Tweet
The Mitt Romneys (image: MittRomneys/flickr)
A perfect example of why Mitt Romney is a bad candidate is how even at this late date he can’t figure out a way to talk about his own signature health care reform law. Romney has never found a way to deal with the fact that in design Romneycare and Obamacare are very similar, yet the Republican Party demands Romney strongly oppose Obamacare. To defend himself from charges of not caring enough about regular people Romney pointed to his health care law. From NBC News:
“I think throughout this campaign as well, we talked about my record in Massachusetts, don’t forget — I got everybody in my state insured,” Romney told NBC’s Ron Allen in an interview before his rally here tonight. “One hundred percent of the kids in our state had health insurance. I don’t think there’s anything that shows more empathy and care about the people of this country than that kind of record.”
Of course, if trying to expand insurance is proof of empathy than that would make President Obama 50 times more empathetic than Romney, since Obama wants to expand coverage into 50 states compared to Romney who did it in one.
Similarly, if expanding coverage is proof of caring about people, then by his own statement Romney is basically admitting he doesn’t care about people or that he puts politics above helping regular people. One of Romney’s biggest campaign promises is repeal a law that would expand his insurance plan nationally. If according to Romney expanding coverage is a sign of empathy, then you would assume Romney’s efforts to take it away would be proof of callousness.
Romney wouldn’t denounce his signature law, yet also want to claim adopting its basic design nationally would devastate the country. Trying to have it both ways on health care has left Romney sounding either incoherent or like an unprincipled con man whenever talking about the issue.
11 Comments
why does Rmoney boast about how “his people” — in this case MASSers — get healthcare, but not for you.
49 states = the 47%
I choose “unprincipled con man” – he can’t hide it.
“Romney has never found a way to deal with the fact that in design Romneycare and Obamacare are very similar, yet the Republican Party demands Romney strongly oppose Obamacare”
This could also be written:
Obama has never found a way to deal with the fact that in design Romneycare and Obamacare are very similar, yet the Democratic Party demands we strongly support Obamacare.
Yup. My take for quite awhile now, based on the evidence out of his own mouth. Also, too…the phony laugh,especially right after a lie, the stiff demeanor…except when caught talking his people…the rich donor types.
All of it also says to me, “I have no reason or rationale for why I ought to be president, I just wanna be. I don’t even know why, but hey, I deserve it.”
Bingo. The hypocrisy around here is stunning and pathetic.
“Mitt Romney’s public persona is exactly as he is—a deeply clueless aristocrat born to wealth and power who’s political interests lie exclusively with those of his class (and race). And his views, as with those of his class, are based on his experience of the world. That many of the rest of us, including Barack Obama, have lived experience quite different from Mr. Romney’s provides us with perspectives different from his. And therein lies the rub—which can better sell the agenda of the ruling class: a conspicuously clueless aristocrat who wears his self-interest on his sleeve or a skilled technocrat who can speak the language of ‘the people’ while serving these same interests?”
“Through his policies Barack Obama has made the rich richer (link) and left liberals and progressives to plea with the rich to give a bit of it back out of ‘kindness.’ Meanwhile, as evidenced by increasing surveillance, militarization of the police and removal of legal restraints, the ruling class is moving ahead with its plans for the next round of ‘negotiations.”
“Defenders of Mr. Obama’s signature achievement, his scheme to force people to buy health insurance from private insurers that have no intention of willfully paying claims, have Mitt Romney to thank for it—it was his plan. And how would Barack Obama’s unconditional and ongoing bailouts of corrupt bankers have gone over if Wall Street McMoneybags Romney had engineered them? The real choice isn’t what either party is claiming it is. The real choice is between the existing political economy and one that at least stands a chance of working. And neither party is offering that choice.”
“Mr. Romney’s comments certainly appear self-serving, conceived to salve the psyches of a class who in 2008 may have felt at some risk of seeing their wealth and prestige disappear in a puff of smoke in the financial meltdown of that year. But between Mitt Romney and Barack Obama, who was it that unconditionally revived their fortunes with bank bailouts while leaving twenty-five million people under / unemployed and forty-six million so poor they qualify for food stamps?”
http://www.counterpunch.org/2012/09/21/mitts-bad-week/
Your comment is brilliant,is good to know that there are people out there with very clear thoughts.
Obama= Romney
Umm not exactly. Close maybe but no cigar for you.
True.
The classic battle of Democrat versus Republican had a good run, but it has been over for a while.
It’s been the Demlicans versus the Republicrats since at least Clinton.
We have to break totally out of the Democrats versus Republican mindset. It is irrelevant. We have to grasp that it has been all of them against the 99% for decades–and we ain’t been the ones winning.
The the second we do that, we have to start trying to figure out what the 99% can and will do about it.
Actually, Romneycare has turned out to be a positive thing in MA, much to our own surprise and no thanks to R himself other than planting the seed. Everything else he did was a disaster.
I’m praying for Vermont to pull off a single payer system. It will put both R and O to shame.
It’s Oct. and Mitt never figured out how to deal with this dilemma staring him in the face? Does he need a map to find his friggin’ ass in the morning?
I get the point here, but reading Romney’s quote demanding ‘empathy credit’ for providing children with health insurance just reminds me that we don’t need access to insurance… we need affordable health care that does not require mandatory insurance company involvement. We need healthcare reform, not healthcare insurance reform.
Excellent, Buford. We have a right to medical care, not just a right to buy insurance.