-
Has the IRS Already Seized Your Medical Records?
May 20, 2013 | 6 comments
-
The Grand Old Poseurs
May 13, 2013 | 72 comments
-
Obamacare Pimps Smear Lipstick on Another Pig
May 6, 2013 | 58 comments
-
Can One Iraq Vet Stop Obamacare?
April 29, 2013 | 88 comments
-
GOP at Fault for Obamacare Train Wreck?
April 22, 2013 | 106 comments
The Right Prescription
Santorum and the Silence of the Shams
Why is Rick Santorum the only GOP candidate talking seriously about Obamacare?
In a recent column, Charles Krauthammer laments the undeniable reality that Obamacare is fading as an issue in the presidential campaign, and calls it “a huge failing of the opposition party.” He points out that the Republican presidential candidates have all promised to repeal the Potemkin “reform” law, but asks if any have been “making the case for why?” This is a surprising question, coming from a man of Krauthammer’s credentials and erudition. He obviously hasn’t been listening as closely as one might have expected. Three of the four remaining Republican presidential candidates have indeed failed to give the issue the attention it merits. Rick Santorum, however, has been all over it.
Santorum has not merely explained why Obamacare must be repealed but has repeatedly declared it the most important issue of the campaign. In fact, he did so during the most recent GOP debate in Arizona, where he called it “the biggest issue in this race” and later went on to explain why: “The real fundamental issue here is government coercion.” Likewise, during the Florida debate, he implored Republican primary voters not to “give this issue away in this election [by supporting Romney]. It is about fundamental freedom.” And Santorum doesn’t reserve such comments for big events with large television audiences. He delivers precisely the same message in the smallest of town hall meetings.
The reluctance of the other GOP candidates to follow suit is odd. It certainly can’t be explained by the popularity of Obamacare. The latest Rasmussen survey shows 53 percent of likely voters favoring repeal while finding only 38 percent who oppose sending it to the death panel. A CNN poll indicates that half of all Americans oppose the latest of Obamacare’s assaults on individual liberty — the anti-conscience mandate — and Gallup finds that nearly half of America’s small businesses are deliberately not hiring new workers because of worries “about the potential cost of health care.” And yet Santorum continues to be the only Republican presidential candidate left who has made Obamacare’s repeal central to his campaign.
Santorum’s willingness to engage the enemy on health care is easier to explain than is the reticence of his rivals. He is well suited for the Obamacare debate for a couple of reasons. First, unlike his primary competitor, Mitt Romney, he’s a genuine conservative. Thus, he actually understands that it constitutes a very serious threat to individual freedom, and this conviction has no doubt been reinforced by the Obama administration’s recent assault on the religious freedom of those who share his faith. Second, he clearly understands health care in a way that the others, including the egregious Dr. Paul, do not. Santorum has done his homework on the issue and talks about its nuances with a fluency that eludes his competitors.
I recently wrote about a demonstration of this fluency that occurred at a town hall meeting held on the campus of Dordt College. After Santorum had outlined his objections to Obamacare, a student blindsided him with a 2009 “study” purporting to show that “50 to 100,000 uninsured Americans” die every year for lack of health insurance. This study, though notorious among health policy wonks for its dubious methodology, is relatively obscure. The likelihood is remote that an advisor-dependent candidate like Mitt Romney would have been aware of its existence. Santorum, however, immediately rejected its tendentious conclusions in terms that made it obvious he was familiar with the study and the biases of its authors.
And Santorum’s grasp of health care isn’t limited to familiarity with bogus studies. Aware that countless surveys have shown lower cost and greater access to be the main things Americans wanted from health reform, Santorum constantly reminds his audiences of Obamacare provisions that will increase the price of care while reducing its availability. The February speech he delivered in Rochester, Minnesota, was typical. During that event, he explained how “benefits” like the elimination of lifetime and annual caps from health plans and guaranteed issue of medical coverage regardless of pre-existing conditions have already driven up costs in states like Massachusetts without improving access a whit.
So, Krauthammer’s query should be reframed thus: Why is Santorum the only GOP candidate “making the case for why” Obamacare must be repealed? Is Santorum alone among the four in believing it can actually be done? Perhaps the pledges issued by the others amount to nothing more than perfunctory rhetoric meant to mollify the Tea Partiers. Maybe they think it’s too late and are merely shamming their commitment to repeal. This would explain some of the signals we have seen coming from the Romney camp. Recently, one of Romney’s closest advisers said, “You can’t whole-cloth throw it out.” And this lines up with comments Romney himself has made about keeping the “good” parts of Obamacare while we “repeal the bad.”
This is little more than what the Democrats have promised to do. It’s obvious, of course, why Romney tap-dances around the issue. He, as Santorum put it in last week’s debate, “used federal dollars to fund the government takeover of health care in Massachusetts.” The reserve of Gingrich and Paul is harder to explain. The sporadic attention the former devotes to Obamacare can perhaps be put down to his ad hoc campaign style, but the latter’s refusal to address it is utterly inexplicable. As a physician and ostensible libertarian, Ron Paul is the candidate one would expect to be screaming his head off. Instead of hammering Obamacare, however, he has spent nearly $30 million attacking conservative challengers to Romney.
Whether this “huge failing of the opposition” is due to a lack of genuine commitment to repeal or not, it certainly plays into Obama’s hands. As Grace-Marie Turner wrote last September, “The White House is quietly implementing a shrewd new strategy of silence on Obamacare.” And the “news” media, having joined the administration’s effort to activate this “Cone of Silence,” rarely cover Santorum’s comments on the subject unless they can find a way to misrepresent his position as hopelessly doctrinaire and irrational. Politico, for example, began its report on his Rochester speech as follows: “How much does Rick Santorum hate President Barack Obama’s health care law? So much that he even opposes the parts a lot of Republicans like.”
Thus, Santorum is a veritable voice crying in the wilderness about what Krauthammer calls Obamacare’s “constitutional trifecta.” Meanwhile, the other GOP presidential candidates confine their opposition to sporadic and formulaic calls for repeal that not only lack passion but cause one to wonder if they are merely faking it for the cameras.
About the Author
David Catron is a health care revenue cycle expert who has spent more than twenty years working for and consulting with hospitals and medical practices. He has an MBA from the University of Georgia and blogs at Health Care BS.
Letter to the Editor View all comments (143) | Leave a comment
More Articles by David Catron
More Articles From The Right Prescription
http://spectator.org/archives/2012/02/27/santorum-and-the-silence-of-th
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
Current Issue
- Wincing at Cumberbatch
- The Demise of Money and Credit
- Screwtape Talks Turkey
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
H/T to National Review Online
ADVERTISEMENT
Bill Hussein O'Stalin| 2.27.12 @ 6:20AM
Your comment that "It's obvious, of course, why Romney tap-dances around the issue. He, as Santorum put it in last week's debate, "used federal dollars to fund the government takeover of health care in Massachusetts," is just part of the issue.
Perhaps Santorum could be described as slam dancing over the fact he voted for federal dollars for Part D of Medicare. Those federal dollars dwarf federal and state dollars for Romneycare which is no longer Romneycare but that's another issue.
If that's Santorum's big issue it's not a winner, because more federal funds have been spent so far on Medicare Part D than Obamacare which is in it's infancy.
Santorum should pick his dancing partners more carefully. This one does not hold up to the facts.
McCandles| 2.27.12 @ 8:57AM
Medicare Part D is a rare federal success story. When is the last time you saw a federal program cost less than projections for 4 years in a row? Part D is successful because it introduces competition into the formula. Seniors now have 2000 prescription programs to choose from. It is a system driven by private competition. 9/10 seniors are happy with the program.
This bit about Romney owning Romneycare but Santorum owns Part D is getting old. There is no comparison between Romneycare and Part D. In fact, the private competition aspects of Part D would be a good model for a truly effective reform effort by Republicans.
Bill Hussein O'Stalin| 2.27.12 @ 9:43AM
According to a GAO report from January 2010 the cost to the taxpayers was 54 billion. That sounds like a good deal to you? Either you're not very bright or you're not a taxpayer.
The government can't force the cost down without unintended consequences. Those consequences are someone has to pick up the tab.
There is a comparison between Romneycare and Part D, a least Santorum is trying to make that case. If you think they shouldn't be compared contact the Santorum campaign.
The comparison is in federal dollars. That's the only fair comparison that can be made. Romneycare federal dollars are aren't even 1% of Medicare Part D.
Dai Alanye | 2.27.12 @ 10:22AM
Part D costs money but is fixable, and its cost is less than was predicted, unheard of for a Federal entitlement.
Neither Romneycare nor the proposed Obamneycare work or will work, and each costs plenty. The only reason Part D looks more expensive than Romneycare is that Stalin is counting only Federal dollars. If Romney's scheme covered fifty states it would break the US budget just as surely as Obamacare, albeit slightly more slowly.
Bill Hussein O'Stalin| 2.27.12 @ 11:00AM
You're right, but Romneycare is not Romneycare any more. It's been modified several times and although the costs are high, little has been achieved. The government is only good at one thing. Destroying free markets and destroying individualism.
McCandles| 2.27.12 @ 10:30AM
Romney's argument has always been that Romneycare is different because it's a state program. "what's right for MASSECHUSETTS....." yada yada. Well, Santorum was simple pointing out that Romney survived on an infusion of federal money.
Now, your brilliant argument is that Romneycare (which is for one state) didn't cost nearly as much as the nationwide Medicare Part D program. You can question my intelligence if you choose to do so, but your argument is ridiculous.
Al Adab| 2.27.12 @ 10:50AM
Which of our candidates, potential nominees, is willing to take a stand in favor or full repeal of this heinous, criminal and yes, socialist, health care plan? Either we stand against the imposition of more government control over our most personal decisions, or we are complicit in the destruction of freedom and the enslavement of the American people. "Choose you this day whom you will serve, but as for me..."
Santorum is on the editorial page of the WSJ today with a semblance of a tax plan. Overhaul not betterment. That is what is needed in the health care field as wel. As long as we debate who can better manage the social welfare state, we accept by default, its legitimacy. In doing so we present no choice to the voters only a chimerical difference. That is the road to defeat we have followed all too often.
Trish| 2.27.12 @ 4:36PM
Agree Al. BTW, there will be a rally against Obamacare on March 24 on the Capitol grounds ala 9-12. I am flying in from Mich. with my fire fighter brother. Indeed, "Choose you this day whom you will serve, but as for me...". Lets let them know that we are still here stronger than ever!
Bill Hussein O'Stalin| 2.27.12 @ 11:07AM
It's not a question of whether Romneycare cost as much (One percent compared to Part D) and it's not ridiculous to compare them when Santorum is doing the comparing.
You're making Romney's case for him in that nationwide programs always cost more than one state program. Santorum claims the two should be compared and I'm not the one claiming that at all.
So if anyone's argument is ridiculous it's Santorums. I'm pointing out how ridiculous it is for Santorum to make that point. Once again, if you think it's ridiculous contact the Santorum campaign:
http://thinkprogress.org/healt.....omneycare/
Rick Santorum continued to rail against Medicare during a stop in South Carolina this afternoon, pledging to reform the program by turning it over to private health insurers and “free markets.” “We have to look at how we’re spending our money,” Santorum explained, before awkwardly comparing the health care program to Mitt Romney’s signature law in Massachusetts. “In the area of Medicare, it is incredibly inefficient. The Medicare system is simply like Romneycare in Massachusetts…It will eventually mean that a lot of seniors aren’t going to get the care that they need.”
George Fulmore| 2.28.12 @ 7:57PM
Part D was unfunded and was rigged to give the drug companies the rights to charge seniors the retail prices for their drugs. Only when a senior comes to the "donut hole" does he/she know how much he/she has really been paying for the drugs. Insurance companies are paid about $100 per month per enrollee whether the enrollee uses the program or not. It is MANDATED for those under Medicare, by the way. The program was projected to cost the federal government about $700 billion over 10 years. It is, apparently, coming in at somehwhat less than that, but that certainly doe not mean the program that was never asked for by seniors a "success." That is baloney. Republicans should be ashamed of the program and most of the other mistakes under the George W. Bush administration. But is there really a difference between that administration and the ideas of the current Republican candidates? I sure don't see many. Maybe that is why they never mention his name?
Alan Brooks| 2.27.12 @ 9:37AM
Well, at least you all know Ron Paul is washed up-
if there was ever any doubt.
axbucxdu| 2.27.12 @ 1:02PM
Oh Al, washed up HE indeed may be, but the USG's financial arithmetic dictates that the IDEAS he represents are not.
Alan Brooks| 2.27.12 @ 5:07PM
whatever happened to, whatsis name... Newt.. something-or-other?
Ricky Santorum| 2.27.12 @ 9:42AM
God willing, we will prevail, in peace and freedom from fear, and in true health, through the purity and essence of our precious bodily fluids. God bless you all.
Barry Obama| 2.27.12 @ 1:58PM
The state coercing, you will obey, in tolerance and enslavement regardless of rationality, and in dictated medical decisions, since the arbitrary chance your essence even exists past your natural partial birth stage the financial costs relating to the release of your bodily fluids not only will be free to you your neighbors will be forced to pay for it. Hate speech will not be allowed by these same neighbors only.
Garfield| 2.27.12 @ 2:19PM
Gingrich has been going after Obamacare, but he's also been going after Obama on other issues.
If Gingrich is our nominee, he will certainly make Obamacare an issue, but it won't be the only issue.
Gingrich will probably be going after:
1. Fast & Furious
2. Obama's collection of Czars
3. Obama's attack on the 1st amendment
4. Obama's Saul Alinski Radicalism
He isn't going to just hit Obama over the head on Obamacare.
Bill| 2.27.12 @ 4:37PM
I love Newt Gingrich because he is authentic and passionate.
Alan Brooks| 2.27.12 @ 7:58PM
Santorum has the movie star looks, but is he more than a pretty face? Not much more.
thoughtcriminal2| 2.29.12 @ 3:48PM
There is the Romney shill again. Rather than approach any issue at face value, he always runs a Romney commercial. All right BillyBoy, it's time to come clean - are you on the Romney payroll or one of those zealous for a coreligionist at all costs?
Clint| 2.27.12 @ 6:21AM
Uh Oh !
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-bjKg.....ukakis.jpg
chuck| 2.27.12 @ 7:48AM
Does anyone really click on any of Clint's links?
Dick Nome| 2.27.12 @ 8:23AM
No.If I want to read BS, I'll link up with the DNC.
loulou| 2.27.12 @ 10:16AM
DON'T CLICK. You'll be infected with a virus.
Doctor Right| 2.27.12 @ 11:16AM
Does the Pope crap in the woods?
Clint| 2.27.12 @ 1:56PM
Doctor Reich Is The RINO-CINO Flunkie Stooge ,Who Said He'll Vote For The RINO-CINO Frontman,Mittens Romney.
The Tea Party Rebellion Heads To A Brokered Convention.
Con Chef (NB) | 2.27.12 @ 2:34PM
So what're you gonna say when your punk-assed, fake-assed "conservative" child of a lesser wad, Ru Paul, throws his support to Mittens to get Rand a VP spot?
Will we be able to tell that you finally did the world a favor & downed a bottle of anti freeze after we will have not seen your 3rd grade level crap on this site for longer than a week?
chuck| 2.27.12 @ 7:59PM
What a waste of perfectly good anti-freeze.
Maybe he could just eat dog squeeze, that way at least the sidewalks would be clean.
Occam's Tool| 2.27.12 @ 12:42PM
I did, once---it was a ridiculous "outreach to minorities" ad that supposed that a Black guy who would be CONSIDERING Ron Paul would have the intellect of a gangsta rapper.
Cwint grows more amusing as his candidate gets repeatedly crotch kicked. I can't wait to see what he does if Mitt nominates Rand to be VEEP, as appears to be likely.
Con Chef (NB) | 2.27.12 @ 1:05PM
I'm hoping him, Jackboot & the rest of those douchebags do a Jonestown-style group KoolAid session.
Clint| 2.27.12 @ 2:20PM
Uh Oh !
The Little Rough Puff Neo-Chickenhawks Are In The Building.
The Tea Party Rebellion Heads To A Brokered Convention.
Con Chef (NB) | 2.27.12 @ 2:35PM
Tell me how Dr. Dementia's support your your boy, Mitt, works out for you. After all, Clit, you brought us Little Bobby Casey here in PA. Thanks for that, putz.
Clint| 2.27.12 @ 2:14PM
Tool Job's The RINO-CINO Israel Firster Smear Bund Neo-Chickenhawk ,Who Said He'll Vote For The RINO-CINO Frontman, Mittens Romney.
The Tea Party Rebellion Heads To A Brokered Convention.
Fred Farkel| 2.27.12 @ 3:38PM
Islamist Firster TPINO bum bandit has spoken.
Clint| 2.27.12 @ 2:10PM
Does Anybody Not Know That Little Ricky Specter-Santorum Is A Rough Puff Chickenhawk ?
Con Chef (NB) | 2.27.12 @ 2:38PM
So's the guy your "candidate" is negotiating with to get his son a VP slot. My, what a "principled" "true conservative" Ron "Treason's Friend" Paul is.
Hey, Clit, since Bradley WoManning has been nominated for the Nobel Prize, does that mean that Ron would nominated him for Sec Def, should the polarity of the Earth resverse & Dr. Dementia actually get the nomination?
http://townhall.com/tipsheet/k.....eace_prize
Fred Farkel| 2.27.12 @ 3:38PM
Romney / Paul that's the ticket. Get on board now all you Paulbots. No steeenking conservatives needed. The TPINO in chief will tell you.
Von Mises Jr.| 2.27.12 @ 7:40AM
Mr. Catron is spot on. The GOP, by all apperances, is fine with ObamaCare. It does not affect the ruling class. They live by different laws and rules.
But for the common man, ObamaCare is ballgame. It annuls and repeals your Constitutional "unalienable" rights of Life and Liberty. It renders Americans "subjects."
But it is a status of "subject" that will be much worse than Europe or Canada. They do not have written Constitutions as defined and classically liberal as the United States. But they have less tyranny than Americans currently face with a blatantly unconstitutional regime. It is one thing to have benevolent leaders with power over the people, it is another to have a tyrannical King or Marxist dictator at the helm, and no rights other than the ones they bestow or retract at a whim.
Europe is adopting austerity and Canada slashing its tax rates. At the same time, the Obama regime is projecting trillion dollar deficits in perpetuity, closing down oil, nationalizing business sectors and destroying our economy.
A "Consititution" is a contract with the people limiting government. No Constitution plus a tyrannical regime equals some version of serfdom or slavery. Apparently the GOP is fine with that?
PJK| 2.27.12 @ 8:37AM
Correct. Ruling and other elites, unions, and fed employees will all be exampt from Doofuscare. We in the trenches, we the people, will be left holding the expensive, substandard bag once again. Are we patheticly masochistic or what?
Alster76| 2.28.12 @ 4:01PM
Not sure why you think so. All four GOP candidates at one point or another during the campaign have sworn to repeal Obamacare and the only way it doesn't get repealed is if one of them does not get elected. It's in for keeps if we don't throw Obama out of D.C. this year no matter who gets the joy of signing the waivers and ultimately the repeal bill.
I think the author has a clear and stated preference for Santorum which is his right. It doesn't mean the other candidates are against Obamacare. Actually, in some ways it shows that Santorum is kind of a one trick pony where the other candidates are focused on a host of natonal issues at hand. Remember this, Obama didn't just screw up the healthcare system, he screwed up the entire USA!! Everything he and his Marxist minions touched is somehow worse off now than it was when they took office in 2009. Yep... Obamacare gets repealed alright, but so does a lot of other things that have happened under this miserable, ne'er-do-well of a President.
David Croon| 2.28.12 @ 5:22PM
I'm not sure Romney's pledge to issue waiver's to all 50 states is the same as a promise to repeal. It allows states to ignore the waiver (My state of Washington will ignore it, with Democrat single party control) while leaving the national law in place, and then we're still on the slippery slope to full national implementation.
mjs_pa| 2.27.12 @ 7:46AM
I have to wonder why conservatives and Tea Party members aren't seriously supporting a candidate who will repeal obamacare.
chuck| 2.27.12 @ 7:51AM
Who says we aren't?
80% of the country has not voted yet.
irish19| 2.27.12 @ 11:01AM
Bingo!!
skip| 2.27.12 @ 4:52PM
usatoday.com/news/politics/story/2012-02-23/swing-states-health-care-obama/53260222/1
www.usatoday.com/news/politics.....53260222/1
BcdErick| 2.27.12 @ 8:10AM
This might be reasonable except... The truth is Santorum has made the centerpiece of his campaign his Catholic faith and is not emphasizing so much repealing Obamacare. His statement that JFK's speech on the separation of church and state "made him want to puke" was stupid and unnecessary. And he is forever saying childish things. Yesterday he slammed Romney for occasionally using a teleprompter. This guy is never going to be President.
Dick Nome| 2.27.12 @ 8:28AM
The Democrats and the Statist media are talking about his Catholic faith, not Risk.. crap, I remeber when this HS was flying about with JFK. Stretch Pelosi and Lurch are certainly not faithful Catholics by any means. Why is that not discussed... oh, they are Liberal Democrats... it's OK.
Ryan| 2.27.12 @ 8:35AM
If you read Santorum's explanation, you might not buy the line fed by the mainstream media.
Look at it in context.
irish19| 2.27.12 @ 11:04AM
Link please. Don't misunderstand. I want to read it, but lack the link.
Dai Alanye | 2.27.12 @ 10:28AM
Romney "occasionally" uses a teleprompter? Mitt won't even debate or discuss matters with ordinary voters, avoiding question and answer sessions. He's afraid of people who aren't appropriately regimented.
Tim the Enchanter| 2.27.12 @ 3:40PM
Sounds like someone else that we're all too familiar with.
darcy| 2.28.12 @ 2:33AM
Let me be as kind as I can be: you are full of horsefeathers. Please do yourself and us a favor and try to educate yourself about the false construct regarding the separation of church and state that burdens your intellect.
Clue #1: Thomas Jefferson and the Danbury Baptist Association, 1802.
Clue #2: 1947 -- Hugo Black; Everson versus Board of Education.
Clue#3: Saving the Best For Last: Read the Declaration of Independence
Addendum. It might interest you to know, well, considering, perhaps not. But regardless, did you know that the very first Supreme Court Justice, John Jay, said that "God has given people the choice of their rulers and it is the duty of our Christian nation to select and prefer Christians for their rulers"??
Did you know that in 1844 the Supreme Court stated, "Why should not the Bible, especially the New Testament, be read and taught as Divine Revelation in the schools? Where can the purest principles of morality be learned so clearly or so perfectly as from the N.T.?"
And now this: what is printed in stone on top of the highest man-made landmark in Washington, D.C. What is that landmark? And what is its inscription at the top, the nearest point to heaven?
You know, it just could be that Santorum has seven children whose language sometimes includes the word "puke." Personally, I use the term, "spit them out." But that's just me.
WRTolkas| 2.27.12 @ 8:23AM
I need help here, and I can't think of a better place to ask for assistance. Every morning during the work week I read The American Spectator and the editorials supporting Rick Santorum or the editorials supporting Mitt Romney. To add icing on the cake, I have been receiving nearly half-a-dozen robo-calls daily from each candidate for the last week. I am confused. My ultimate goal is to replace that Kenyan born Socialist community organizer with a candidate that can whoop him good in the election. For this reason I'm drawn to Mitt Romney for the best chance. But then I'm drawn to a more conservative candidate. What good is winning an election when we elect a shadow-progressive from Massachusetts? That is why I tend to lean to Santorum. But then I'm looking for a person with a grasp of the national debt. I'm not certain that Santorum is the one to tackle this problem.
Sorry for my ramblings. I haven't had my morning cup of tea.
You probably have guessed by now I'm in Michigan and don't want to leave my vote to a coin toss.
Any help out there?
Tommy Frisco| 2.27.12 @ 10:44AM
WRTolkas,
I'd recommend you focus on Santorum and Newt since they are the only two Republicans left in the primary. Mitt is still an independent/moderate he once described himself as and Ron Paul continues to describe himself as a Libertarian. Mitt is the only candidate who has signed Government-run health care into law and Paul supports legalizing drugs and prostitution, not to mention that he won't support our allies. Doesn't that sound like what we have now with Obama?
Also, remember that you are voting in a primary where you should vote for the candidate that YOU like. Don't listen to anyone telling you that candidate blah-blah is most electable. The most electable candidate is the one who wins the most primary votes and this primary is just getting started. The general election is where you may have to vote for a GOP candidate you don't like very much, but whoever it is, especially if it's Newt or Rick, our candidate will be better than Obama. That, my friend, is your most important vote.
One final piece of advice, talk is cheap, especially coming from politicians. Consider what you would like our next POTUS to accomplish and then look at the voting records and accomplishments of each candidate. Romney has a liberal voting record and Ron Paul, who has been a representative for over 30 years, has not accomplished anything other than being a thorn in everyone's backside.
Tommy Frisco| 2.27.12 @ 11:16AM
WRTolkas,
You should also know, if you don't already, that it was George Romney who brought you your state income tax. Being from Texas, I hated paying that tax while I lived in Michigan. And, don't anyone fool you into believing that all the other taxes in Michigan are lower because of the state income tax. Maybe at one time that was true, but once a tax is in place, it goes nowhere but up.
WRTolkas| 2.27.12 @ 5:17PM
Thanks guys. That helped.
TommyFrisco| 2.27.12 @ 7:35PM
I hope I was able to help you, WRT, without being biased. Remember, don't pay any attention to the polls or what you're reading and hearing. As you probably know, almost everyone has an agenda, and most are trying to hide it. Vote for the candidate that YOU like. If you haven't been to Rick or Newt's website, that's a good place to get some information. Both have had some bad press, especially Newt, but both have good explanations for their perceived transgressions that you might not have heard about from the MSM or the GOP establishment people.
Good luck, tomorrow!
Don L| 2.27.12 @ 8:40AM
"He obviously hasn't been listening as closely as one might have expected. Three of the four remaining Republican presidential ...."
CK has spent his credibility taking down Palin (who would have repealed it) and now, Santorum (the ho hum treatment) for one reason. CK is merely a mouthpiece (as are the other GOP addicted pundits) for the elite GOP, who have hand-picked Oromney.
The right-wing media are merely helping to elect and protect him.
Romney is the father of Obamacare and now we see him attack the "rich 1%" as if he were Obama himself, while pandering and pretending(he's a NASCAR man?). He is one of the most unpricipled candates in history.
The GOP will never repeal the power they gain over our lives -they are but faux opposition and merely the other side of the ruling class coin.
Con Chef (NB) | 2.27.12 @ 9:03AM
Santorum HAS been a bulldog about this issue. And not only on the national level. In one of the debates (Florida, I believe), he nailed Romney's ass to the wall on conervative principle. Romney, just like some of his mindless adherents, repeated the mantra that what he did was a state issue, not a federal one. And he's correct. Under the 10th Amendment, he's absolutely right. However, when the people who helped Mittens craft MassCare also consulted with the White House to craft MaoBamacare, alarm bells should ring in any self respecting conservative's head.
More than that, however, is what I believe to be at the heart of WHY Mitt's MassCare Misadventure. And that is that Mitt thought that the GOVERNMENT, not the private sector, was the solution to the healthcare problem in his state. Again, what self respecting conservative thinks that the government, on no matter WHAT level, is the better answer to the problem of healthcare?! That's the automatic DQ in Mitt's column to me.
IF Mitt's the nominee, I'll still pull the lever for him, in the hopes that we also take the Senate & will be able to repeal & defund MaoBamacare in that way.
Gee, Paultards, whatever are y'all gonna do if your false god of faux conservatism, Dr. Dementia, throws his support behind Mittens for Rand to get the VP slot, should Mitt win the nomination. I just want to go on the record RIGHT NOW as telling all you Paultards (not Paul SUPPORTERS, there's a difference) that I will never miss an opportunity to rub your faces in one of the most amazing sellout moves in politics, should that rumor actually come to pass. I will literally PISS myself with laughter. And if I'm wrong, then, as Cicero said, "that will be the best refutation of my speech."
Von Mises Jr.| 2.27.12 @ 9:24AM
Hey Chef, I like what Paul has said and wrote, but I would not vote for him in a primary. But I cannot understand why when his son Rand and he espouse libertarianism; that he would jump in bed with the establishment candidate. It seems like a capitulation and compromise of his principles for expediency.
Con Chef (NB) | 2.27.12 @ 9:48AM
Yeah. I'll believe it when I see it, if it comes to pass. But IF it does, I'll never let the frothing, Jew hating type of Paulistinian forget it. Those people who so piously & self righteously call themselves "true conservatives" & the rest of us "fakes" will have their entire worldview shifted, should their minor messiah throw his support behind the least conservative candidate in the race.
Occam's Tool| 2.27.12 @ 12:45PM
Remember to rub their faces with a cheesegrater, with a refreshing rubbing alcohol followup, Con Chef.
By the way, most confirmed Paul supporters are "Ronulan" assholes. Saw a Bitch Paul supporter this last Saturday.
Con Chef (NB) | 2.27.12 @ 1:07PM
I can count on one hand the number whom I've gotten along with. And they're both regulars at Townhall & have been for some time. And NEITHER of them is like the The Gay Goy Brothers, Jack & Clint.
Mike Rogers | 2.27.12 @ 9:04AM
Santorum may not be perfect, and may have made a few transgressions against the constitution in his career, but he understands better than most what those limits are, and I suspect that, as president, he would not cross them.
The Ron Paul supporters here must be disturbed at his unholy alliance with Mittens. That should be a sign that he is for sale just as much as any other insider, and possibly more than some.
irish19| 2.27.12 @ 11:08AM
The ronulans here are mostly just plain disturbed.
Con Chef (NB) | 2.27.12 @ 11:28AM
"Paul Trek II: The Wrath of Ron"
I can't remember if I saw someone write that here or on Townhall, but I thought it was hilarious!
Nick099| 2.27.12 @ 6:04PM
THAT was hilarious!!!!
Nick| 2.27.12 @ 11:35PM
That was by yours truly, Con Chef (NB).
Glad you liked it!
Dick Nome| 2.27.12 @ 12:00PM
The Paulbots are are getting their tinfoil hats retuned. They have to readjust for a Romney/ Paul ticket.
Con Chef (NB) | 2.27.12 @ 12:08PM
I will literally crap myself with glee if that comes to pass. Dr. Dementia, faux lesser god of conservatism, gets on the ticket with Mittens. Two fake conservative peas in a pod.
Occam's Tool| 2.27.12 @ 12:47PM
Well, it will be his Son Rand on the ticket with Mittens, I believe, but the same difference to Ronulans like Clint. Amusement will follow. Have you noted how his assaults are more on Santorum and less on Mittens, recently?
Con Chef (NB) | 2.27.12 @ 1:09PM
Oh, yeah. I've noticed. Jackboot's also conspicuous by his absence today. Maybe he taste tested the KoolAid a little too early.
Mike Hawk| 2.27.12 @ 3:35PM
Clint the Phony TPINO must have voted for Bob (with one 'o') Casey over Rick Santorum in '06. His venom is such that one can only conclude he supported the Liberal Democrat over the Conservative Republican.
Nick099| 2.27.12 @ 6:03PM
LOL!!!!
k. bourg| 2.27.12 @ 9:14AM
If Santorum starts to win the primary, they will try for a brokered convention. If this doesn't work, Paul will run as a third party candidate. Those in power want either Romney or Obama. Gee, I wonder why?
Doctor Right| 2.27.12 @ 9:16AM
The only people who aren't talking about the monstrosity called "ObamaCare" are the Liberal media and pundits.
It's on the minds of everyone I know. Romney says he'll do what he can to gut it; ditto Santorum and Gingrich.
Surrender-Monkey Ron Paul is silent on ObamaCare.
Not sure who Krauthammer is talking about..?
Garfield| 2.27.12 @ 2:16PM
Romney has also said he won't repeal it. Then he has also said he will repeal it.
We can count on Gingrich and Santorum, but not Romney.
J.C.Eaton| 2.27.12 @ 4:55PM
Mitt Romney is George W. Bush with better hair.
Vern Crisler | 2.27.12 @ 9:28AM
Charles Krauthammer is an establishment Republican; nuff said.
Nock| 2.27.12 @ 9:44AM
Establishment NeoCon chickenhawk who loves quagmires, you mean. Giggedy.
Vern Crisler| 2.27.12 @ 10:21AM
He has good foreign policy views, not like blame-America-first Paulistas.
Rich Birkett | 2.29.12 @ 6:15PM
I'm tired of foreign policy hawks who criticize anyone who tries to understand the underlying reasons and motivations of US government's adversaries, and label them "appeasers" and "blame America firsters". Only advocates of perpetual conflict blame the messengers.
Occam's Tool| 2.27.12 @ 12:48PM
Shut up, Clint. Use your real monicker, Nocklehead.
Ricky Santorum| 2.27.12 @ 9:43AM
Luckily I... I was able to interpret these feelings correctly. Loss of essence.
Peppermint Tea| 2.27.12 @ 9:52AM
@ricky, save your fluids by quit p!ssing here.
@WRT, I feel your dilemma. Responsible America feels your dilemma. Can we vote for a hybrid of the top 4? Romney's prep and business acumen, Santorum's faith and conservatism, Paul's economics, Newt's fearlessness and volleying.
Bill| 2.27.12 @ 10:01AM
Guess Who?
voted for
1. Raising the debt ceiling 5 times
2. Planned Parenthood
3. Medicare Part D
4. NCLB
5. Bridge to nowhere
voted against
1. "Right-to-Work" law
Ans: Ricky "Keystone big-government pro-union RINO" Santorum
Dai Alanye | 2.27.12 @ 10:33AM
Poor Bill. Originality is not his ideal.
Dai Alanye | 2.27.12 @ 10:34AM
Nor accuracy.
Lee Ghume| 2.27.12 @ 1:43PM
Must have studied with Clint.
Bill| 2.27.12 @ 2:58PM
alright, RINO lovers, they all are facts, not fictions.
Dick Nome| 2.27.12 @ 3:31PM
fiction
Bill| 2.27.12 @ 4:41PM
Santorum voted against the "Right-to-Work" law, and those labor unions will spend millons of dollars destroying him if he gets the GOP nod. Unlike Gingrich, Santorum never mentions his stance on big labor unions because Santorum cannot offend his beloved labor union bosses.
Nick099| 2.27.12 @ 6:02PM
You are correct. Santorum did vote against right to work. He does admit it. Actually you are factually correct on the other votes as well....despite what other may wish to believe.
Bill| 2.27.12 @ 6:17PM
I love you brother, Nick099.
Nick| 2.27.12 @ 11:28PM
"That nigger lover President Clinton had the pen and vetoed so many good bills passed by the Gingrich-led Congress."
- Written by Bill, in the Time for Newt to Do the Honorable Thing thread:
http://spectator.org/archives/.....ent_749403
You're a moron and a racist, Bill.
GO AWAY!
Patrick| 2.27.12 @ 10:13AM
Heh. Santorum looks like a midnight cowboy.
spoofproof| 2.27.12 @ 10:17AM
I live in a town of 2800 people served by 2 doctors. Both of them have already installed the software that goes w/Obamacare. They complained about it but they did it. Medicine is no longer an art, it's a business. People are forgetting that Bernake's printing-press funny money has been used to buy the phase-in Obamacare. The wickedness of these Big Labor Big Government elitists in bottomless. Richard "The Tyrant" Trumka is licking his bureaucracy-loving chops.
Occam's Tool| 2.27.12 @ 12:49PM
Yes, because they didn't want to get dinged. However, if they can't make money, they will leave, as you know.
Al Adab| 2.27.12 @ 3:19PM
My Doctor, who never took Medicare, has left his practice due to the insidious control attached to Obie-care. He is surely not alone.
darcy| 2.28.12 @ 3:00AM
This is grievous to hear, Al Adab; and as you say, he is but one of many.
The outrages against freedom are targeted to destroy a people incrementally -- so that the frog in the kettle succumbs of his own free will, feeling, knowing, fearing, that no exertion of his own can effect escape.
Nevertheless --
The memory of 1776, of 1773 Boston, of the 1765 Stamp Act repudiation -- are becoming real to us who suffer almost daily the intolerable acts of despotism (dressed in the mantra of fairness and equality) that effuse from our nation's capital.
spoofproof| 2.27.12 @ 10:25AM
Allow me to repost the last two sentences this time with the correct preposition & verb:
People are forgetting that Bernake's printing-press funny money has been used to buy the phase-in OF Obamacare. The wickedness of these Big Labor Big Government elitists IS bottomless. Richard "The Tyrant" Trumka is licking his bureaucracy-loving chops.
JimW9| 2.27.12 @ 11:07AM
Judging by some polls that reveal a slim majority of Republicans feel that the issues surrounding Obama's identity need to be aired and resolved, many, if not most, of those who hold these beliefs are likely Tea Party members. The sweeping under the rug of this monumental issue has led, I believe, to great disillusionment of people who consider themselves Tea Party members. Much of the unifying power of this movement has fizzled over this abrogation of fundamental constitutional concerns and to the lack of engagement by Tea Party members in the current primary process.
Al Adab| 2.27.12 @ 3:21PM
If anyone noticed over the weekend, apparently the administration has bought off the Georgia suit over citizenship by, get this, licensing two new nuclear plants for GA. Everyone has a price it seems.
Nick099| 2.27.12 @ 5:59PM
Please clarify.
Nick099| 2.27.12 @ 6:00PM
No one has swept this issue under the rug. It is just the Media picking and choosing what they wish to publicize: last week it was contraception.
Floyd Looney | 2.27.12 @ 11:26AM
Santorum is the only serious about repealing it.
Hardly Core| 2.27.12 @ 12:23PM
You write, about Santorum, “First, unlike his primary competitor, Mitt Romney, he's a genuine conservative.”
Now, THAT’S funny! I especially like your emphasis on “genuine”. Um, “Industrial policy”, aka zero taxes for manufacturing companies---that’s GENUINELY conservative? Anti right-to-work laws?
Ricky boy MAY be conservative on social issues, but he’s far from it when it comes to economic ones.
By the way—he’s a SENATOR. Check your history, especially how many GOP senators were elected president, compared to governors. The Rickster is ALREADY toast.
When Romney is sworn in as president, there’s no way he’s NOT going to do his darnedest to repeal Obamacare. Whatever comes next, though, is debatable, and I trust the system ---Congress and the prez---will come up with an acceptable fix to the bleeding, that government involvement in healthcare IS.
I can see how it’s possible for the voters, come November, to throw the bums out, and with Paul Ryan, Mitch McConnell and Mitt Romney working together, start to bring fiscal sanity to ALL federal programs.
Emphasis on START.
The essential question is always, “Who’s got the power?”
And, in the great fiscal-social-foreign policy “chess game” played in the seat of power, Washington D.C., the sine qua non is---GET ELECTED! So, since the president is SO POWERFUL a player, for the sake of the survival of the still-free nation, the prime directive is REMOVE OBAMA!
This can’t be emphasized enough! When Santorum goes off the rails in his criticism of Romney---read “Right Turn”, Jennifer Rubin’s blog today about this---he’s showing how he doesn’t get this.
Romney and Santorum are on the SAME TEAM, whose sole purpose is to BEAT OBAMA!
Rick doesn’t have the best interests of America in mind, with his self-serving, mindless, over the top rhetoric about Mitt! I’ll say it—he’s NOT being a patriotic conservative.
And, that’s the GENUINE truth.
Controse| 2.27.12 @ 1:28PM
I fear you do capitalize too much.
Hardly Core| 2.27.12 @ 1:31PM
Sorry. But I don't know how to use italics in the comment section, or I would.
How else can I emphasize words I want to highlight?
Help.
Occam's Tool| 2.27.12 @ 12:50PM
Well, if I recall, the Greatest Republican President of all was a 1 term Congressman before being elected President.
Controse| 2.27.12 @ 1:26PM
There is no mystery as to why Ron Paul is not out front on ObamaCare. Rand Paul is in line to be Romney's VP choice. It is as plain as the nose on your face. That is the only explanation for why the raging libertarian has not raged against ObamaCare.
LarryK| 2.27.12 @ 1:45PM
""Santorum had outlined his objections to Obamacare, a student blindsided him with a 2009 "study" purporting to show that "50 to 100,000 uninsured Americans" die every year for lack of health insurance.""
Cause of Death: Lack of Health Insurance
Seriously?
Just like the liberal that stated on one of the morning "news" shows- "Every second a homeless person dies in America!"
Really>> That would mean 31,536,000 homeless people die in America every year. IN 10 years that would be 315,360,000 dead people.
Good thing I have a home and limited health insurance. I'll live forever. (yea, right!)
Worried for the country| 2.27.12 @ 1:58PM
This article is pure BS. Every candidate will repeal Obamacare. They all know the importance of repeal and the danger of Obamacare and they all talk about it.
The facts don't support your case and they don't hold water.
Garfield| 2.27.12 @ 2:15PM
Actually Romney has said he won't repeal Obamacare in some speeches.
Worried for the country| 2.27.12 @ 3:19PM
Wrong.
He has been consistent on the repeal. His opponents try to sow seeds of doubt based on comments by Norm Coleman that the campaign immediately disavowed. Typical, Axelrod tactics.
Quartermaster| 2.27.12 @ 7:27PM
I wish he had been consistent, but he has not. Like so many things, we have no real idea where he stands.
Purp| 2.27.12 @ 2:11PM
This issue is dying because everyone needs healthcare and the more people consider it, the more they realize we'll be broke if we don't do something like Obamacare, and that it isn't as bad as first portrayed by Republicant naysayers.
Moreover, when everyone realizes that Republicants want to use the power of the government to force people to have sex how they want, marry whom the government says is okay, and stick a vaginal probe inside a woman to help "convince" her of her evil ways before having an abortion, people realize that the Republicants are hypocrites and none to listen to regarding mandates.
Garfield| 2.27.12 @ 2:14PM
Seriously, if you honestly believe the bull the Democrats are saying, I've got a bridge to sell you on Saturn, and I think you'd be gullable enough to buy that bridge.
Purp| 2.28.12 @ 1:31PM
I said it, no one else had to tell me what to say... unlike Fixed News viewers apparently. Why else would you claim that I can't create my own opinion, unless you can't yourself?
From the Desk of Media Matters| 2.28.12 @ 4:51PM
Pierre "Purp" Pelosi,
We are aware we promised you we would not use your proper name, 'Petey', but we are losing our patience trying to get your attention in order to focus on the fact you are embarrassing us during this crisis when we are under attack.
Even bottom rung Media Matters parrots know there is no reason why MEDICAL INSURANCE should be in the domain of employers.
Even bottom rung Media Matters parrots know there is no reason why MEDICAL INSURANCE is not purchased by citizens just like AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE or HOME OWNER'S INSURANCE or LIFE INSURANCE is purchased.
Even bottom rung Media Matters parrots know HEALTH CARE refers to the behavior that citizens engage in as it relates to their own health.
We need you to pull your head out of the orificial cavity we all here at Media Matters are obsessed with so that we can fool the citizens into paying for the MEDICAL INSURANCE necessary for dealing with the consequences of our behavior resulting in our health problems such as our rodent-scratched fecal sewer pipes and our lower jaw teabagged dislocations and our infestations of AIDS.
You of all bottom rung Media Matters parrots should be more particularly acutely aware of this than just about anyone else on the face of the earth.
- MM staff
Dick Nome| 2.27.12 @ 3:30PM
You have some serious issues you twirp. I guess you like nanny gummint running your life too because you sure as hell can't fend for yourself.
Purp| 2.28.12 @ 1:32PM
So you'd rather have daddy gummint telling you where you have to stick a probe? Ya, that's so much better, huh? And you say I have serious problems? Look in the mirror, pal.
Nick099| 2.27.12 @ 5:56PM
You are delusional. Now put on your tin foil hat and take your meds.
Purp| 2.28.12 @ 1:33PM
What a clever reply - NOT. Go learn something.
Rich Birkett | 2.29.12 @ 6:05PM
Mandating health insurance is NOT the way to control health care costs. More competition is the answer, not less competition that results from heaping more government regulation on top of the regulation that caused the high costs in the first place.
Nick099| 2.27.12 @ 5:55PM
Is Mr. Catron serious???? Has he ever heard Gingrich speak about Obamacare???? Ooops! I forgot, this guy hates Newt...judging by his previous articles. Which of course nullifies this entire article.
David| 2.27.12 @ 9:28PM
True, all the candidates are SAYING they will repeal Obamacare.
But, which one of them do you TRUST most to be behind it 100% and actually do it?
Contrary to what many have said here, Santorum and Newt are NOT the same on the issue.
Please recall that Romney and Newt HAVE SUPPORTED an individual mandate for health insurance for many years, and now claim they do not.
Santorum NEVER has supported it.
I think that answers the question of who to trust, and which one has had the best judgment on this issue over the years.
Rich Birkett | 2.29.12 @ 5:50PM
I only trust Ron Paul to resist the forces of Washington lobbyists: Pharma, AMA, and large insurance companies who all benefit from ADA.
Rich Birkett | 2.29.12 @ 5:57PM
Oops. That should have been ACA aka Obamneycare
POST American| 2.27.12 @ 11:07PM
"Notice once again, as the REAL
campaign approaches, the REAL
issues 'disappear'."
Santorum backed the ANTI-Constitutional
NDAA 1021 ---and is getting away with it.
ALLLLLLL we need to know about
-----------------TTT-Rick Sanitarium-------------------.
Scott Ryan| 2.28.12 @ 12:10AM
Newt wants YOU to vote Santorum in Michigan (opinion)
http://www.TableOfWisdom.com
Tenn SLim| 2.28.12 @ 9:52AM
Folks, the answers to the Kruauth... question is simple.
The GOP "other 3" really do not believe they can undo the Obamacare Law. A read of the final text and the Time Lines available on HHS....Gov show that the entanglements of the law are firmly in place.
IF the GOP continue to abviscat the issues, w/o full face confrontation on SPECIFICS the 2012 November election will be an OB landslide.
The LEFT is NOT going to go quietly into the night.
Semper Fi
Beppo| 2.28.12 @ 10:49AM
The problem with the "majority want to kill the ACA" is that it's way too simplistic because this includes a lot of people who'd like even more extreme. Dig down into the entrails of the act and by wide margins the public applauds its main features. And guess what Obama won't be running on the ACA but on things like no caps on coverage or no cancellation of coverage.
shelfos| 2.28.12 @ 11:11AM
I don't usually post links but this one is very telling about how Obama feels towards Romney vs Santorum. Thought some of you might appreciate it:
http://darinscott.blogspot.com.....house.html
Paul in Colorado| 2.28.12 @ 12:30PM
When the Supreme Court rules the individual mandate unconstitutional and Obama defies the ruling and proceeds with implimentation, there will no ignoring the issue. Assuming the Republicans call him on it, we are very likely to have a constitutional crisis this summer, and in the middle of his re-election campaign all of the old wounds will be re-opened, with his essential lawlessness vividly displayed for the voters.
bcb| 2.28.12 @ 3:36PM
what the author fails to mention,is that the united states is the only,non- third world country that does not provide basic healthcare for it;s citizens.
shipley130| 2.28.12 @ 5:27PM
Wrong.
shipley130| 2.28.12 @ 5:27PM
This is the way I see it. Rick is talking Obamacare because he was not responsible for Romneycare or Obamacare. But Rick can't brag about concepts such as small government related to other spending. We all know who we should be considering and it's not the pretty boys of the GOP.
POST American| 2.28.12 @ 10:09PM
----------------BOTTOMLESS LINE--------------------
"Rick Santorum BACKED the ANTI-Constitutional,
chillingly North Korean, NDAA 1021
----and --IS-- GETTING AWAY WITH IT."
-POST American
rdman| 2.29.12 @ 4:09PM
Santorum is debating his points at this point in time because he's stupid.
Why provide Obama your debating strategies so he can prepare his rebuttal points... the only thing we would "see" in Ricky's counter would be "deer eyes in the headlights!!"
Tom Calarco| 2.29.12 @ 4:14PM
The problem is not national healthcare -- Obamacare is a stupid euphemism -- it's the collusion between Big Phara, the AMA, the FDA, and the Insurance companies that's the problem.
Matt| 2.29.12 @ 4:33PM
So Mr. Catron, how long have you been working on the Santorum campaign? That's the only thing that makes any sense for anyone to call Mr. Santorum a conservative of any kind, let alone a "genuine conservative." The first example is of course Part D. I know that some people will try to call it a "success story, " but this just shows that they are not conservatives either. Government doesn't have any business at all being involved in health insurance. That is the point. Also, there's NCLB for which Santorum voted also. A horrendous bill which doubled the dep't of education, another department that should not exist in the Federal government. These are bad, but not near as bad as Santorum voting for the Patriot Act. For Santorum to be praised for saying that Obamacare is the biggest issue in this race is to ignore what's happening to individual freedom in America. He claims to stand for conservative issues, but what he means is he's all for individual freedom as long as you agree with him. If you live in another country or aren't part of his religion then you don't deserve those same rights. Santorum has forfeit his part in conservative America when he is so willing to break his oath of office and favor political parties over principles.
Rich Birkett | 2.29.12 @ 5:39PM
It's funny to hear Santorum talk about freedom and coercion, words of the libertarian lexicon, when he so explicitly condemns libertarianism and his fight to keep its influence out of the Republican Party. Ron Paul's opposition to Obamneycare is so predictable, maybe he thinks its so obvious he doesn't need to remind anyone. I agree Paul needs to talk more about it to inform those voters who can't make the connection.
chris| 2.29.12 @ 8:39PM
Maybe no one noticed Santorum's talking about Obamacare because 98% of his focus revoles around his wish for government intrusions into our bedrooms and restricting women's rights.