Posted on 01/11/2008 6:07:58 PM PST by CharlesWayneCT
We shall see what happens.
BTW, I thoroughly enjoyed watching Fred Thompson last evening. He kicked butt.
Also BTW, Mitt's team is not very dumb as are it seems so many FReepers at times.
This entire primary ritual is a race to gain delegates.
Right now, Romney has more delegates than any other Republican candidate.
A month from now, you will be in a much better position to gloat about the Republican nominee and the delegate count.
Meanwhile, for gloating privileges,,,,,,please, take a number..
The answer is a resounding 'no'. Unfortunately, Petronius has a problem with truth.
Major Michigan Newspaper endorsement for Romney!
Good find. I hope the Michigan voters take him over the top!
~”BTW, who’s Romney?”~
Stick around. You’ll find out on Feb. 5th.
“Unfortunately, Petronius has a problem with truth.”
Oh! That’s rich!!!
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/homepage/story/23068.html
WASHINGTON — Fred Thompson escalated the Republican presidential candidates’ war over abortion Wednesday by tying former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney to “$50 abortions in Massachusetts.”
Romney, the governor from 2003 until January, helped create Commonwealth Care, a state-run and subsidized program for low- and moderate-income people. The state helps determine what services are to be covered, and its list includes a provision in which women can get abortions for $50 co-payments.
The legislation also created a MassHealth payment policy advisory board that gave Planned Parenthood a seat, but not an anti-abortion group.
“Romney claims to be pro-life,” the Thompson campaign said in a statement. “But under his health care plan, Massachusetts residents now have access to taxpayer-funded abortions for $50.”
The Thompson statement also said that Romney had used his line-item veto authority to strike eight sections of the bill, but not the terms guaranteeing Planned Parenthood board representation, “and he did nothing to prohibit taxpayer-financed abortions as part of his plan.”
http://www.newsmax.com/newsfront/Huckabee:_Romney_Okayed_$/2007/12/31/60734.html
http://www.truthnews.us/?p=1265
http://www.christiannewswire.com/news/962685067.html
http://schotlinepress.wordpress.com/2007/12/13/romney-50-abortions-in-massachusetts/
http://www.blogsforfredthompson.com/romney-massachusetts-health-plan-included-50-abortions
btw, Massachusetts state law mandates that abortions be covered under any state health care plan. It's been that way since the Moe decision in 1981. Are you really trying to pin that on Romney?
So what you are ignoring is that you and me are paying EVERY SINGLE LIVING RESIDENT’s cost right now. Actually we are paying MORE than we should because these folks are forced to wait until their health problem becomes an EMERGENCY. Ask any doctor, you must know at least one, if emergency care in a hospital is more expensive than routine care delivered at a physician’s office.
So by hollering against Commonwealthcare, you are forcing me and you to pay MORE than we would. We pay the cost vis higher hospital bills and higher insurance premiums.
Is this all too deep for you by any chance?
You, apparently, are a person who doesn’t like to face facts. Mass. state law doesn't "mandate" that abortions be offered at the incredibly low, low price of $50.But Mitt's plan does! The plan he toured & touted & preened about.
“Erick points out also that Romney vetoed portions of that plan using the line-item veto as Governor. But clearly, he did not veto making abortion just as cheap as possible. Just $50 to take an innocent human life — Romney’s plan — Romney’s position less than 1000 days ago.”
http://www.blogsforfredthompson.com/romney-massachusetts-health-plan-included-50-abortions
” Is this all too deep for you by any chance?”
This is what’s too deep for me - Mitt, prancing about, proud of his $50 abortions.
You have already shown yourself to be a shill for Thompson. I am OK with that. But your attack on Romney is uncalled for. btw, have you been pro-life since birth?
Rewind, Repeat: Mass. state law doesn’t “mandate” that abortions be offered at the incredibly low, low price of $50. But Mitt’s plan does!
“am OK with that. But your attack on Romney is uncalled for.”
It IS CALLED FOR!!! Because Mitt is a stealth liberal. Do yourself a big favor and drop him!!! I didn’t even get started on him. Shall we move on to his Gay rights record - or how about his flaccid response to the Gay Marriage decree??? Maybe he had a similar “conversion” on those issues also!
How convenient if he did.
“btw, have you been pro-life since birth?”
Without a doubt. Only a self-deceived moron couldn’t see it as murder.
Yeah, I donated $50 to the Romney campaign and they promised me a BMW, but couldn’t guarantee the color I wanted. (In other words, get a grip.)
I didn’t realize I was dealing with a Pharisee. My bad.
Rominey will NOT be the nominee!
Looks like you’ve got the right man!!!
Romney in Seven Words “Make all the promises you have to.”
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1952384/posts
“I didn’t realize I was dealing with a Pharisee. My bad.”
Is this the part where you take your ball and go home?
I just knew it...you ignore realities of what the true cost of health care are....you are hung up on one issue which does not affect 99% of the people.
One last question...who was the best president in your lifetime as far as anti-abortion/pro-life policies? I have to believe it was Reagan? Then how come over a million abortions were allowed to take place during Reagan’s 8 years? I am sure you have no cogent response, so I will make a statement...and that is, the president has no control over abortions! It is the people of United States who need to convert to pro-life stance. Until that happens, nothing changes.
Hillary Clinton, John Kerry, [James Carville] Back Mitt Romney's Health Plan
In what could be a blow to Massachusetts Republican Gov. Mitt Romney's presidential aspirations, two Democratic White House hopefuls have offered preliminary endorsements for his health care plan, which would force small businesses to offer health insurance to all uninsured employees.
"To come up with a bipartisan plan in this polarized environment is commendable," Sen. Hillary Clinton told the Associated Press on Thursday.
The Romney plan, which has already been passed by the Massachusetts legislature and is waiting the governor's signature, mimics in some ways Mrs. Clinton's own Hillarycare proposal, which crashed and burned in 1994 with disastrous political consequences.
In another sign of trouble for Romney, Hillary isn't the only Democratic presidential aspirant singing his plan's praises.
"I like this health care bill that's passed," Sen. John Kerry told radio host Don Imus Friday morning. "I think it's terrific. Massachusetts has set a good course on that and I give everybody involved in that credit."
The Romney plan would tax individuals who don't buy their own health insurance. And businesses who didn't provide health insurance for their employees would be penalized $300 per year. A similar proposal in New York carries a much stiffer penalty for businesses - $300 every five weeks.
Romney says he favors removing the business tax. However, when Mrs. Clinton was asked about cutting back the penalty, she told the AP: "That would unravel the plan."
The comments echoed Hillary's defense of her own 1994 proposal. When small businessmen complained that it would bust their budgets, the then-first lady famously declared: "I can't be responsible for every undercapitalized business out there."
The Romney plan is also winning praise from another strange bedfellow, Clinton strategist James Carville, who likes the proposal's bipartisan pedigree.
"It's a feel-good story, this Romney thing. Republican Governor. Democratic legislature," Carville told the AP. "Romney is an ascendant guy."
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.