Tag Archives: Romneycare

Romney’s Royal ‘We’ — and ‘Personal Responsibility’ – Terry Jeffrey – Townhall Conservative Columnists

http://townhall.com/columnists/terryjeffrey/2012/04/04/creators_oped/page/full/

Advertisements

Leave a comment

Filed under 2012 elections, Activism, Current events, Obamacare, Politics

Politico:Romney advisors think Romneycare will help him with independents by showing his ”compassion” #obamacare #2012 #teaparty

Mitt Romney or not, GOP is coming for ‘Obamacare’ – Alexander Burns – POLITICO.com

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0312/74629_Page2.html

…..“The debate right now is fundamental and there’s one candidate in this race who can actually make the contrast that is necessary to take the Republican position, conservative position,” Santorum said outside the Supreme Court on Monday. “There is one candidate who is disqualified to make the case.”

RRD:I am not a Santorum supporter,(he has problems of his own),but Santorum,(and Gary Johnson and Ron Paul,when you can find coverage of them),are correct,this is a fundamental moral issue and one of Individual Rights ,and the GOP is reverting full-bore to its suicidal mee-tooism that helped give us Obamacare.

For why this is a disaster see:

“Obama’s Atomic Bomb: The Ideological Clarity of the Democratic Agenda” by John David Lewis

http://www.theobjectivestandard.com/issues/2009-fall/obamas-atomic-bomb.asp

….”Romney and his aides view things differently: Since the outset of his 2012 run, they have privately predicted that “Romneycare” would be an asset in the general election that could help cast Romney as a kinder, gentler kind of Republican that swing voters can embrace.

More recently, Romney has sought to reassure conservatives by vowing to scrap the federal law “root and branch,” though he has also pointed to the Massachusetts law as an example of his compassion as a governor.”

RRD:From the “Etch-a-sketch” comment to this,(assuming it is accurate),the man’s own campaign is vindicating the predictions and fears of his critics.

….”Regardless of how swing voters ultimately view the Massachusetts law, it still presents a quandary for the rest of the Republican Party, which has typically been able to paint in the broadest of rhetorical strokes when discussing the federal law and its impact on individual rights. And softening Romney’s image is not necessarily an urgent priority for Republicans focused on the House and Senate.”…

RRD:Translation:Romney will kick the legs out from under our efforts to defeat statism,and Republicans in the House and Senate are frightened that Romney will so alienate the GOP Base that they will not vote,and Congressional Republicans will be slaughtered in 2012.
If true,such is the “practicality” of the GOP.

“Colorado Attorney General John Suthers, a Romney endorser who has also brought suit against the federal law, said that the party would have to be “slightly more nuanced” in its health care messaging with Romney at the top of the ticket.

RRD:Those who participated in the 2008 campaign know exactly what is meant by “nuanced”:Self-defeating hypocritical partisanship that,at best,undercuts the efforts of those of us who oppose and condemn the Individual Mandate on principle,and at worst leads some to sell their souls by shilling for a position that they never would have taken had not a Republican taken it.

There are people that, as a matter of public policy, think they shouldn’t be required by anybody to do anything,” he said. “As a matter of public policy, those guys are goners. But I think there’s a lot of people in between that understand the difference, where states can make their own decisions.”

RRD:”There are people that, as a matter of public policy, think they shouldn’t be required by anybody to do anything”,indeed,they include the Founding Fathers,Objectivists,Libertarians,and a significant portion of the Teaparty and Conservatives;including some of the most dedicated,passionate and energetic activists.And what does he mean by “goners”?That they will not vote for Romney?
Not true,I will not,but I know many who believe that Romney is the “lesser of two evils”.
Or does he mean “goners” in that they are marginal figures?If the latter then he has it backwards:the argument that the Individual Mandate violates individual rights is what has motivated people to oppose it,(due to their vestigial knowledge of,and respect for,the concept of individual rights),it is the narrow,legalistic argument that does not have wide backing.(And don’t get me started on the absurdist irony of the “states can make their own decisions”;on

image

what?Whether to violate individual rights?On the Individual Mandate?On Forced segregation?On Forced abortions?On Eugenics?On Slavery?)

image

Leave a comment

Filed under 2012 elections, Activism, Current events, Obamacare

Demint doesn’t like #obamacare but glad Obama got something done #teaparty #tlot #2012

image

RRD:Well no,Demint isn’t that consistent.Remember,socialized medicine is ok on the state level,but not on the federal level.
At least that will be the new Republican plank if Romney gets in.
I’m glad I’m a registered independent at times like these.

DeMint walks fine line on Romney health plan – The Hill’s Ballot Box

http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/gop-presidential-primary/218179-demint-walks-fine-line-on-romney-health-plan

…..”When DeMint met with Romney on Thursday, he said he wasn’t bothered by the GOP front-runner’s role in enacting healthcare reform in Massachusetts that’s not dissimilar to the president’s national plan.

“That comparison is not a problem for me,” DeMint said. “I still don’t like the plan the way it ended up in Massachusetts, but I like the fact he tried to solve the problem.”….

Leave a comment

Filed under 2012 elections, Activism, Current events

Mitt ”inevitable” Romney,defeated in Alabama,Mississippi & Tennessee GOP primaries.

The ”inevitable” candidate gets rejected by the base again.

RRD:Romney stands on,and for no principle other than his “conservative case for the Individual Mandate”,and the belief that “the Earth is getting warmer”,and man is largely to blame.(fn1)

Yet despite the fact that Romney has no convictions other than liberal ones,people continue to be suprised when he keeps losing.

While some of Santorum’s Mississippi & Alabama supporters are no doubt motivated by agreement with some or all of Santorum’s platform,others,(& perhaps more than one would think),are motivated by opposition to Romney & Romney’s great ”achievement”:Romneycare.

Erikson seems to think that more of the voters were motivated by a desire to stop Romney,than by support of Santorum.

I have excerpted the key parts below,& I summarize some parts.

Romney came in third,in Alabama & Mississippi.

Not Closing the Deal

http://www.redstate.com/erick/2012/03/14/not-closing-the-deal/

….”Yesterday, Mitt Romney went on CNN and told Wolf Blitzer that Rick Santorum’s campaign ‘was coming to a desperate end.’ That seems more apt this morning to Romney’s southern campaign.”….

…”Newt Gingrich last night proved he is neither a regional candidate nor a spoiler. ”…….”Gingrich could not win the deep south. He won Georgia and South Carolina. A Catholic yankee from Pennsylvania won Tennessee, Alabama, Mississippi, and will probably win Louisiana. Even with Gingrich in the race, Santorum beat Romney. He was no spoiler. ”….

…” The striking thing about the exits, which over all captured the race fairly well, is that Santorum’s voters made up their mind in the last few weeks. In other words, Santorum’s voters made up their minds as Romney was winning Arizona, Michigan, and Ohio. Santorum’s vote is not about Santorum so much as it is about stopping Romney.”….

….”No doubt buoyed by exit polling yesterday, the Romney campaign made sure everyone knew they could seriously win Mississippi. By 8pm, Eric Fehrnstrom was on CNN telling Anderson Cooper that no one really thought Romney would win Alabama or Mississippi.”….

…”In heavily Republican Madison County, MS, voter turn out barely topped 7,000 voters. In 2008, when the GOP contest was done and everyone knew McCain would be the nominee, 10,500 people still turned out to vote for McCain. Yes, more Republicans turned out to vote McCain in 2008 than Romney in 2012. ”…..

Footnotes:

fn1

Though,interestingly,the closer we move to the GOP convention,the less convinced Romney is of man’s role in Global Warming.One wonders what will happen if he gets the nomination.Will Man’s role increase again?

Leave a comment

Filed under 2012 elections, Activism, Current events

#CNNdebate transcript for #scprimary #Romney #Newt & #Santorum on #Obamacare

South Carolina GOP CNN debate, Jan. 19, 2012. Transcript – Lynn Sweet

http://blogs.suntimes.com/sweet/2012/01/south_carolina_gop_cnn_debate_.html

….”Number two,we have to go after a complete repeal. (Cheers, applause.) And that’s going to have to have to happen — that — that’s going to have to happen with — with a House and a Senate, hopefully that are Republican. If we don’t have a Republican majority, I think we’re going to be able to convince some Democrats that when the American people stand up loud and clear and say, we do not want “Obamacare,” we do not want the higher taxes, we do not want a $500 billion cut in Medicare to pay for “Obamacare,” I think you’re going to see the American people stand with our president and say, let’s get rid of “Obamacare.”

But we’ll replace it. And I’ve — and I’ve laid out what I’ll replace it with. First, it’s a bill that does care for people that have pre-existing conditions. If they’ve got a pre-existing condition and they’ve been previously insured, they won’t be denied insurance going forward.

Secondly, I’ll allow people to own their own insurance rather than just be able to get it from their employer. I want people to be able to take their insurance with them if they go from job to job. (Applause.) So — so we’ll make it work in the way that’s designed to have health care act like a market, a consumer market, as opposed to have it run like Amtrak and the Post Office. That’s what’s at risk — (applause) — at stake here.

Do we — we go back to this. Ours is the party of free enterprise, freedom, markets, consumer choice. Theirs is the party of government knowledge, government domination, where Barack Obama believes that he knows better for the American people what’s best for them. He’s wrong. We’re right. That’s why we’re going to win. (Applause.)

MR. KING: Mr. Speaker, you heard the skepticism. It’s a Southern Republican voter. But he’s skeptical, and he knows how Washington works.

MR. GINGRICH: Well, sure.

MR. KING: He’s watched Washington work. He’s asked: Can it be reversed in its entirety. You — you were the speaker of the House. You understand how this works. How? How can it be repealed in this current political environment?

MR. GINGRICH: Well, let me say, first of all, if you’ve watched Washington and you’re not skeptical, you haven’t learned anything. (Laughter, applause.) I mean, this — this system is a total mess right now.

Second, can you get it repealed in total? Sure. You have to elect a House, a Senate and a president committed to that. It has to be a major part of the fall campaign. And I think that, frankly, on our side with any of us, it’s going to be a major part of the fall campaign. The American people are frightened of bureaucratic centralized medicine, they deeply distrust Washington, and the pressure will be to repeal it.

And a lot of what Governor Romney has said I think is actually pretty good, sound stuff for part of the replacement. I would always repeal all of it, because I so deeply distrust the congressional staffs that I would not want them to be able to pick and choose which things they kept.

But let me make one observation. You raised a good example. Why is President Obama for young people being allowed to stay on their parents’ insurance until 26? Because he can’t get any jobs for them to go out and buy their own insurance. (Cheers, applause.)

I mean, I — I have an — I have an offer — I have an offer to the parents of America: Elect us, and your kids will be able to move out, because they’ll have work. (Cheers, applause.)

MR. KING: (Laughs.) Let’s — (inaudible) — Senator Santorum, you heard Governor Romney and you heard Speaker Gingrich. Do you trust them, if one of them is the Republican Party’s nominee, and potentially the next president of the United States, to repeal this law?

MR. SANTORUM: The biggest — the biggest thing we have to do is elect a president. I think Newt’s right. The problem is that two of the people up here would be very difficult to elect on, I think, the most important issue that this country is dealing with right now, which is the robbing of our freedom because of “Obamacare.”

Governor Romney tells a very nice story about what his plan is now. It wasn’t his plan when he was in a position to do a plan. When he was governor of Massachusetts, he put forth “Romneycare,” which was not a bottom-up, free-market system. It was a government-run health care system that was the basis of “Obamacare.” And it has been an abject failure, and he has stood by it.

He’s stood by the fact that it’s $8 billion more expensive — (applause) — than under the current law. He’s stood by the fact that Massachusetts has the highest health insurance premiums of any state in the country; it is 27 percent more expensive than the average state in the country. Doctors — if you’re in the Massachusetts health care system, over 50 percent of the doctors now are not seeing new patients — primary care doctors are not seeing new patients. Those who do get to see a patient are waiting 44 days, on average, for the care.

It is an abject disaster.

He’s standing by it, and he’s going to have to have to run against a president — he’s going to have to run against a president who’s going to say, well, look, look at what you did for Massachusetts, and you’re the one criticizing me for what I’ve done? I used your model for it.

And then — (cheers, applause) — then we have Speaker Gingrich, who has been for an individual mandate, not back in the time that just was — Heritage was floating around in the ’90s, but as late as — comments (since/in ?) 2008, just a few years ago, he stood up and said that we should have an individual mandate or post a $150,000 bond. How many $150,000 bondholders do we have here who can post a bond for their health insurance?

These are two folks who don’t present the clear contrast that I do, who was the author of health savings accounts, which is the primary basis of every single — (cheers, applause) — conservative reform of health care. I was the author of it back in 1991 and ’92, 20 years ago. I’ve been fighting for health reform, private-sector, bottom-up, the way America works best, for 20 years, while these two guys were playing footsies with the left. (Cheers, applause.)

MR. KING: I want to bring Congressman Paul — I’ll bring him into the discussion in just a moment, but Senator Santorum directly challenged the governor and then the speaker. Governor, you first.

MR. ROMNEY: Well, so much of what the senator said was wrong. Let me mention a few of the things.

First of all, the system in my state is not a government-run system. Ninety-eight — 92 percent of the people had their own insurance before the system was put in place, and nothing changed for them. They still had the same private insurance. And the 8 percent of the uninsured, they bought private insurance, not government insurance. And the people in the state still favor the plan three to one.

And it certainly doesn’t work perfectly. Massachusetts, by the way, had the highest insurance costs before the plan was put in place and after, but fortunately, the rate of growth has slowed down a little less than the overall nation. And one of the things I was proud of is that individuals who wanted to buy their own insurance saw their rates –when they were not part of a big group — saw their rates drop by some 40 percent with our plan.

Is it perfect? Absolutely not. But I do believe that having been there, having been on the front lines, showing that I have compassion for people that don’t have insurance but that the Obama plan is a 2,700-page, massive tax increase, Medicare-cutting monster, I know how to cut it. I’ll eliminate it. I will repeal is and I’ll return the — I’ll return the power to the states, where the power for caring for the uninsured ought to reside constitutionally. Thank you.

MR. SANTORUM: Yeah, I’d like —

MR. KING: Senator Santorum, he says your facts are wrong.

MR. SANTORUM: Well, they’re simply not wrong. The fact is that, yes, you’re right, Governor Romney, 92 percent of people did have health insurance in Massachusetts, but that wasn’t private-sector health insurance. A lot of those people were, as you know, on Medicare and Medicaid, so they’re already on government insurance, and you just expanded it, in fact. Over half the people who came on the rolls since you put “Romneycare” into effect are fully subsidized by the state of Massachusetts, and a lot of those are on the Medicaid program. So the idea that you have created this marketplace and — and — with this government-run health care system where you have very prescriptive programs about reimbursement rates, you have a very prescriptive program just like what President Obama is trying to put in place here, you’re arguing for a plan — you’re defending a plan that is top-down. It is not a free-market health care system. It is not bottom-up. It is prescriptive in government. It was the basis for “Obamacare.” And we do not draw a distinction that it’s going to be effective for us just because it was the state level, not the federal level. (Applause.)

MR. ROMNEY: (Chuckles.)

MR. KING: If you want, Governor, quickly.

MR. ROMNEY: Sure, absolutely.

First of all, as you probably know, Medicaid is not a state program. All right?

MR. SANTORUM: Of course it is. It’s a state and federal program.

MR. ROMNEY: Medicaid is as demanded by the federal government, and it is — it’s — it is a mandate —

MR. SANTORUM: (Off mic.)

MR. ROMNEY: — it’s a mandate by the federal government and it’s shared 50/50 state and federal. The people of Massachusetts who are on Medicaid, I would like to end that program at the federal level, take the Medicaid dollars and return them to the states, and allow states — states to craft their own plans.

That would make the plan we had in Massachusetts a heck of a lot better. My view is, get the federal government out of Medicaid, get it out of health care, return it to the states. And if you want to go be governor of Massachusetts, fine. But I want to be president, and let states take responsibility for their own plan. (Cheers, applause.)

MR. KING: Mr. Speaker, it may seem like a while ago, Mr. Speaker, but Senator Santorum made the point, in his view, you don’t have credibility on this.

MR. GINGRICH: No, what he — what he said, which I found mildly amazing, was that he thought I would have a hard time debating Barack Obama over health care. Now, in fact, I — as Republican whip, I led the charge against “Hillarycare” in the House. As speaker of the House, I helped preside over the conference which wrote into law his idea on health savings accounts. So I was delighted to help him get it to be law. (Applause.) And — and the fact is, I helped found the Center for Health Transformation. I wrote a book called “Saving lives and Saving Money” in 2002. You can go to healthtransformation.net, and you will see hundreds of ideas — none of which resemble Barack Obama’s programs.

So I’d be quite happy to have a three-hour Lincoln-Douglas-style debate with Barack Obama. I’d let him use a teleprompter. I’ll just rely on knowledge. We’ll do fine. (Cheers, applause.)

MR. KING: Senator, you’re — I want to bring Congressman Paul in. You’re shaking your head. Quickly.

MR. SANTORUM: The core of “Obamacare” is an individual mandate. It is what is being litigated in the Supreme Court right now. It is government top-down telling every business and every American what kind of health care that you will have. That is the problem with “Obamacare” at the core of it. And the speaker supported it repeatedly for a 10-year period. So when he goes and says, I can, you know, run rings around President Obama in a Lincoln-Douglas debate, you can’t run rings around the fact, Newt, that you supported the primary core basis of what President Obama’s put in place.

MR. GINGRICH: Look, just one — one brief comment. One —

MR. KING: All right, quickly, Mr. Speaker. The Congressman is getting lonely down here. Let’s go.

(Applause.)

MR. GINGRICH: Well, one — just one brief comment. Of course you can. I can say, you know, I was wrong, and I figured it out; you were wrong, and you didn’t. (Cheers, applause.)

MR. SANTORUM: You held that — Newt — Newt, you held that position for over 10 years. And, you know, it’s not going to be the most attractive thing to go out there and say, you know, it took me 10 or 12 years to figure out I was wrong, when guys like Rick Santorum knew it was wrong from the beginning. (Cheers, applause.)

MR. KING: Congressman Paul, you have the floor. Do you trust these men to repeal “Obamacare”?

REP. PAUL: Thank you! (Laughter, applause.) I thought you were — I thought maybe you were prejudiced against doctors and a doctor that practiced medicine in the military or something. (Cheers, applause.)

No, I want to address the question. The gentleman asked whether he thinks we can repeal “Obamacare.” Theoretically, we can. The likelihood isn’t all that good. We can diminish some of the effect. But I’m more concerned about a bigger picture of what’s happening, and that is government involvement in medicine.

I — I had the privilege of practicing medicine in the early ’60s, before we had any government. It worked rather well, and there was nobody on the street suffering with no medical care. But Medicare and Medicaid came in and –and — and it just expanded. But even when we had the chance to cut back on it, when we had a Republican Congress and a Republican president, we — we gave them prescription drug programs. Senator Santorum supported it. (Laughs.) You know, that’s expanding the government! (Cheers, applause.) So — so it’s endless.

And the — and most of them are bankrupt. Prescription drugs, they — they’re not going to be financed; Medicare is not financeable; Medicaid’s in trouble. But nobody talks about where the money’s going to come from.

Now, even in my budget proposal — which is very, very tough, because I’m going to cut a trillion dollars the first year — but I try to really — (cheers, applause) — even though these programs should have never started that a lot of people are dependent on, I want to try to protect the people who are dependent on — on medical care.

Now, where does the money come? My suggestion is, look at some of the overseas spending that we don’t need to be doing. (Cheers, applause.) We have — we have troops in Korea since — since the Korean War, in Japan since World War II, in Germany since World War — those are subsidies to these countries. And we keep fighting these wars that don’t need to be fought, they’re undeclared, they never end. Newt pointed out, you know, World War II was won in less than four years; Afghanistan, we’re there for 10 years. Nobody says, where does the money come?We could work our way out of here and take care of these people on — with these medical needs, but we can’t do it with the current philosophy of the government taking care of everybody forever on medical care, cradle to grave, and being the policeman of the world.

We will get rid of all this government program, unfortunately because we’re going bankrupt and you’re going to have runaway inflation and our checks are going to bounce. And that’s going to be a lot worse problem than we’re facing tonight. (Cheers, applause.)

MR. KING: All right. I’m going to ask all of our candidates to stand by, our audience as well. We have a couple breaks tonight. We’re going to take one of them now.

One candidate on this stage suggested this week that two candidates should get out of the race. One of them listened. We’ll get the reaction from the other coming up.

And also coming up, this is just in: While we’ve been on the air having this debate, Speaker Gingrich has released his tax returns. He’s put them online. We’ll ask him what’s in them when we come back. (Cheers, applause.)….

Leave a comment

Filed under 2012 elections, Activism, Current events

Romney should not be attacked for being a Capitalist.He should be attacked for being a enemy of Freedom.

RRD:Many Objectivists,Libertarians & Conservatives have defended Mitt Romney’s actions at Bain Capitol

against the attacks leveled against him by Gingrich & Perry.

I agree with many of their arguments.I do not believe Romney should be damned for his actions at Bain Capitol.The attacks on Romney’s service at Bain Capitol are despicable attacks on Capitalism.But they are despicable because they are attacks on Capitalism &.the free-market,not because they are attacks on Mitt Romney,who himself is a despicable enemy of Capitalism,Freedom,Liberty,Free-Market Health Care & the American way of life.

Romney raped Massachusetts’s health care system to death,paved the way for Obamacare by acting as the left’s Window-dressing,and wants to make the ”the conservative case for the Individual Mandate.He also promotes the Global Warming hysteria.(see footnotes)The fact that he was a businessman makes him,(like Warren Buffett) A GREATER THREAT TO CAPITALISM THEN IF HE WERE A ALINSKITE LIKE OBAMA.The reason is that he helps to hide the true nature of socialism under a capitalist veneer.

The claim,made by some Romney supporters,that his business career is a ”good point” in his favor completely misses this crucial factor.

And they are not alone.

For some time I have known some individuals who see men like Gates,& Buffett & Steve Jobs as real life Hank Reardens.Either in ignorance of their politics,or because they are oblivious to them.

Some insist on seeing Hank Rearden in these men,when Rearden,for all his errors would never support the kinds of inexcusably statist positions they’ve taken.

For Buffett simply googling any of his obnoxious statements on taxes will do.Obama has invoked them often enough.For Gates the same.For Jobs see below:

Apple ditches U.S. Chamber – Lisa Lerer – POLITICO.com

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1009/27935.html

….”We strongly object to the Chamber’s recent comments [in] opposition the EPA’s effort to limit greenhouse gases,” wrote Catherine A. Novelli, the vice-president of worldwide government affairs at Apple. “Apple supports regulating greenhouse gas emissions, and it is frustrating to find the Chamber at odds with us in this effort.”…

And in a similar,though less defensible, vein,I have seen some people speaking of Romney’s career at Bain as if it something to be weighed in his favor.

They will speak as if ”on the one hand he was a businessman” & on the other:a statist criminal who destroyed Massachusetts’s health care system,a man who did more than almost any other single Republican to aid & abet the passage of socialized medicine, a man who wishes to make ”the conservative case for the individual mandate”,& who promotes the Global Warming hysteria.

The former cannot excuse,defend,or justify the latter.The former,in light of the latter is utterly IRRELEVANT by contrast.

The two are not even close.

Ayn Rand never suffered from this kind of misguided generosity.

She wrote:

http://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/businessmen.html

”As a group, businessmen have been withdrawing for decades from the ideological battlefield, disarmed by the deadly combination of altruism and Pragmatism.Their public policy has consisted in appeasing, compromising and apologizing: appeasing their crudest,loudest antagonists; compromising with any attack, any lie, any insult; apologizing for their own existence. Abandoning the field of ideas to their enemies, they have been relying on lobbying, i.e., on private manipulations, on pull, on seeking momentary favors from government officials. Today, the last group one can expect to fight for capitalism is the capitalists.”

“The Moratorium on Brains,” The Ayn Rand Letter, I, 3, 2

But this is not true of all businessmen.It is not true of John Mackey for example:

The Whole Foods Alternative to ObamaCare

http://www.theobjectivestandard.com/blog/index.php/2009/08/the-whole-foods-alternative-to-obamacare/

This took tremendous courage given the current administration.

Nor is it true of the Koch brothers.

There is no excuse for Romney.

And there is no excuse for those who seek some kind of ”balance” between his achievements & his evil.

Most of those whom I know understand this,(particularly about Romney),but some do not,& it needs saying in any event.

Don’t damn Romney for being a Capitalist.

Damn him for betraying Capitalism.

Footnotes:

Romney on Romneycare: ‘I Am Not Going to Walk Away From That’ – By Katrina Trinko – The Primary Event – National Review Online

http://www.nationalreview.com/primary-event/283441/romney-romneycare-i-am-not-going-walk-away-katrina-trinko

“You have seen a lot of candidates look at their biggest vulnerability, call it a mistake, and ask for forgiveness,” Romney continued. “In my case that wouldn’t be honest.”

He affirmed that he believes the health-care program was the “right thing” for Massachusetts then, although he conceded that it hasn’t “worked perfectly.”

Romney doubles down on argument that state health mandate is ‘conservative’

http://thehill.com/blogs/healthwatch/politics-elections/200793-romney-doubles-down-on-argument-that-state-health-mandate-is-conservative

The PJ Tatler » RomneyCare Mandate Nightmare

http://pjmedia.com/tatler/2011/10/18/romneycare-mandate-nightmare/

We Stand FIRM: Interview With RomneyCare Author Jonathan Gruber

http://blog.westandfirm.org/2011/03/interview-with-romneycare-author.html

Jonathan Gruber was the architect of Romneycare.

”It is equally true in Gruber’s mind that without the Massachusetts example, Obama’s individual mandate plan in all likelihood would not have passed. He says that as the federal health care plan emerged, the Massachusetts plan was “widely discussed.” And he should know. He was first called in as an unpaid consultant to work on Obama’s health care plan, then as a paid consultant to HHS to work on health care modeling, and then as a paid consultant working with Congress to develop the bill. ”

Gruber also said that Romney was indifferent to the argument that the individual mandate violated individual rights.

The failure of RomneyCare, doctor shortage edition | Philip Klein | Beltway Confidential | Washington Examiner

http://washingtonexaminer.com/blogs/beltway-confidential/2011/05/failure-romneycare-doctor-shortage-edition#ixzz1Lxs74s5B

We Stand FIRM: Lucidicus On RomneyCare

http://blog.westandfirm.org/2011/04/lucidicus-on-romneycare.html

Is RomneyCare Different from ObamaCare? | John Goodman’s Health Policy Blog | NCPA.org

http://healthblog.ncpa.org/is-romneycare-different/

PJ Media » The Truth About RomneyCare

http://pjmedia.com/blog/the-truth-about-romneycare/?singlepage=true

Study: RomneyCare Increased Health Premiums by 6 Percent | Cato @ Liberty

http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/study-romneycare-increased-health-premiums-by-6-percent/

The world is getting warmer : Romney June 3 2011

http://mobile.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE7525GM20110603?irpc=932

“I believe the world is getting warmer, and I believe that humans have contributed to that,” he told a crowd of about 200 at a town hall meeting in Manchester, New Hampshire.

“It’s important for us to reduce our emissions of pollutants and greenhouse gases that may be significant contributors.

Romney makes new shift in global warming position – Political Intelligence – A national political and campaign blog from The Boston Globe – Boston.com 10-28-2011

http://www.boston.com/Boston/politicalintelligence/2011/10/romney-makes-new-shift-global-warming-position/aBMsQrPwV3bxnFZHLRNPwO/index.html

…“My view is that we don’t know what’s causing climate change on this planet,” Romney said in the speech, a clip of which was posted by the liberal blog Think Progress. “And the idea of spending trillions and trillions of dollars to try to reduce CO2 emissions is not the right course for us.”

He wrote in his 2010 book “No Apology,” “I believe that climate change is occurring…I also believe that human activity is a contributing factor. I am uncertain how much of the warming, however, is attributable to man and how much is attributable to factors out of our control.”

In New Hampshire, in August, he said: “I think the earth is getting warmer…I think humans contribute to that. I don’t know by how much. It could be a little. It could be a lot.”…

“Mitt Romney’s positions change, often dramatically, depending on the audience or location,” Perry spokesman Ray Sullivan said in a statement. “Voters need to consider the fact that Romney, in one week, changed positions on manmade global warming, capping carbon emissions, and Ohio’s efforts to curb union powers.”…

Andrea Saul, a Romney spokeswoman, rejected the flip-flopping charge.

“This is ridiculous,” she said in a statement. “Governor Romney’s view on climate change has not changed. He believes it’s occurring, and that human activity contributes to it, but he doesn’t know to what extent. He opposes cap and trade, and he refused to sign such a plan when he was governor. Maybe the bigger threat is all the hot air coming from career politicians who are desperate to hold on to power.”

Romney has sometimes been hard to pin down on the issue.

He wrote in his 2010 book “No Apology,” “I believe that climate change is occurring…I also believe that human activity is a contributing factor. I am uncertain how much of the warming, however, is attributable to man and how much is attributable to factors out of our control.”

In New Hampshire, in August, he said: “I think the earth is getting warmer…I think humans contribute to that. I don’t know by how much. It could be a little. It could be a lot.”…

Romney touts himself as successful consenus builder

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/romney-touts-himself-as-successful-consenus-builder/2011/12/06/gIQAquTVEP_story.html

Behold the 1099-Romney

http://ohpcenter.org/editorials.php?nav=20110211a

Leave a comment

Filed under 2012 elections, Activism, Current events, Obamacare

Coulter’s latest imbecility:Only Romney can save us from #Obamacare & Illegal #Immigration

RRD:Romney is the republican most responsible for giving Obama the cover for passing Obamacare.He instituted socialized medicine in Massachusetts.

Yet according to Coulter he is our

Obi-Wan Kenobi.

He is also a Rockefeller Republican,so of course he will fight efforts of the GOP establishment to offer Amnesty to illegal immigrants,(rolls eyes).(fn1)

I know of some people–people whom I respect–who admire this woman.

Why,I don’t know.

If Romney is elected we will not only NOT repeal Obamacare,but we will enable the Democrats to win two victories:one on the Individual Mandate,(Romney believes it to be ”conservative”),& the other on the increasingly discredited Global Warming Hysteria.(fn2)

But don’t worry about tomorrow.

Focus on ”beating Obama”.

Then,when Romney is defeated in 2016,the Democrats can pass Cap & Trade using the same:”It can’t be socialism if Romney supports it” trick.

My goal is saving the United States.

Not having Republicans destroy it, instead of Democrats.

If you get Romney the nomination,goodbye & good luck.

I’ll not be a party to this farce.

”But you’ll be responsible for Obama’s reelection”.

I used to argue with such people;telling them ”No,those who got Romney the nomination will be responsible…”.

But I’ll bite.

I take full responsibility for Obama getting in.

Now what?

What’s your next argument?

Frankly if this country is going down the tubes,then we should at least have its killers clearly identify what their ideology is.

We should NOT provide a ”conservative” face for statism.

This is a philosophical,moral,& political battle.

It cannot be won by electing Republican versions of our opponents.

It would be better to lose,(& rebuild ultimately),then have the collapse blamed on ”conservatism”.

Romney is capable of doing something Obama can’t:He can make Obamacare,& belief in global warming appear bipartisan.

And that would marginalize us,after we have basically won the public opinion battle.

His nomination would be a unmitigated disaster.

One Candidate Is Right on The Two Most Important Issues – Ann Coulter – Townhall Conservative

http://townhall.com/columnists/anncoulter/2011/12/28/only_one_candidate_is_right_on_the_two_most_important_issues/page/full/

fn1.

I am not taking a position on the various immigration proposals at this time.But since Coulter brought it up,I felt the need to point out the absurdity of her claim.

fn2

See:

Will the #Teaparty return to it’s vomit,& choose Romney? #tcot #2012 – fightingstatism

http://fightingstatism.posterous.com/will-the-teaparty-return-to-its-vomit-choose

Romney doubles down on argument that state health mandate is ‘conservative’ – The Hill’s Healthwatch

http://thehill.com/blogs/healthwatch/politics-elections/200793-romney-doubles-down-on-argument-that-state-health-mandate-is-conservative

Leave a comment

Filed under 2012 elections, Activism, Current events, Obamacare

Why does Pajamas Media keep shilling for Romney?

RRD:After Fleming characterizes those who actually oppose Obamacare,& those who actually oppose Cap and Trade;i.e. rational human beings,as “shotgun toting nuts who emerge from a bomb shelter”,(and pretends that Reagan never existed fn1),he counsels us to do the “practical thing” of voting for a candidate who will give Obama and the left a victory they could never win on their own by “conceding” that Global Warming is occuring and that the state has the right to force us to buy health insurance.This “practicality” is detroying this country.I am not interested in winning a battle against Obama,only to lose the war against statism;and that is exactly what Romney’s nomination will bring us.If Romney gets the nomination then the GOP needs to go the way of the Whigs. 

    PJ Media » Why Can’t the Republicans Nominate a Genuine Right-Wing Nut?  http://pjmedia.com/blog/why-cant-the-republicans-nominate-a-genuine-right-wing-nut/?singlepage=true     

Footnotes:   fn1.   I know many Objectivists,not the least of whom was Ayn Rand herself,were highly critical of Reagan.But Reagan neither sought to impose socialized medicine,nor to finish off what’s left of our rights through global warming legislation,Mccain sought the latter,and Romney did the former and wants to do the latter.

Leave a comment

Filed under 2012 elections, Current events