Mitt Romney... our current biggest 2012 obstacle?

[Sentient Void]

He advocated, supported and helped pass a bill that increased govt intervention by *forcing* individuals buy health insurance. If someone doesn't, than they are PUNISHED by *much* higher taxes. If they don't acknowledge such authority and fight paying those taxes, they will be brought to jail. If they resist being brought to jail - they will be shot.

How is this NOT being for big govt and increased govt power? This is not only a clear violation of the free market, but also a violation of civil liberties.

Romney is no conservative and no believer in limited govt.

 

[Nate G.]

He advocated, supported and helped pass a bill that increased govt intervention by *forcing* individuals buy health insurance. If someone doesn't, than they are PUNISHED by *much* higher taxes. If they don't acknowledge such authority and fight paying those taxes, they will be brought to jail. If they resist being brought to jail - they will be shot.

How is this NOT being for big govt and increased govt power? This is not only a clear violation of the free market, but also a violation of civil liberties.

Romney is no conservative, no believer in the constitution, and no believer in limited govt.

Well to answer... you are wrong in your premise. Romney didn't seek to mandate insurance coverage for everyone. He wanted to created incentives for people to get insurane through tax credits, not punish them through fines. He was overridden on that. After that he tried to make it possible for people to opt out if they could prove that they could afford to pay their own expense in a health problem. Over-ridden again. Another thing he tried was for people to be able to post a bond to use for their expenses if they need them and then be able to opt out of the plan. No go. Regarding jail... you are wrong there. You are thinking of Pelosi's plan. There is no jail for non-conformity.

It appears to me that you don't fully understand Romney's plan. I don't expect you'll ever approve of it, but perhaps, if you are going to rail against it you should know the details. You seem to think that Romney wrote the bill himself. Many of the things wrong with it are things he fought against. It more complicated than saying it is simply RomneyCare and he's completely responsible for it.

 

[sratiug]

Well to answer... you are wrong in your premise. Romney didn't seek to mandate insurance coverage for everyone. He wanted to created incentives for people to get insurane through tax credits, not punish them through fines. He was overridden on that. After that he tried to make it possible for people to opt out if they could prove that they could afford to pay their own expense in a health problem. Over-ridden again. Another thing he tried was for people to be able to post a bond to use for their expenses if they need them and then be able to opt out of the plan. No go. Regarding jail... you are wrong there. You are thinking of Pelosi's plan. There is no jail for non-conformity.

It appears to me that you don't fully understand Romney's plan. I don't expect you'll ever approve of it, but perhaps, if you are going to rail against it you should know the details. You seem to think that Romney wrote the bill himself. Many of the things wrong with it are things he fought against. It more complicated than saying it is simply RomneyCare and he's completely responsible for it.

Did he sign the healthcare bill?

As far as it being constitutional for states to force you to buy health insurance, it's not. Slavery was outlawed a long time ago.

The state has the power to tax and would have been better off to just build public hospitals where all the state citizens could go for free than to mandate the buying of private insurance. People don't need insurance, they need health care. They are two different things. But then that wouldn't benefit the insurance companies, which is why Romney is a corporatist.

 

[Ninja Homer]

The biggest 2012 obstacle is MSM. Get equal air time and Ron Paul wins hands down. The same would have been true for '08 as well. As MSM news credibility goes down, Ron Paul popularity goes up.

 

[paulitics]

The state has the right to issue such a program, but the Fed government does not, but I'm sure a constitutionalist as yourself would already know that. Also, the government doesn't oversee that program, the Commonwealth connector does. The MA plan is not perfect. And I readily admit that I would not want it in my state. Even Romney admits that his plan is not perfect. But neither was it implemented in the manner he sought to do it as the MA legislature over wrote many of his vetoes.

I am not for cap and tax on any level. But if a state chose to that it would have the right. I would fight it tooth and nail.

BTW- Dems are lying when they say they used MA care as a template. They never once spoke with Romney about it. The plans they tried to push were very different. And the end result is much different than MA care is as well. Don't succumb to their propaganda by equating the two. The differences are numerous.

His signature is on the bill, therefore he must accept credit for what he signs into law. His hands were not tied, he could have easily not have moved the ball in the socialist direction in the first place. This was his baby. He needs to take ownership of what he creates and be a man about it.

If he sincerely changed, then he needs to make some aplogies ASAP, and explain how he was wrong.

America is in dire shape. We really don't have anymore time left for the Romney politician, where we overlook their past and hope their rhetoric is sincere.

 

[Nate G.]

For those of you asking if Romney's name was on the bill, I'd like to remind you that of two things.

1- Massachessetts allows for a line item veto. No, he did not sign the portions of the bill that mandated people must buy insurance or be fined by the state. The part he did sign was to divert funds that were already coming into the state for Medicaid and to pay hospitals for their losses, divert those funds to help poorer families obtain their own insurance and take some responsibility for the expenses of their health-care.

2-The MA legislature is vastly Dems, almost 80%. They overrode his veto on all 7 of the items in the bill that he vetoed.

When you say that the governor is solely responsible for a bill, when his legislature overrode his vetoes, then you are being intellectually dishonest. You WANT to pin the whole thing on him, irregardless of the facts. Since Romney may run as a contender in 2012 he is the enemy and you NEED him to be wrong on everything.

I have shown you the facts here. Most of which I'm sure most of you did not know. But you have it so ingrained in you heart that Romney is to blame for everything in MA Care that you simply will no longer listen to reason. That's when our conversation comes to an end.

 

[wgadget]

Pardon me, I only read the thread title, and.....


BWAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHA!

 

[sratiug]

For those of you asking if Romney's name was on the bill, I'd like to remind you that of two things.

1- Massachessetts allows for a line item veto. No, he did not sign the portions of the bill that mandated people must buy insurance or be fined by the state. The part he did sign was to divert funds that were already coming into the state for Medicaid and to pay hospitals for their losses, divert those funds to help poorer families obtain their own insurance and take some responsibility for the expenses of their health-care.

2-The MA legislature is vastly Dems, almost 80%. They overrode his veto on all 7 of the items in the bill that he vetoed.

When you say that the governor is solely responsible for a bill, when his legislature overrode his vetoes, then you are being intellectually dishonest. You WANT to pin the whole thing on him, irregardless of the facts. Since Romney may run as a contender in 2012 he is the enemy and you NEED him to be wrong on everything.

I have shown you the facts here. Most of which I'm sure most of you did not know. But you have it so ingrained in you heart that Romney is to blame for everything in MA Care that you simply will no longer listen to reason. That's when our conversation comes to an end.

Then why does he say he supports the mandates? And why does he support terrorism?

 

[Smitty]

Romney is owned.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/ar...tt_romney_at_aipac_national_summit_98789.html

Fortunately, his health insurance mandate will prevent him from being a serious contender for the GOP nomination.

He could save himself a lot of time and money by choosing not to run.

 

[ninepointfive]

I would like to extend a hand towards Nate G, and thank him for providing some great feedback here. I would also like to remind some of our rpf members to remain mature and debate intelligently.

 

[wgadget]

I would like to extend a hand towards Nate G, and thank him for providing some great feedback here. I would also like to remind some of our rpf members to remain mature and debate intelligently.

Yes, ma'am.

 

[sofia]

For those of you asking if Romney's name was on the bill, I'd like to remind you that of two things.

1- Massachessetts allows for a line item veto. No, he did not sign the portions of the bill that mandated people must buy insurance or be fined by the state. The part he did sign was to divert funds that were already coming into the state for Medicaid and to pay hospitals for their losses, divert those funds to help poorer families obtain their own insurance and take some responsibility for the expenses of their health-care.

2-The MA legislature is vastly Dems, almost 80%. They overrode his veto on all 7 of the items in the bill that he vetoed.

When you say that the governor is solely responsible for a bill, when his legislature overrode his vetoes, then you are being intellectually dishonest. You WANT to pin the whole thing on him, irregardless of the facts. Since Romney may run as a contender in 2012 he is the enemy and you NEED him to be wrong on everything.

I have shown you the facts here. Most of which I'm sure most of you did not know. But you have it so ingrained in you heart that Romney is to blame for everything in MA Care that you simply will no longer listen to reason. That's when our conversation comes to an end.

Mitt IS the enemy. He is a despeccable hypocrite.

....An Israeli bootlicker and warmonger with FIVE able bodied sons that refuse to fight.

...A donor to Planned Parenthood until he decided he wanted to be a national candidate and is now "pro-life"

... a sleazy Botoxed con man who would sell his own mother to fulfill his political ambitions.

...a peddler of the Global Warming Hoax

...a big government Republican who wont cut a dime from the budget

...a supporter of the Bailout

take your Romney garbage someplace else....we aint buyin it....

 

[Dan Chisholm]

We need to move Mitt closer to libertarianism. He isn't the enemy. Progressivism, liberalism, and the growing dependency culture is the enemy. We need to acknowledge areas where we agree and work to convince others on what we disagree. We also need to realize that some of the issues that Mitt is attacked for are made-up or taken out of context political attacks cooked up by the DNC in 2006 and 2007. Mitt's not perfect to be sure and neither are any other republican candidates, but if we focus on each other too much, we won't be able to stop Obama in 2012. If he wins one more election, our country will be too far gone to save. We're almost there right now, but we still have one last chance in 2012 to Bring America Back.

 

[low preference guy]

We need to move Mitt closer to libertarianism. He isn't the enemy. Progressivism, liberalism, and the growing dependency culture is the enemy. We need to acknowledge areas where we agree and work to convince others on what we disagree. We also need to realize that some of the issues that Mitt is attacked for are made-up or taken out of context political attacks cooked up by the DNC in 2006 and 2007. Mitt's not perfect to be sure and neither are any other republican candidates, but if we focus on each other too much, we won't be able to stop Obama in 2012. If he wins one more election, our country will be too far gone to save. We're almost there right now, but we still have one last chance in 2012 to Bring America Back.

All the things you say are true and we should consider Mitt Romney again. But only after after these two things happen:

1. He apologizes for supporting the bailout.
2. He apologizes for supporting an individual mandate to buy health care, and repudiates his "I like mandates" statement at a Republican Presidential debate in 2007.

 

[sofia]

We need to move Mitt closer to libertarianism. He isn't the enemy. Progressivism, liberalism, and the growing dependency culture is the enemy. We need to acknowledge areas where we agree and work to convince others on what we disagree. We also need to realize that some of the issues that Mitt is attacked for are made-up or taken out of context political attacks cooked up by the DNC in 2006 and 2007. Mitt's not perfect to be sure and neither are any other republican candidates, but if we focus on each other too much, we won't be able to stop Obama in 2012. If he wins one more election, our country will be too far gone to save. We're almost there right now, but we still have one last chance in 2012 to Bring America Back.

So...Romney, Bonior, and McConnell are gonna save us from socialism???

What is this....Romney troll night?

If Romney or any other GOP fool besides Ron paul is the nominee.....i aint voting

 

[radiofriendly]

Mitt Romney is Gorgeous

YouTube - Mitt Romney is Gorgeous

 

[sofia]

All the things you say are true and we should consider Mitt Romney again. But only after after these two things happen:

1. He apologizes for supporting the bailout.
2. He apologizes for supporting an individual mandate to buy health care, and repudiates his "I like mandates" statement at a Republican Presidential debate in 2007.

LPG... they're getting to you!...say it aint so...


Romney will tell you anything to get elected....Reject ANY republican who aint Ron Paul

 

[low preference guy]

LPG... they're getting to you!...say it aint so...


Romney will tell you anything to get elected....Reject ANY republican who aint Ron Paul

I said I'll consider him.

I didn't say I'd support him.

 

[Flash]

For those of you asking if Romney's name was on the bill, I'd like to remind you that of two things.

1- Massachessetts allows for a line item veto. No, he did not sign the portions of the bill that mandated people must buy insurance or be fined by the state. The part he did sign was to divert funds that were already coming into the state for Medicaid and to pay hospitals for their losses, divert those funds to help poorer families obtain their own insurance and take some responsibility for the expenses of their health-care.

2-The MA legislature is vastly Dems, almost 80%. They overrode his veto on all 7 of the items in the bill that he vetoed.

When you say that the governor is solely responsible for a bill, when his legislature overrode his vetoes, then you are being intellectually dishonest. You WANT to pin the whole thing on him, irregardless of the facts. Since Romney may run as a contender in 2012 he is the enemy and you NEED him to be wrong on everything.

I have shown you the facts here. Most of which I'm sure most of you did not know. But you have it so ingrained in you heart that Romney is to blame for everything in MA Care that you simply will no longer listen to reason. That's when our conversation comes to an end.

Ah, so he swallowed his pride, negotiated his principles for the good of the state! But once he gets into that white house.. he'll pull off his fake moderate uniform and transform into Super-Conservative. Just like Obama became an anti-war president, only lying about supporting the iraqi war during the debates. You completely won us over with your superior logic.

Yeah he's the 'enemy.' We don't like him because hes running against a 77 year old man. Not because the guy supports a hawkish foreign interventionist policy, not because he spent his entire time into office pandering to democrats, not because he influenced Obama's health care plan, not because he endorsed loony-tunes John Mccain. But because hes going to run against a man pushing 80 that we're all obsessed with.


Seriously, nominating Romney is a sure way to ensure an extended Obama Presidency. Just like nominating Sarah Palin. I'm not saying Ron Paul is the only guy that can take Obama down, I'm saying a guy that supported a form of health care similar to Obama is going to look like a total hypocrite to most Americans. It just goes to show why sticking to your principles is a little more important than pandering to the Ted Kennedy mafia.

 

[Nate G.]

Ah, so he swallowed his pride, negotiated his principles for the good of the state! But once he gets into that white house.. he'll pull off his fake moderate uniform and transform into Super-Conservative. Just like Obama became an anti-war president, only lying about supporting the iraqi war during the debates. You completely won us over with your superior logic.

Yeah he's the 'enemy.' We don't like him because hes running against a 77 year old man. Not because the guy supports a hawkish foreign interventionist policy, not because he spent his entire time into office pandering to democrats, not because he influenced Obama's health care plan, not because he endorsed loony-tunes John Mccain. But because hes going to run against a man pushing 80 that we're all obsessed with.


Seriously, nominating Romney is a sure way to ensure an extended Obama Presidency. Just like nominating Sarah Palin. I'm not saying Ron Paul is the only guy that can take Obama down, I'm saying a guy that supported a form of health care similar to Obama is going to look like a total hypocrite to most Americans. It just goes to show why sticking to your principles is a little more important than pandering to the Ted Kennedy mafia.

You're argument still shows that you know very little about Romney. Pandering to Dems in MA. You must not realize that the Dems hated him as Governor. Why? Because he was relentless with his veto pen. He vetoed billions from their budget. He vetoed provisions that would expand access to abortion in the state. He fought against raising the minimum wage. He did not negotiate his principles. Having your veto over-ridden is not negotiating.

BTW- I fully support his foreign policy. I won't even attempt to argue that because it is moot. That is the one area where I differ greatly from the good Dr. Paul. You can bash me all you want for that. My feelings and opinion will stay intact.