wrong, dead wrong, on almost every count.
Our cost projections were off by almost an order of magnitude. The cost of insurance for most citizens has risen, while services have declined. We did not even manage to provide coverage for all the uninsured. Today, most of the citizens of Massachusetts have serious complaints about the health care plan we passed, and would like to see it repealed.
Once burned, twice shy. Fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me! Having seen the tangible results of this type of health care scheme in one state, we will not make the mistake of imposing the same thing on the entire country.
We know what does not work, and we should reject it. Fortunately, the most onerous parts of President Obama's plan have not yet been implemented. There is still time to repeal it before permanent harm is done to the country's health care system and the broader economy.
We should repeal this monstrosity of a law, and in its place enact common-sense, market-based reforms that will lower costs by increasing competition, eliminating outrageous malpractice awards and making patients and their doctors responsible for health care decisions.
[Hereafter would follow the detailed proposal, including tranfering the deduction for health insurance from employers to individuals, allowing competition in health insurance across state lines, expansion of health savings accounts, allowing individuals and small businesses to form pools to buy insurance at group rates, tort reform, and a government-subsidized "last resort" plan for high risk individuals and those with pre-existing conditions.]
This ought to do the trick. Is Mitt smart enough to leverage his own mistakes into an advantage, using the political equivalent of jiu-jitsu?
Grzmlyk| 4.16.10 @ 10:22AM
Don't forget that one of the goals was to decrease the number of emergency room visits and in fact that number, too, has increased.
I agree, if Romney did something like this - and if he could seriously prove conservative bona fides - I might take another look at him.
But that's not what he's doing. In all interviews he's a typical weasel, defending the indefensible. It is that defense, even more than the original health care travesty, that has expunged any respect I had for Romney as a potential leader.
Not to mention his already-troubling history of reinventing his positions for the sake of political expediency.
He's a technocrat. He's no leader.
George S| 4.16.10 @ 12:39PM
He may as well also say:
"I have no judgment, nor am I that bright. I thought I could, like Superman, leap the laws of economics in a single bound, bend cost curves with my bear hands, and, who, disguised as a Republican, would fight for a never-ending government as the American Way. The history of failed state run medicine - from Canada to England to Tennessee's TennCare - was just the result of some not too bright thinking. Guess you can add me to the list. Sorry. Now about my qualifications to be president..."
Stuart Koehl| 4.16.10 @ 3:03PM
Transcending the laws of economics is nothing as compared to "alternative energy" mavens who want to repeal the laws of thermodynamics.
South Texan| 4.17.10 @ 5:02AM
Good post George S. I would like to add that the financial cost of Romneycare or Obamacare is secondary, in my opinion to the fact that they take away freedom and implement more socialism. There is no way that Romney didn't know it was a socialist program. As much as I don't want a third party, how else will the Republicans learn that we don't want socialism from them or the democrats? Find someone new that supports constitutional principles or it won't matter who we vote for.
UpChuck.Liberals| 4.16.10 @ 11:45PM
There is NO WAY IN HE## Romney will say that he made a bad mistake. Which, btw is the only thing that he could say that would make me vote for him.
JonH| 4.19.10 @ 12:06AM
Just wait to see what else he has to say before you nix anything friend. Romney is playing the game like no one knows. You'll find he is a conservative and when you see what he's getting set up and ready to do you'll really like the guy!
Possum Dearie| 4.17.10 @ 10:58AM
Mitt Romney lost in 2008, because he couldn't gain the trust of social conservatives who saw his support for the sanctity of life as mere political expediency. He still hasn't given a convincing reason that anyone should vote for him, other than that he isn't Obama.
He inherited his wealth from his father, who was the president of American Motors. He used some of that wealth to run a campaign against Edward Kennedy for Senate in 1994 that fell apart when he conceded every issue to Ted Kennedy in their debate. He won the MA governor's race in 2002, narrowly, in a good year for the GOP in which they were the incumbent party, mainly because the Democrats had a horrible candidate.
As governor he served as a red stamp for the Democrat legislature. He signed legislation for insurance mandates, including taxpayer-funded abortions, and for draconian gun control (at a time when most of the nation was moving away from gun control).
If he had run again in 2006, he would almost certainly have been defeated in a landslide. Instead he made a run for the Presidency. Despite throwing huge amounts of his own money into the campaign, he finished third.
Since then he has used his mouthpieces like David Frum to smear his potential opponents like Sarah Palin. He has also never faced up to the mistake of the Massachusetts health insurance system he signed into law.
The only argument I've seen for Romney is the "Goldilocks" argument: he's not too conservative like Palin, and he's not too moderate like McCain, so presto! he's a "just right" candidate.
The problem is that the Presidency is a job demanding in judgment, stamina and moral courage. It isn't just a point on a political graph. Reagan was not a great President because of where he lay politically, but because he was willing to fight for it. Mitt Romney shows none of that fighting spirit.
Nancy| 4.17.10 @ 4:01PM
Saw Romney on O'Reilley the other night, and he's standing behind RomneyCare just like the annointed one. Why do politicians always think they have to fix things with another government program? Name me one government program that has been successful. They are always corrupt, wasteful and get in the way of progress. What we really need from the government is sound national defense (and not the defense of every two bit country in the world), and just enough regulation to keep people basically honest. That should eliminate about 50% of Washington, and we can pay down that huge debt in a few years. Couple that with term limits and adherence to the Constitution (including states rights) and we might get this country back on track.
Michael L. Hauschild| 4.16.10 @ 9:32AM
I had hopes for Palin but they have all but evaporated with the McCain endorsement and the comment the other day about "Romney/Palin you becha." NO MORE RINOs!!!!!!!!!!
Stuart Koehl| 4.16.10 @ 9:41AM
Perfect is the enemy of good enough.
To govern, one must first win.
Ideological purity is the pathway of futility.
Do not build sandcastles in the air.
Grzmlyk| 4.16.10 @ 11:09AM
Been there, done that. It's called Richard Nixon. Gerald Ford. George H.W. Bush. George W. Bush.
If there were ever a time when ideoloegical purity is not the pathway to futility, it is now, at this moment in time.
The exigencies of governing foist enough ideological compromise onto a conservative president (Reagan famously couldn't erradicate the Department of education, and in fact government grew under Reagan, despite his relative ideological purity).
Instead of electing an ostensible conservative only to watch him drift leftward, how about we elect an ostensible "moderate" and watch him drift rightward?
We simply cannot afford another ideologically rudderless Republican - that is if there's any republic at all left in 2012.
FawnridgeFarm| 4.16.10 @ 11:49AM
Grzmlyk writes:
"We simply cannot afford another ideologically rudderless Republican - that is if there's any republic at all left in 2012".
Well said, sir. Truer words have never been spoken. Pursuant to the encroachment of socialism within our constitutional republic, the only appropriate area of compromise relates to the choice of shovels with which to bury it.
Grzmlyk| 4.16.10 @ 12:14PM
I agree, Fawnridge.
I'm just waiting for the day, a year or so hence -after Alito, Roberts, Scalia and Thomas have all met with amazingly coincidental fatal accidents and have been replaced by Bill Maher, Medea Benjamin, Al Sharpton and Ariana Huffington - for SCOTUS to declare unanimously that the Constitution is now and forevermore unconstitutional.
Not that it's not already our de facto operating environment, but it'll be so comforting to know that Obama will have ascended from the presidency to Leader for Life with the full force of the law.
paradoctor| 4.16.10 @ 3:05PM
Stuart Koehl: Grzmlyk shows us what his sandcastle-in-the-air looks like.
Nancy| 4.17.10 @ 4:04PM
Now that is enough to make me lose my lunch, AND keep me awake for eons.
Possum Dearie| 4.17.10 @ 11:00AM
"Instead of electing an ostensible conservative only to watch him drift leftward, how about we elect an ostensible 'moderate' and watch him drift rightward?"
LOL you did that in 2008. How's that Hopey Changey stuff working out fer ya?
Karl Jung| 4.16.10 @ 12:20PM
Stuart, I told you not to drink when your on medication!
JonH| 4.19.10 @ 12:15AM
Blind "RINO CALLERS",
Pay attention to Stuart Koehl, the above. Your talk is based on panic and it is divisive. Wise up and head for The Heritage Foundation. Mr. Philip Klein is a problem finder and embelisher for those given to PANIC. That's how he makes his money. Wait for the problem solvers to give their responses before you stay paniced out.
Pingback| 4.16.10 @ 9:45AM
How Romney Could Kill the ObamaCare Repeal Movement | Republican Party of Door County links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Ellis Wyatt| 4.16.10 @ 9:46AM
I can't figure Romney out. I agree he is a rino but he also obviously has a huge ego. From a political standpoint the best thing he can do is admit he was wrong, he tried healthcare reform that was just like Obamacare and it failed as Obamacare is destined to fail. He would do himself a large favor to speak of experience that comes from that failure and how Obamacare will be repealed and more market based solutions that have proven to work will be implemented. To just ignore this grotesque mistake of his will doom his campaign for any other office.
Stuart Koehl| 4.16.10 @ 9:51AM
See my post four above yours.
Siegfried X| 4.16.10 @ 10:35AM
That would be too much flip-flopping. Romney has already reversed his view on abortion and homosexuality compared to when he was governor. For him to also reverse himself on RomneyCare would make it obvious that he is just saying whatever it takes to get elected.
Stuart Koehl| 4.16.10 @ 3:04PM
So, when a conservative goes all wobbly and moves left, he's "grown" or "matured", but if a liberal moves right he's a "weasel" and a "sell-out"?
Glad we cleared that up.
Don Rorschach| 4.16.10 @ 9:48AM
Romney is just one more example of what destroyed the Republican Party. Liberals like Bush and Romney should be in the Democrat Party where their views are in step with the party. Bush and his liberal criminals set the stage for Obama. Otherwise, Obama would be a mere footnote in the history books.
Possum Dearie| 4.17.10 @ 11:03AM
Reagan got saddled with Poppy, and here we are. The Rockefeller Republicans need to go the way of the dinosaur, and this might be the year to do it.
Stuart Koehl| 4.16.10 @ 9:52AM
If you think Romney and Bush are liberals, then what do you call the real thing?
Possum Dearie| 4.17.10 @ 11:03AM
Socialists.
Nancy| 4.17.10 @ 4:06PM
Marxists.
somnolence| 4.16.10 @ 10:12AM
Is Romney going to drop the mandate that you have to buy health insurance? Because if he isn't there really is no difference between him and Obama. I'll tell anyone on this page that you can't make me buy anything, including Medicare. Millions like me will say go ahead, incarcerate us in a federal tax jail while our loyal relatives/confederates guard our hidden money while real criminals walk the streets. Folks, in the long run, whether it is Obama or Romney it is simply unenforceable and destined to be skirted, avoided, and ultimately defied.
Ben Gleck| 4.17.10 @ 12:24AM
Haha, good one.
Your news source has misinformed you.
There will be no fines or jail; you just pay more in tax (ie do not get the 'write off' if you don't purchase the insurance.
And no, there won't be 16,000 IRS agents hired etc.
What flavor is your kool aid?
South Texan| 4.17.10 @ 5:10AM
It's obvious you've had too much Kool aid already.
Possum Dearie| 4.17.10 @ 11:16AM
The law does make individuals subject to a tax, starting in 2014, if they fail to obtain health insurance coverage. The health care bill sets aside $10 billion for the IRS to hire up to 16,500 agents to enforce the mandate. The only reason the current language says "may need" and "as many as" is because the bill hasn't kicked into effect. Also, notice it's pitched as "tax credits" for low income families.. who don't pay taxes. How will you enforce the mandates for the working families who have healthcare they already like and won't keep? Liens, seizures and jail. Duh.
Tim*| 4.16.10 @ 10:26AM
Nice Mormon fellow ,with corporate ties ,but not the conservative choice for 2012.
Real Conservatives like Jim DeMint would trump Romney for 2012 .
JonH| 4.19.10 @ 12:24AM
Tim and friends,
Sen DeMint is a great guy .....who supported Romney in 2008--BIG TIME. He's not panicked out of his mind like most on this site. He's waiting to see what Romney will do and of course the Heritage Foundation (they've already started what they're going to do). Take a look at their site.
Margie| 4.16.10 @ 10:33AM
Forget about Romney. Chris Christie 2012!!
CL| 4.16.10 @ 10:33AM
No Romney. No Huckabee. We do not need do overs.
Charles E Hoy| 4.16.10 @ 10:59AM
Hard to understand these politicians these days. They'll do anything, IF, it doesn't come at their political expense. McCain has turned into a total loser, with his wanting to provide AMNESTY, to the Illegal Immigrants. Romney, on the other hand, did very well, until he came up with RomneyCare, and is now a total loser, along with McCain. Guiliani is too old, although I still admire him for his actions on 09/11/01. Gingrinch has been out of the limelight far too long, and I believe is also a RINO. The only people that have a real good shot, I feel, are Paul Ryan, Tim Pawlenty (possibly), Michele Bachmann, and Sarah Palin (VP??). These are the only ones that I still, at this point, think have a good shot at un-seating that idiot that's in there now. I also think that Huckabee is toast. Having spent 8 yrs in the military, fighting for my country, there are not too many of these people that impress me very much. Don't much care for losing my rights and freedoms, and will do as much as possible to stop any of these clowns from destroying the USA
NCdefector| 4.16.10 @ 11:05AM
If the nominee, Romney will be the last nail in the coffin of the Republican Party. That could be good or bad for conservatives, and the country.
mike ames| 4.16.10 @ 11:07AM
OK. Romney is a RINO, Mccain is a RINO. Palin aligns herself with both. So why no serious investigation into her? Make no mistake, she is a RINO no matter how much lipstick she wears.
Nancy| 4.17.10 @ 4:17PM
An opportunist...and a RHINO. She lost it for me by supporting McCain who cost the 2008 election (no big loss, except Obama is really bad). I'm glad she's making money on her book and speaking engagements, and keeps out of politics as far as being a candidate. I just don't think she's got what it takes. Now Michelle Bachmann is another matter. But Jim DeMint, Mike Pence and Paul Ryan look good too.
somnolence| 4.16.10 @ 11:22AM
I really believe that Giuliani might be a good President , but I dislike his pro abortion stance. Most of my acquaintances believe he is solidly conservative on taxes, crime, budgets, etc.- therefore an able administrator. They just cannot fathom why he had to wear that dress and lipstick and walk down the streets of Manhattan like that. I really believe the GOP is in a dilemma. Obama by any means SHOULD be toast in 2012, and yet we can't find a viable candidate. I really like Palin, but fear that she has been made unelectable by not only a large part of the media but by the GOP hierarchy. So right now I'm hoping for Mike Pence. I dare anyone on here to compare him to Tom Tancredo or Duncan Hunter in going to the distance to the Convention. Since he has been a part of the media he knows the ins and outs in addition to staying with his conservative message.
NH| 4.16.10 @ 11:48AM
Candidates who will not make it past New Hampshire:
Romney
Guiliani
Gingrich
- An Insider
NH| 4.16.10 @ 11:50AM
OH yea, HUCKABEE! Just because he's a 'pastor' does not mean he's conservative. Can you say Arkansas mob?
Don's Johnson| 4.17.10 @ 12:27AM
Sarah Palin your country is calling.
Siegfried X| 4.16.10 @ 12:34PM
Giuliani will not run again. He gave up last time, just sitting in Florida waiting to be eliminated.
Also Giuliani is just as much a RINO as Romney, except maybe tougher on crime and war. A lot of Republicans have this tough guy problem, assuming that anyone who acts tough must be a real conservative. But even though McCain was a POW and Giuliani was tough on 9/11, they are still both RINOs.
Possum Dearie| 4.17.10 @ 11:18AM
Bingo. Giuliani wussed out running against Cuomo for Governor of NY state. He's done.
Mr. Reagan| 4.16.10 @ 11:23AM
Labels, labels, labels.
Oh Philip Klein,
The only people who are buying your drivel are the right-wing conservatives - that's it.
No one else is buying it.
Here are the facts:
* Romney CAN and WILL argue against Obama's plan, regardless of Commonwealth Care in MA.
* Romney can and will make a strong case to repeal Universal health care.
What you cannot talk about is health care reform. You and right-wing conservatives can't even talk about it or confront it. It scares you to death.
Americans aren't buying the Obamacare is the same as Romneycare.
There is no Republican candidate that can win against Obama other than Romney.
The majority of Americans are in the middle - with a slant to the left.
You want Jim Demint in the Whitehouse? You'll have to put him there through Romney.
There is no other way.
Grzmlyk| 4.16.10 @ 12:23PM
You can't see me, but I'm laughing. I guess you took your own poll of your fellow travelers to come up with the statistic taht most Americans slant left. funny, you're the only pollster to come to this conclusion.
You know, I did'nt realize that talking out your ass had been elevated to a college major, but you clearly have a PhD in it.
Scared of health care reform? I assume you mean scared of totalitarianism-as-inflicted-on-an-unsuspecting-populace-through-the-trojan-horse-known-as-health-care-reform.
Funny how Obamacare isn't about health, it isn't about care, and it's not about reform. It's about institutionalizing government thugs.
Conservatives talk till we are blue in the face about the simple five or six point plan that will bring health care costs down - but you MORONS just stare blankly, slack-jawed, and when we're finished speaking truth to arrogated power, you simply blink stupidly and say, "see? you have no solution!"
My question for you, dipshit: Under which column of "healthcare reform" advocacy shall we place you? Under "Fools" or "Theives?"
Slammin Sammy| 4.17.10 @ 12:33AM
"Funny how Obamacare isn't about health, it isn't about care, and it's not about reform. It's about institutionalizing government thugs. "
Actually, it's insurance reform, not healthcare.
Conservatives talk till we are blue in the face about the simple five or six point plan that will bring health care costs down - but you MORONS just stare blankly, slack-jawed, and when we're finished speaking truth to arrogated power, you simply blink stupidly and say, "see? you have no solution!"
Yeah, too bad your 'conservatives' couldn't find time during the 8 years of Bush to do any of those simple fixes. If only they had you there to advise them. So actually it's true; you have no solution (doing nothing doesn't count)
And finally (and you do know that when you hurl insults it's because you lack actual facts)
One more time
"Under which column of "healthcare reform" advocacy shall we place you?"
Health insurance reform. Not health care reform.
You misspelled thieves. Probably just a typo.
Possum Dearie| 4.17.10 @ 11:22AM
"Funny how Obamacare isn't about health, it isn't about care, and it's not about reform. It's about institutionalizing government thugs. "
Why else would Andy Stern, President of the SEIU, have been the most frequent visitor to the White House in 2009? It's a pay off to the unions. Ted Kennedy came up with Obamacare years ago, and he got Mitt Romney to test drive it in MA. It's pure graft, and it needs to be put to rest in Ted's rusted Oldsmobile.
Tim*| 4.16.10 @ 2:18PM
An aggregate of 21 Gallup and USA Today/ Gallup polls from 2009 show that 40 percent of Americans call themselves conservative, while 36 percent identify as moderate and 21 percent identify as liberal.
John Zogby| 4.17.10 @ 12:36AM
A recent Zogby poll showed that 90% of liberals and 100% of conservatives and 94% of moderates cannot define those terms.
Mrs.Zogby| 4.17.10 @ 8:24AM
And John here can't remember to pick up his socks and take the garbage out.
Get back to work and bring home a gallon of milk.
Mr. Reagan| 4.16.10 @ 11:23AM
Labels, labels, labels.
Oh Philip Klein,
The only people who are buying your drivel are the right-wing conservatives - that's it.
No one else is buying it.
Here are the facts:
* Romney CAN and WILL argue against Obama's plan, regardless of Commonwealth Care in MA.
* Romney can and will make a strong case to repeal Universal health care.
What you cannot talk about is health care reform. You and right-wing conservatives can't even talk about it or confront it. It scares you to death.
Americans aren't buying the Obamacare is the same as Romneycare.
There is no Republican candidate that can win against Obama other than Romney.
The majority of Americans are in the middle - with a slant to the left.
You want Jim Demint in the Whitehouse? You'll have to put him there through Romney.
There is no other way.
First in the Nation| 4.16.10 @ 11:47AM
Sorry bud we're not buying the 'only one who can win' baloney.
Romney has made far too many flip flops and blunders and we're done with him!
JR| 4.16.10 @ 1:58PM
Thanks for saying that First in the Nation.
Romney is so self-deluded.
It is 'baloney'.
Brigham Old| 4.17.10 @ 12:37AM
His magic underwear is stronger than his opponents'.
DaJon Bingham | 4.16.10 @ 11:25AM
Very interesting article and comments. I do agree that Romney has made some blunders. I currently don't know of any Republican or any person that hasn't. If he has learned from his past blunders, maybe he has maybe he hasn't, (we have three more years to decide that) he could definetley be a viable candiate. If he hasnt learned or doesn't learn, then we should of course look elsewhere. But until we find what we are looking for, don't count him out or critizize to loudly, unless of course you who have it all figured out plan to be our candidate...
Being alert matters| 4.16.10 @ 11:27AM
I am truly amazed at how many Republicans are in denial about the state of affairs in America.
Republicans, mostly ultra-conservatives, have buried their head in the sand.
ChuckO| 4.16.10 @ 11:32AM
Mitt Romney isn't a conservative or a RINO or a liberal - he is a technocrat. He believes that a well-designed government program can mitigate the risks of unintended consequences. Unfortunately technocrats are in love with the details of their programs and fail to see the philosophical underpinnings - no matter how smartly you design your program it is still bigger government, and sooner or later will inevietably devolve into another disaster. Romneycare is disintegrating almost immediately due to Deval Patrick and the Massachusetts legislature, but the same thing would happen eventually under the most conservative state government imaginable.
Even NASA changed within 10 years from a high achievement/high adventure program into political porculus that can't re-create the achievements of the Apollo program 40 years later.
We should NEVER elect anyone who votes to expand ANY government program except the Military. And if the Republican party is too stupid to get past their historical practice of nominating the "next in line" then we are doomed - we might as well move to Sweden now and get it over with.
Carolyn| 4.16.10 @ 11:53AM
I agree with most of your points. However, what we are failing to remember is this. The people of his state, when he was governor, wanted healthcare. The difference between Obamacare and MA is that the public did not want Obamacare. In fact, the people of MA don't want Obamacare because it would violate how it was constructed...it would not stay within the confines of the percentage of the budget and would be out of control. Say MA has a $1billion budget and Romneycare is a percentage of it. The number would be high to most people...but then...who has a $1billion budget? Romneycare is a relative factor thing...Obamacare IS NOT.
Oldefarte| 4.16.10 @ 11:42AM
Philip, you have beautifially expressed THE TRUTH, THE WHOLE TRUTH, AND NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH! Apolitical candidate exiting a whore house cannot climb on top of a sidewalk soapbox, grab a microphone and begin profession the evils of sin. Romnity would simply have no non-hypocritical leg to stand upon; and would be therefore detrimental to the cause of repealing WELFARECARE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
First in the Nation| 4.16.10 @ 11:46AM
The other nite on Hannity they all clapped... when that fraud Frank Luntz asked for a straw poll. I said, if these RINOs like Romney -- that's four more years for Obama! IDIOTS!
Carolyn| 4.16.10 @ 11:47AM
I think that this article is being skewed a little. Here is why I say this. When Romney was interviewed on Cavuto, he said two things. (1) Romney Care is tied to the state budget. It is a percentage of the budget and it has remained relatively the same as when it was enacted. The budget in MA was always high and therefore the numbers reflect the same thing. (2) monies sent from the federal government were given to the hospitals as was the case previous to Romney Care, now those monies go into providing $$ for individuals to have healthcare. Now, I am not a RINO, I do not like Obamacare. Remember, the people of MA wanted healthcare. With the Federal program...we did not. The reason that the people of MA don't want it now is because the costs under Obamacare would EXCEED THEIR PERCENTAGE OF BUDGET.
As far as the election...Huckabee and McCain double teamed Romney. We know that the Republican Party propelled their favorite son into the candidacy. I would like a lot more scutiny of Romney...but like several of the posters have mentioned, Romney has the brains to get us out of this financial mess we are in.
At any rate...we know he doesn't have Reverend Wright in his past and he isn't a Marxist.
Curly Smith| 4.16.10 @ 2:05PM
I don't know where you get your numbers but the following are from the Massachusetts Budget and Policy Center:
Health Care Budget
2006 $7.3 billion (28.0% of total)
2007 $7.5 billion (27.6% of total)
2008 $9.4 billion (30.0% of total)
2009 $13.1 billion (39.2% of total)
2010 $12.9 billion (40% of total)
Total Budget
2006 $26.1 billion
2007 $27.1 billion
2008 $31.0 billion
2009 $33.4 billion
2010 $32.1 billion
Note: the above are mixtures of FY actual and Budget forecasts.
Read more like this: "Since the bill became law, the state’s total direct health-care spending has increased by a remarkable 52 percent. Medicaid spending has gone from less than $6 billion a year to more the $9 billion. Many consumers have seen double-digit percentage increases in their premiums."
here if interested: http://dailycaller.com/2010/03.....obamacare/
Gary J. Mallast| 4.16.10 @ 11:49AM
Mitt Romney is NO conservative and certainly NO libertarian.
It may be unfair to visit the sins of the father on the son, but his father, late Governor George Romney of Michigan actively persecuted conservatives in the Michigan Republican Party in the 60s. I was there. For example I have a tape recording of a speech by the late Richard Durant detailing just how. In 1964 Durant was elected a delegate to the Republican National Convention committed to Barry Goldwater. The senior Romney was running a "favorite son" boomlet for himself as part of a liberal plot to deny the nomination to Goldwater. Romney's agents "requested" that Durant change his vote for Romney. Durant replied he had run committed to Goldwater and it would be against his pledge to change his vote on the first ballot. He was threatened that there would be consequences if he refused to do so. There were: his state and federal taxes were audited, his business records were subpoenaed and investigated, all his business affairs were subject to various investigations, and he was subject to every other form of harassment the governor's office could think of. That is not an isolated case. Durant mentions other people present in the audience at the time of the speech. Plus I have known other people harassed by the senior Romney. Perhaps the most infamous was when it looked like the late former Congressman Robert Huber (R, MI) would win the nomination for the Republican Candidacy for U.S. Senate in 1972. There were three "liberal" candidates with Huber the only conservative. The liberal Republican machine forced out the other liberal candidates and pushed the candidacy of Mitt Romney's mother Lenore Romney for the sole purpose of denying the nomination to Huber (whom his supporters affectionately called "The Hube"). The result was a nomination for Lenore and any more years in the Senate of far left wing radical Senator Phil Hart (D. MI). I was active in the College Republicans at the time, and the Romny Republican officials engaged in various shady dealings to keep the Michigan Federation of College Republicans safely in liberal hands until finally overwhelmed at which point the CRs were simply abandoned by the senior party.
As I said, it may be unfair to visit the sins of the father and mother on the son, but in this case I think there may be something to it.
Stuart Koehl| 4.16.10 @ 3:06PM
No conservative is a libertarian, and vice versa.
JonH| 4.19.10 @ 12:39AM
Dear Mr. Gary J. Mallast,
Let's put the kabash to your phoney story....ok?
You forgot to put in your references--opps!
Go ahead and do it now............................we're waiting.
Laura | 4.16.10 @ 11:50AM
Sorry, but this author is right on point. If the 2010 congressional elections are shaping up to look like 1994, then putting Mitt Romney on the top of the ticket will look like Bob Dole in 1996. ("But it's my turn!")
The average American will not understand whatever differences there are between Romneycare and Obamacare. (And excuse me? What differences ARE there? Spending has skyrocketed beyond the original cost projections under Massachusetts', Maine's and Tennessee's health care initiatives.)
Democrats will be able to argue - successfully - that Republicans have no new ideas, they just want power. That Republicans' dislike of Obama MUST be just racism, because they've just nominated a guy who put the "same" healthcare program in place in his state, but that's ok, because he's WHITE.
And if Romney is the nominee, the response will be????
*crickets chirping*
And I will tell you bozos something else, too. If you put Romney at the top of the ticket in 2012, because you think he's "electable," you will be handed your head in a platter by your own voter base. Just like in 2006. Just like in 2008. You didn't listen to the public in EITHER of those elections. And now see what we have to contend with?
This "he's electable" crap has got to stop. The party that purports to be the party of conservative values must run a candidate who LIVES those values - not one who caves at the first sign of political pressure, and then seeks to make excuses.
Carolyn| 4.16.10 @ 11:59AM
If you had read my post...you would have known the differences. BTW...what specials buyoffs were in Romneycare...but I digress. The costs have not skyrocketed....they have gone up as a percentage of the budget...which has skyrocketed. The healthcare bill is tied to a percentage of the budget...Obamacare is NOT.
I would like to hear more from Romney and what he could do. BTW Romney was not the favorite son...McLame was.
Possum Dearie| 4.17.10 @ 11:26AM
Romney is the favorite son this time. McLame lost in 2000, so it was his turn to lose again in 2008. Romney lost in 2008. It's his turn to lose in 2012. That's the way the GOP does it. I don't know why.
Danny| 4.16.10 @ 11:52AM
If Romney clings to the MA plan he will not be the Republican nominee in '12.
Gary Aminoff | 4.16.10 @ 11:54AM
Romney is a "big government" Republican. If we want to win in 2012 he should not be the Republican candidate. We need a limited government fiscal conservative who respects states rights and the limitations on the Federal government. We can't let the press pick our candidate for us in 2012 like they did in 2008.
Mimi| 4.17.10 @ 11:05AM
Look folks: The movement towards constitutional government in this nation is becoming so powerful and strong , we need to put the candidates from 2008 to bed once and for all!!! We all know whom amongst us has lit this fire of patriotism. There is wave going on. I have my favorites whom lit sparks: Rush, Mark Levin, Hannity Willy , Laura, Savage, and many more. As for scribes: I love articleswritten by: Victor David Hanson, Peter Ferrara, Quin Hillyer. The left in this country have over-played their hand and continues to be the 'GIFT " that keeps on giving. I am truly, so proud of this country, the people, whose souls have become alerted at this heart wrenching time. We WILL get the person who can lead this nation toward LIBERTY.
Possum Dearie| 4.17.10 @ 11:45AM
Victor Davis Hanson. I know. Just a typo. But I'm a fan, as well. The man is an intellectual giant.
JonH| 4.19.10 @ 12:53AM
News......... and I like mr. Hanson too!
Victor Davis Hanson is an enormous supporter of Romney and was from the start. He knows Romney very well--personally!
Do some Romney-Victor David Hanson keywords prior to 2008. Go back as far as you can. Mr. Hanson will bring you back to Romney fast! Have a little patience with Romney. He's a conservative but he's rounding up some independents for you and I conservatives when we will need them ...and we will. It won't be too awfully long and you'll feel better about Romney. The man and his people have a plan. Three years is a while but it will unfold. You can help out and calm your fears a bitby going to the Heritage Foundation website and getting involved with them NOW.
antodav | 4.16.10 @ 11:54AM
Romney's experience with health care, and the similarity of the bill to what he signed, makes him the perfect person to address this issue. It means that Romney can believably offer proposals to FIX the bill—rather than wasting time and effort to repeal it, which is unrealistic and really not even desirable in its entirety—so that the country gets the health insurance reform that it NEEDS rather than this deeply flawed, phony reform that has been forced upon us by Congress and the Obama Administration.
What we need is someone who understands how the power of the free market can be put to work to serve the interests of the common good, and who is qualified to lead the nation during a time of great economic crisis. That man, regardless of how extremists on either side might feel about him, is still Mitt Romney, and if he runs in 2012, he'll have my vote.
JonH| 4.19.10 @ 1:01AM
Dear Antoday,
Glad you like Romney, but he wants to defund Obamacare right after mid-term elections. He doesn't like any type of Federal healthcare. Study the federalist papers and learn why state based healthcare is the safest approach. WHEN YOU AND THE PANICKED DRIVEN READERS AND COMMENTORS understand federalist papers you'll see why a federal hc program is heck to our freedoms.
To fix fed hc is to kill it!!!!
Charlie| 4.16.10 @ 11:55AM
Is it too much to ask the "right" to do a little reading and decide whether Obama is a "socialist", a "markist", a "fascist" or what. Folks they are different. Or perhaps you believe he really can suck and blow at the same time.
Carolyn| 4.16.10 @ 12:07PM
Charlie...first off, socialism is a financial mechanism that is used by both fascists and Marxist. So, I think by the evidence of Obama...he has used socialism (redistribution of wealth) as a basis for his policies. Now, fascists are people like Ahmandinejah....they believe in a religion...AND ONLY THEIR RELIGION and use that religion to justify their socialism. Marxists are athiests...they don't believe in God...they believe in themselves...sounding like Obama yet? They want God out of everything because they can propel their socialistic agenda without invoking God to justify it.
paradoctor| 4.16.10 @ 2:35PM
That was not political analysis. It was free-association.
If it is socialist to redistribute wealth, then every human society is socialist. The question is, who gets the redistributed wealth? Under radical rightism, it is the richest 1%.
And if self-belief is godless Marxism, then every successful politician is a godless Marxist, including Reagan.
In fact Obama is a pragmatic left-centrist. In temperament he is conservative, if you use the word 'conservative' in its non-Orwellian sense.
Ted| 4.17.10 @ 1:41PM
Obama is no left-centrist. There's nothing close to the center about the man or his politics. I'll give you that he is, in a sense a pragmatist. He's certainly no conservative, regardless of what definition is chosen. He's a leftist-socialist.
Charlie| 4.16.10 @ 4:46PM
Carolyn, my point was not in asking for definitions. It was that too many of those on the right, take Fox News commentators like Hannity or Beck, use the words simply to call other names. If you actually listen to them, as hard as that is, it becomes clear the don't know or don't care what the words mean. Like five year olds repeating the swear word they heard from their parents mouth. No clue what it means but if Daddy said it so will I.
DAnMingo| 4.16.10 @ 8:39PM
fascists are people like Ahmandinejah....they believe in a religion...AND ONLY THEIR RELIGION and use that religion to justify their socialism
Uh, no.
Fascism, as defined by Mussolini himself:
“Fascism should more appropriately be called Corporatism because it is a merger of state and corporate power”
No socialism there.
Just corporations working to get what they want in collusion with the state ( our government).
Like bailing out the banks could well be considered fascist.
Or using the might of the US military to protect your business asserts (oil companies) or get large subsidies from the government (oil companies, agriculture), although one could make the argument that these are examples of corporate socialism/welfare.
Somehow, conservatives seem to be ok with most of these policies that favor the corporations over the people. But if the state tries to help 'those people'............
Then we get the tea parties.
Balios| 4.16.10 @ 11:15PM
I'd say OBama is all three. He wants to redistribute wealth in line with Marxist values while working with, protecting and promoting a criminal financial class. Though he could also very well be a traitor and/or a mole. Sigh. Who is savvy and strong enough to guide this country out of this mess? I hope you are all praying.
steveb| 4.16.10 @ 11:56AM
Romney would be the worst candidate for the Republicans since...John McCain. We can't beat a Big Government liberal with a Big Government republican. We tried that last time,remember? Romney has shown he is willing to forgo basic conservative principles to buy votes. The first second he criticizes Obamacare, he will be besieged with a massive wave of propaganda concerning his "Romneycare", which is essentially the same program on a smaller scale. Mitt, if you're reading this, just drop out. Allow someone who hasn't destroyed conservative principles to lead our party.
Howard| 4.16.10 @ 1:11PM
I agree with you steveb. Romney was pro-abortion when he first ran against Ted Kennedy in the 1990's. He later on was Pro-Life when it suited his needs. Also, Kennedy savaged him for being involved in private equity takeovers which resulted in massive layoffs. We need to have the old "Reagan Democrat" base with us in 2012. Romney offers a lot, but he carries a log of baggage as well.
ujay| 4.16.10 @ 11:56AM
Romney's only chance with me is to say something like "The states are laboratories for the fed, and MY experiment failed. I know what NOT to do, and I will repeal ObamaCare." Of course, he'd also have to mean it.
1Fearless1| 4.16.10 @ 12:02PM
I trust Romney as far as i could throw Stone Mountain. If fact HELL should freeze over before any true Conservative votes for him!
JonH| 4.19.10 @ 1:10AM
Dear 1Fearless(blind)1,
A true conservative block of voters CAN'T elect anyone potus. There are not enough of us. WE need all the repubs and Rinos and a good part of the independents to get anywhere. That's the base Romney is trying to build. That's what the Heritage Foundation understands too. Go to their website and find out how a true conservative can help the repub party AND conservative WIN!!
Tim*| 4.16.10 @ 12:02PM
Interesting.
A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey of likely voters finds Obama with 42% support and Paul with 41% of the vote. Eleven percent (11%) prefer some other candidate, and six percent (6%) are undecided.
Carolyn| 4.16.10 @ 12:13PM
Does anyone on this board listen to what the man says instead of listening to the talking heads explain to you what he said? I found out some interesting facts about Romneycare...and if you would read my posts...perhaps you would see that it is not how it is painted. No...I am not a liberal...but I do want to hear it from the horse's mouth...I am sick and tired of listening to other people tell me what I just heard.
Possum Dearie| 4.17.10 @ 11:33AM
All I know is, they voted for Scott Brown in MA to show you how popular Romneycare is there.
steveb| 4.16.10 @ 12:19PM
Charlie, I agree it is hard to pinpoint Obama. Is he Castro or Hitler? Mao or Hugo Chavez? Marx or Woodrow Wilson? At least many of the above mentioned dictators actually loved their own countries, which isn't the case with the Obama regime.
Possum Dearie| 4.17.10 @ 11:35AM
Dictators love themselves alone. Even Castro.
Ronald| 4.16.10 @ 12:20PM
This author and anyone who agrees with him is an idiot. Who better to debate Obama about the weakness of this bill than someone who actually did it, has authority on the issue, but most importantly, did it RIGHT. Romney's bill was a STATE law, not a FEDERAL law and that makes all the difference. If the Republicans try nominating anyone else, Obama will be a two-term President. In addition, clearly this author does not understand politics and the public as a whole. In just another mere 6 months (which is a lifetime in politics), all the fervor and anger against ObamaCare will have dramatically died down. Come 2012, people will be re-focused on the real issue that concerns everyone: jobs. The economy, jobs, and most likely, foreign policy, as I'm sure Obama will find some way to screw up on foreign policy since he is weak and inexperienced, will dominate the national debate- and when that happens, Romney will shine and, God-willingly, win, come November 2012.
GW| 4.16.10 @ 3:39PM
Whoa...whoa...hold on now. Don't you know AmSpec is a Romney hate-site? You're sure to piss off a lot of people by saying what you did...tread carefully, brotha.
Possum Dearie| 4.17.10 @ 11:39AM
Explain how Romneycare is a success. Even Romney hasn't accomplished that. He just blames it admitted failures on his successors. I'm glad Romney seems hellbent on wasting a bunch of his money on another political wash. This time conservatives can finally kick him from the herd based on his policy and explain that it's not just because they dislike Obama personally, but his policies are wrong for this country. Mitt Romney and his record in Massachusetts are proof.
JonH| 4.19.10 @ 1:16AM
Proof....proof....proof!
Possum Dearie,
You've got the false proof. Don't be so lazy! Go dig out the real PROOF. Your such a ditz!!!!!
somnolence| 4.16.10 @ 12:22PM
No true conservative could vote for either Romney or Paul. I know I have made up my mind to vote for neither, even though I supported Romney in the primaries in 2008. Paul is now too old(and don't bring up Adenauer or Mandela or some other clumsy comparison), and to me is too libertarian in his approach to marijuana laws, etc. I'm committed to eternal vigilance on the devil weed and am strongly for the war on drugs with more teeth in it than it has now. Like Rush I'm also pro-Israel, and I hope they wipe the Iranian thugs off the face of the earth first. Waterboarding is not torture to me; how does Paul stand on that? I supported Romney in 2008 mainly because of his business background and pro-life stance without weighing the Mass. health care debacle which he implemented(or the Big Dig, for that matter). No more. However, I continue to be appalled by many in this country who dislike him simply because he is Mormon. I don't hear that much about Harry Reid's Mormonism. I don't give a tinker's damn what a person's religion is. And neither did Madison, Jefferson or Lincoln. Religion is not an issue, national prayer and free speech are.
Ted| 4.16.10 @ 12:22PM
"...achieving a full repeal of the recently-passed health care law will be extremely difficult. Given that Obama would veto any bill to undo his signature legislative accomplishment, it means that to get rid of the law, Republicans will have to not only take back Congress, but capture the White House."
Not true. We only need to recapture the House and the Senate with a veto proof majority, although the way things are shaping up some Democrats would likely vote to override a Presidential veto of Obamacare repeal in order to save their political skins.
Anonymous| 4.16.10 @ 12:25PM
None of this matters, moot discussion it is.
All politicians only do what they are told by the ILLUMINATTI, the ROTHSCHILDS, the ZIONISTS, the BILDERBURGS, etc....we are but pawns in their game.
Possum Dearie| 4.17.10 @ 11:40AM
Ron Paul 2012! LOL
nova9047| 4.16.10 @ 12:25PM
I thought Romney was the best of a weak field in 2008. His Mass. health care plan was thoroughly vetted and found non-disqualifying by conservatives. Going back to the days of Lincoln, there has always been a nativist sliver of the Repub. party (the "Know Nothings"). The sliver has never decided the nomination and the neo-Know Nothings (a/k/a "Tea Baggers") won't in '12, either.
paradoctor| 4.16.10 @ 12:33PM
Health care reform is here to stay. Repeal is a mirage, and any 'movement' for it will go nowhere. That's just the facts. Permanent quixotic outrage is pointless.
Grzmlyk| 4.16.10 @ 3:54PM
What you are missing is that the entire thing is unsustainable. Even without Obamacare, we are over the fiscal cliff. This is not some abstract talk about deficits under which normal Americans' lives remain largely unaffected, as in past debt debates that remained largely moot for Joe Sixpack.
This is going to touch every single one of us profoundly. We know there simply isn't enough money to pay for all of our entitlements even if you confiscate every last dollar in this country.
China and Japan are already balking at buying our bonds. Once China figures out it can sell its goods to its own population, they won't need our promiscuous consumerism anyway.
So there's only one of two futures: Massive default or massive inflation.
Obamacare is like the medieval doctor who bleeds the patient in order to cure his prior blood loss. Eventually, the patient is gonna run out of blood.
Very soon, we will run out of money (or it will be worthless paper) and Obamacare will fail utterly; when the fiduciary house comes tumbling down, you had better believe Obamacare will be repealed.
I'd like to see that happen before we go "splat," but it's going to happen one way or another.
Ted| 4.17.10 @ 1:47PM
That's what they said about Prohibition. Perhaps it is quixotic outrage. Nevertheless, that quixotic outrage is shared across the political spectrum by Independents, Democrats, and Republicans; young and old. Dismiss it you may. However, political ideology, political arrogance, and political dismissiveness will not change the consistent poll numbers of those opposed to this health care legislation. Repeal is a mirage only to those who have a vested interest in maintaining this mistake as law. As the weeks and months go by, and more and more issues are identified in this legislation, more people will oppose it.
somnolence| 4.16.10 @ 12:39PM
Yeah, health care "reform" is here to stay, but not Obamacare or Mass Care. They are both going downhill fast if you just look around you. Paradoctor, there aren't enough jail cells to enforce it, and the laugh tracks accompaning it are endless. Eternal vigilance is precious.
igout| 4.16.10 @ 12:42PM
All Romney has to say is, yeah, I tried it because it sounded like a good idea, it wasn't. I speak from personal knowledge: It's a bomb.
This is so obvious . That he can't or won't see it is what makes me so wary of him.
voteNOforMitt| 4.16.10 @ 1:00PM
Jed Merrill how much does Romney pay you?
You may as well let MittTwit know he isn't selling his 'brainwashing' to the public on his failing 'tests' on how to get himself out of his flip-flop box.
Man, Romney seriously got away with stealing too many cookies from the cookie jar in his mama's kitchen.
And
I NEVER believed the gardener drank that liqueur from his dads liqueur cabinet.
AND
Mr. Dramaqueen Romney, exactly what was he smoking when that 'man' appeared in his high school dorm room at post Cranbrook? The one Mitt jumped out his window, in fright? (no one every found a trace of the mysterious man)
http://mittromney2012potus.blogspot.com/
Northern Rebel| 4.16.10 @ 1:01PM
Mitt Romney is a good man, and would be great at Treasury Secretary, or replacing Bernanke, if we must continue having that job.
I like Mitt, but he could never quite wash off that used car salesman smell. I was a Fred Thompson man, and was disappointed that he coasted through the nominating process.
At this point, if I can't have Thompson, or George Allen, (WHERE ARE YOU?) I'd be happy with a Guiliani - Palin ticket. Pawlenty has no chance to beat "President" Anti-Christ, because the election would be over before anyone knew who he was!
Ryan is too young, but I love Mike Pence, who is slightly better known by normal Americans. It is they who will elect the next President, not political junkies like us.
JR| 4.16.10 @ 1:59PM
"Mitt Romney is a good man" -
He is not
Flipside| 4.16.10 @ 1:04PM
Being from MA, I can say that I have mixed feelings for Romney but lean to the negative. He has flip flopped on issues. He was wishy washy on abortion and gay marriage. Strike one. Once the Gov. he didn't do too much. Yes he is a fiscal conservative (great businessman leading Bain Capital ) and shaped the budget back on track from a 3 Mil deficit to a small surplus. But the state legislature has a uber-liberal super majority and they can do anything they want include override any governor veto, which they did to him over 200 times. He did nothing to help to campaign for the conservative base during the midterms and they got slaughtered. He did nothing to help his Lt. Gov, Kerry Healey in '06 for the Gov. election as she was up against Deval Patrick. He won and has been a disaster. Strike two. Just because you have money doesn't buy you an election. Ask former NJ gov. Corzine. Romney pumped personal millions into his '08 and did poorly. He's very smart but too wimpy, he should have debated and verbally knocked Hucklbum and McCain to the floor. He wimped out. Strike three. He's had his chance and blew it. He's a good guy, his religion doesn't bother me at all. The conservative party needs fresh faces not the same retreads. They need to move away from nominating the next old guy in line. McCain's loss should burry that that party rule for ever.
Clearbrook| 4.16.10 @ 1:09PM
Oh, I think it will be a defining paradigm for Romney Long before his candidacy becomes defining for what will happen to Obamacare, and should he try to redefine himself after that point, he may be destroying himself -- risking handing the torch back to Obama for a second term and destroy any further political ambitions Romney may have.
At that point, the pundents will say it will not happen, but we could see the third party candidate make a massive difference in the race. I fear the Democrats win at that point unless America Goes ALL IN on that hand to get rid of Obama! It would be interesting, and if EVER anyone wanted to register discontent with D.C., that WOULD be the right time to do it, and a GROUND SHAKING -- WORLD CHANGING move. You want HOPE? You want CHANGE? At that point, the Third Party Candidate makes sense in ways the Big Party candidates never could...
Pingback| 4.16.10 @ 1:27PM
» Financial News Update – 04/16/10 NoisyRoom.net: There are two ways to conquer and links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Fred| 4.16.10 @ 1:28PM
I enjoyed the article because it was logical. Going on and on about Obama as Marx or as a Muslim is not. Thus, some of the responses are without doubt sophomoric. Appealing to emotions alone is not going to help win people over to your point of view. Name calling wins you nothing. Time to wake up.
Possum Dearie| 4.17.10 @ 11:49AM
It won the Democrats both chambers of Congress in 2006 and the White House in 2008. There is more factual basis to calling Obama a Marxist than there was in calling Bush a fascist. Like actual quotes and administration appointments.
Pingback| 4.16.10 @ 1:49PM
How Romey could kill Obamacare repeal movement | x-Political links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Pingback| 4.16.10 @ 1:59PM
How Romney could kill the Obamacare repeal movement | x-Political links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Teflon93| 4.16.10 @ 2:06PM
Among other reasons why Romney won't win the nomination is one that hasn't gotten a lot of attention: he is universally despised by the other Republican candidates.
He is a phony. And a smarmy one at that.
Ted| 4.17.10 @ 1:53PM
Here's the thing I don't get about Romney. If he was really conservative, surely he would know that in order to get elected in Massachusetts he'd have to compromise on several important issues in order to get elected. So why not go to another, more conservative state to run for Governor? Or, if you really had guts, run in Mass as a real conservative? I just don't have the warm fuzzies with Romney; I just can't seem to put my trust in him.
JonH| 4.19.10 @ 1:31AM
Brains to run always out does guts to run. Especially, in MA. A pure conservative image CAN'T win in MA. Never has in 50 years and going forward never will.Anybody who knows the numbers knows that. you obviously do not know the numbers or at least the right numbers.
If you are a conservative in MA and truly want to get elected you have to appear as a moderate or you do not make it even to 1st base. Then later if you want to run Nationally and make conservative enroads you have to endure accusations of being a Rino by lazy people who don't know the numbers in MA. That's what Mitt is toughing out.
Ken (Old Texican)| 4.16.10 @ 2:07PM
Several thoughts.
Having read all the comments above, heh, I have one overwhelming reality in mind. "Cart before the horse".
If we can't get a majority in the House of Reps this fall, the 2012 candidates will be moot.
Folks,
please re-focus! If things do not go well in November, we are all toast. The America we have known and shed blood for... will no longer exist.
The poor "useful idiot" sad sacks that pop in here will be in worse shape than most of us who will have taken prudent steps to protect our families.
These "useful idiot" losers are obviously already being fitted for their iron neck-collars....uh... with the appropriate fuzzy soft linings....and they will never see it coming until it is too late.
I sigh with regret for each of them. ( I'm so so sorry for each of you. Your god of government is a so terribly jealous god, and such a murderous god.)
Free folks,
this November is the ballgame in my best estimate. I am somewhat saddened that Mr. Klein threw the 2012 turd in the punchbowl at this time.
If we can somehow get our act together and vote in enough good Reps and Senators this November, then splendid candidates will throw their hats in the ring.
Mr. Romney is a Mormon. He has AT LEAST two years self sufficiency of food shelter and clothing set aside.....way out in the boondocks. That is what Mormons do.
I personally think it is a pretty good idea.
You know, our wonderful country has generated enough "extra" to provide pretty good safety nets for our elderly and disabled. If November does not go well...that is over...repeat...over. We productive types begin to watch after neighbors and family first....from pure survival and liberty concerns.
...the communists, (pardon the shorthand), will run out of cash/credit very quickly...along with the big corporations that snuggle up with them. We will simply quit buying those corporations' products. OOPs!
C'mon, folks, stop the third party nonsense. Quit straddling the fence. Quit being depressed by the folks who are throwing up their hands in despair, and for God's sake, ignore... or pray... for the "useful idiots" of the communists.
Find a couple of electable conservatives and ge them on the ballot and elected.....or else...gulp.
Best regards
Ken
Margie| 4.16.10 @ 2:20PM
Super encouraging.
Sensible.
Perfect advice.
Thank you!
God bless.
RAMIII| 4.16.10 @ 2:37PM
Ken,
Thank you for the clarity.
In my home state we have had several come up through the ranks as "conservatives", get elected and then suddenly become turn-coats.
How can these impostors be vetted AND held accountable once they reach the safety of incumbency and their elected office FAR AWAY from the hard working voters for whom time is a scarce resource?
What can be done about those who betray the voters?
Ken (Old Texican)| 4.16.10 @ 3:02PM
RamIII
Give me the turncoats' names and phone numbers.
Team America will retire them.
www.myteamusa.org or our gateway site:
http://judgeroy.wordpress.com
Heh, sign in and read our true selves and our strategies for victory.
Lyndon Johnson| 4.16.10 @ 8:44PM
Scott Brown.
Roy Bean| 4.17.10 @ 12:43AM
Hey tex, I went to the judgeroy site but it hasn't been updated in a while???
Same with team America.
Is the movement dead?
Ken (Old Texican)| 4.17.10 @ 11:34AM
Absolutely not, Roy. We simply get so many NEW hits every day that we don't want the "inaugural articles" moved just yet.
The articles represent the best broad strokes of our understanding.
Many of us have switched our efforts into working with the local tea-parties across the country, heh, as "outside agitators" and phone calls to campaigns.
Many of our members post here at Amspec from time to time, since this was our first place to meet online.
As the primaries near, we plan to nationalize some congress Reps races so watch for our tweets, and stay tuned to amspec for day to day updates as to our thinking.
Best regards
WM| 4.16.10 @ 2:11PM
This column is right. Romney is damaged goods. You cannot just win an argument or a race on technical arguments; you have to hold the moral high ground as well, and Romney does not have that. He agrees in principle that the state is superior to the individual and that it should be able to impose its will on the individual. You cannot rally a base with that, and if elected, he could be counted on to govern like that.
David| 4.16.10 @ 2:43PM
Forget about Romney, Huckabee, Gingrich, and anyone else who has voted on or supported the wrong side on even ONE SINGLE BIG ISSUE. Such as Gingrich on the park bench with Pelosi, Romney and Romneycare and his flip-flops, and Huckabee with his pardon the crimnals mindset.
paradoctor| 4.16.10 @ 3:08PM
All or nothing equals nothing.
Siegfried X| 4.16.10 @ 3:16PM
Actually it is the opposite. Unlike the Democratic Party, no Republican is ever punished for voting with the opposition, even if they vote with the enemy almost all the time.
So the tea parties are not an over reaction, but adding a long over due bit of party discipline.
Real Al Ittycheck| 4.17.10 @ 12:45AM
Unlike the Democratic Party, no Republican is ever punished for voting with the opposition, even if they vote with the enemy almost all the time.
Haha. Get back to us when even one Republican Senator votes for an Obama bill.
Siegfried X| 4.17.10 @ 6:50AM
There was _NO_ Republican party discipline until the Obama presidency and the tea parties.
McCain's nomination would be like Joe Lieberman winning the Democratic president nomination. Someone who has spit in the face of the party and voted with the enemy is not punished but rewarded by being given his party's nomination through a rigged election. The Democrats would never stand for that, but the pre-tea party Republicans rolled over and supported McCain.
It was never just "one issue". The pre-tea party RINOs voted with Democrats on every important issue. They only voted Republican when it didn't matter.
Myles | 4.16.10 @ 2:53PM
Mitt Romney, John McCann, the list goes on and on... leave these RINO losers and Democrat sycophants where they belong: in yesterday's news. They don't care for America and the AMERICAN people, they are only interested in getting to Washington.
Mitt Romney should be shunned as the RINO he is. If he truly were a Conservative, he would have worked NOT to have Obamacare in Massachusetts.
And now... what does he do?
He sends his "people" out to make excuses and "distance him" for his pushing that trash on the people of his own state.
"It's not like Obamacare..."
Ye-ah... Ri-ight...
Jackie has it exactly right: Romney cannot beat Obama. Especially when Obama runs around saying things about how HIS healthcare was based on "the sort of plan proposed by current Republican nominee Mitt Romney."
Mitt, go home, call your buds John Kerry and John McCann, have a few cold brewskies and talk amoungst yourselves about how we... the little people out there... just don't understand all that you do for us...
Ken (Old Texican)| 4.16.10 @ 3:05PM
Myles,
Snort. wiping my nose and screen ROTFL!
Please see my comment above.
somnolence| 4.16.10 @ 3:39PM
Right now at this point it looks like ANY GOP nominee, including Romney, will wipe the floor with Obama in 2012. At least most of the polls indicate the problems the "chosen one" will have. Sorry but he is not the political strategist Clinton was, and I truly believe the GOP now has learned the lessons of post 1994. Foremost in that lesson plan is no more Mr. Nice Guy, especially with Obama or Pelosi. I still believe the central theme of this article is accurate. Romney had better get to work now in washing his hands of the mess he created. He can point out and master the glaring differences between now and 2012. I criticize him, yes, but will support his candidacy certainly over Obama. People, we now have two important elections. Our future depends on reversing the course.
Possum Dearie| 4.17.10 @ 11:52AM
Nope. Any candidate BUT Romney. Including Palin.
Dean M.| 4.16.10 @ 4:10PM
This is a smear against Romney. The issue is constitutional. The states have a right to do things that are prohibited to the federal government. States may even establish a religion if they so vote. It is the federal government that is prevented. If a state wants its own health care system, that is fine by the constitution.
kingsmill| 4.16.10 @ 4:58PM
Romney wanted an issue for his 08 Prez run. He opted for a big government health care plan. He rolled it out there and let the Left wing, Democratic controlled MA Legislature do all the fine tuning of the plan.
You want a guy who has been rolled by the Democrats as your standard bearer in 2012?
It hasn't a thing to do with the Constitution. Massachusetts can bury itself in red ink till the end of time.
Mittster, naively at best, trusted the most Left Wing Legislature to design and implement his plan. I don't believe the guy is naive. I believe he is an opportunist who sees the main chance in front of him and doesn't give a damn for the long term.
Mitt was sure he had his issue for 08 and thought it would carry him to the White House. His excessive ambition blinds his judgment. Kick him to the curb.
Pingback| 4.16.10 @ 4:32PM
Wonk Room » Pataki Calls RomneyCare ‘Unconstitutional,’ Joins Growing Conservative O links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
somnolence| 4.16.10 @ 4:44PM
Dean M. may have made the most valid point on this blog. Leave all this insurance reform decision up to the states. If it turns out like Kentucky a few years back they'll be more than willing to get rid of it.
txn4ever| 4.16.10 @ 4:59PM
Relax people. All this socialist, statist non-sense will be repealed whether we do anything or not. If it isn't deconstructed in whole, or brick by brick voluntarily then it will collapse of its own weight.
Of course, the latter method will likely hurt a bit more.
Channel the anger and vote the bums out.
Mandy Fox| 4.16.10 @ 5:45PM
The only way Romney could deflate Obama's arguments is if he admits the MA bill was a mistake, and as a mistake he, more than anyone, knows how important it is to repeal the federal bill.
Unfortunately, Romney keeps defending the bill and his role in it.
I really believe though, regardless of what people are saying now about Romney, should he become the nominee Americans will go out and vote for him overwhelmingly because most Americans realize the very future of our country is at stake with another Obama term.
Possum Dearie| 4.17.10 @ 11:55AM
No one believes Mitt Romney when he says he has changed. Problem is, there's a pattern there.
Mary | 4.16.10 @ 6:44PM
Think outside the box! Vets should be the first in line for any benefits they need!!! Without our dedicated military we would be in deep doodoo. That said, why do the republicans keep nominating the same old tired hacks? Unless they get some new blood, I'm voting third party. They promise a lot, but keep doing the same old same old.
craig| 4.16.10 @ 7:45PM
The original GOP flip -floppers, Lincoln and Reagan, must be rolling in their graves laughing at this writer. Remember Reagan, the author of the EMTALA bill in 1986 that put all voters without health insurance, into hospital emergency rooms for free primary health care? Remember, that was 1986 . Remember, it was supported by a GOP controlled Senate. Remember that Romney was trying to bail out his constituents in Mass. who were getting buried in this GOP motivated, unfunded committed?
Show me a politician who cannot learn, who is, dinosaur like, rooted in some fuzzy, pink past and I will show you a political neanderthal unable to lead, only criticize
Tim*| 4.16.10 @ 8:18PM
Obama's gonna learn that when He took $ 994,795 from bundled Goldman Sachs Employee Donations for his Presidential Campaign , it will come back to bite him in the rump.
The S.E.C. just charged G-S with Fraud to the tune of $ Billion Cost to G-S Investors.
Obama is a taker from those he hypocritically two face condemns.
Pingback| 4.16.10 @ 8:50PM
Romney is wrong for the Republican Party « The Javelineer links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
MArk| 4.16.10 @ 9:41PM
Let's see now.
American Spectator was against Mitt Romney in 2007. Then the excuse was he was a Mormon.
They were against him in 2008. Then the excuse was he was a flip-flopper
They were against him in 2009. Then the excuse was he was a has-been.
They are against him in 2010. Now the excuse is MassCare.
So what excuse will they use in 2011?
Ken (Old Texican)| 4.17.10 @ 11:41AM
Hi Marky,
answer: all of the above.
Kent| 4.16.10 @ 10:01PM
Romney's got exactly the same chance of being president as I do-- exactly none. That guy is poison. Even though Obama will be widely understood by the average Joe to be the commie he is by '12, Romney can't beat him. If he really cared about the country, he'd go away.
Lisa| 4.16.10 @ 10:38PM
If the RNC runs Romney, the Republicans wil lose, and worse, the country will be LOST! The RNC needs to get with the program and run a REAL conservative. I'm sorry the Repub. party is all we have standing between freedom and slavery.
Chris| 4.16.10 @ 10:53PM
I would be very suspicious of anyone soliciting money under the guise of repealing Obamacare. Even Stuart Butler from the Heritage Foundation has advocated for Universal Health Care. Mike Huckabee has said there are "some good things" in Obamacare. And Romney??? Goes without saying... With Republicans (or conservatives) like this who needs Democrats or liberals? Repeal looks very unlikely.
Possum Dearie| 4.17.10 @ 11:58AM
2008 should tell you few Republicans were that wild for Awwwshucksabee or Flip Flop.
Pablo| 4.16.10 @ 10:55PM
Romney would get killed in the primaries by his rivals. If in 2008 he couldn't win in the primaries having spent $45 million of his own money on top of what was donated to him, in 2012 he is toast with this RomneyCare albatross around his neck.
blarset| 4.16.10 @ 11:11PM
LISA the republican party along with the democrats have made the current legislative mess
the norm in their conduct of business. Reconcillation was the republicans. WE will be fine but LISA We need to send a mesage to the government-DEMS/REPS... NO! HELL NO! VOTE against incumbency. HELP free a proud nation with your vote to stop entrenched politicos.
bluecollarbytes| 4.16.10 @ 11:29PM
Yes Romney simply has to much baggage. It's not worth twisting Obama's opposition all up in knots over a parsing of RomneyCare, just so a Romney can gain the nomination. It's not worth going through trying to defend another Bush either. We've had 12 years of Bush out of 22. Polls show folks still blame a Bush for many of our current problems (a mix of validity & demonization). "Wise" professional politicians would have us believe we need to take the path of least resistance...like selecting a Republican who touches on all the liberal/Leftist concerns while professing some some loosey goosey allegiance to conservative slogans.
If we can't get a true ideological conservative in 2012 in the white house with this kind of momentum on our side, I think a third political party will be worth considering, for real, long term (because it will take decades to create a viable threat).
Mandy| 4.17.10 @ 2:32AM
The problem with a third party candidate is that it would split the vote and Obama would easily get re-elected.
MichelleLarney| 4.17.10 @ 2:40AM
After a lifetime of belonging to the Republican party I've sadly left and am now an Independent. I miss the Republican party of Lincoln and Einsenhauer. You guys are nothing like that now, I'm reminded of the climate during the civil rights era. Name calling, assumptions and stereotypes, threats of violence and no more honor. Y'all are making Republicans look ignorant. You all keep going like this and it's going to be like living in Ireland where the Catholics and Protestants are/were at war. This crap about pulling a gun and 'choosing sides' are gonna lead to people getting hurt. Calm the hell down and bring some class back to the Republican party.
Ralph Averill| 4.17.10 @ 3:22AM
Thank you for your quiet voice of sanity in the noise of all the stupidity, arrogance, and ignorance. I think we are seeing the results from the leadership of the American conservative movement changing from the erudite, civilized voice of William Buckley, appealing to our higher angels, to Rush Limbaugh stirring up the rabble and encouraging ignorance and shouting over civilized discourse.
Tim*| 4.17.10 @ 8:05AM
We Are In A Media War against The Liberal Media Agendists of The Mainstream Media.
We,The Tea Party Rebels are " The Rabble " You condemn ,yet The New York Times Polling is now sayin' we're " More Educated and Wealthier than the general public .
Such Rabble !
Aaaaand ,We'll Remember In November !
Possum Dearie| 4.17.10 @ 11:59AM
You can't even spell Eisenhower, you phony twit.
brooklyn| 4.17.10 @ 2:52AM
This is utter sophistry. The fashion above, by 'michellelarney' is really amusing. Clearly a Democrat pretending. Republicans fought for Civil Rights, just as Republicans fought to end Slavery. A real Republican would be proud of Reagan and GW Bush for leading the fight for Freedom around the World. Mr. Klein's offering is nonsense as well. Mitt Romney is a hero of the free market, a true private sector success, who is one of the best CEO's this Country has ever produced. He offered a state solution, and included the Heritage Foundation in the effort. It has hurt him, and so have what Democrats have done to the Reform since he left office. But Romney turned MASS around for the better. Mr. Klein is offering a bias, imagining that Mr. Romney would not work to stop the disastrous Obama Socialist efforts. Of course he would, and any Conservative should be willing to grasp the difference between a State offering, and Federal Mandate. This bashing Romney is getting rather absurd. Conservatives should be thankful for outstanding leaders like Romney. None are perfect. I remember Reagan foolishly enabling Social Security. We all make mistakes. But still, Mitt Romney may make the best President. The fashion was against Chris Christie as well, and it was wrong. Thank you.
Ralph Averill| 4.17.10 @ 3:45AM
The Party of NO NO NO?!!!! Where is the counter-proposal? Where is the alternative? "Free market"? Never was, never will be. We've seen what the so-called "free market " is capable of; higher and higher premiums, coverage denied to people when they need it, and middle-class bankruptcy. All hail the free market!
Barak Obama ran on a platform of national health care. He won a majority and is therefore instituting the will of the people. That is how a democracy works. Considering the mess he inherited from Idiot-in-Chief George Bush, Obama is doing a stellar job. I predict re-election by a landslide.
Bill| 4.17.10 @ 9:33AM
Ralph just proves that liberalism is a mental disorder!
Tim*| 4.17.10 @ 10:09AM
DUUHHH Ralphie Baby !
Republican Alternative Plan :
HSA's ,Tort Reform , Small Business Health Care Pools, Access Across State Lines .
Try Readin' Ralphie : http://gopleader.gov/UploadedF.....lternative
Ted| 4.17.10 @ 2:06PM
You are correct that there has not been for quite some time a free market in healthcare. However, your general comments indicate you do not understand free markets in general nor do you understand health care economics in particular.
You presume that the mess pre-Obamacare was cause by a free market. It was not. The vast majority of health care market issues were caused by government intervention in that market. These interventions (most of which were well intentioned) caused said market to cease being a true free market. The higher premiums you decry will not decrease with Obamacare. In fact, they will increase. We are seeing that now.
You will note that President Obama is in fact NOT instituting the will of the people. That is why about 60% (in various polls) have consistently opposed Obamacare. He is in fact instituting the will of the far left wing of the Democratic Party.
As for GOP alternatives, there have been many presented. Tim* pointed out a resource above. Many of these proposals were rejected by the Democratic majority.
Brian Richard Allen | 4.17.10 @ 3:48AM
Presidential material though he be, Mr Romney's problem is that he's been a politician too darned long and has the track record to prove it. Which is only a slight improvement on Sayed Sail-Eared Simpleton's having been a bloody politician too too darned long and has no sign of anything approaching a track record prove it.
PALIN/WEST/2012!
Possum Dearie| 4.17.10 @ 12:01PM
PALIN / RUBIO 2012!
Timothy Singleton | 4.17.10 @ 5:50AM
You know, Americans can either bygod learn to govern themselves or be governed by strongmen.
You cannot run around screaming about how free you are and then legislate how people spend the dollars they earn. Romney needs to shut up and sit down. He has proven in the past that principle is a sometime thing. You cannot call yourself a conservative and support nationalized or State controlled healthcare.
Vote them all out, look for ANY smell of progressivism in a candidate and if it is there oppose them.
SchnauChef| 4.17.10 @ 7:07AM
The federal apparatus is going to collapse (Yeah !!! - dance on their friggin grave). The usless paper pushing parasites and thier limp **** lawyer/politico buddies are going to attempt to hold the tax payer hostage. The taxpayer is going to have to make a chioce..... me or thee? Sane people pick me. If thee is forced upon the citizenry - take 3 of thee on the way down. It isn't going to be a pretty sight.
Pablo| 4.17.10 @ 9:02AM
"I like mandates."
- Mitt Romney -
This quote and admission alone during today's era of ObamaCare kills Romney's chances at beating the Obama political machine. Mitt should have known better than to go along with the SOCIALIST Massachusetts healthcare that is now in shambles, which is no surprise to those who understand the mediocrity and failure of such a system.
defeated pigs| 4.17.10 @ 9:49AM
come on guys. Mitt Romney lost to John Mclame. No one in the republican party has a snowballs chance in hell of beating Obama anyway. He's cleaning up after the last idiot elephant. The chimpster. Because Obama is succeeding in turning this country in the right direction, I would just not even have a republican candidate in 2012 and wait it out until 2016. Save face and hope you have a chance in 2016. Don't let Sarah Palin even touch a microphone at rallies, gop conventions, or fundraisers if you dare have a republican candidate in 2012. And for gods sake don't let her run as a candidate. She will ruin your party and possibly kill it completely. Trust me, it is in your best interest to disassociate Sarah Palin from the republican party.
Lullaby's, Legends and Lies| 4.17.10 @ 12:42PM
Thanks for the advice DP, but we'll ignore it!! I could pick somebody out of the phonebook right now to run against the President in 2012, and we'd get behind him/her, that's how well he's doing in turning this country in the right direction. So if it turns out to be Palin? So be it!!
Ted| 4.17.10 @ 2:10PM
There are several high quality GOP governors out there who will make excellent Presidential candidates in 2012. There are some high quality GOP ex-governors out there as well. All are quite capable of beating President Obama.
As far as turning this country in the right direction.... Well, you seem to have misread the evidence completely.
Jed Merrill | 4.17.10 @ 9:50AM
RomneyCare is constitutional under the 10th amendment. ObamaCare is not.
RomneyCare focuses on individual choice and responsibility. ObamaCare focuses on government choice and responsibility at the expense of both state and individual rights.
RomneyCare = 70 pages. ObamaCare = 2,700 pages. The difference? Lost rights, higher taxes, greater bureaucracy, government takeover.
Ted| 4.17.10 @ 2:17PM
Jed,
I won't argue the Constitutional particulars with you. Suffice it to say that regardless of Constitutionality, they were both misguided legislation. All the evidence available from before either bill was enacted showed that the systems RomneyCare and ObamaCare were to create had serious shortcomings.
TennCare is the most obvious example (we also could discuss the issues with European or Canadian health care systems). TennCare was a disaster. Who killed it? A Democrat named Phil Bredesen. Why? Because it was bankrupting the state. And Phil Bredesen understands health care. He made his money in the health care industry before going into politics.
During the Obamacare debates, no one asked him about Tennessee's experience with TennCare and what led him to kill the program (and defend that action in court - which he won).
So whether it's 70 pages or 2,700, a Federal or a state action, these things are still bad laws.
Jed Merrill | 4.17.10 @ 9:55AM
If free market Mitt Romney Care is equivalent to socialist ObamaCare, why did the conservative Heritage Foundation not only endorse Romney's plan but help to develop it?
Romney's plan is based on traditional, conservative American values, adulterated a bit by a Democrat state Congress. ObamaCare is based on European mistakes that are sure to undermine quality of care and raise our taxes.
Romney's plan reallocated existing resources to solve the "problem" of many people being uninsured. Obama's plan levies half a trillion dollars in new taxes annually.
Both plans do have mandates. Romney's plan had penalties up to $295. The House version of ObamaCare suggested penalties of $250,000 and 5 years in jail.
Seriously, is the glass half full or 99/100ths empty? There are 2,630 pages of difference!
hill_jonathan51@yahoo.com| 4.19.10 @ 1:50AM
LISTEN TO JED (above) AND THEN GO TO THE HERITAGE FOUNDATION AND READ ALL YOU CAN THERE.
Turns out knowledge IS power but it is also peace of mind through calculated actions. FIGHT YOUR OWN IGNORANCE.
Pingback| 4.17.10 @ 10:13AM
News Machine :: Will the Mitt fit in 2012? links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
somnolence| 4.17.10 @ 10:33AM
As far as the quote about mandates goes, Romney can say "that was then, this is now," and put the whole thing to rest. It appears to be disintegrating in the Bay State by degrees anyway. I'm telling you to look around at the unemployment, skyrocketing prices, tax hikes coming, diminishing iras, etc. Mitt Romney and even Palin would destroy Obasm Obama if the election was held today. Romney would destroy him in debate. 2008 was really a long time ago. The only one I don't want to see run is Gingrich.
Siegfried X| 4.17.10 @ 11:38AM
' Romney can say "that was then, this is now," '
What if tomorrow Obama and Hillary Clinton say "We are now Reagan Republicans. Then was then and this is now". Would you vote for them?
It is shocking that so many people are terrified of Obama, BUT NOT HIS IDEAS. They say that Obama will bring the end of the world, yet are ready to vote for Republicans who believe the exact same thing as Obama. Just because they have an (R) after their names.
Lullaby's, Legends and Lies| 4.17.10 @ 1:08PM
X, what? I'm having a hard time understanding your post, but I'll run with it anyway. To turn Obama into a Reagan Republican, you'd have to go back in time, and turn Reagan into a complete idiot, who was trying to destroy this country from within, by raising taxes for everybody, taking over private industries, expanding entitlements, and weakening our foreign policy, all at the same time as he tried to shove unwanted healthcare down the population's throats while they clearly rejected it. And since time travel is "still" impossible, then Obama can never be "like" Reagan, until we change history. Am I terrified of Obama? No? I'm just terrified of watching him throw another pitch at a baseball game!! Obama is just another man, who's filling the seat, of the job of the President of the United States. And when his job is done (2012) he'll still just be a man, he'll never be bigger than the office itself. It's the ongoing, never stopping Liberal agenda that terrifies me for our Country's future, not the man or woman sitting in the seat. But I got to give him this much, there's going to be some good books written about this man, once he's finished with the job, and it should be some good reading too. I hope they still publish books at that point, and that the Government hasn't taken over that industry as well. The truth always comes out in time, and the truth about him, might be startling.
Siegfried X| 4.17.10 @ 1:55PM
My point is that no one, whether Romney or Obama, can wipe out their past actions just by saying so.
Also given that so many Republican leaders are Democrat-Lite, supporting the same things as Obama, it's hard to see the danger as that much higher. BushCare, RomneyCare, ObamaCare. Bush's & McCain's & Obama's support for amnesty. McCain and Obama's support for cap & trade.
If Republicans stick together in the Senate this year, they can block the rest of Obama's agenda. So if Obama passes anything else it will be because some Republicans voted with him. If that happens it will be hard to feel safe by voting for Republicans.
Lullaby's, Legends and Lies| 4.17.10 @ 2:46PM
Okay? I got you now X!! This is exactly why, Romney is done already, but he just doesn't believe it yet (we're not buying his line/lies). Don't waste your time, defending Masscare to us Mitt, we don't want to hear it (ask Charlie down in Florida). We want the exact opposite of what President Obama is selling us, not a smaller version of it, that's easier to swallow (we don't want any of it!!). I'm hoping, that between now and November, that the Republicans can put the breaks on anything, yes anything that this Administration tries to do, because if everything goes, the way I'm hoping it will go, the Republican-lite's (the RINO's) will either be gone, or will be reading the writing on the wall, and will keep their stupid RHINO mouths shut out of fear of the results, and their next election. But if there's only two names to chose from on the ballet in November, one with a D and one with a R next to it, I'll chose the one with the R in a second. The Democrats have been taking over by the Communist, and I hate Communist, always have, and I always will!! But it's hunting season right now, so let's go hunting RHINO's!!
Ted| 4.17.10 @ 2:20PM
Oh, I am not afraid at all of President Obama. His ideas give me pause. His ideas are not the same as a majority of Republicans across the board. And as polls are showing consistently, his ideas across the board are not share by most Independents or Democrats either.
somnolence| 4.17.10 @ 11:55AM
Romneycare is not the same as Obamacare by any stretch of the imagination, even though it is bad with its mandates to buy, etc. It is surrealism at its worst to suggest Obama and Clinton are now disciples of Reagan. Their economic principles are in tune with Saul Alinsky or John Kenneth Gailbraith or John Maynard Keynes while Reagan's are more in tune with Hayek. I said the plan is "disintegrating by degrees" in Massachusetts as it did in Kentucky and Tennessee, and one respondent aptly stated that it is best to let the respective states deal with it. How true.
Pablo| 4.17.10 @ 11:57AM
Mitt Romney has too many "that was then, this is now," episodes or convenient last minute flip-flops. The nation doesn't need a candidate Democrat, Independent, or Republican that is for mandates like Mitt Romney currently is all for in healthcare. Republicans need a candidate that has nothing in common or is as far away as possible from ObamaCare or RomneyCare or any kind of Federal or State mandates. Such a candidate would increase his chances of beating the Democrats in November 2010 and 2012.
Pingback| 4.17.10 @ 5:18PM
workhunt.net » Blog Archive » Pataki Calls RomneyCare ‘Unconstitutional,’ Joins Growi links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Yosemeti Sam| 4.17.10 @ 5:30PM
Thanks AS for the Photo.
A smiling Ted Kennedy loftily standing behind Romney signing his signature Messachusetts health deform bill.
A smiling Ted Kennedy - depends on where he is
now on that assumption - no doubt also would have stood behind BHO signing his signature health deform bill.
No need for words to - illuminate Liberalism!
Pingback| 4.17.10 @ 10:43PM
Right-Wing Links (April 17, 2010) links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Osamas Pajamas| 4.18.10 @ 3:52AM
His Mormon religion doesn't mean jack to me --- I'm an atheist. But Mitt likes healthcare statism "for the little people." Big kids like Mitt who've made piles of money can go buy their healthcare outside his bullshirt government system while we're saddled with RomneyCare [OhBummerCare]. We need Republicans with balls who state outright that total repeal is their goal --- and who openly appeal to the good sense of the American people to elect as many warriors as it takes --- to undo the most atrocious act of vandalism committed against the American people since a gang of jihadi frootloops and loonytoons hijacked some planes and flew them into the World Trade Center towers. Are the Republicans now too pussified for a streetfight?! Are they confident of getting the Tea Party vote and the disenchanted-taxpayer vote without having to fight for it? Are the Republicans part of the problem or part of the solution? If Romney wants in for 2012, he'd better get ready to admit that RomneyCare might have been a matter of "compassionate inspiration" --- blah blah blah, they all say that --- but that obviously the program is sucking-up huge amounts of tax money and is crashing --- and that therefore it ought to be repealed. Romney would be admitting to a "mistake," to be sure, but given the animosity which so many of us feel toward government-run healthcare, Romney could still beat OhBummer by saying that we already tried OhBummer's bad medicine in Massachusetts--- and it failed. Or we could seek out a genuinely free-enterprise lad or lass to run for President, instead.
JonH| 4.19.10 @ 2:17AM
If you really think you know Romney you will already know this........ (but if you don't, then dig deeper).........
When Romney ran his businesses and the debate was ongoing and tough. And all sides and all issues were coming out and began to be stated clearly--Romney would switch if necessary. It surprised some of the new people that he'd take a different position. His choice was always based on what was right. Even if it meant to change his opinion, direction, view, etc. He ultimately chose truth. His choices yielded 113% average each year for all 14 years he ran Bain Capital. AND he was ethical to boot--across the board at all times. If you do not know that about him....you don't know him. So start now to learn more about the man.
Again, he will not run for potus if the issues you all fear are in place. He will bow out or admit mistakes ( that's what he did at Bain, in SLC and wherever he has been). That is who he is. For now you can bet he has a strategy that addresses all you fear. He will solve the problems or drop out and keep trying to solve problems. That's what he does. Just because you don't know or see his plan doesn't mean there isn't one brewing.
Some of you say he is without courage. He has steel courage to hold his tongue while you cry--like you are doing right now. While you brand him falsely he is working hard to work the problems through. It won't happen overnight like your nerves would demand but it is coming. And most of you will eat your words and be delighted to support him!! In the meantime, go to The Heritage Foundation site and read everything that has to do with why you who are whinning and crying. Mitt sits with steel nerves and courage to take your bad mouthing yet he's aimed at solving what's ailing this nation. He isn't a lone brain he has many that work with him behind the scenes. For now, go to The heritage Foundation site and get busy. They too are not calling it quits on the MA hc plan either.
martin j smith| 4.18.10 @ 7:40AM
Let me repeat that no 2008 candidate for president should be nominated in 2012. Why ? Because they were losers. And, their weaknesses are too well known. Why make it "easy" for Obama and the Democrat Party where instead a "fight" among new blood could bring out a more emergized candidate willing to confront the Democrat agenda and just as important willing to confront Obama directly on his failed polices. A good example were those Repubs at the " health care summit " confronted Obama who was incapable of responding. That is what is necessary.
Bill from Tea Party Patriots| 4.18.10 @ 10:28AM
If the Republicans run Romney they will LOOSE!
Bottom line, the Democrats will use the fact he created a similar governemnt funded healtcare program that did not lower costs, and is a failure in Massachussetts!
And he is not strong enough on the remaining issues to pull the a Conservative Constitutionalist votes from the Tea Party even if they would put palin on with him!
He is seen as a RHINO and would be trested as such by the Tea Party members.
Mike Pence would be a better pick as far as Tea Party support would go due to his conservative, constitutionalist ideals.
Bill from the TeaParty Patriots
somnolence| 4.18.10 @ 12:20PM
So the Tea Party Patriots in the end may very well play a part in reelecting Obama if Romney is the nominee? Well, that is where you and I part company. If you cannot discern the difference that has already been spelled out for you on several of these posts between the implementation of Romneycare and Obamacare, and the glaring constitutional differences in such, then I guess that ultimately you deserve Obama. Like I say, as for me, I don't want Gingrich to be the nominee but I sure as hell will vote for him if he is over this disaster in the White House. When Bush left the White House unemployment was at 6% and it is 10% now with the "stimulus." Enough said as I really do not have to go any further. I favor Pence as the nominee also. Will he get the votes to be the standard bearer? Right now I have my doubts.
Siegfried X| 4.18.10 @ 12:54PM
For this and other reasons I believe that Haley Barbour will be the nominee in 2012.
No other candidate comes even close to Barbour in experience and proven p0litical skill.
Barbour will probably be less conservative than I would like, but he will be acceptable to just about everyone in the Republican and Tea Parties, and has the skill to fix the Republican Party machinery while fighting Obama and the Democrats.
Siegfried X| 4.18.10 @ 1:00PM
False.
Voting for a third party conservative is not voting for a Democrat. The reason why Obama is in the White House and because so many Republican candidates are socialist-light is because a lot of conservatives have been brain-washed into voting for the "lesser of two socialists".
Anyone who votes for a socialist of any type gets socialism.
somnolence| 4.18.10 @ 1:11PM
Haley Barbour is a very skilled administrator and an astute politician, but sorry, he is very unelectable. Unfortunately, his regional dialect is far more pronounced than Clinton's was, and he also carries the baggage from closed door RNC shenanigans. If he is so redeeming why has he avoided tossing his hat in the ring. Still, if he was the nominee, it would be a much closer presidential race than the last time with this disaster all around us. Romney didn't endorse Rubio yesterday for nothing either. It is Romney's for the taking and he will trounce Obama if he is the nominee.
JHE| 4.18.10 @ 1:14PM
I never liked Romney. Even when right wing bloggers like Hewitt were trying to brainwash us into thinking Romney was the solid conservative and McCain was the RINO.
somnolence| 4.18.10 @ 1:43PM
Well, if it takes voting for "socialists-lite" entities like Romney or Barbour, then I guess I prefer that over "socialist-full-blown" like Obama. Siegfried, you and many may as well spell out disaster for all of us with your expectations of a candidate, none of which really exist in the long run. I can see right now this will result in Obama being reelected more than anything else. BTW I wouldn't count on the results of recent straw polls. Once again, I would advise supporting the GOP candidate against Obama, that is unless you want any change in your pocket at all come 2014, But hey, you'll have healthcare. Right?
Margie| 4.18.10 @ 6:58PM
Amen to that. The ONLY way we are going to get rid of the party of doom is to hound them out of office, and the ONLY way we are going to be able to do that is by voting Republican. It's called reality!
Siegfried X| 4.18.10 @ 2:04PM
No one has officially "tossed their hat in the ring". Romney, Barbour, and others all say they are focused on winning this year's elections, not the presidential election in 2012.
Barbour has already taken the first steps, like visiting Iowa. Articles have been written about it. Barbour currently has a full time job as Governor, unlike Romney, so he can't focus 100% of his time on campaigning for president.
Given that Bill Clinton was elected president twice with a southern accent, I don't see that as eliminating Barbour. The South is the base of the Republican Party, so if a candidate from there can't win, the party is in deep trouble.
somnolence| 4.18.10 @ 2:26PM
Do you really believe, seriously, that Barbour would get more votes in the primaries than Sarah Palin? Because I sure don't. She is the one generating all the money and spearheading many Tea Party rallies. I dare say she would get more votes in a general election than Barbour. Have I made my point yet?
Margie| 4.18.10 @ 6:55PM
I would LOVE to see a Barour/Palin ticket. I think they are both great!
W.P. Koch| 4.18.10 @ 3:08PM
Detailed below is how Romney should critique the U.S. government budget .
WHAT `SHOULD HAPPEN
Congress and the White House should stop squandering the people’s money first and use savings to improve quality of basic invested entitlements. No new taxes. Congress should stop vote bribery and restart. Citizens come first. Vote opponents to this “out”.
It is time the U.S. limits its human rites and military policeman for the World by lobbying the United Nations and NATO to “take on more”. 800 bases across the world should be reduced. Starting with Iraq, remove most troops in 2010 and continue consulting for self reliance. After a surge in Afghanistan repeat, remove corruption and substitute same value food crops for drugs. Reduce forces in selected areas such as Germany, Bosnia and Okinawa.
Cut bureaucracy. Combine CDC, EPA and FDA. Combine the FAA, NHTSA and Transportation Department. No CZARS Mr. president.
Contribute to only one of: The World Bank or International Monetary Fund.
Reduce foreign aid. For example, no aid to oil rich -Iraq.
Reduce the “stimulus” by halting ridiculous earmarks. The earmark cost to date is nearly 3 billion!
Please- no private or military jets for congress including Pelosi’s family at taxpayer expense. The leaders should set travel standards and control expenses.
Stop the “bailout”. “To big to fail” is obsolete. No more executive bonuses of losing companies at taxpayer expense.
Reduce medical costs by; insurance buying anywhere in U.S., “tort reform”, and limiting “red tape”.
Enforce immigration laws. Entitlements or benefits are for citizens. Deport criminal “illegals”. Workers with visas should receive only needed medical benefits.
Improve medical expense tax deduction for citizens reaching age 65. Provide employer tax reduction incentives for company healthcare.
The savings allows full funding for “Medicaid”,” Medicare”, and “Veteran’s Affairs”.
Healthcare quality should be at least that for Congress or the Federal Employee Health Benefits Program (FEHBP). A result: no drug “benefit hole”, dental coverage, improved visual coverage and no co-pays except for extended skilled level nursing.
These actions will also aid unemployment compensation, and stabilize Social Security.
LiberalCombatMarine| 4.18.10 @ 8:05PM
Before you all forget:
Ronald Reagan gave amnesty to millions of illegals in 1987.
Gov. Rick Perry signed into law a bill that allows illegal aliens to pay in-state tuition in Texas.
Ronald Reagan was a RINO?
Get a life! Learn to accept that perfection is a abstract concept. Learn to compromize
W.P.Koch| 4.18.10 @ 9:10PM
Elegal aliens ,if not deported ,would have to pay for all benifits such as unemployment and education.
Pablo| 4.18.10 @ 9:06PM
Mitt Romney is no where near the caliber of Ronald Reagan.
"I like mandates."
- Mitt Romney -
I can see devastating 30 second adds in the primaries of this being quoted by Romney. The Republican party can do much better.
Charles Martel| 4.18.10 @ 10:48PM
For this reason, if for no other, Mitt Romney must not be the Republican nominee for president in 2012. Because of the Health Control act, though, he will be the candidate favored by Democrat cross-overs.
We must not repeat the mistake of 2008: Democrats must not be permitted again to select the Republican nominee.
+++
JonH| 4.19.10 @ 2:59AM
Martel already sees the crossovers leaving the democrats. Yet, he wants you to keep Romney from absolutely not winning. Why??????
Mr. Martel is a liberal Obama supporter like others who on this site parade as though they are republicans and tea party people. They've helped to stir you up, to make you mad, to divide the conservative movement, and to get you to distrust Romney. They are subversives and this is their job. THEY FEAR ROMNEY. THEY DID IN 2008 AND THEY STILL DO. Are you their dupes? Don't be, go to the Heritage Foundation website and read everything you can there. It is an innoculation against the dupers and ignorance.
Charles Martel| 4.19.10 @ 12:05PM
"Mr. Martel is a liberal Obama supporter... "
And you, sir, are a known pedophile. (See? I can make stuff up about you that's only slightly more vile than what you can about me.)
I've been called a lot of things in my time, but "liberal Obama supporter" would make my friends laugh and laugh hard. Hell, even my enemies would smirk at that one.
The single most important issue in the next two elections can reasonably be expected at this time to be Health Control. Making Romney the nominee concedes that issue to the statists. And "Homey don't play that."
Now, JonH, if you *are* a statist, you actually want that, but I have to think that most of the people who come here to read the online incarnation of Mr. Tyrrell's fine publication aren't and don't. Count me among the latter, at all times.
So, let's all take what we have in common and after we pry the gavel from Nancy's bony grip, let's work together to find the better candidate for 2012. I don't know who that is yet, but I do have a few ideas for who it isn't, and Mitt is not coming off that list.
+++
Charles Martel| 4.19.10 @ 12:14PM
PS: The Democrats are very unlikely to be seeing a contest for their own nomination, so in many states that leaves them free to cross the aisle, change their registrations, or, as the case in my own beloved Texas, merely show up on primary day in order to mess with our nomination process. They won't be voting in the GOP primary because they prefer Mitt to the Dear Leader; they'll be doing so in order to weaken us and saddle us with a second term of post-Americanism and the ideology of national decline. And the best way to do that will be to take the most important issue off the table and send the real conservatives looking for someone who actually opposes the march toward Health Control.
+++
somnolence| 4.18.10 @ 11:47PM
Reagan is not coming back and the nostalgia for him and the futile search for him in another embodiment will just add more division instead of unity to the GOP. I believe the Gipper also said do not speak ill of another Republican. He was a great President, but he also made glaring mistakes and I'm bold enough and realistic enough to know that. To the Romney naysayers the future of this country is no joke. I don't feel that any of you are ready for primetime even though you have a right to your opinions. It is just sad you are looking for something that never really was. I'm all for walking the line in the image of the Bill Of Rights and the Federalist Papers. I also know that this isn't 1789 and you haven't convinced me that Romney cannot be elected over a pitiful Mother Jones subordinate.
Charles Martel| 4.19.10 @ 1:57AM
It's really just this simple: Romney cannot be elected if I do not vote for him.
I know, I know, you're figuring that you can call my bluff, somehow manage to get that tall glass of tepid water nominated, and then just dare me not to vote for him. Make this sink into your brain, or else: I recommend in the strongest terms that you or I can possibly imagine that you not test me. You will be disappointed, the Republic will fall, and it will have been your fault for letting victory slip through your fingers just to prove... well, if your candidate is Romney, I'm not sure what it is that you're trying to prove. That you were right last time? That would be too bad, because you weren't: you were only slightly less wrong than those who infiltrated our primary process and stuck us with John McCain.
We're going to need a candidate on whom we can ALL agree, and you are going to have to accept that that candidate is absolutely not Mitt Romney.
+++
JonH| 4.19.10 @ 2:40AM
Mitt Romney grows. He will continue to grow in a drip method even with the not so intellectual conservatives too. He will not arrive with out bumps along the way. You who have cried and whinned about the MA HC are one of the bumps in the pathway that Mr. Romney is on. You will (most of you ) vote for him when you can see clearly past this current bump along the road to the WH and removing the liberal socialists from the American scene. They have underestimated their own successes and arrival into their current power. They have a tiger by the tail and are already loosing their grip. They were never able to see past their fantacies and do any realistic accounting. Many in the republican Party were able to do the accounting and number crunching. That's the group at the Heritage Foundation now calculating and planning the victories this fall and in 2012 with Mitt Romney winning it back--that's the guy accused of being a RINO.....who will establish the next great CONSERVATIVE STRONGHOLD since Ronald Reagan. You may not see it at this moment but at the intersection of preparation and opportunity the Great Event will take its place in history.
Pingback| 4.19.10 @ 3:17AM
Career and Education » Blog Archive » Pataki Calls RomneyCare ‘Unconstitutional,’ Joi links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Yosemeti Sam| 4.19.10 @ 3:47AM
Um, can Romney still get into the Messachusetts
governorship race?
To:
A) succeed the BHO ideological bro governor.
B) develop a templative model - via repairing
Messachusetts' health care runaway costs
in the swiftness of time: all of 2011.
C) resign after success.
D) thus with flawless bona fides - presumptively
challenge BHO in 2012 on such seething issues.
Putting the horse before the cart - so to speak.
MTK| 4.19.10 @ 2:41PM
The author needs to take a constitutional law class before making ignorant statements about the Mass. law being similar to the now-US law. The Federal Gov't doesn't have authority to make people buy this insurance, but states do. It's called the 10th amendment. Read it sometime. Therefore, Romney's healthcare law is constitutional, and is irrelevant to the Fed's law. Also, as conservative as this site is supposed to be, where's your sympathy for taking care of these things on a state level????? Come on people think!
Pingback| 4.20.10 @ 1:17AM
Articles for your consideration | Conservative Heritage Times links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Manny| 4.20.10 @ 6:02PM
How dared the Heritage Foundation come up with a plan (RomneyCare) including a MANDATE? Why is the Heritage Foundation getting off so easily on this? I used to give them money. No more.
Pablo| 4.20.10 @ 10:29PM
Mitt Romney was for the "MANDATE" before he was against it.
Umh, sounds familiar doesn't it?
drewhause| 4.23.10 @ 10:34AM
nice post, i like it, very informational and by the way, i dont like this Romney guy.
Drew
Pingback| 4.24.10 @ 8:18PM
Weekly articles « Interned In Northfield links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
copycd | 4.30.10 @ 1:09PM
Mitt Romney was for the "MANDATE" before he was against it.
Umh, sounds familiar doesn't it?
Pingback| 5.5.10 @ 12:57PM
Rethinking Petraeus in 2012 | FrumForum links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
fjdksj| 6.30.10 @ 11:11PM
beijing massage shanghai girl
wholesale beads | 4.15.11 @ 2:09AM
China Wholesale Beads is your best choice for beading.
wholesale jewelry findings | 9.19.11 @ 5:37AM
jewelry findings are necesary material used in beading