Romney’s Latest Position on Health Care


Holy crap. After running like hell away from any mention of health care reform in Massachusetts, which is virtually identical to the Affordable Care Act that Obama pushed through, now suddenly Romney is touting that plan that the entire base of his party thinks is horrible and evil. Here he is Sunday morning on Fox News:

ROMNEY: With regards to women’s health care, look, I’m the guy that was about to get health care for all of the women and men in my state. They’re talking about it on the federal level, we actually did something. […]

CHRIS WALLACE (HOST): So you’re saying, look at Romneycare?

ROMNEY: Well, absolutely. I am very proud of what we did, and the fact that we helped women and men and children in our state… And then with regard to contraceptives, of course Republicans, myself in particular, recognize that women have a right to use contraceptives. There is absolutely no validity whatsoever to the Obama effort to try and bring that up.

Uh, Mitt…you’ve said you would repeal the ACA, which is virtually identical to the program you’re now touting. And you’ve hammered the Obama administration over contraception coverage as part of that program, which your plan also did. For crying out loud, how many times do you think you can contradict yourself on a single issue without everyone realizing that you’re just making it up as you go along?

Comments

  1. d cwilson says

    There is one very important difference between Obamacare and Romneycare: Romneycare covers abortions.

    Ann Coulter is going to completely lose her shit over this. But don’t worry, by the time he gives his speech tonight, the Etch-A-Sketch will be shaken up and he’ll be back to promising to repeal his own plan.

  2. says

    Mittens is NOT just “making it up as he goes along”: that would require conscious thought on his part. I think he’s more like Herbie in Asimov’s short story Liar!: he answers questions based on what the asker wants to hear, and believes his answers completely.

  3. Michael Heath says

    To repeat the obvious: How ironic is it that the Republicans are now promoting the undisputed king of all flip-floppers while justifying their vote for George W. Bush a mere eight years ago because Sen. Kerry kept switching positions on one issue. That with President Bush, “you knew where he stood” (without them actually defending where Mr. Bush supposedly stood.)

    Mitt Romney’s sister’s now out and about proclaiming that Mitt won’t seek to further restrict abortion rights. After he claimed he supported a personhood bill which would deny women all their abortion rights or parents’ rights when it comes to the very IVF procedures his own family’s used.

  4. Abby Normal says

    I don’t see why you’re criticizing him. Romney has been saying all along that we need to repeal the awful Obamacare legislation, with its death panels and socialist takeover of your health care decisions, and replace it with his plan, which would:
    * Ensure that all Americans have access to quality, affordable health care.
    * Extend much needed relief to small businesses.
    * Create a new, regulated marketplace where consumers can purchase affordable health care.
    * Improve Medicare by helping seniors and people with disabilities afford their prescription drugs.
    * Prohibit denials of coverage based on pre-existing conditions.
    * Limit out-of-pocket costs so that Americans have security and peace of mind.
    * Help young adults by requiring insurers to allow all dependents to remain on their parents plan until age 26.
    * Expand Medicaid to millions of low-income Americans.
    * Provide sliding-scale subsidies to make insurance premiums affordable.
    * Hold insurance companies accountable for how our health care dollars are spent.
    * Invest in preventive care.
    * Require all citizens not participating in a health insureance plan to pay a tax each year.

  5. slc1 says

    We’re having a grand old time laughing at this but there’s nothing funny about it. The fact that this clown is at least a 40% bet to be inaugurated president on Jan. 20, 1913, instead of being the laughing stock of the country for his foolishness is serious stuff.

  6. Drew says

    Come on, the explanation here is simple.

    He’s previously been trying and trying to court the right, and get their vote. Someone finally clued him in to the fact that he doesn’t need to court the right, they’re going to show up in droves to vote against Obama. But they’re not going to be enough.

    He needs to court the independent vote.

    If he’d stuck with his record as Governor from the start he’d be in a much better position with independents. Some will point out that the likelihood of him winning the primary would have not been as good if he hadn’t courted the crazies but that’s bullshit, the crazies didn’t support him in the primary until the others all dropped out; whereas the ones who though strategically knew that of any of the nutters that were up in the primary, Romney was the only one who would have made the general election a fight.

    I’m glad that whoever is in charge of his candidacy didn’t listen to them until now, because now it’s obvious that he’s just a puppet saying to people what he (and by “he” I mean the people pulling his strings) thinks they want to hear.

  7. David Marjanović says

    There is one very important difference between Obamacare and Romneycare: Romneycare covers abortions.

    Makes sense. Mormoneyism does not claim that “life begins at conception”.

  8. says

    The fact that this clown is at least a 40% bet to be inaugurated president on Jan. 20, 1913, instead of being the laughing stock of the country for his foolishness is serious stuff.

    I’m not a betting man, but I would bet every penny I own that Romney will not be inaugurated president on Jan. 20, 1913.

  9. Reginald Selkirk says

    Michael Heath #3: Mitt Romney’s sister’s now out and about proclaiming that Mitt won’t seek to further restrict abortion rights.

    What does that mean? He just won’t actively push for it? But what if a Republican House and Republican Senate put such a bill in front of him? Would he veto it?

  10. blf says

    I would bet every penny I own that Romney will not be inaugurated president on Jan. 20, 1913.

    Yeah, if that were to happen, then both Obama’s time machine, and the thug’s “boldly return to the 6th Century BCE” plan, must have failed.

    And yer pennies would be worthless as they’d all be dated in future, and hence counterfeits. (Albeit the metal is perhaps of some intrinsic value?)

  11. tomh says

    I would bet every penny I own that Romney will not be inaugurated president

    That would be very foolish. There are only a few states that matter, primarily, OH, VA, FL, WI, and things are close and still fluid in those states. Two months is a long time in American politics, things can change very fast. Voter turnout may decide the election and that is where the Dems may well be hurting.

  12. slc1 says

    Re TCC @ #8

    I may have overstated the probability. Nate Silver puts the probability at about 30% as we sit here today.

  13. Hercules Grytpype-Thynne says

    I’m not a betting man, but I would bet every penny I own that Romney will not be inaugurated president on Jan. 20, 1913.

    I’ve heard enough about what’s in the GOP platform this year to believe he’s really aiming for 1613.

  14. Michael Heath says

    Me earlier:

    Mitt Romney’s sister’s now out and about proclaiming that Mitt won’t seek to further restrict abortion rights.

    Reginald Selkirk:

    What does that mean? He just won’t actively push for it? But what if a Republican House and Republican Senate put such a bill in front of him? Would he veto it?

    It means his sister’s trying to get more women to vote for her brother. Logic and truth have nothing to do with it. My goodness, Mrs. Romney said in her speech she, “loved women”; which reminded me how some slave-masters used to fondly recall their favorite slaves. It also means the media’s too stupid and/or cowardly to ask the obvious follow-up questions, only one of which you raise.

  15. jeevmon says

    I’ve often thought that the real reason Mitt Romney doesn’t want to disclose his tax returns for prior years is that some of them list his occupation as “Governor of Massachusetts.”

  16. rork says

    Heath: “It also means the media’s too stupid and/or cowardly to ask the obvious follow-up questions..”
    That is a problem over and over again these days. Perhaps reporters who do follow-up hard don’t have any future as reporters any more. They aren’t nice, you see.

  17. pHred says

    Michael Hearth #12

    Yea, ick, I got physically ill when Mrs. Romney said she “loved women” and I am pretty sure that I said “get it off me” out loud a few times. I have listened to this drivel that is apparently supposed to “humanize” Romney and I don’t have words – other than WTF. I also heard her rant again someone calling her marriage a storybook marriage, which is apparently an insult now? So, poor her … five boys rampaging around the house on rainy days … bummer … poor you.

    Now dealing with breast cancer and MS – these are deep, but how she talks about – so shallow and self-absorbed it is amazing.

    And this makes Romney more human how ?

  18. slc1 says

    Re rork @ #18

    Reporters who ask hard questions don’t get access to politicians these days and their employers at the lamestream media let the politicians get away with it.

  19. slc1 says

    Re phRed @ #20

    Now dealing with breast cancer and MS – these are deep, but how she talks about – so shallow and self-absorbed it is amazing.

    A reporter doing his/her job would ask Ms. Romney how a woman without health insurance or a husband worth 200 million or more deals with breast cancer and MS.

  20. typecaster says

    I would bet every penny I own that Romney will not be inaugurated president on Jan. 20, 2013.

    Given the likely economic policies that would go into effect if he did win, I think you’ve already made that bet.

  21. tfkreference says

    @slc1–just a little levity. No offense intended (if I were arguing, I wouldn’t have mentioned it–not much is worse than a grammar troll).

  22. slc1 says

    Re tfkreference @ #25

    No offense was taken. I screwed up and cannot complain about being called on it.

  23. John Phillips, FCD says

    I have to admit that the more I see of Mrs Romney, especially when the smile slips, the more she reminds me of Mom from Futurama when in a particularly feral mood. Romney on the other hand is more like a Madame Tussauds waxworks dummy of himself, except the actual waxworks dummy would be more life like.

Leave a Reply