Question for democrats about Romney

[dblack]

See Post #4 dopey

Saw it, disregarded it, doofey.

 

[naturegirl]

See, overreaching Feds, again. What may be right for one state's constituents may not be right for each and every state. What works in NY probably won't be so good for small town Georgia.

Romney answered to his people, he didn't impose his own views. The majority wanted health care, he did what he was elected to do.

So tell me does the majority of America want Obamacare?? Is Obama answering to the people or driving his own agenda??

You can certainly argue that they did. It's essentially the same argument you're making for Romneycare.

It's hilarious (and grotesque, and depressing) to watch Republican followers trying to defend Romney's mandate while condemning Obama's. The state's right's excuse is weak tea. PPACA is a corporatist abuse of individual rights at the federal level. Romney's version was a corporatist abuse of individual rights at the state level. If the only objection Romney has to Obamacare is the state's rights issue - and not the recognition that forcing people to buy shit from your corporate buddies is wrong - then he can go sit in the same corner as Obama and fuck himself.

So your argument is if it's good for MA, then it must be good everyone. The public overwhelmingly supported it. Obama couldn't possibly be shoving his agenda down the throats of stoopid Americans, they are just stoopid!!

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

See Post #4 dopey

Saw it, disregarded it, doofey.

 

[Avorysuds]

See, overreaching Feds, again. What may be right for one state's constituents may not be right for each and every state. What works in NY probably won't be so good for small town Georgia.

Romney answered to his people, he didn't impose his own views. The majority wanted health care, he did what he was elected to do.

So tell me does the majority of America want Obamacare?? Is Obama answering to the people or driving his own agenda??

You can certainly argue that they did. It's essentially the same argument you're making for Romneycare.

It's hilarious (and grotesque, and depressing) to watch Republican followers trying to defend Romney's mandate while condemning Obama's. The state's right's excuse is weak tea. PPACA is a corporatist abuse of individual rights at the federal level. Romney's version was a corporatist abuse of individual rights at the state level. If the only objection Romney has to Obamacare is the state's rights issue - and not the recognition that forcing people to buy shit from your corporate buddies is wrong - then he can go sit in the same corner as Obama and fuck himself.

Seeing that Mitt feels Romneycare should be ado0pted on a federal level everyone here who makes the argument that Mitt understands the difference between state and federal is outright lying or just out of touch with some very basic position Mitt held before he started running for President and needed to look conservative.


Here, video... I made it easy.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2M9gGwW2gCs&feature=results_main&playnext=1&list=PL4557B42A79B1BA1C]Mitt Romney supported Federal Mandate in 2009 MTP appearance - YouTube[/ame]

 

[dblack]

See, overreaching Feds, again. What may be right for one state's constituents may not be right for each and every state. What works in NY probably won't be so good for small town Georgia.

Romney answered to his people, he didn't impose his own views. The majority wanted health care, he did what he was elected to do.

So tell me does the majority of America want Obamacare?? Is Obama answering to the people or driving his own agenda??

You can certainly argue that they did. It's essentially the same argument you're making for Romneycare.

It's hilarious (and grotesque, and depressing) to watch Republican followers trying to defend Romney's mandate while condemning Obama's. The state's right's excuse is weak tea. PPACA is a corporatist abuse of individual rights at the federal level. Romney's version was a corporatist abuse of individual rights at the state level. If the only objection Romney has to Obamacare is the state's rights issue - and not the recognition that forcing people to buy shit from your corporate buddies is wrong - then he can go sit in the same corner as Obama and fuck himself.

So your argument is if it's good for MA, then it must be good everyone....

Nope. Try again. My argument is that it's a violation of individual rights. It doesn't matter whether it's at the federal or state level, or how popular it is. It's wrong. Romney doesn't get that - any more than Obama. And he's just as wrong. Neither of these tools will get my support.

 

[VaYank5150]

Do you view Romneycare as an enormous accomplishment for Mitt Romney?

It's basically Obamacare, something most every democrat supports, at the state level. So if you think Obamacare staying on the books would be a big accomplishment for Obama, then you also view Romneycare as a big accomplishment for Mitt, correct?

Thanks for your input.

Difference between Romneycare and Obamacare

"Romneycare” was developed by a coalition of Labor, Management, Republicans and Democrats, who collaborated on its makeup, its contents, and represented the people of the state of Massachusetts—at that time in history. That is how a representative democracy works. If Romney disagreed with parts of the Massachusetts law, that was overcome by the 85% Democratic legislature’s power.

Obamacare was “crammed down our throats” by Barack Obama, Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid and the Democratic majorities in the House and Senate, in spite of the fact that almost 2/3 of Americans neither favored the law nor wanted it! And almost that many still do not like it, and still do not want it. Pelosi’s now famous statement, “We have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it…away from the fog of the controversy…” is indicative of the disregard for the wished of American citizens.

Interesting article from factcheck.org. You Romney supporters and Obama hates should read it.

FactCheck.org : ‘RomneyCare’ Facts and Falsehoods

Both laws have an individual mandate, requiring persons to have insurance or pay a penalty; subsidies for low-income persons; an expansion of Medicaid; an exchange where individuals can buy insurance; and requirements for employers. But the national law puts a greater emphasis on small businesses by providing tax credits for those who want to offer insurance, and it includes many potential cost-control measures that Massachusetts lawmakers are only now tackling in separate legislation. Yes, those are largely experimental ideas, and as we’ve said before, it’s unclear whether the bundled payments and pilot projects President Obama touts will have a big impact on costs. But the national law included many steps aimed at decreasing the growth in health spending, while the law Romney signed purposefully did not.

■The major components of the state and federal law are similar, but details vary. The federal law put a greater emphasis on cost-control measures, for instance. Massachusetts is just now tackling that.
■The state law was successful on one big goal: A little more than 98 percent of state residents now have insurance.
■Claims that the law is “bankrupting” the state are greatly exaggerated. Costs rose more quickly than expected in the first few years, but are now in line with what the Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation had estimated.
■Small-business owners are perhaps the least happy stakeholders. Cheaper health plans for them through the state exchange haven’t materialized, as they hoped.
■Despite claims to the contrary, there’s no clear evidence that the law had an adverse effect on waiting times. In fact, 62 percent of physicians say it didn’t.
■Public support has been high. One poll found that 68.5 percent of nonelderly adults supported the law in 2006; 67 percent still do.

 

[candycorn]

Do you view Romneycare as an enormous accomplishment for Mitt Romney?

It's basically Obamacare, something most every democrat supports, at the state level. So if you think Obamacare staying on the books would be a big accomplishment for Obama, then you also view Romneycare as a big accomplishment for Mitt, correct?

Thanks for your input.

I don't see why the Governor doesn't talk about his accomplishment more...

 

[VaYank5150]

See, overreaching Feds, again. What may be right for one state's constituents may not be right for each and every state. What works in NY probably won't be so good for small town Georgia.

Romney answered to his people, he didn't impose his own views. The majority wanted health care, he did what he was elected to do.

So tell me does the majority of America want Obamacare?? Is Obama answering to the people or driving his own agenda??

You can certainly argue that they did. It's essentially the same argument you're making for Romneycare.

It's hilarious (and grotesque, and depressing) to watch Republican followers trying to defend Romney's mandate while condemning Obama's. The state's right's excuse is weak tea. PPACA is a corporatist abuse of individual rights at the federal level. Romney's version was a corporatist abuse of individual rights at the state level. If the only objection Romney has to Obamacare is the state's rights issue - and not the recognition that forcing people to buy shit from your corporate buddies is wrong - then he can go sit in the same corner as Obama and fuck himself.

Seeing that Mitt feels Romneycare should be ado0pted on a federal level everyone here who makes the argument that Mitt understands the difference between state and federal is outright lying or just out of touch with some very basic position Mitt held before he started running for President and needed to look conservative.


Here, video... I made it easy.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2M9gGwW2gCs&feature=results_main&playnext=1&list=PL4557B42A79B1BA1C]Mitt Romney supported Federal Mandate in 2009 MTP appearance - YouTube[/ame]

But....but....wouldn't that make Mitt Romney a SOCIALIST????

 

[Lovebears65]

It was an accomplishment for a version of Mitt Romney that no longer exists.

What does Obama's ass taste like?

 

[naturegirl]

Do you view Romneycare as an enormous accomplishment for Mitt Romney?

It's basically Obamacare, something most every democrat supports, at the state level. So if you think Obamacare staying on the books would be a big accomplishment for Obama, then you also view Romneycare as a big accomplishment for Mitt, correct?

Thanks for your input.

I don't see why the Governor doesn't talk about his accomplishment more...

I guess for the same reason Obamavider doesn't talk about his signature accomplishment.

 

[candycorn]

Romney has repudiated ORomneycare, so in view of his new position, which is effectively that those plans were mistakes,

the extent that those plans have succeeded or will succeed measures the extent to which Romney is now wrong.

I'm not asking for your opinion on what he says while campaigning, I'm asking your opinion as to whether or not Romneycare was a huge accomplishment for Romney.

It was an accomplishment for a version of Mitt Romney that no longer exists.

It was before the etch-a-sketch was shaken up.

 

[dblack]

But....but....wouldn't that make Mitt Romney a SOCIALIST????

More of a corporatist. Just like Obama.

 

[Sallow]

You can certainly argue that they did. It's essentially the same argument you're making for Romneycare.

It's hilarious (and grotesque, and depressing) to watch Republican followers trying to defend Romney's mandate while condemning Obama's. The state's right's excuse is weak tea. PPACA is a corporatist abuse of individual rights at the federal level. Romney's version was a corporatist abuse of individual rights at the state level. If the only objection Romney has to Obamacare is the state's rights issue - and not the recognition that forcing people to buy shit from your corporate buddies is wrong - then he can go sit in the same corner as Obama and fuck himself.

Seeing that Mitt feels Romneycare should be ado0pted on a federal level everyone here who makes the argument that Mitt understands the difference between state and federal is outright lying or just out of touch with some very basic position Mitt held before he started running for President and needed to look conservative.


Here, video... I made it easy.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2M9gGwW2gCs&feature=results_main&playnext=1&list=PL4557B42A79B1BA1C]Mitt Romney supported Federal Mandate in 2009 MTP appearance - YouTube[/ame]

But....but....wouldn't that make Mitt Romney a SOCIALIST????

To what extent?

The very nature of most Democracies have some measure of socialism.

In any case..RomneyCare is essentially socialism lite.

In that it's a "market based" solution.

 

[VaYank5150]

Seeing that Mitt feels Romneycare should be ado0pted on a federal level everyone here who makes the argument that Mitt understands the difference between state and federal is outright lying or just out of touch with some very basic position Mitt held before he started running for President and needed to look conservative.


Here, video... I made it easy.

Mitt Romney supported Federal Mandate in 2009 MTP appearance - YouTube

But....but....wouldn't that make Mitt Romney a SOCIALIST????

To what extent?

The very nature of most Democracies have some measure of socialism.

In any case..RomneyCare is essentially socialism lite.

In that it's a "market based" solution.

My point being that with all of the other names the right has come up with for Obama, "Socialist" is among them. Can voters now publicly begin calling Romney a Socialist as well?

 

[hortysir]

Do you view Romneycare as an enormous accomplishment for Mitt Romney?

It's basically Obamacare, something most every democrat supports, at the state level. So if you think Obamacare staying on the books would be a big accomplishment for Obama, then you also view Romneycare as a big accomplishment for Mitt, correct?

Thanks for your input.

Romney has repudiated ORomneycare, so in view of his new position, which is effectively that those plans were mistakes,

the extent that those plans have succeeded or will succeed measures the extent to which Romney is now wrong.

Sidestep much?

 

[Dr.Drock]

Romney has repudiated ORomneycare, so in view of his new position, which is effectively that those plans were mistakes,

the extent that those plans have succeeded or will succeed measures the extent to which Romney is now wrong.

I'm not asking for your opinion on what he says while campaigning, I'm asking your opinion as to whether or not Romneycare was a huge accomplishment for Romney.

It was an accomplishment for a version of Mitt Romney that no longer exists.

And then comes the time where you ask yourself what should I take more seriously? What a politician says or what he does?

I find my answer to that question puts me in the tiny minority of americans.

 

[hortysir]

Interesting, so many "conservatives" support very liberal Ideas as long as it's done on a state level but uses federal money to exist.

I assume all conservatives defending Mitt would vote for HC like Romneycare in their own state and view it as "conservative" as well.

BTW, Mitt supported Romneycare (Obamacare) on a federal level... Almost like Mitt didn't know the difference between state VS federal.

No one, here in this thread, has voiced support of Romneycare---including the Dembulbs that were directly asked.

Another sidestepper

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Seeing that Mitt feels Romneycare should be ado0pted on a federal level everyone here who makes the argument that Mitt understands the difference between state and federal is outright lying or just out of touch with some very basic position Mitt held before he started running for President and needed to look conservative.


Here, video... I made it easy.

Mitt Romney supported Federal Mandate in 2009 MTP appearance - YouTube

But....but....wouldn't that make Mitt Romney a SOCIALIST????

To what extent?

The very nature of most Democracies have some measure of socialism.

In any case..RomneyCare is essentially socialism lite.

In that it's a "market based" solution.

 

[Avorysuds]

Yeah this thread lost it's way, just as Mitt will during this election when Obama spends a billion dollars showing us where Mitt supported everyone one of the policies you "conservatives" hate most about Obama.

Obama's strat is not to run against Mitt, it's to run against himself by depressing the Republicans as they see even a vote for Mitt is a vote for Obama's policies.

The biggest issues Republicans have with Obama are the Stimulus, TARP and Obamacare… All three issues Mitt supported, on video even. One, the biggest one (Obamacare) Mitt passed in his home state.

Good luck Reps, you’re gonna need it when Obama actually tarts punching.

 

[Warrior102]

Yeah this thread lost it's way, just as Mitt will during this election when Obama spends a billion dollars showing us where Mitt supported everyone one of the policies you "conservatives" hate most about Obama.

Obama's strat is not to run against Mitt, it's to run against himself by depressing the Republicans as they see even a vote for Mitt is a vote for Obama's policies.

The biggest issues Republicans have with Obama are the Stimulus, TARP and Obamacare… All three issues Mitt supported, on video even. One, the biggest one (Obamacare) Mitt passed in his home state.

Good luck Reps, you’re gonna need it when Obama actually tarts punching.

You sound worried and desperate, asswipe. Calm down before you blow a fucking gasket.