Skip to comments.Chaffetz: Gingrich ‘Fairly Hypocritical’ on Individual Mandates
Posted on 01/30/2012 9:29:24 AM PST by Windy City Conservative
Utah congressman Jason Chaffetz, a Tea Party favorite, slammed Newt Gingrich today as an unreliable conservative and a convenient conservative.
Speaking in a conference call with reporters arranged by the Romney campaign, Chaffetz, who has endorsed Romney, pointed to an audio clip from 2009 unearthed by Verum Serum this weekend that shows Gingrich supporting an individual mandate as a reason the former Speaker was less conservative than Romney.
For all the rhetorical barbs, Speaker Gingrich has thrown at Gov. Romney, this certainly leads one to believe that hes fairly hypocritical on this issue, Chaffetz said. He was advocating an individual mandate at the national level, something that Mitt Romney has never done.
In the audio, Gingrich does say that those who are absolute libertarian[s] could post a bond instead of buying health insurance.
Looks like the Tea Party needs to replace this guy, too. He's been bought out by the enemy.
Oh, yes....it must be Monday. Time for NR to unleash a fresh batch of Newt hit pieces.
This is ridiculous.
I understand Newt is not a “perfect” conservative, but these criticisms imply that Romney is a conservative. I am simply amazed by these pundits, who think they can sway us.
Obviously this is going to the masses, using the theory that if you say it long enough, it must be true. Well, good luck to all these idiots next time they try to ask for my support and money.
Just my opinion, but it sure seems National Review is just like Drudge...they are all in for Romney.
Hey chaffy - Mitt is hypocritical ALL THE TIME!
Hypocritical is not the word you should bring up with Mitt, the POS, snake in the grass, gay marriage, romneycare, big gov’t, lying/deceiver backstabber, in the race.
Honesty is not a hallmark of National Review Magazine.
Who the F asked him anyway?
We need to fight these guys hard.
NR came out for Romney even before the primaries. They’ve been pushing him non-stop. Between that and the Sarah bashing on that site, I no longer frequent that inside-the-beltway-establishment rag.
Chaffetz is a Mormon, so it might make sense that he would back Romney. (Is it out of bounds to point that out?)
Utah congressman Jason Chaffetz, a Tea Party favorite TRAITOR
I thought Chaffetz might have a future as a Conservative....
I was wrong. He is a Kool-Aid drinker for Romney.
Wonder how Jason squares Mitt’s Anti-gun stance with Utah voters? How about Pro-Choice??? How about Romneycare.Obamacare?????
I am really disappointed. Jason looks like he is supporting Mitt just because of their shared faith in the Mormon Church.
National Review has been in the tank for Romney since the run up to the 2008 election. I hadn’t seen it in Drudge before, but it’s really been flagrant for the past week or so.
Hugh Hewitt was also big on Romney in 2008. I haven’t seen much of him recently; maybe Freepers just don’t visit him much any more.
Nothing else needs to be added - he has the same reasons for Mitt as Pres. as other Mormons have.
Flagrant, snarky, and condescending!
I’m sick of hearing about how Gingrich was for an individual mandate as an argument FOR Romney.
Gingrich was Speaker of the House for 4 years. During that period how many times did he introduce a bill in the House to be voted on that would’ve implemented an individual mandate for healthcare?
Did he get the House to pass any bill implementing an individual mandate?
Also it just so happened to be a time when Hillarycare was trying to be shoved down our throats. And during that period the Heritage Foundation was also TALKING about an individual mandate as an alternative to Hillarycare.
The way I see it introducing the individual mandate into the DIALOGUE at the time as a stand alone against Hillarycare served a purpose of muddying the political waters and taking any steam out of Hillarycare that might’ve developed.
In any case even if you want to make the argument that Newt was for an individual mandate do NOT give me this BS that his position was somehow WORSE than Romney’s. When Romney essentially nationalized(and I do mean nationalized as I’m sure the country as a whole will soon be on the hook to pay for that fiscal boondoggle) the entire healthcare structure of Massachusetts.
Romney is NOT a conservative, and he is NOT to the right of Gingrich on this issue. Or any issue that I know of for that matter.
Hell, in the debate a couple DAYS ago Romney DEFENDED the individual mandate inherent in Romneycare.
Listening to all these SUPPOSEDLY conservative pundits and politicians torching Gingrich in favor of Romney over issues where Romney is OBVIOUSLY to the LEFT of Gingrich is enraging.
It feels like I’m living in a bizarro world, and it’s sickening.
A month, maybe six weeks ago, I was relatively agnostic about Romney. I figured, ‘OK if he wins I’ll have a couple beers before I go vote for him over Obama while holding my nose.’ But in these last few weeks I’ve grown to genuinely dislike and distrust the man.. along with many of the people whom I previously had respect for who are now trying to prop up Romney by trashing Gingrich. And furthermore I’m genuinely questioning whether Romney would attempt to govern in even a center-right fashion let alone from the right, he is a leftist.
I’m to the point now where SHOULD Romney win the nomination, I might do what previously was unthinkable to me. I might just write someone in for President(probably Palin).
I genuinely don’t think Romney will push for any kind of meaningful repeals if he’s elected INCLUDING the repeal of Obamacare. Romney advisor and loser to Al Franken, Norm Coleman is hinting at as much.
All a Romney presidency would do is put a tremendous pressure on the Jim Demints and Jeff Sessions’ of the Senate and the Michelle Bachmanns, Steve Kings, Louie Gohmerts, and to some extent the Paul Ryans’ of the House. Ultimately, either the party would bow to the moderates, or be splintered beyond any recognition. With the moderates joining with the dems more often than not and the conservative tea partiers being outcast.
The Republicans would be AGAIN blamed for whatever F-ups Romney would introduce(and I’m positive there would be more than a few).
The way I see it is we may be better off strengthening an already strong check against Obama by adding numbers AND quality to the House and Senate. While Obama is President the moderate Republicans in Congress have much more incentive to side with the conservatives in the party against Obama than they would if Romney were to be elected.
What can I say other than to repeat that I genuinely dislike Romney and genuinely don’t think he will shrink government in any meaningful way. And I feel the adverse effects of his moderate governing will only hurt the prospects of the Republican party becoming the conservative party that this country needs to survive.
They’re all political whores.
Romney paid their price, and they, meaning NR or whoever, will do what he requests.
It is about power and money.
Santorum endorsed Snarlin' Arlen.
Newt endorsed Dede Scozzafava.
Mitt Romney endorsed ... himself.
Ron Paul ... who knows.
As Mark Steyn put it, all the candidates in the race represent a compromise of conservatism to some extent. One may disagree with another's judgment without completely denouncing good conservatives like Jason Chaffetz.
Endorsements really aren't that big a deal, and certainly not worth attacking one's allies over.
When it becomes a pattern of behavior, like Ann Coulter's long, strange trip off the reservation, that's a different story. But most regular people and most politicians will make substandard endorsements now and again.
One obvious question arises - is Chaffetz a Mormon? I like him, and he’s a great conservative, but he is from Utah, and I wonder if he’s a Mormon and is feeling a bit of empathy with Mitt over the religion issue.
Sort of like the Catholics and JFK and the Blacks and Obama????