thanks, for the clarification / truth.
....Its very easy for rumors to get started, given
the Government-liberal media environment.
Posted on 03/17/2011 5:40:47 PM PDT by BfloGuy
Hoping for a cabinet position? Who knows? These guys get to WA DC and metamorphose into complete idiots!
Thanks. Some people seem to be too short-sighted, giving up the greater goal of less government and conservative values for the immediate satisfaction of “he’s not perfect, screw ‘em”.
We need to focus on the goals. #1 is to repeal Obamacare. Then #2 is to shrink government’s role and intrusion in our lives. Anybody working toward thoses goals is our ally. People here who flippantly reject them just for one mild disagreement - even an emotionally charged one - risk sabatoging the overal conservative effort to achieve our goals.
Focus & win.
Just crossed him off my “Conservatives to Support” list. Too bad—I thought he looked pretty good before this.
First, Jim DeMint endorsed Mitt Romney in 2008. Here's a link to a report on that endorsement.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,242547,00.html
The author even quotes another source that says that Jim DeMint endorsed Mitt Romney in 2008. Is she really so stupid that she doesn't read the quotes that she includes in her own commentary?
Of course, Senator DeMint is now insisting that he can't endorse Mr. Romney in 2012 unless Mr. Romney denounces the Massachusetts plan.
I believe that's called a flip-flop on Senator DeMint's part. Another way of saying the same thing might be, "I was okay with Mr. Romney's efforts in Massachusetts before I wasn't okay with Mr. Romney's efforts."
What makes the commentary so ridiculous is that Jennifer Rubin gets the order of the flip and flop exactly wrong. She seems to think that Senator DeMint wasn't okay with individual mandates previously but is considering excusing them now.
In spite of what many people believe, the Tea Party didn't start as hard core religious conservatives trying to impose the entire religious conservative agenda on everyone. In most places, the Tea Party started to promote more libertarian ideas of small government, less government spending, and adherence to the Constitution. If he wanted to avoid the flip-flop, Senator DeMint could simply say,
"The United States Constitution does not give the federal government power to enact national health care of any kind and much less a law with an individual insurance mandate. In 2008, I endorsed Mr. Romney because I saw him as the best candidate in that group of candidates at that time. The law he signed in Massachusetts does not violate the United States Constitution because the Tenth Amendment gives Massachusetts the power to work on its own health care issues. I didn't like the individual mandate at the time, but that single issue was not a big enough problem to keep me from making the endorsement. He was trying to put some personal responsibility in a law written and passed by an 85% Democrat legislature. I recognized that his task was a huge challenge and gave him some slack. Given the events of the past two years, I can't make that endorsement again."I'm sad that Senator DeMint didn't take this honest approach, but what he's doing now is closer to pandering to the Tea Party than Ms. Rubin's silly suggestion that he risks his Tea Party standing with what he's doing now.
A few weeks ago, DeMent was singing the praises of Jeb Busb. This week we saw Pence come out of the RINO closet.
Sarah has to battle the liberals in the GP before even taking on Omarxist.
I expect to support the Republican nominee. I can’t think of a candidate on the Republican side that would make me more ill than Obama. Two terms for him — and more judicial appointments, among other things — would be disastrous.
A point seemingly lost on those who just can’t see the forest for the trees, and just love what spite does for the nose.
You make some good points. Nothing you’ve cited, though, shows that DeMint supported the Massachusetts law itself, so there’s no flipflop on that. He did support Romney in 2008, though (the article implies as a more conservative alternative to McCain) and praised his “attempts to make private health insurance available at affordable prices.” With support of government mandated health care very strong in Massachusetts, and the Democrat-controlled legislature pushing for even worse alternatives, it’s true that Romney did support a version that most Republicans nationwide vehemently oppose, and especially Tea Party activists.
It’s one thing, though, for DeMint to accept Romney in 2008 despite the flaws of his state’s plan, and quite another to propose such a plan for the country as a whole. DeMint has been one of the strongest opponents of Obamacare, and “a source close to DeMint” has made it clear that he rejects Romney’s state plan on the national level too, and “would never consider” endorsing Romney for 2012 unless he himself rejects it.
I don’t think much importance can be attached to the wording that comes from the unidentified source. A good bit of what you put in your own proposed statement is what I think is implied by DeMint’s position on national health care.
Same here Czar. To bad...
thanks, for the clarification / truth.
....Its very easy for rumors to get started, given
the Government-liberal media environment.
Happy to provide!
paraphrased - libs rolling of conservatives post 26.
A very astute analysis there!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.