Romney accuses Obama of not protecting troops

CNN - Political Ticker ^ | 2009-11-14

[Graybeard58]

I even got a temporary new tag line out of it.

[mountainbunny]

He says it is a good model.

Which is a big part of what is so very wrong with Romney. He thinks big government can actually offer solutions better than the private sector..

That is correct. It is a model that we can now look at and see what we like and don't like about it. It is good as a model, but it is not necessarily good as a model for the nation to adopt.

RomneyCare can be tweaked until doomsday. It'll still be a big government "solution". It'll still take money from earners to pay for people who don't earn. It's still intrusive, invasive and ineffective. It is still stealing from workers. Dress it up however you like. Stealing is stealing. Tweaking it will never make it right.

The primary requirement the people of MA were wanting was a system that insured everyone. The primary thing Romney wanted was to keep the operation in the private sector.

You say "the people of MA", as if all of those people wanted this. Did they ask everyone who pays taxes to support it if they wanted it? Or are people working hard and having their taxes taken to support those who don't pay into the system? Hint: I know the answer to this one, as one of my best friends lives in Massachusetts and is being taxed out of his home to pay for this junk.

RomneyCare is not "in the private sector". It's funded on the back of taxpayers, and those backs are getting close to breaking.

Romney said they wanted to make it cost effective, but that is not where all the effort went in getting it started. He thinks it needs more work on that.

Sigh.... Like all liberals, Romney thinks that Nirvana is just one legislative tweak or new law in the future.

[broncobilly]

He says it is a good model. That is correct.
So now you are praising Romneycare, eh?

BB: No. To me, it is only an experiment to show what happens when you follow that approach. It is a “good” model only in the sense of it being an “effective” demonstration from which we can learn what works and doesn't work.

I don't want either Republican or Democrat “solutions” since they all involve more government.
The only “solution” to health care is to get the Feds out of it entirely...and yes, that means phasing out Medicare/Medicaid!

BB: OK. That is another model that needs to be judged on its merits like all other options. And I suppose part of your approach is that there should be private sector insurance policies available for those who want them and a firm policy that if you can't pay for medical help no doctor or hospital would be required to give it to you.
I just want to understand your full “package.”

If the government stays out, then they can't enter the picture and demand that a hospital can't turn people away. And I also don't think it is fair to have those unpaid charges subsidized by other patients. Charity should not be coerced, right?

[fieldmarshaldj]

Yeah, because Cap'n Slick Willard did such a bang-up job with his last ship of state.

[broncobilly]

I accept your point.
I know, because I live in California. Our governor and legislature keep giving us “what we want,” but at least some of us don't want what they are giving us.
Unfortunately, not enough of us want things changed, so we have to suffer the consequences of the idiots who have crazy ideas.

[broncobilly]

I don't think anyone could govern MA properly. There are just too many far left ideologues in the state to satisfy.
I am willing to give Romney a little wiggle room to present the case for how he would govern a country more well balanced. If he can't make the case, then too bad. If he does make the case, but there is someone who makes a better case, then also too bad. But in any case, I would vote for him over another stint of Obama. Obama winning has only one virtue. Hopefully it will convince enough people that they can not trust the democrats on security or economy without some strong checks and balances to keep them from going off and running the ship of state into the rocks.

[fieldmarshaldj]

"I don't think anyone could govern MA properly."

Ed King did. But, of course, unlike Slick Willard, he was a Conservative. :-)

"I am willing to give Romney a little wiggle room to present the case for how he would govern a country more well balanced."

You ? No kidding. However, unlike you, I don't have a death wish for our country to have that disastrous abomination at the helm. At least Zero has the common-courtesy to serve as a Democrat. :-)

[mountainbunny]

I'm a native Californian who has lived on both coasts and everywhere in between. We left when I was still living at home because my dad saw the writing on the wall.

We've lived in liberal places and conservative places. I'm married now, with kids from college on down, and live in a conservative community.

I can tell you that working yourself half to death to pay high taxes so that others don't have to work as hard; and giving up your own rights because others can't manage theirs isn't any way to live.

Mitt Romney doesn't understand what freedom means, and he has shown his willingness to enslave the middle class through much higher taxes to pay for his pet welfare projects.

In that sense, Mitt Romney is not one tiny iota different than any Democrat, including the one in the White House.

If we're going to have a Democrat in office, we may as well have one with a D next to his name, rather than the faux version who will drag the GOP down with him.

If I seem humourless and strident about this, its because this isn't a game to me. I love my country more than I love any political party. I don't want to see a Republican win. I want to see a conservative win. The time has come to put down our pom poms and stop cheering for "our side" when "our side" is opposed to the things the Founders sacrificed to give us.

[Brimack34]

Do you have the feeling this guy is always late to dinner. Notice me Notice me I am still here.

[oldbrowser]

We desperately need a President who is deeply committed to the United States and her citizenry, to capitalism, and to freedom.

And do you think that Obama shares those goals?

We made a serious mistake last election by going on conservative republican litmus test witch hunt and eliminated most of the candidates in favor of some regional guys that sounded good but were not really ready to compete and dropped out.

We let the trolls on these sites bring up all sorts of wedge issues and set us against each other until we ended up with McCain as our candidate. Nobody voted for McCain, they either voted for Obama or against Obama.

I hope we learned that elections have consequences. We need a majority of the votes to win and we aren't going to get that by cannibalizing the republican party. So direct your fire against the other side.

[broncobilly]

I feel the same way you do about the country.

However, I am pessimistic about our chances next time around, because every possible candidate has positives and negatives. No one seems ideal. The way that worked out last time was too many of the Republicans and conservatives promoted their favorite by trying to ridicule and destroy the reputation of whomever was not their favorite. As a result, when our favorite bowed out (Fred) all that was left is a lot of wounded and destroyed candidates. The media picked the one we got, and he ran an abominable campaign.

I see the same thing happening again. We will put our hopes in Sarah. In the end she will implode with the help of the vicious demos and media. And we will be left with a stable of already demolished candidates, demolished mostly by our own doing.

As I see it, our best chances are to prevent amnesty so the Illegals won't be controlling the next election. Then we need to win enough in 2010 to stop the Obama agenda. And then by 2012 the country will be sick of Obama and ready for a change. And it would help if the conservatieves would concentrate more on the poitives instead of the negatives.

[mountainbunny]

And do you think that Obama shares those goals?

No, but I wouldn't expect him to. I do expect the so-called conservative candidate to, though. And toward that end, I do not believe for one split second that Mitt Romney wants what is best for America. I believe he wants what is best for Mitt Romney.

We made a serious mistake last election by going on conservative republican litmus test witch hunt and eliminated most of the candidates in favor of some regional guys that sounded good but were not really ready to compete and dropped out.

I'm not sure what you mean by that (please explain), but we make a serious mistake every four years when we hold open primaries. We make an even bigger mistake when we coddle candidates like Mitt Romney or John McCain because its somehow "their turn". We make a serious mistake in allowing the media to play a part in deciding who will be our nominee.

We let the trolls on these sites bring up all sorts of wedge issues and set us against each other until we ended up with McCain as our candidate. Nobody voted for McCain, they either voted for Obama or against Obama.

I lay that blame on those who should have spent the last four years grooming conservatives for the office... you know - the ones who gave Dede Scozzafava 900K, and didn't give that kind of money to deserving conservatives. I also blame the party leaders who handed McCain everything on a silver platter while simultaneously telling those running in local races that there wasn't any money for them.

I hope we learned that elections have consequences. We need a majority of the votes to win and we aren't going to get that by cannibalizing the republican party. So direct your fire against the other side.

You're right; elections do have consequences. But that isn't going to scare me into voting for someone just because the guy on the ballot has nice hair or an R next to his name.

I can't control what the Republican Party does. All I can ever control is what I do. As a matter of conscience and morality, I will not vote for a liberal, regardless of which party they belong to. It isn't like being a football fan, loving your team through thick and thin. I don't care which "side" wins if both sides are trying to appeal to liberalism.

If the Republican Party wants my vote, they need to:

* Close the primary system to "Republican-For-A-Day" voters who skew primaries. This is key.

* Spend as much time and money supporting conservative candidates nation-wide as they do people like Dede Scozzafava

* Get rid of that race-bating ineffective imbecile, Michael Steele, who seems permanently stuck on stupid talking about a "Hip Hop makeover" for the GOP and how white people are afraid of him. If Republicans aren't deeply ashamed and chagrined to have him as their party's leader, they aren't paying attention.

[Finny]

I am hugely flattered! Thank you for the compliment!

[Timeout]

I think you’re onto me. I post these comments for amusement, too.

I simply say I like Mitt and, like clockwork, the DREADED RED INK appears! I’m a commie! Only “true conservatives” belong on FR! I get a lot of good LOL’s out of it.

They call themselves conservatives, but at the same time they demand group-think and enforced policy discipline. My type of conservative holds to the old fashioned: Let a thousand flowers bloom.