After 10 or 20 years of campaigning for the Presidency, you'd think Romney would get it.
He doesn't.
....Santorum didn't just offer a grazing attack of Romneycare like many other candidates have in prior debates. He got very specific. He noted that it was top-down government control -- from the mandate forcing individuals to purchase health insurance to the expansion of Medicaid. And when Romney tried to wiggle away, and defended the individual mandate making the same arguments as President Obama, Santorum pinned him down, explaining all the problems with the health care system in Massachusetts under the law. Romney's response to Santorum's passionate case against government-run health care was to say, “It’s not worth getting angry about,”...
Perhaps Willard doesn't recall the genesis of the American Revolution, which was a very small tax on tea, along with a Statism which resembles the one Obozo is beginning to impose.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
7 comments:
As Santorum likes to point out, a woman impregnated by a rapist is given a gift from God.
Santorum's right about that. It might take an extraordinary woman, but a child is a gift indeed.
But these are ordinary claims about extraordinary things. It shouldn't be shocking to realize that gifts from God pass ordinary sensibility. What should be shocking is the capacity to turn such a thing into a gift. That is strength; that is power.
Au Contraire Mr. Romney - it is most certainly worth "getting angry about"... In fact that anger prompted millions to get off their couches and get involved in 2009. That anger created the red tidal wave that swept the country in 2010 - not just the House of Representatives, but at the local and state level. It is that anger that understands that once the Federal government can force you to purchase something they specify, there is no longer any limit to their power.
THIS is why Romney is so untrusted. THIS is why he is not a conservative and should not be the conservative standard bearer.
Yet, if Romney does earn the nomination, he will receive the votes from the likes of Dad29 and neomom because he is the "lesser of two evils". So much for being the "conservative standard bearer".
My state's primary is so late in the cycle that, odds are, I will have no say in who our candidate will be.
That said. Yes. I will plug my nose and vote for Romney if it comes to that. Marginal improvement over Obummer is still improvement.
I won't. We have heard that you know a tree by its fruit: the fruits of these trees are the same, Romneycare and Obamacare. We know an animal by its feed, and these two feed from the same trough. Look at their donors.
Four years is better than eight. If it comes to it, 2016 isn't so far, and both parties will have to bring new faces to the table.
Neomom, Newt just stated that not only is Romney a liar, but also a liberal. So by voting for him, from the eyes of a "true conservative", you seemingly is supporting the very things you allegedly disdain. As I stated before, feel free to compromise your principles. Interesting how you direct your anger at Romney and his policies, only to support him at the poll IF he wins because he is somehow "better" than Obama. Hilarious, or sad, I can't tell.
At least Billiam's scruples are not compromised if he follows through with his pledge. His reasoning is sound.
Post a Comment