Cole writes: "After campaigning for months on repealing Obamacare, you suddenly say you want to keep 'parts' of it, including preventing insurance companies from declining to cover people for pre-existing conditions. The way Obamacare allows that provision, however, is to make all the healthy young people get insurance."
Republican presidential candid Mitt Romney delivers remarks on the Affordable Care Act, President Obama's health care reform bill, after the Supreme Court upheld a majority of the law, in Washington, D.C. on June 28, 2012. (photo: Kevin Dietsch/UPI)
Dear Mitt: *You* Don't Get to Say That
09 September 12
ear Mitt Romney:
Your so-called Medicare reform is just a way of shifting health expenses from millionaires (whose taxes you want to lower) to middle class and working people (with whom you want to stick the bill). A 48-year-old today, who starts getting Medicare in 2030, would have to pay an extra $124,600 under your plan! Meanwhile, your running mate's tax plan would reduce your own income taxes, as a multimillionaire, to less than one percent a year. You don't get to say that!
You and your running mate are blaming Barack Obama for high gasoline prices. But you demand a stricter blockade on Iranian petroleum! Given that the present blockade has taken perhaps a million barrels a day off the market at a time of increasing demand in Asia, you don't get to slam President Obama for causing high gasoline prices. Prices, as your MBA courses might have informed you, Mr. Romney, are based on supply and demand. If you reduce Iran supply, and demand stays the same or rises, then prices will go up. Since you want to tighten the blockade, you don't get to say that!
After campaigning for months on repealing Obamacare, you suddenly say you want to keep "parts" of it, including preventing insurance companies from declining to cover people for pre-existing conditions. The way Obamacare allows that provision, however, is to make all the healthy young people get insurance or face a fine, thus increasing the pool size so as to allow those with known health conditions to also join the pool without bankrupting the companies. I mean, this is flip-flopping on an epic scale. First you invented Obamacare in Massachusetts, then you repudiated it as a national program, now you are embracing the key "parts" of it while pledging to repeal it! You don't get to say that!
You defend yourself for not mentioning the Afghanistan War, in which US troops are fighting and dying, in your acceptance speech, by saying that people should focus on policies, not on words. But, you didn't mention Afghanistan policy, either. What is your position on the US branding the Haqqani Network a terrorist organization? How will that affect US-Pakistan relations, given that we think the Pakistani Inter-Services Intelligence has links to the Haqqanis? What about the the US halt to training Afghanistan policemen because so many turned out to be … Taliban? But training up local security forces is the pathway the US has announced to exit from Afghanistan. Where do you stand on this policy, since you like policy? In fact you haven't told us what your foreign policy will be on almost any issue, except that you have managed for no good reason to anger Russia by branding it our number one enemy? I mean, I know Mormons don't like Vodka, but still… You don't get to say that!
Your running mate Paul Ryan all of a sudden says states should have the right to legalize marijuana for medical purposes and not be bothered by the Feds. But you've been campaigning for years on a 'war on drugs' platform. As with 'parts of Obamacare,' your campaign is now speaking out of both sides of its mouth to muddy the waters and perhaps attract some votes. You don't get to say that!
|
THE NEW STREAMLINED RSN LOGIN PROCESS: Register once, then login and you are ready to comment. All you need is a Username and a Password of your choosing and you are free to comment whenever you like! Welcome to the Reader Supported News community. |













Comments
We are concerned about a recent drift towards vitriol in the RSN Reader comments section. There is a fine line between moderation and censorship. No one likes a harsh or confrontational forum atmosphere. At the same time everyone wants to be able to express themselves freely. We'll start by encouraging good judgment. If that doesn't work we'll have to ramp up the moderation.
General guidelines: Avoid personal attacks on other forum members; Avoid remarks that are ethnically derogatory; Do not advocate violence, or any illegal activity.
Remember that making the world better begins with responsible action.
- The RSN Team
Maybe I'm deluded, and I would not under any circumstances vote for Romney, but at this point I do not fear a Romney administration as much as I did the George W. Bush first administration. GWN scared the hell out of me, and still does, I tried to tell people at the time they did not listen to me. Seeing that guy get elected was an 8-year-long bummer.
Trouble is, their polkcies have been in effect for the last 12 years!! --so, where are the jobs?
It doesn't matter who the GOP candidate is, as long as he can sign his name. Pernsey has it right, they just want a figurehead there so that the Cheney's etc, can still do whatever they want. It worked out so well for them with GWB that now they want more, so that they can finish ruining the country.
But there is one this as a Bain CEO that he he did not have to deal with that a CEO of a company that makes stuff does deal with. Shareholders.
As President the shareholders that would be responsible for hiring him are the extreme right wing of American politics. They are extreme in both fiscal and social policies. These are the people that Willie will be indebted to, and they don't like being double crossed.
I know many would say that President Obama is also controlled by the same group, or at least the fiscal faction. Their control and influence over Obama is a fraction of how tightly Romney has tied himself to them, both fiscally and socially.
Right now, he has free rein to say anything to get elected; remember the etch-a-sketch? If he wins, the free rein gets replaced by puppet strings made of steel.
I have a constructive suggestion for moving jobs back to America. Companies like Costco could have a "Kirkland #" on the products that they sell. the "#" is the percentage of the product that was made in the USA. The containers that bring Chinese goods to the USA, probably return empty. These empty containers could be carrying things like the bolts in the chair I just bought from Costco. If the nuts and bolts were made in the USA, taken to China and installed in the chairs and they were 5% of the parts in the chair... the chair would be a "Kirkland 5". I would be happy to pay a dollar or two more for a chair that had 5% USA parts. This could be the start of bringing jobs back to America.
There's something liberals miss about their middle class republican friends motives. Like little boys dreaming of football fame, they dream of being rich and believe they will be. They want to be tax cheats like Romney. They do want their church and sleeze too. That's what's wrong with them. It's also why they aren't thinking critically about their own party and why they aren't listening. It's why they want social/politica l/economic anarchy. They really beleive they will get rich that way.
I'm not in a position to comment on the policy decisions, but I am able to do some of the arithmatic behind those claims.
If, as Juan Cole suggests, "A 48-year-old today, who starts getting Medicare in 2030, would have to pay an extra $124,600 under your plan!".
If he's right, my vote is already decided. I don't need a whole lot of convincing on which way to go. I can read the dollars and cents more easily than I can weigh the pros and cons of the policies being presented.
Looks like Obama is the only one who gets it.
+ Guaranteed Issue
+ Community Rating
Those are the only problems America's health care system had before ObamaCare.
Now we have government death panels, an HHS secretary that is "beyond judicial review" (read the ObamaCare law - all 2700 pages of it; "beyond judicial review" ocurrs 17 times) and a significant hindrance to small business growth.
If those death panels really existed would they so much worse than insurance company death panels, that really do exist? Insurance companies dedicate acres of office space for people whose sole function is to figure out ways of denying coverage to their customers when they need it. Likewise, hospitals spend millions on staff whose only job is to dicker with insurance companies over coverage for their patients. The elimination of all of that would save billions.
WRONG on so many levels. I just spent the last 6 years with no insurance and no way to get any because of pre-existing conditions - now THAT is a death panel. It wasn't even a week after SCOTUS ruling came out that our agent called me saying "I have some really good news for you".
A "...hindrance to small business growth." - hardly. CA PCIP for me, closing in on 60, with many PreExCon can now get a policy for $492 a month, $1,500 deductible. Many local providers, even my own family doc are on that list. The former PreCon was (and there still is) a MRMIP program with a huge premium, huge deductible and taps out at 75k - and that ain't annual. There is your damned Death Panel and that happened under Ahnuld and The Shrub.
Other health insurance plans also have provisions for denying care.
What the ACa does is provide assistance to those who want to decide for themselves when "heroic measures" should be applied and when not. But lying about this is the Republican way. Some of them seem to prefer to lie even when the truth would serve them better. Yes, Romney & Ryan, I'm looking at you.
This is the most bizarre thing I've seen in this election cycle, and that includes a lot so far.
I wonder now that Romney has gotten past the far right if he is suddenly going to start to poping out with more statements like this on different issues to try to appeal to moderates and independents?
Can that work after all his flip-flopping and hedging?
Are you missing the point? The very power of the Rove-Luntz-Aile s machine is that it repeats the BIG LIE over and over again, a simplistic, quotable, and usually emotion-laden tidbit. It works along with the power of media control: the BIG LIE is asserted on FOX, then a right-wing 'guest' appears on a CNN or CBS or even an NPR show, and gets to repeat the same line. Remember 'Weapons of Mass Destruction', 'Anchor Baby', 'Obamacare' [that was more subtle, linking Health Care Reform with the visage of Obama, a blackman, which the Tea Party had already 'enhanced' with the Hitler Mustache]?
The BIG MISTAKE with the Liberal - or let me just call it the rational - response to the BIG LIE, is that it presumes that the BIG LIE is policing itself with a rational underpinning. And, of course, it is not!
Furthermore, by starting each little crazy episode with a newness and crazed forwardness EACH TIME, without reference to the old BIG LIE or the last BIG LIE, the right-wing propaganda machine's BIG LIE strategy seems forever on the offensive.
In the meantime, the rational people are left in the dark.
Obviously, you get it!
Read more: http://www.vosizneias.com/113209/2012/09/09/washington-obama-hits-romney-with-new-medicare-study/
Today in the paper I read, it said Romney now wants to keep parts of Obama care...hes such an etch-a-sketch. So you can just shake and clear what he said before...today is a new day in Mitt town. Just another flip flop, arent the right wingers getting sick of it? They spout his crap one day as if its rational and the next day he changes it, its got to be hard to keep on defending him. I suppose all they really do have is the attacks on Obama, who can keep up with the rest?
Romney isn't flip flopping. Its all about getting you to turn over the reins of your company, whoops, I mean country, into his hands. The tea baggers actually are right about him. He only believes in one thing. That is that he, Willie Mitt Romney, must be President. Do you actually know why? I don't.
If anyone thinks he's for the working man, they're under a Republican mind warp. The Republican politicians have entered into treasonious territory.
One of the contributing factors to Mitt's game is the unwillingness of some members of the press to press for clarification and explanations.
This morning on Meet the Press Mitt spouted absurdities and contradictions regaling the masses with monopoly money while some cheered. It's more dangerous when the lie is allowed to be aired without proper debate - hard hitting questioning is more often saved for President Obama.
Why did Gregory fail to make Mitt explain his improvised often contradictory non-solutions? Why is serious discussion avoided ? And why oh why does Mitt get featured for half a show when it's the Democratic Convention that just took place? Isn't it enough we suffered the GOP the previous week? Does Mitt need more PR?
He must see himself as a modern Moses with a new improved tablet every day. Maybe that's how he adds spice to his life but there's too much at stake for games.
In the end even with his inexhaustible collection of masks and costumes Mitt remains a non-entity.
" Anything Mitt Romney says comes with an expiration date"
Of course he gets to say "that," or anything else he wants to say. He's paying good hard cold cash, and lots of it, to say whatever he wants to say!
If we don't consider him human, all he has to do is incorporate himself, and then by the power of SCOTUS, he becomes a human person.
I find fault with the corporate interviewer who doesn't smack him upside the head for his lies, lies and more lies. But, that corporate interviewer knows who pays his salary, and his bonus.
When your boss is General Electric, the company that makes nuclear power plants, you don't usually step out of line for fear of being nuked right on the spot!
To hear Mitt & Paul talk these days, they are the ones who invented the Internet, are going cure cancer, know where Jimmy Hoffa is buried and came up with the idea of sliced bread.
Ah, if only Pinocchio was around today, we could rebuild our decaying bridges by just seating Mitt on one side and Paul on the other, aim their proboscises correctly, and start interviewing them on any subject. Offset the aim a bit and you'll get a two lane crossing. I'm serious! This would work...wouldn't create that many jobs, but it would solve the infrastructure problem!
But, you do agree with me...this proboscis thing would work. It might get a bit ugly if either one of them got a cold, but hey, what the hell; a bridge over troubled waters, is a bridge nonetheless.
They are liars and cannot provide any specifics about anything other than they want to accommodate the 1% and take us to a war with Iran.
Their entire party has had only one goal- to remove the black president at any cost.
Enough said?
Better yet, start helping the diabled, elderly, minority and poor to get IDs in your state!
I've never had any heart trouble and it's been checked as OK. I'm a senior and, when I hit 65 my doctor put me on statins. Because I'm considered low income, the government pays for my prescription as well as paying totally for the doctoring and the diagnostics, the same as it would do for everyone else.
I can't imagine why the citizens of the USA permit this situation to exist. Is everyone cowed into subservience to the HMOs down there? Whats the matter with you people? Get with the 21st century.
Blaming Obama for gas prices is like blaming Santa Claus for winter.
Then slamming "Obamacare" is like shooting your own foot for wearing shoes. The ACA is basically "Romneycare" that Mitt supported in MA. BBut Mitt is a liar and a tax dodger, so why should we expect anything better from him?
Today, there may be death panels (when an ins co refuses to cover something). However, today, you have a state insurance commissioner and a lawyer as teammates to change the decision. Under the many "beyond judicial review" sections in the ACA, the HHS secretary's decisions are singular and final. If that doesn't scare people, nothing will.
ObamaCare is bad for America in so many ways that no one recognizes because no one has read the law and few understand medical economics.
Well now Mitt agrees with some Obama care so Im sure your mind will change soon too. Flip flop, flip flop Mitt is like a fish out of water, and looks about as comfortable as one too.
Obama's State of the Union speech in which Joe Wilson belted out "you lie" was part of that debate, and Joe Wilson's comment was typical of the Republican rhetoric.
State Insurance Commissioner is just another tool the private for profits use to deny care - I appealed a denial of service (a need for urgent care, not care 5 weeks later for a serious life threatening issue hubby had) have yet to meet anyone that had their appeal upheld. But thanks for pointing out another status quo 'death panel' that truly exists. While I would wish you could understand what this family has been through - I get the feeling you don't really care about we mere mortals - you're out for a political kill.:-/
"...transparent attempt to transform American healthcare to a single provider system." An incredible statement. The obvious decision was to keep private health insurers but regulate them. The private health insurers are pushing back against the regulations.
Well put, the Insurance Companies love to see government used to put a mandate on people to buy insurance, they just do not want to have to do anything for it or be answerable to what they do with the money.
If that is not sick I don't know what is.
The best Romney can try to say is that over some LONG TERM the market will magically become fair and efficient with competition, but that is pure fantasy nonsense. The health care market and many other markets have never been seen to behave that like.
Even if we did not want to move towards an experimental dergulation of health care, there would need to be EFFECTIVE interim regulation or nothing would be accomplished but HIGHWAY ROBBERY !
Already, Obama's administration has handed out a bunch of exemptions to huge corporations like McDonalds...tha ts crap if you ask me because McDonalds makes millions each year and can afford to offer decent healthcare not the crap they offer now and actually call it health inbsurance...wh ich it's not in any way, shape or form.
None of these countries have had to become totalitarian dictatorships or bankrupt future generations to pay for it. The problem with the ACA was that o successful plan with a history behind it was looked at. Only Romneycare. Now, people like you and Romney are against that plan so much that you don't mind telling lies about it. It's bad enough you could stick to facts and do better. But lying is preferable to neo-cons.
You always know exactly where he stands. Just listen to what he says, assume he'll do the opposite and you'll be right every time.
Between the two of these guys - Obama and Romney - that the two party scam is exactly that, a scam - has never been clearer.
"There's always free cheddar in a mousetrap, baby." - Tom Waits
Anyone who votes for either one of these guys isn't paying attention.
By that common usage you have a viable candidate in either Romney or Obama.
I, on the other hand, define "viable candidate" to mean a candidate who is not bought off and who will work for the American people rather than for his financial backers.
Why don't you let us know when you are willing to work, not against the interests of the American people, but for a real viable candidate.
RSS feed for comments to this post