Posted on 04/12/2011 4:51:58 AM PDT by suspects
As governor, Mitt Romney accomplished a feat that most Republicans would have thought impossible. With the single stroke of a pen he convinced the liberal population of Massachusetts that they, too, hate government-run health care.
As a health care plan, Romneycare is an unmitigated fiasco. It has caused costs to skyrocket, insurance premiums to soar and nonprofit providers like Blue Cross to suffer hundreds of millions of dollars in losses.
But as a political policy, Romneycare is nearly unparalleled in Republican history. It has destroyed one front-runner’s presidential hopes (Romney’s) and helped undermine an entire presidency. For, as Barack Obama’s supporters keep reminding us, Romneycare was the precursor to Obamacare.
And what has Obamacare accomplished? It knocked Nancy Pelosi out of the speaker’s chair and helped drive the president’s approval rating to new lows. Dick Cheney couldn’t have come up with a sneakier scheme to destroy Democrats.
Think about how powerful Romneycare has been. In 2008 — when Obama was running for president and Ted Kennedy was towering over the Senate — nearly 70 percent of Massachusetts voters supported the plan. A mere 22 percent of right-wing holdouts opposed it.
After all, this is Massachusetts, where “uni- versal health care” is a political mantra, like “collective bargaining rights” or “indicted House member.”
But after five years of actually experiencing this new universe, even the Kennedy Democrats have had enough. A new Suffolk University poll showed that nearly half of Massachusetts voters say the law isn’t helping, while just 38 percent say it is. As Michael Cannon at the Cato Institute pointed out, Romneycare is almost as unpopular here as Obama- care is across America.
That’s not supposed to happen.
Romneycare has also blown a hole in Romney’s reputation as...
(Excerpt) Read more at bostonherald.com ...
Be sure to check out www.anyonebutmitt.com
1) No one really thought it would save money. That wasn't a real goal.
2) It was intended to help people who needed help. She didn't say "social justice", but her message was clear.
3) It was intended to channel resources to those who needed it. She didn't say "wealth redistribution", but her message was clear.
It's communism, and she loved it.
As if we didn’t know or that the “bust” was unexpected.
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.