Romney The Progressive

[Openmind]

I am about to sign off so it will have to wait. Feel free to remind me if I slip up - I am not perfect.

However, since you have failed to answer somewhere between 80 and 99% of the questions I have asked you it would only be right if before I answer that you go back and answer just three questions that you have ignored before. Why would this be right? Because your demonstrating some good faith means that I am not just spitting in the wind.

I know I have answered a lot more than 1% of your questions. . .but probably not to YOUR satisfaction!

However, in spirit of good faith, ask me the three questions that you don't think I have answered, and I'll do my best to satisfy your curiosity.

 

[Dr.Who]

I know I have answered a lot more than 1% of your questions. . .but probably not to YOUR satisfaction!

However, in spirit of good faith, ask me the three questions that you don't think I have answered, and I'll do my best to satisfy your curiosity.

Deal. I will leave them in the threads where they are at, but each one will include the word: "hereyago" so you can easily find them.

 

[Openmind]

Deal. I will leave them in the threads where they are at, but each one will include the word: "hereyago" so you can easily find them.

I have to leave in a few minutes, bu I'll try to look at it later this afternoon.

 

[Dr.Who]

Since you have stated that you will be answering questions I will too - good faith.

A little over dramatic, there, aren't we, Doctor?

As a matter of opinion it is m opinion and I still completely stand behind my assertion that Obama is the most harmful president we have ever had.

I happen to believe that the Obamacare plan is far from perfect, because it was allowed to be so watered down by the Right.

Again, as a matter of opinion, it is far from perfect but hardly because it has been watered down.

What we do need (if this country is to survive as a semi-leader in the world) is a PUBLIC OPTION.

There is zero need for a public option. As they have been proposed they are not consistent with the constitution and if we had market options they would be as good - it is a shame congress has been obstructing market options.

This is the ONLY WAY for this country to compete, not only in social well-being, but also in economic development against all the other developped country who, because of their various version of public option health care are taking a huge load off the back of enterpreneurs, and the public, both because of the MUCH lower ratio of cost for health care to the GDP, but also because it offers more security to people and allows them to move more freely from job to job if necessary, and provide a more stable "growth path" in term of health care costs to businesses.

We have been far more competitive in the past when we had less congressional interference - that is what we need to compete. By definition competition is when market players work against other market players and not when the gov regulates market players stifling their competitive edge.

How do you know when a politician is lying? HIs lips are moving. And how do you know that other countries with a public option have a better ratio? Because politicians have told you. There is not sufficient reason to think that other countries have a better cost to GDP ratio. A,ll countries hide the true expenses of things. Presently in the US we have congressmen trying to inflate to apparent cost of our health care for political reasons and we have politicians in other countries trying to deflate the cost of their systems. Of course it looks like they are cheaper. They very well might not be.

I am pretty sure you will not agree with all this. . . but why don't YOU present your factual arguments and your numbers to show that the various "flavors" of public options/universal health care that have been in place for decades in other developped countries have been the cause of a terrible downturn in economy and have limited enterpreneship development. . . or is too expensive to sustain, or has shown a greater increase in cost of health care than what we have been experiencing over the last 15 years in the US?

I have already done that on the Health care threads. They have inferior health care and they might pay less for worse results. Of course they might pay more for worse results. What they do not have is a better value.

The facts are in the other threads. The health care threads and not the Romney thread.

 

[Dr.Who]

Since you have stated that you will be answering questions I will too - good faith.



As a matter of opinion it is m opinion and I still completely stand behind my assertion that Obama is the most harmful president we have ever had.



Again, as a matter of opinion, it is far from perfect but hardly because it has been watered down.


There is zero need for a public option. As they have been proposed they are not consistent with the constitution and if we had market options they would be as good - it is a shame congress has been obstructing market options.


We have been far more competitive in the past when we had less congressional interference - that is what we need to compete. By definition competition is when market players work against other market players and not when the gov regulates market players stifling their competitive edge.

How do you know when a politician is lying? HIs lips are moving. And how do you know that other countries with a public option have a better ratio? Because politicians have told you. There is not sufficient reason to think that other countries have a better cost to GDP ratio. A,ll countries hide the true expenses of things. Presently in the US we have congressmen trying to inflate to apparent cost of our health care for political reasons and we have politicians in other countries trying to deflate the cost of their systems. Of course it looks like they are cheaper. They very well might not be.


I have already done that on the Health care threads. They have inferior health care and they might pay less for worse results. Of course they might pay more for worse results. What they do not have is a better value.

The facts are in the other threads. The health care threads and not the Romney thread.

https://www.houseofpolitics.com/forum/showthread.php?t=13327&page=2

 

[Dr.Who]

I have to leave in a few minutes, bu I'll try to look at it later this afternoon.

On second thought-

If you happen to find them great but it is probably not worth the time. In the interest of a new start lets forget obsessing about past questions asked of you that were unanswered. If I happen to see one I might repost it. Otherwise bygones can be bygones.

 

[Openmind]

On second thought-

If you happen to find them great but it is probably not worth the time. In the interest of a new start lets forget obsessing about past questions asked of you that were unanswered. If I happen to see one I might repost it. Otherwise bygones can be bygones.

Does that mean you would rather not answer my latest question?

I may decide to repost it again, you know!

 

[Dr.Who]

Does that mean you would rather not answer my latest question?

I may decide to repost it again, you know!

If you mean the questions in post #10 I have already answered some of them and have posted links to threads where more answers are already posted and more discussion can take place.

 

[Gipper]

George Will - "Romney is the Republican Party's Michael Dukakis. Running on competence, not ideology."

NO DOUBT!

The Rs have a great opportunity to end the era of liberalism once and for all. If they nominate Romney, they will have missed that opportunity.

 

[Gipper]

This could be more proof of Romney's progressive nature...

Romney Declines to Take Position on Ohio Collective Bargaining Law

The former Massachusetts governor visited an Ohio Republican Party phone bank in the suburbs of Cincinnati, where GOP volunteers were contacting voters about two hot-button measures that will be on the Nov. 8 ballot.

One of them, Issue 2, would overturn Senate Bill 5 –the controversial legislation backed by Republican Gov. John Kasich that curbs collective bargaining rights for public employees.

Another measure, Issue 3, would amend the state constitution to forbid the state and federal government from imposing a mandate to buy health insurance.

Romney expressed generic support for Kasich's efforts to curtail union rights, but he would not say whether he supports or opposes the specific measures.

"I am not speaking about the particular ballot issues," Romney said, only after repeated questions from reporters. "Those are up to the people of Ohio. But I certainly support the efforts of the governor to rein in the scale of government. I am not terribly familiar with the two ballot initiatives. But I am certainly supportive of the Republican Party's efforts here."
http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/romney-declines-take-position-ohio-collective-bargaining-law_603987.html

 

[Openmind]

This could be more proof of Romney's progressive nature...

As I said before, he is the ONLY serious candidate in the GOP pool.

All the others are so EXTREME (or jockers!) that even Pat Robertson says so. . .and God knows I don't think Pat Robertson has much clarity of thought left!

 

[BigRob]

This could be more proof of Romney's progressive nature...

Leaving a state issue to a state makes you a "progressive"?

 

[Openmind]

Leaving a state issue to a state makes you a "progressive"?

I agree. . .that's weird! And all along I thought that one of the basis of the GOP ideology was to keep the Federal Government as much out of the States as possible!

I guess it depends who does (or doesn't do) the "interfering!)

 

[Gipper]

Leaving a state issue to a state makes you a "progressive"?

It likely does. Ohio SB 5 is about g-school education reform and busting the stinking teachers unions. Most informed Americans know reforming the g-schools is WAY OVERDUE. The law limits much of the stinking teachers union power, tenure, etc....and a vote on the law is forthcoming in Ohio.

Anyone paying attention knows the g-schools run by stinking liberals are doing a horrible job. Most conservatives and even some others are demanding reform.

Why would Romney not support it? Reforming g-schools should be high on all conservative candidate's list of campaign promises. But, not with good old Romney the flip flopper.

SB 5, the union-busting legislation Ohio Gov. John Kasich worked hard to pass and is now working to save, seems headed for defeat in a statewide referendum set to take place on November 8th. But no worries, SB 5 supporters! Former Mass Gov. Mitt Romney, Presidential candidate and consistent straight talker, has come to the rescue. According to a tweet from CNN’s Peter Hamby, Romney stopped by a pro-SB 5 phone bank in Ohio to rally the troops.

Then, when asked what his own position was, Romney said….well…he didn’t have one.

The SB 5 battle lines have been largely partisan: the bill was passed by a Republican controlled Legislature and signed by the Republican Kasich. In a poll out Tuesday morning from Quinnipiac, Republicans were the only group that wanted to keep the law, which polls have shown is deeply unpopular.

Of course, there seems to be a fairly simple explanation for Romney’s hedging: the bill looks to be going down hard. Quinnipiac’s polling showed that repeal forces have a 25 point lead at the moment, and a recent Public Policy Polling (D) survey showed a 20 point one.
http://2012.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/10/romney-fight-the-sb-5-repeal-that-i-dont-have-a-position-on.php

 

[Openmind]

It likely does. Ohio SB 5 is about g-school education reform and busting the stinking teachers unions. Most informed Americans know reforming the g-schools is WAY OVERDUE. The law limits much of the stinking teachers union power, tenure, etc....and a vote on the law is forthcoming in Ohio.

Anyone paying attention knows the g-schools run by stinking liberals are doing a horrible job. Most conservatives and even some others are demanding reform.

Why would Romney not support it? Reforming g-schools should be high on all conservative candidate's list of campaign promises. But, not with good old Romney the flip flopper.

Romney is not supporting this NEW union bisting law because 80% of the people in ohio are against it, as theyshould be.

Face it, heis theonly one who has a small chance to defeat Obama among the losers in the GOP pool of crazies.

Bu, please, be my guest, I woodlove to see al of you extremists throw away the elections.