One of the biggest problems Mitt Romney faced in 2008 was his, shall we say, malleability on several major political issues. It had many Republicans wondering who the real Mitt was; many still have that concern.
What the Washington Examiner found won’t help (emphasis added):
This can’t be good for his flip-flopping image. The Boston Phoenix has discovered that potential 2012 presidential candidate Mitt Romney has made edits to his 2010 book “No Apology” to be more in line with today’s Tea Party rhetoric.
In the original book, Romney says that President Obama’s 2009 stimulus package will accelerate recovery, but could do more. In the newly-released paperback version of the book Romney goes after it. “This is the first time government has declared war on free enterprise,” he writes, according to the Phoenix. He’s also changed his tone regarding ObamaCare, now calling for its repeal. (As Massachusetts governor Romney signed off on a similar health care plan).
Oh, and for all you other Ken Cuccinelli fans out there, I remind you of this comment from Romney during the 2008 campaign:
I like mandates. If you can afford health insurance, you should buy it.
Yes, he actually said that.
“…I like mandates. If you can afford health insurance, you should buy it.”
as opposed to – ” no.. don’t be responsible for your needs. just wait until you need health care and we’ll tax the bejesus out of others to pay for it via EMTALA”.
So.. personal “liberty” is defined by the Republicans to mean that you can be a scofflaw about your health care but it’s okay because these rest of us will pick up the tab for you.
This would be the very same Republican Party that DID SUPPORT the individual mandate in 1993 with people like Gingrich, Delay and Armey.
What has changed is not Romney so much but the Republican party which has lurched so far to the right that anyone who caters to their base but is honest about it to John Q Public could never get elected.
Just to be clear – SS and Medicare ARE individual mandates also.
If the Republicans are honest with the public about their views on this issue – they’d end up with about 25% of the seats in Congress because that’s about the percentage of people who actually support their true position.
The biggest govt health care program ? EMTALA.
Good to see you’re making up for bad economics with bad history.
The House side of the GOP *never* supported the mandate. Dole and a number of GOP Senators did, but others (including but hardly limited to Phil Gramm) did not.
Would you like a FULL LIST of the GOP that …DID co-sponsor the individual mandate for health care?
it was more than a “few”.
more to the point – “bad” economics is supporting taxpayer subsidies for people who won’t buy their own health insurance and wait until they need it and have you pay for it – EMTALA.
The righteous position here is if you say you are opposed to individual mandates to oppose all govt healthcare that is based on individual mandates – FICA.
And to oppose all taxpayer subsidies for people who won’t buy insurance and have us pay for their health care when they need it – EMTALA.
or you Conservatives could put your money where your mouth is and do what the Heritage Foundation suggests:
” On the Wings of Their Court Victory, States Should Advance Health Care Freedom”
http://www.heritage.org/Research/Reports/2011/02/On-the-Wings-of-Their-Court-Victory-States-Should-Advance-Health-Care-Freedom
but ..hey… that would actually be doing something constructive about the problem instead of attacking Obama …and Romney, etc, .. eh?
I think Heritage has a good thought.
How about youse guys get McDonnell and like-thinking Republicans to pursue it here in Va?
And of course you want to paper one evil with another evil. In other news, sun rises in East.
Romney is would’ve been a cylon on BattleStar Galactica except he creeped the actors out too much. He is more cylon than the cylons. His and Huckabee’s popularity in the GOP demonstrate the rottenness of the GOP and conservatism.
You know if you read the Heritage Foundation Study urging the States to take on the health care issue for their State, in part, to preempt the Feds from “interfering” with a “State Right” by pursuing their own “market-based” option you get to this sentence:
” State officials can circumvent these obstacles by leveraging the generous federal tax benefits that are exclusively available to persons under group insurance…”
think about that statement…
the most obvious question here that ought to be asked by Conservatives is why are the Feds tiling the scales of the marketplace by giving discriminatory tax treatment to group plans?
My primary complaint about the Conservatives is they talk the talk – about market-based approaches rather than govt approaches but with the exception of think tanks like the Heritage Foundation those “ideas” never make it to the political and legislative realm.
Right now – the Republicans, Cuccinelli and McDonald have NO ALTERNATIVE competing ideas of how the States should handle this issue instead of the Feds – and the one guy who did it – Romney – they ATTACK for being about the only State to take responsibility and pursue a state path.
You don’t hear the Conservatives give Romney for at least preempting the Feds involvement even if they would do a different implementation – nope – they attack one of their own for his own initiative.
This pretty much defines most Conservatives these days as they are not looking for real solutions just lining up against those they oppose even if they come from their own ranks.