Posted on 12/17/2011 4:40:38 PM PST by RobinMasters
Just when it seems every last shred of evidence against a candidate has surfaced, a new iteration of a troublesome past position will appear. This will just fuel those commenters who’re convinced I’m anti-Mitt, but it has to be posted. (I’d repeat again that I’m genuinely undecided but that would just feed those who’re convinced I have a secret bias in favor of a particular candidate that I refuse to reveal.)
When Obamacare passed in 2010, Mitt Romney didn’t exactly have the same reaction as, say, Tea Party protesters. He was less immediately concerned with what the law represented — that is, a massive overreach by the federal government, a total takeover of health care — than he was with the specifics of the law, with the question of whether they would work. And, on several occasions, he went on record in support of the individual mandate — the very mandate that might now be declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court of the United States.
We already knew that Mitt Romney signed Romneycare — with its individual law and its taxpayer-subsidy-funded premium exchange — into law at the state level. If I had stopped to think about it, I might even have remembered that Romney’s original idea about Obamacare was to “repeal its worst aspects.” But that phrase — “repeal its worst aspects” — could be construed to mean Romney still thought the entire law was “bad.”
(Excerpt) Read more at hotair.com ...
Let’s bring Ann Coulter in here to defend Willard once again..What exactly is good about it? Amazing
That is pretty much Newt’s position too, isn’t it?
It is exactly the Gingrich position. In order to write about Romney care it would be wise to understand it and the circumstances and costs that led to it. Massachusetts at the time was handing out free health care to anyone that showed up on the door step. What Romney care proposed was that in order to deal with this massive unaccounted for benefit all recipients would pay a minimum premium and additionally the liability would be limited by purchase premiums through a private market pool.Unfortunately the 86 % of the liberal legislator here did not stick with the concept and has repeated increase the eligibility of the recepiants in the Massachusetts population. I suggest that if the state of Illinois or anywhere else wants to enact a similar plan be my guest. Romney feels the same its a state issue not a federal one and as he feels that philosophy require Obama care needs to be abolished.
No, Newt said he likes 300 pages of obamacare, including individual mandate.
You got confused. It is the evil Ryan plan Newt hates. Ryan is radical rightwinger
Mark Steyn said that Republicans were like Europe’s conservatives. When the Socialists enacted a new law, and the Conservatives got in power later, they didn’t rescind it, only said they would make it run more efficiently.
He’s not only a first-rate wordsmith, he is prescient.
It didn’t work in Mass and it won’t work anywhere else.
We need a real market system in healthcare.
Looks like Mitt Romney has now adopted Newt Gingrich’s position on Obamacare.
If you're lucky enough to get the nomination and the White House, you, or anyone else simply ought to have the good sense to abort the Reid, Pelosi and Obama Communistic legislation that was crammed right in the face of the American People against their will!!!
As the Vice President correctly stated... "It's a big effing deal." Now Romney wants to force us to endure even part of it, totally against out will!!! We don't want to be "effed" or otherwise maligned by this malignant legislation!!!
Hey, you honyock! What part of "Will of the People" don't you understand???
I think what Newt said there was maybe 100 or 300 pages of Obama care that might be good but he could not trust his staffers to go through and select the good parts so just throw the whole thing out.
Mitt Romney is not to be trusted - at all. Ever!
Finally someone how makes sense, thanks Jim O.
Nope, just means Romney liked the bill generally, but objected to a part here an there, for example the 1099 over $1000, or whatever it was, reporting requirement.
Newt sure isn’t trustworthy, just ask his wives.
What’s good about it?
There is no good, so the whole thing needs to get dumped..Romney has to have some wiggle room for his own nasty Romney care....gee, some of it might be good.....NOT
This should be sidebar, says I!!!!
What say you? :-)
The republican party leadership wanted the HC bill to pass, and aided the democrats in it’s passage. The beloved whore of conservatives the Heritage Foundation wrote a paper advocating for mandatory coverage.
Now, becasue they understand just how much we detest this bill they all are trying to back pedel. Anyone who belongs to Heritage or pimps for them is suspect.
Most republicans were saying at that time to fix the bill.
Which is what they will do once we elect whoever from the current list of republican front running prostitutes. Of course there are 3 conservatives in the race, and no one of them isn’t Paul.
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.