Well, Romney nuked himself last night

Status
Not open for further replies.

Little-Acorn

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 23, 2009
Messages
2,444
Location
San Diego, CA
Mitt Romney gave a speech last night and talked about the Universal Health Care initiative he signed in Massachussetts. And said, in essence, that it was the right thing to do in that place and time, and that he still believes that today.

He then went on and tried to present conservative credential, saying that the reason such a thing should not be done on a national level is because it's against the Constitution for the Fed govt to do it, though not for the states to do it individually. He also started outlining various areas the Fed govt should not get involved in, and some areas of Health Care and insurance where it should get involved.

Though he was right about the Constitution's mandates and bans, his speech showed clearly that he does nto understand either the purpose of insurance, or the purpose of government, at all.

He nuked himself last night, displaying in no uncertain terms that he is not qualified to be President of the U.S. This country was founded on the idea that people should take care of themselves, taking their own responsibility for their welfare, helping each other where needed, learning from their mistakes, and NOT waiting for government to force other to help them. Though he got some things right, Romney showed last night that he opposes that general idea, in some ways almost as completely as the Democrats do.

I'm now sorry that I supported Mitt four years ago. It was a mistake. The country is fundamentally conservative, and the Constitution lays out a government that preserves and supports that. People like Romney (and others) who oppose that idea, should not be in government, certainly not at a national level.
 
Werbung:
you know who else supported the mandate health care before?

Newt

as it was a republican idea first before it became the COmmunist plot of the evil Facist secular Islamists.....

Once again, you are "historically challenged", PFOS. Universal health care has been a mantra of the left since the days of FDR.

PFOS is like the annoying little brother who wants to play with the bigger kids, but gets beat up and sent home with a bloody nose.
 
Who supported this plan?

SUMMARY AS OF:
11/22/1993--Introduced.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Title I: Basic Reforms to Expand Access to Health

Insurance coverage and to Ensure Universal Coverage

Subtitle A: Universal Access

Subtitle B: Qualified General Access Plans in the

Co sponsors include:

Sen Bennett, Robert F. [UT] - 11/22/1993
Sen Bond, Christopher S. [MO] - 11/22/1993
Sen Boren, David L. [OK] - 5/17/1994
Sen Cohen, William S. [ME] - 11/22/1993
Sen Danforth, John C. [MO] - 11/22/1993
Sen Dole, Robert J. [KS] - 11/22/1993
Sen Domenici, Pete V. [NM] - 11/22/1993
Sen Durenberger, Dave [MN] - 11/22/1993
Sen Faircloth, Lauch [NC] - 11/22/1993
Sen Gorton, Slade [WA] - 11/22/1993
Sen Grassley, Chuck [IA] - 11/22/1993
Sen Hatch, Orrin G. [UT] - 11/22/1993
Sen Hatfield, Mark O. [OR] - 11/22/1993
Sen Kassebaum, Nancy Landon [KS] - 11/22/1993
Sen Kerrey, J. Robert [NE] - 5/17/1994
Sen Lugar, Richard G. [IN] - 11/22/1993
Sen Simpson, Alan K. [WY] - 11/22/1993
Sen Specter, Arlen [PA] - 11/22/1993
Sen Stevens, Ted [AK] - 11/22/1993
Sen Warner, John [VA] - 11/22/1993

not exactly a who's who of liberal Democrats.

Health care reform is an absolute necessity, and making it a political football is not the kind of reform that is needed.
 
not exactly a who's who of liberal Democrats.

Correct. It's a Who's Who of liberal Republicans.

As I said, such people (Dem or Repub) do not belong in government at a national level, and we need to vote them out and replace them with people who understand the proper role of government.
 
Correct. It's a Who's Who of liberal Republicans.

As I said, such people (Dem or Repub) do not belong in government at a national level, and we need to vote them out and replace them with people who understand the proper role of government.


LA why do you persist in this quaint idea that politicians should follow the Constitution? That is so cliche' and passe'....Don't you know that goes against everything liberals/progressives believe?

It is so much better for politicians to act as they wish without constraints. Liberals and progressives believe this. Why can't you?

:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:
 
As one who hates the whole medical care industry as much as I hate Obama-care, maybe Romney has hit on a compromise that could satisfy a lot of people. Make government-run health care the responsibility of each State. Each State could then decide exactly how they wanted to set up a program - or not set up a program.

Let the Liberals of Massachusetts choose their own poison. Let things like medical liability claims be determined on a state-by-state basis.

From what I am reading and hearing, medical costs are being driven up by many factors. You know the list: doctors that over treat, the bio-technology community forcing machines on hospitals that really should be optional.

As a fiscal conservative, it looks to me like we are going to be stuck with some form of government health care program - just like we are stuck with Medicare. I don't see it going away, I just see it morphing over time into some money-gobbling monster that nobody can control. It is a case of an unlimited desire to help people, not realizing that the cumulative result of all programs is causing great harm to the whole.

By pushing this whole thing off to the States, we remove a lot of special interest lobbying. Let the people in the State deal with the issue, like Arizona is dealing with immigration. If something is costing too much money, like State-programs in California tend to do, then they are force to take cuts. It can't just pile up as another Federal Debt.
 
Interesting that Romney would be both for and against his plan as passed while he was Gov..
Is this political fence setting or is Romney conceding that the Progressive neo Marxist plan, that was modeled after his plan, is the best We the People can do.
Or is he saying, that although it looks funny, through the appropriate use of political 'surgery' and strategic lip stick applications 'we' can make 'my' ugly political pig look better?
 
LA why do you persist in this quaint idea that politicians should follow the Constitution? That is so cliche' and passe'....Don't you know that goes against everything liberals/progressives believe?
No argument.

It is so much better for politicians to act as they wish without constraints. Liberals and progressives believe this. Why can't you?

:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

Mea maxima culpa. ;)
 
Once again, you are "historically challenged", PFOS. Universal health care has been a mantra of the left since the days of FDR.

PFOS is like the annoying little brother who wants to play with the bigger kids, but gets beat up and sent home with a bloody nose.

I do want universal health care...still waiting...but if you could read you would notice I said that health care Mandate...and if you actuly bothered to look, you would see it was a republican idea back in the 90's...
 
I do want universal health care...still waiting...but if you could read you would notice I said that health care Mandate...and if you actuly bothered to look, you would see it was a republican idea back in the 90's...

I guess you never heard of "Hillary-Care"? That went over like a lead balloon.

I rest my case.
 
Correct. It's a Who's Who of liberal Republicans.

As I said, such people (Dem or Repub) do not belong in government at a national level, and we need to vote them out and replace them with people who understand the proper role of government.

you know in your view there seems to be no actul republicans....evry single one is a horrible liberal...Regan would be a liberal, Bush was, Bush II was, Dole was, McCain was....it must be nice to have to take no responsibliity by just disowning anyone in the party when ever you see fit....guess its hard knowing that no one with your views will ever hold office because you need more then a 2% base to hold office.

some day you should give us a list of republicans who you will not attack as liberal ...for being anything left of Rush is a commie.
 
Werbung:
Mitt Romney gave a speech last night and talked about the Universal Health Care initiative he signed in Massachussetts. And said, in essence, that it was the right thing to do in that place and time, and that he still believes that today.

He then went on and tried to present conservative credential, saying that the reason such a thing should not be done on a national level is because it's against the Constitution for the Fed govt to do it, though not for the states to do it individually. He also started outlining various areas the Fed govt should not get involved in, and some areas of Health Care and insurance where it should get involved.

Though he was right about the Constitution's mandates and bans, his speech showed clearly that he does nto understand either the purpose of insurance, or the purpose of government, at all.

He nuked himself last night, displaying in no uncertain terms that he is not qualified to be President of the U.S. This country was founded on the idea that people should take care of themselves, taking their own responsibility for their welfare, helping each other where needed, learning from their mistakes, and NOT waiting for government to force other to help them. Though he got some things right, Romney showed last night that he opposes that general idea, in some ways almost as completely as the Democrats do.

I'm now sorry that I supported Mitt four years ago. It was a mistake. The country is fundamentally conservative, and the Constitution lays out a government that preserves and supports that. People like Romney (and others) who oppose that idea, should not be in government, certainly not at a national level.

Romney is going to get hammered on this issue, but I have to respect the guy his position on the matter.

As Governor, he allowed the people he was elected to represent to have a bill that they wanted..what is wrong with representing the people that you were elected to serve?

If anything, this clearly shows that Romney actually listen to the will of the people will he is making his decisions. I can respect that.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top