Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

BREAKING: Mitt Romney Urged Obama to Embrace the Individual Mandate
Red State ^ | March 2, 2012 | Erick Erickson

Posted on 03/02/2012 4:15:43 PM PST by red flanker

Had Michigan not been as close, the Democrats would have waited to spring this on us in the general election. Luckily we have it now and I hope Ohio voters are paying attention.

In July 2009, Mitt Romney wrote an op-ed in USA Today urging Barack Obama to usean individual mandate at the national level to control healthcare costs.

On the campaign trail now, Mitt Romney says the individual mandate is appropriate for Massachusetts, but not the nation. Repeatedly in debates, Romney has said he opposes a national individual mandate.

But back in 2009, as Barack Obama was formulating his healthcare vision for the country, Mitt Romney encouraged him publicly to use an individual mandate. In his op-ed, Governor Romney suggested that the federal government learn from Massachusetts how to make healthcare available for all.

(Excerpt) Read more at redstate.com ...


TOPICS: Breaking News; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: healthcare; individualmandate; obama; obamacare; romney; romney4obama; romney4obamacare; romneybigdigs; romneybringsdeath; romneycare; romneycare4ever; romneycare4everyone; romneycare4u; romneydeathpanels; romneylies; romneymarriage; romneytheliar
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120 ... 141 next last
To: entropy12
Your health care insurance premiums are not increasing due to any "freeloaders", they are increasing because of government mandated "free" coverage - like contraceptive services. I am a 55 year old male, why can't I purchase a health insurance policy that only covers my needs. Why should I be required to pay for women's health services? Why can't I simply purchase a policy that covers me for major accidents and illnesses? You can get "minimum coverage" for auto insurance, why not health insurance? I can negotiate "cash" rates with my doctor, I don't need an HMO or "preventative services". Why does the government mandate that I have to have them in my policy? Get the government out of health care and allow the market to naturally compete, and the costs will plumment.
81 posted on 03/02/2012 7:44:37 PM PST by Conservative_Rob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: red flanker

http://virginiavirtucon.wordpress.com/2011/12/13/mitt-romney-2002-im-a-moderate-with-progressive-views/

Now why would a self-described ‘moderate with progressive views” do that??

lol


82 posted on 03/02/2012 8:17:06 PM PST by GeronL (The Right to Life came before the Right to Pursue Happiness)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MissMagnolia
He also was pro Cap and Trade for MA, even consulted John Holdren.
83 posted on 03/02/2012 8:21:04 PM PST by opentalk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Jim Noble

Then what will?


84 posted on 03/02/2012 8:39:25 PM PST by DNA.2012
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: DNA.2012
Then what will?

The failure of the GOP to nominate an opponent to Obama (Romney is not an opponent) is going to provoke a political crisis the scope of which we have not seen since 1860.

There are several possibilities, none of them very good.

First, there will be a straight-up Obama-Romney contest which will lead to Obama's reelection.

Second, a true opponent will emerge AFTER Romney locks it up and BEFORE the convention.

Third, the party will split AT the convention and there will be no official nominee.

Fourth, there will be widespread violence BEFORE the convention, a "can't we all just get along" ticket will emerge (Richardson-Huntsman, Boren-Snowe, etc), and conservatives will be locked out completely. I could go on.

The main point is that the "fundamental transformation of the United States of America" was and is a call for war, and, one way or another, war is coming. The last normal prewar election has already happened. The first postwar election can't happen until conservatives are eliminated "by any means necessary" OR the Left is eliminated, again, by any means necessary.

Interesting times.

85 posted on 03/02/2012 8:51:55 PM PST by Jim Noble ("The Germans: At your feet, or at your throat" - Winston Churchill)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 84 | View Replies]

To: MissMagnolia

Just now coming out?


86 posted on 03/02/2012 9:03:05 PM PST by CPT Clay (Pick up your weapon and follow me.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Conservative_Rob

I am against all free handouts. You are making an illogical argument when you say that the freeloaders who can afford insurance but do not buy it. There are hundreds of thousands of these people who end up in hospital and then can’t afford the humongous bill without help from insurance.

My wife was hospitalized for 2 days for outpatient surgery and the hospital bill was $40,000. Good thing we have insurance. Otherwise others would be stuck with our bill.

As for mandates, it must be a state issue, not federal. If I do not like mandates on a state I can move to another.

I fully agree with you that a catastrophic only coverage should be available. So should you be allowed to purchase insurance from out of state. The insurance should be portable from job to job. Groups should be allowed to form so you can buy in bulk instead of as individual.

Many reforms are needed. What we have now is not working, and the solution is not one size fits all national Obamacare.


87 posted on 03/02/2012 9:12:14 PM PST by entropy12 (Profits are the mother's milk of capitalism & prosperity!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 81 | View Replies]

Comment #88 Removed by Moderator

To: heye2monn

please See my post above.


89 posted on 03/02/2012 9:13:48 PM PST by entropy12 (Profits are the mother's milk of capitalism & prosperity!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 78 | View Replies]

To: Joan Kerrey

Health care is certainly out of control cost wise as it now exists. The mandate I am talking about is not nation wide. Each state should be free to legislate as it sees fit for their need. Also, any mandate should never include everything as you say. I am talking about a policy which would only cover catastrophic medical expense.


90 posted on 03/02/2012 9:20:06 PM PST by entropy12 (Profits are the mother's milk of capitalism & prosperity!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 73 | View Replies]

To: Jim Noble
First, there will be a straight-up Obama-Romney contest which will lead to Obama's reelection.

That is looking probable.

The main point is that the "fundamental transformation of the United States of America" was and is a call for war, and, one way or another, war is coming.

Many Republicans will sell out all that they claim to believe in for a penny on the dollar: a little tax break, another Middle East war, a few less regulations. With promises of such crumbs made to them, they will support Romney.

The first postwar election can't happen until conservatives are eliminated "by any means necessary"

That's happening: anti-Christian immorality is imposed by judicial decree, the private sector is converted to being just another part of the public sector, and free speech is stomped on with a brutality that makes Nazis look slow-moving in comparison.

OR the Left is eliminated, again, by any means necessary.

Regarding that, what do you recommend?

91 posted on 03/02/2012 9:57:25 PM PST by DNA.2012
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 85 | View Replies]

To: red flanker

Whoa. This needs to spread!


92 posted on 03/02/2012 9:59:00 PM PST by Yaelle (Santorum 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: conservaterian
I would rather these people have to pay for their own health insurance so they go to a regular doctor then to go to the much more expensive E.R. and stick us taxpayers with the bill.

The government has no power to force an illegal immigrant to buy insurance. This illegal will still go to the ER, and the ER will treat him just the same.

Lots of other people, not illegals, are getting government assistance. That assistance is less than the premiums that Obamacare is about to saddle us all with. These people will not be paying anything (they legally can't.) This means that not working (or working unofficially) just became even more profitable.

Lots of other people do not want insurance. Insurance is needed only when you cannot afford something. If you can, you are better off self-insuring. Majority of large businesses are self-insured, and anyone who is "sufficiently" wealthy can also do the same. Insurance companies are working for profit. You can become your own insurance company and keep the profit. If you have a $100K in liquid assets you may be already good to go this way. If you need more, chances are it's not treatable anyway, and you will do better if you just use the money in a more worthy way. There are also groups of people (some are church-based, other are not) that do the same within the group; this allows you to join with zero capital and invest as you go. In essence, that is a commune-based, not for profit insurance company.

And, of course, requiring anyone to buy a commercial product is completely insane from every point of view. Such a mandate is deeply offensive and has no place in a free society. A free man cannot be forced to pay just because he is alive.

93 posted on 03/02/2012 11:18:07 PM PST by Greysard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies]

To: Greysard
The government has no power to force an illegal immigrant to buy insurance. This illegal will still go to the ER, and the ER will treat him just the same.
Illegals are an entire different story and discussion - treat true emergencies only, then deport them all.
Lots of other people do not want insurance. Insurance is needed only when you cannot afford something. If you can, you are better off self-insuring. Majority of large businesses are self-insured, and anyone who is "sufficiently" wealthy can also do the same. Insurance companies are working for profit. You can become your own insurance company and keep the profit. If you have a $100K in liquid assets you may be already good to go this way. If you need more, chances are it's not treatable anyway, and you will do better if you just use the money in a more worthy way. There are also groups of people (some are church-based, other are not) that do the same within the group; this allows you to join with zero capital and invest as you go. In essence, that is a commune-based, not for profit insurance company
I have no problem with the self-insured, individuals or groups.But they have to show they are sufficiently capitalized. Don't expect anyone to bail you out if you run out of $$. Your group needs to take up the slack.
And, of course, requiring anyone to buy a commercial product is completely insane from every point of view. Such a mandate is deeply offensive and has no place in a free society.
So how do you feel about car insurance? Should we allow any yahoo to run around without liability insurance? Do you really want to pay the vastly increased premiums on YOUR policy because of them?
94 posted on 03/03/2012 3:54:14 AM PST by conservaterian (Sarah/DeMint '12-XXX= Now what? Cain?XX Guess not. I GIVE UP)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 93 | View Replies]

To: red flanker
OBOMNEY
95 posted on 03/03/2012 4:25:26 AM PST by Do Not Make Fun Of His Ears (Ann Coulter isn't about conservatism. Ann Coulter is about Ann Coulter.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DNA.2012
Regarding that, what do you recommend?

I'm too old to go bushwhacking.

96 posted on 03/03/2012 4:31:12 AM PST by Jim Noble ("The Germans: At your feet, or at your throat" - Winston Churchill)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 91 | View Replies]

To: conservaterian
treat true emergencies only

You have to spend a lot of money to find out if the complaint is a "true emergency" - or you have to ban lawsuits for error.

97 posted on 03/03/2012 4:33:18 AM PST by Jim Noble ("The Germans: At your feet, or at your throat" - Winston Churchill)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 94 | View Replies]

To: entropy12

So we’re both against gov mandates. Heritage, too. That’s good. But I think your first post threw us off a little bit.


98 posted on 03/03/2012 4:41:16 AM PST by heye2monn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 89 | View Replies]

To: entropy12

Why should I have to support these free loaders?

Why should healthy people pay for sick old people? Maybe the government should get out of medicine all together.


99 posted on 03/03/2012 5:31:56 AM PST by freedomfiter2 (Brutal acts of commission and yawning acts of omission both strengthen the hand of the devil.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: kevao

why didn’t you locate this yourself? Why are you counting on a santotum volunteer to find this? Romney pours millions into oppo research. Santorum has a few hundred volunteers


100 posted on 03/03/2012 6:24:11 AM PST by delms
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-8081-100101-120 ... 141 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson