To: Steelfish
Roll the clock back far enough, and Santorum was also for
individual and
employer mandates.
Anyway, I don't really care what a person's position on an issue was years ago if they've since changed their mind in a consistent transition, so it's petty to lob accusations about thatit should be expected that a person's opinions on issues will evolve when faced with new facts, given that nobody is omniscient. It's people that are completely intransigent or flippant in their opinions that are worrisome.
I'm more interested in what their current proposals to addressing healthcare cost problems are. Does Rick really think HSAs are the end-all, be-all answer to this?
14 posted on
03/10/2012 8:08:32 PM PST by
Utmost Certainty
(Our Enemy, the State | Gingrich 2012)
To: Utmost Certainty; Steelfish
Anyway, I don't really care what a person's position on an issue was years ago You should when that person is traveling the nation claiming he was never for such a thing, that's he's pure on the issue, and the he's "honest" with the American people about it as Santorum claimed as recently as his Michigan concession speech.
It's about character and when you have built your whole campaign mythology around your moral character, it matters.
26 posted on
03/10/2012 8:18:02 PM PST by
newzjunkey
(Santorum: 18-point loss, voted for Sotomayor, proposed $550M on top of $900M Amtrak budget...)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson