Good news: Leader of Romney’s transition wants to implement ObamaCare exchanges

posted at 4:23 pm on June 4, 2012 by Allahpundit

Remember, under ObamaCare states have a “choice” of either introducing their own exchanges — subject to federal regulations, natch — by 2014 or letting their citizens participate in the new federal exchange when it finally comes online. If you’re a Republican governor who opposes O-Care, the obvious move is to do nothing. By creating a state exchange now, you’re legitimizing Obama’s pet boondoggle before Republicans in Congress get a serious crack at repealing it and burdening yourself with a program that may yet be micromanaged by federal regulators even if the mandate is struck down by the Supreme Court. Resist implementation as long as you can and hope for the best in November.

Romney’s point man on his presidential transition, former Utah Gov. Mike Leavitt, disagrees. Ben Domenech explains:

One can argue about the merits of an exchange absent Obamacare’s rules, regulations, authority shifts, price controls, and taxpayer funded subsidies. But the overwhelming majority of conservative policymakers understand that Obamacare’s exchanges are nothing more than delivery mechanisms for massive taxpayer-funded subsidies and bureaucratic regulations from Washington. What’s more, states which avoid implementing exchanges may be able to avoid the implementation of Obamacare almost in its entirety…

What’s most concerning about all of this is not that Romney selected one of the few Republicans in the country who backs implementation of Obamacare’s exchanges. It’s what the selection of Leavitt means as an indication of how Romney would potentially “fix” Obamacare if repeal proves impossible. According to Politico, “already, plugged-in Republicans from Washington to Salt Lake City are buzzing that Leavitt could make his own transition next January into the job of White House chief of staff or as a Valerie Jarrett-like personal counselor to a President Romney.”

Should the Supreme Court strike down only a portion of Obamacare, it seems clear Leavitt would be a major voice in deciding how to replace it. And he is convinced that “exchanges are part of the future, no matter what.”

Team Mitt answered an e-mail about this from Matt Lewis by insisting that they’re committed to repeal, but that’s a dodge. A four-seat pick-up in the Senate in November isn’t guaranteed, and even if it happens, it’s not fully clear which parts of ObamaCare can be repealed via reconciliation, which requires just 51 votes, and which can’t. Domenech’s worry, quite understandably, is that if full repeal ends up being derailed due to procedural roadblocks, Leavitt will convince Romney to keep both the exchanges and the federal “oversight” mechanisms that govern them. Imagine how useful those mechanisms will prove to the next Democratic administration that wants to reclaim the dream of top-down command and control of health-care policy.

It gets worse. Turns out that Leavitt’s consulting firm has done some nice business in advising states on … how to set up health care exchanges. Philip Klein marvels at the possibility of Romney’s decisions on one of his key vulnerabilities being driven by the magical combo of big-government impulses and crony capitalism:

Romney has been incredibly vague about how he would reform the health care system in the absence of Obamacare. The danger is that he could end up replacing it with a system that still has exchanges, but exchanges that are billed as having fewer regulations, lower subsidies and giving more flexibility to states. The problem is that this would still put the basic exchange infrastructure in place that a future Democratic administration could build on so the country would eventually wind up with Obamacare anyway – or something worse.

Beyond the health care issue, there’s the cronyism issue involved. One of the biggest dangers of a Romney “CEO presidency” is that his business background would make him conflate being pro-business with being pro-free market. But as we’ve seen time and again, these are two separate things. As somebody who stands to personally profit if more states implement Obamacare exchanges, Leavitt clearly comes from the tradition of a Republican Party that’s perfectly okay with expanding government in the name of helping business. This is something we saw during the Bush administration, most prominently, with the subsidies for drug companies in the Medicare prescription drug law (which Leavitt helped implement ass HHS Secretary) and the Wall Street bailout.

Follow the last link for background on Leavitt’s time as governor. As Klein puts it, “Leavitt, in short, was exactly the type of Republican the Tea Party was founded to oppose.” The only reassurance I feel that Mitt won’t follow him down the path to supporting federally-managed state exchanges is that he simply can’t afford to. He has no political capital to spend on defending Obama’s signature government expansion given the suspicions that surround him because of RomneyCare. And he also won’t be able to count on this issue fading into the background after he takes office. The Supreme Court’s going to force it front and center in the next few weeks with its ruling on O-Care; unless the law is upheld in its entirety and the GOP fails to win a Senate majority in November, Romney will have to deal with either repealing or “fixing” the statute ASAP after he’s sworn in next year. If he betrays the right straight out of the gate, he’ll be left with no base of support for his presidency virtually from day one. And the risk of a primary challenge in 2016 is more real for him than it’s been for incumbent presidents past. The tea party proved its staying power by knocking off Lugar and propelling Deb Fischer to victory, and there’s already speculation that Rand Paul and Paulworld might be ready to challenge Romney if he veers too far left. Frankly, I wonder if some grassroots conservatives might not relish the chance to primary Mitt if he betrays the cause, partly to make up for him having won the nomination this time and partly because there’ll be no fear of a new Obama term in 2016 if a primary battle weakens Romney. (There may, however, be fear of a Hillary term.) Exit question: Can he really afford to alienate his base on something this huge and visible? C’mon.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 5 6 7 8

gryphon202 on June 4, 2012 at 9:51 PM

I’ve already addressed this, in response to LevinFan.

Buy Danish on June 4, 2012 at 9:59 PM

What I didn’t see you address anywhere in this thread is how Willard Milton Romney, they guy actually running the campaign, can convince people that have now said they won’t vote for him. You’re so busy criticizing voters who are hostile to Mitt that you overlook the importance of Mitt Romney running the absolute best campaign that he can (which I don’t believe he is doing at the moment).

gryphon202 on June 4, 2012 at 10:03 PM

“As somebody who stands to personally profit if more states implement Obamacare exchanges, Leavitt clearly comes from the tradition of a Republican Party that’s perfectly okay with expanding government in the name of helping business.”

O_O

Seven Percent Solution on June 4, 2012 at 10:05 PM

Here’s what you’re missing. Obama has and will continue to abuse his power. Look what he did with the EPA and the Clean Air Act bypassing Congress. Look at the power to the czars. He had and will continue to make congress irrelevant.

And gridlock will not get Obamacare repealed, we will be stuck with it for life.

Plus what about Supreme court nominees?

LevinFan on June 4, 2012 at 10:00 PM

Indeed he will try. But if enough Conservative Republican win house seats Michelle will be Speaker. Then Obama will be stopped. Only the House can approve spending. They will simply not approve and if Government shuts down it will shut down.

This will make for so much pressure that Obama will have no choice but to actually compromise.

But not with Romney. He would get all the Democrats and many of the RINOs as well and could get any thing passed he wanted. Romney is actually not Obama lite he is Obama supercharged.

Steveangell on June 4, 2012 at 10:05 PM

Sounds about right….

LevinFan on June 4, 2012 at 9:51 PM

You’re f**king bonkers, pal. The majority of America is not “evil”. You’re a deluded elitist if you think so.

MadisonConservative on June 4, 2012 at 10:07 PM

We watched the debates and followed what Romney did with his millions and the despicable ads against the other Republican Candidates. So don’t get too high and mighty just because your boy is the “presumptive” Nominee.

bluefox on June 4, 2012 at 8:43 PM

Damn, when you’re a sore loser, you REALLY are a sore loser, aren’t you? So your boy would’ve prevailed against the millions that Axle would throw at him, when he couldnt even make it thru the fire of a REPUBLICAN primary??? Really? Damn, you really don’t understand this vetting process, and wining by making it thru the fire…do you. Suck it up and stop Whining…

lovingmyUSA on June 4, 2012 at 10:08 PM

We went through the friggin’ process…..the RNC and the repub establishment was the big winner with Romney…..and we’ve got to carry this moderate to the whitehouse and keep him honest.
Four more years of the current bumbling Marxist fraud is unnacceptable and probably unrecoverable.
Tim_CA on June 4, 2012 at 9:50 PM

Why is every political calculation a zero-sum assumption? Depending on how conservatives vote, the calculus could be made that boehner and McConnell need to be stripped of their leadership. But it won’t happen if the gop feels like they’re in the driver seat by marginalizing conservatives. On the other hand, if the gop realizes that the base is pissed and the only reason that the gop has majority is due to conservatives then the leadership will change. Especially in the house.

So how can the base put the fear of the people into the leadership while ensuring congressional majority? I’d posit that it’ll be due to them getting a larger % of the vote than the presumed titular head of the party.

But as I’ve said all along, I won’t decide how I’ll vote until after the convention. But at this point, Mittness is insufficiently conservative to the core that if voting today, I won’t pull for him. Miracles could happen, but I doubt it.

AH_C on June 4, 2012 at 10:10 PM

Steveangell on June 4, 2012 at 9:56 PM

Most likely Obama could not get the votes to do anything to fix Obama Care thus it would end up mostly repealed.

President Obama has to sign the repeal legislation. You think there will be a super majority to override an Obama veto?

Mitt identifies himself as a Progressive so lets make it simple Obama is a Muslim Marxist. Romney is a Marxist. They work together just fine Muslims and Marxist as Muslims are Marxist.

I know all about how Communists called themselves Progressives (I’m probably the first person to talk about that fact here at this blog years ago, quoting David Horowitz) but to say all Progressives are Communists/Marxists ergo Romney is a Marxist (and the rest of your blathering) is just flat out Outer Limits kookoobananas.

Buy Danish on June 4, 2012 at 10:10 PM

bluefox on June 4, 2012 at 8:36 PM

I have wondered about this myself. It would be interesting to see some speeches and debates re that election.

LazyHips on June 4, 2012 at 9:20 PM

He may have been on the ballot as a Republican, but ran as a Mod/Dem is the only thing I can conclude. During the debates I viewed a lot of videos during that time period and watched some interviews he had. My impression was that he took positions that would favor his election, which differed from previously held positions.

bluefox on June 4, 2012 at 10:11 PM

A theoretical conversation between a Mitt supporter and a Mitt detractor might go something like this:

Supporter (S): You should really vote for Mitt Romney.

Detractor (D): Mitt Romney isn’t conservative. I’m not sure he’ll be all that different from Obama.

S: Mitt said he’d repeal start the process of repealing and replacing Obamacare on day one. He’ll also start drilling for oil that very same day.

D: I just don’t trust him. He hired a manager for his transition team who stands to profit from one of the most important cornerstones of Obamacare

S: But Mitt said he’d repeal it replace it with something.

D: What will he replace it with?

S: State-level exchanges.

D: How is that any different from what Obamacare was?

S: No individual mandate.

D: So the exahcnges will be voluntary?

S: Not exactly.

D: Whatever. I don’t trust Mitt. Not after Romneycare. I’m not voting for him.

S: Then you’re helping Obama.

D: I just don’t see all that much difference. I promised I wouldn’t choose between the lesser of two evils after 2008 and the McCain disaster, so I’m through.

S: You’re stupid.

D: I don’t care. Good luck without my vote, rombot.

gryphon202 on June 4, 2012 at 10:11 PM

You’re f**king bonkers, pal. The majority of America is not “evil”. You’re a deluded elitist if you think so.

MadisonConservative on June 4, 2012 at 10:07 PM

All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing.

gryphon202 on June 4, 2012 at 10:12 PM

Most likely Obama could not get the votes to do anything to fix Obama Care thus it would end up mostly repealed.

But President Romney could easily get 60 votes as some RINOS would vote with the Democrats to keep Obama Care lite. Romney Care forced on each State to level the States as Romney promises. He would block grant money to the States like he said but they would have to implement Romney Care or something very similar.

I doubt Romney would even try for a second term. He would do just like he did in Mass. Use one term very effectively to implement his “Liberal Moderate” “Progressive” ideas.

By the way for those that know little history. The Communist were very active prior to WW2 in America even after but then Mc Carthy exposed the USSR and China for what communism really is. The Communist after that changed their name to Progressives. Eventually some called themselves Liberals but now most all call themselves Progressives. Mitt identifies himself as a Progressive so lets make it simple Obama is a Muslim Marxist. Romney is a Marxist. They work together just fine Muslims and Marxist as Muslims are Marxist.

Steveangell on June 4, 2012 at 9:56 PM

Worse case scenario: isn’t Romney making it Obamacare lite better than leaving it in place and making it worse like Obama would do?? Look at Medicare, social security, medicaid. We’re stuck with those entitlements, yet you think giving Obama another 4 years and having Obamacare unchanged for life is no big deal???

Plus Romney can’t afford not to repeal it. He’d lose all credibility and have no shot at reelection.

Stop calling Romney a Marxist. You’re embarrassing yourself. Look the word up and learn what it means before you keep carelessly throwing it out there.

LevinFan on June 4, 2012 at 10:13 PM

But as I’ve said all along, I won’t decide how I’ll vote until after the convention. But at this point, Mittness is insufficiently conservative to the core that if voting today, I won’t pull for him. Miracles could happen, but I doubt it.

AH_C on June 4, 2012 at 10:10 PM

Is something going to happen at the GOP convention we should know about??..Inquiring minds want to know..:)

Dire Straits on June 4, 2012 at 10:14 PM

Stop calling Romney a Marxist. You’re embarrassing yourself. Look the word up and learn what it means before you keep carelessly throwing it out there.

LevinFan on June 4, 2012 at 10:13 PM

LoLz..He is way past embarrassing himself..:)

Dire Straits on June 4, 2012 at 10:15 PM

Romney said he’d issue waivers from Obamacare to all 50 states the day after he takes office.

I trust he’s a man of his word… but we should remind him anyway.

mollymack on June 4, 2012 at 10:16 PM

Romney said he’d issue waivers from Obamacare to all 50 states the day after he takes office.

I trust he’s a man of his word… but we should remind him anyway.

mollymack on June 4, 2012 at 10:16 PM

Really? That kind of blind trust almost never has good consequences…

gryphon202 on June 4, 2012 at 10:17 PM

PolAgnostic on June 4, 2012 at 9:07 PM

That kind of arrogance is only going to chase folks like me further away from holding our noses and voting for Romney, not towards it.

Again, it is not my job, to sell my values, my views, my beliefs, to vote for a candidate. It is the candidates job to tell me why I should vote for them, and for what reasons why.

“Because the other guy might win if you don’t vote for me” is not a reason, it’s an excuse. Thank you, I know that Obama is terrible. What Romney, the GOP Elite, and the Mittbots can’t seem to understand about our complaints is something very simple.

We’re not voting for someone who’s being Captain Obvious about the current sitting President’s record. Despite popular belief amongst some of you, we’ve figured that one out for our selves. People like me, want to vote for someone whose views and record is actually DIFFERENT. And that there, lies the key problem with Romney. You have Romney’s Words, and you have Romney’s Record. They do not match up. Further more, what’s making me even more skeptical, and cynical, is the matter of timing of Romney’s flipping from New England RINO views, to Conservative/Constitutionalists/libertarian views. Take for example his views on 2nd amendment rights.

Mitt Romney’s Record says, he’s a pro gun control guy that would get along with Mayor Nanny Bloomberg, who very much liked the 1994 Assault Weapon’s ban, and as of 2008 was still very much in support of that ban. A ban that did nothing to drop crime rates.

His current words claims that despite this, he’s supposedly now a staunch defender of the 2nd amendment supporter.

What bothers me though, is that he starts changing from his record, to his supposed new outlook, at the same time as the ’08 Republican Presidential Primaries which is just a bit too convenient in timing for me.. What proof then, do I have that he’s really no longer “Liberal Lite” beyond mere words on that issue?

Razgriez on June 4, 2012 at 10:19 PM

Whatever one’s personal opinion of Romney and his policies, this looks like a boneheaded move to me coming from someone who should be trying to shore up his base.

gryphon202 on June 4, 2012 at 9:51 PM

I agree. It was a terrible move, how Romney couldn’t have seen the backlash coming is beyond me. No way this helps him, it won’t sink him, but doesn’t help him at all.

LevinFan on June 4, 2012 at 10:21 PM

What I didn’t see you address anywhere in this thread is how Willard Milton Romney, they guy actually running the campaign, can convince people that have now said they won’t vote for him. You’re so busy criticizing voters who are hostile to Mitt that you overlook the importance of Mitt Romney running the absolute best campaign that he can (which I don’t believe he is doing at the moment).

gryphon202 on June 4, 2012 at 10:03 PM

Who is Milton? I haven’t been “hostile” to anyone except commenter DDRINTN who deserves a huge heap of hostility (and even then my hostility is a 1 compared to his 10). I mostly mock him for being a lunatic.

I have taken on over-the-top criticism of Leavitt propagated primarily by Red State, who have always been hyper critical of Romney. That’s how I chose to respond. I already said I don’t know how it will play out but don’t think the concerns of a few commenters here and there necessarily translates to widespread outrage.

Buy Danish on June 4, 2012 at 10:23 PM

I agree. It was a terrible move, how Romney couldn’t have seen the backlash coming is beyond me. No way this helps him, it won’t sink him, but doesn’t help him at all.

LevinFan on June 4, 2012 at 10:21 PM

As someone who believed a couple of months ago that Mitt was running neck-in-neck with Obama, I have to believe he needs every last vote he can get. What doesn’t help him can only hurt him. And I really really REALLY want to see Obama lose.

gryphon202 on June 4, 2012 at 10:23 PM

There were always be supporters (me included) for any politician that will rub you the wrong way.

My question is why would any person who values his/her own vote, let the attitudes of a candidates supporters influence their vote?

Shouldn’t you think for yourself?

Look at the actual candidates policies, record, and how bad his opponent to make your decision??

LevinFan on June 4, 2012 at 10:24 PM

I have taken on over-the-top criticism of Leavitt propagated primarily by Red State, who have always been hyper critical of Romney. That’s how I chose to respond. I already said I don’t know how it will play out but don’t think the concerns of a few commenters here and there necessarily translates to widespread outrage.

Buy Danish on June 4, 2012 at 10:23 PM

As someone who believed a couple of months ago that Mitt was running neck-in-neck with Obama, I have to believe he needs every last vote he can get. What doesn’t help him can only hurt him. And I really really REALLY want to see Obama lose.

gryphon202 on June 4, 2012 at 10:23 PM

The worst thing that Mitt Romney can do right now is to assume he has it all tied up simply because Obama sucks. There stands a very good chance that between now and the convention, Romney could get fat and lazy — at least in the proverbial electoral sense. I am telling you, I don’t see this ending well.

gryphon202 on June 4, 2012 at 10:26 PM

For the millionth time, no, it’s not. If you continue to insist so, I won’t bother responding.

A vote for Romney is a vote for Romney.
A vote for Obama is a vote for Obama.
A vote for neither is a vote for neither

Romney supporters say a vote for neither is a vote for Obama.
Obama supporters say a vote for neither is a vote for Romney.

You’re both wrong.

MadisonConservative on June 4, 2012 at 8:49 PM

It’s a vote less for Romney, therefore it helps Obama. On the other hand, fewer votes for Obama help Romney. I think you are aware of that, or you wouldn’t be so touchy.

Gelsomina on June 4, 2012 at 10:28 PM

And by the by, someone shortly upthread referenced Red State as a supposed font of anti-Romney sentiment. I can not vouch for or against that position, as Red State is not on my daily blog roll.

gryphon202 on June 4, 2012 at 10:29 PM

There stands a very good chance that between now and the convention, Romney could get fat and lazy — at least in the proverbial electoral sense. I am telling you, I don’t see this ending well.

gryphon202 on June 4, 2012 at 10:26 PM

So far that has not happened..Team Romney is not going to do that..:)

Dire Straits on June 4, 2012 at 10:31 PM

gryphon202 on June 4, 2012 at 10:26 PM

So far that has not happened..Team Romney is not going to do that..:)

Dire Straits on June 4, 2012 at 10:31 PM

Team Romney’s hiring of Mike Leavitt says otherwise. At a bare minimum, it smacks of obliviousness to the voters who find any association with Obamacare/Romneycare — no matter how tenuous — radioactive. And that’s even assuming that Romney is any kind of “conservative” at all.

gryphon202 on June 4, 2012 at 10:33 PM

Stop calling Romney a Marxist. You’re embarrassing yourself. Look the word up and learn what it means before you keep carelessly throwing it out there.

LevinFan on June 4, 2012 at 10:13 PM

What do you call a person who signs Romneycare into law then? Definitely not a conservative or a person who believes in individual liberty.

RedRobin145 on June 4, 2012 at 10:34 PM

The worst thing that Mitt Romney can do right now is to assume he has it all tied up simply because Obama sucks. There stands a very good chance that between now and the convention, Romney could get fat and lazy — at least in the proverbial electoral sense. I am telling you, I don’t see this ending well.
gryphon202 on June 4, 2012 at 10:26 PM

He doesn’t assume that he has it tied up and he’s not going to get fat and lazy.

Buy Danish on June 4, 2012 at 10:34 PM

It’s a vote less for Romney, therefore it helps Obama. On the other hand, fewer votes for Obama help Romney. I think you are aware of that, or you wouldn’t be so touchy.

Gelsomina on June 4, 2012 at 10:28 PM

Exactly, the truth hurts.

Any so called conservative not only not voting for Romney, but not supporting him to defeat Obama is in effect voting for Obama as you said.

And they should no longer ever criticize Obama ever again, as it wasn’t worth their time to try to stop him when it mattered most!

LevinFan on June 4, 2012 at 10:34 PM

gryphon202 on June 4, 2012 at 10:26 PM

He doesn’t assume that he has it tied up and he’s not going to get fat and lazy.

Buy Danish on June 4, 2012 at 10:34 PM

Argument-by-assertion much? Romney’s base finds anything that even smacks of socialized medicine radioactive. From a purely strategic standpoint, hiring Mike Leavitt smacks of obliviousness to that fact. Now either Romney wasn’t aware of how poorly it would be received, or he didn’t care. Either way, it just wasn’t smart.

gryphon202 on June 4, 2012 at 10:37 PM

It’s a vote less for Romney, therefore it helps Obama. On the other hand, fewer votes for Obama help Romney. I think you are aware of that, or you wouldn’t be so touchy.

Gelsomina on June 4, 2012 at 10:28 PM

Touchy? Sorry if I’m touchy after being accused of being an Obama supporter by dozens of deranged Romney supporters. Sorry if I’m touchy after continually being called an “enemy”. Sorry if I’m touchy after being told that not wanting to support a self-identified “progressive”, anti-gun, pro-choice politician that signed into law the very system that served as a model for ObamaCare…makes me a Marxist.

A vote for neither is a vote for neither. Anyone who tries to claim it’s a vote for either candidate is full of s**t.

MadisonConservative on June 4, 2012 at 10:38 PM

gryphon202 on June 4, 2012 at 10:33 PM

Let’s let this play out a few days..Things change!!..:)

Dire Straits on June 4, 2012 at 10:40 PM

A vote for neither is a vote for neither. Anyone who tries to claim it’s a vote for either candidate is full of s**t.

MadisonConservative on June 4, 2012 at 10:38 PM

Except the problem is, there is no “neither” choice for the presidency. It WILL be either Romney or Obama. I’d be utterly shocked if there were any other outcome; I just don’t see it happening.

gryphon202 on June 4, 2012 at 10:42 PM

It really has gotten waaaaay too squishy around here lately.

Been hangin’ alot at Newsbusters and breitbart when I’m looking for fellowship.

This place has really lost it’s vibe lately.

Hows about some truth in advertising…..this place is alot of things – most of them good, but it’s hardly a “conservative” blog.

Tim_CA on June 4, 2012 at 5:51 PM

This x1000. It became pretty obvious to me after two open registrations that Salem was trying to stack the deck with pro-Romney commenters. The quality is pretty sub-par at this point. Gutless moderates like crosspatch think they run the joint. Actually, it seems like they do, since Ed and Allah apparently couldn’t be bothered to do anything about their attempts to swarm/spam every thread during the primary.

Frankly, I haven’t even checked in to Hot Air in several weeks now, let alone commented. It’s not worth it when I can get better quality blogging from sites like Breitbart. Shoot, even Weasel Zippers is eating Hot Air’s lunch at this point.

And what’s Hot Air’s solution? Hire a low-rent hack like Erika Johnson to take a dump on Gingrich the day he drops out of the race? LOL at you guys. You need to take a long, hard look at your business model, dudes. I predict 5 more years of this garbage before you’re either subsumed into the Salem collective or just out of a job entirely.

If this comment doesn’t get me banned I’ll check in on you from time to time, if only to get a laugh at BuyDanish’s attempts to rationalize Mitt’s latest love letter to statism. Ya’ll be good.

Nom de Boom on June 4, 2012 at 10:43 PM

It’s a vote less for Romney, therefore it helps Obama. On the other hand, fewer votes for Obama help Romney. I think you are aware of that, or you wouldn’t be so touchy.

Gelsomina on June 4, 2012 at 10:28 PM

Exactly, the truth hurts.

Any so called conservative not only not voting for Romney, but not supporting him to defeat Obama is in effect voting for Obama as you said.

And they should no longer ever criticize Obama ever again, as it wasn’t worth their time to try to stop him when it mattered most!

LevinFan on June 4, 2012 at 10:34 PM

The only thing hurting right now, is my sides from laughing at the hypocrisy…

So, whenever any of us challenge Romney on his supposed Conservative credentials, because we want actual substance to a candidate beyond “Not Obama”, you lot are quick to tell us to basically “Shut up and vote for Romney, or just shut up”…

…and yet we’re the ones who are “touchy”? Uh-huh,…. riiiiight

Razgriez on June 4, 2012 at 10:43 PM

Typical double standards.
If beloved Sarah Palin was working on the exchange program for health providers and the citizens in Alaska, the right would be gun-ho on the idea – but because it’s Romney you plug your nose.

c.j.ammenheuser on June 4, 2012 at 10:45 PM

Let’s let this play out a few days..Things change!!..:)

Dire Straits on June 4, 2012 at 10:40 PM

They may not change for the better.

gryphon202 on June 4, 2012 at 10:47 PM

Any so called conservative not only not voting for Romney, but not supporting him to defeat Obama is in effect voting for Obama as you said.

And anyone not only not voting for Obama, but not supporting him to defeat Romney is in effect voting for Romney. So by that logic I’m voting for Romney even if I don’t show up at the polls on Election Day.

And they should no longer ever criticize Obama ever again, as it wasn’t worth their time to try to stop him when it mattered most!

LevinFan on June 4, 2012 at 10:34 PM

And what if our complaints aren’t just with Obama but with both parties? The GOP in Congress hasn’t exactly been anything to write home about either.

Aitch748 on June 4, 2012 at 10:48 PM

Typical double standards.
If beloved Sarah Palin was working on the exchange program for health providers and the citizens in Alaska, the right would be gun-ho on the idea – but because it’s Romney you plug your nose.

c.j.ammenheuser on June 4, 2012 at 10:45 PM

You’re kind of missing the point, Butch. She didn’t, and she wasn’t. And here’s yet another rombot appearing from out of the mist to invoke Sarah Palin’s name for absolutely no reason at all. You guys kill me.

gryphon202 on June 4, 2012 at 10:49 PM

Touchy? Sorry if I’m touchy after being accused of being an Obama supporter by dozens of deranged Romney supporters. Sorry if I’m touchy after continually being called an “enemy”. Sorry if I’m touchy after being told that not wanting to support a self-identified “progressive”, anti-gun, pro-choice politician that signed into law the very system that served as a model for ObamaCare…makes me a Marxist.

A vote for neither is a vote for neither. Anyone who tries to claim it’s a vote for either candidate is full of s**t.

MadisonConservative on June 4, 2012 at 10:38 PM

It’s not that you don’t call people names, as well. You have quite a reputation in that regard, so it’s kind of ironic that you turn suddenly into a martyr.

Gelsomina on June 4, 2012 at 10:57 PM

This thread reminds me of the circular firing squads during the GOP primaries.

Good times. Good times.

Thanks for the memories ya’ll.

Flora Duh on June 4, 2012 at 11:03 PM

AH_C on June 4, 2012 at 10:10 PM

I completely understand and respect your position.

Tim_CA on June 4, 2012 at 11:04 PM

They may not change for the better.

gryphon202 on June 4, 2012 at 10:47 PM

May not..Such is life..:)

Dire Straits on June 4, 2012 at 11:07 PM

Flora Duh on June 4, 2012 at 11:03 PM

LoLz..I hear you..Some live for it!..:)

Dire Straits on June 4, 2012 at 11:08 PM

This x1000. It became pretty obvious to me after two open registrations that Salem was trying to stack the deck with pro-Romney commenters. The quality is pretty sub-par at this point.

Nom de Boom on June 4, 2012 at 10:43 PM

Thanks for this…..the research will be interesting.

See you over at breitbart!

Tim_CA on June 4, 2012 at 11:08 PM

Argument-by-assertion much? Romney’s base finds anything that even smacks of socialized medicine radioactive. From a purely strategic standpoint, hiring Mike Leavitt smacks of obliviousness to that fact. Now either Romney wasn’t aware of how poorly it would be received, or he didn’t care. Either way, it just wasn’t smart.
gryphon202 on June 4, 2012 at 10:37 PM

Um, you made an assertion about Romney growing fat and lazy, not me! I provided a link which proves he is fighting, not sitting around assuming he’ll be elected. And you yet to provide a scintilla of evidence Leavitt supports “socialized medicine”, which was the crux of your argument. For the umpteenth time, I’ve already addressed the rest of your concerns which have to do with optics.

Buy Danish on June 4, 2012 at 11:09 PM

Any so called conservative not only not voting for Romney, but not supporting him to defeat Obama is in effect voting for Obama as you said.

And they should no longer ever criticize Obama ever again, as it wasn’t worth their time to try to stop him when it mattered most!

LevinFan on June 4, 2012 at 10:34 PM

Screw you. My vote is my vote to use or piss away as I damn well wish. And if I vote any which way, to include sitting at home, I have every right to criticize the outcome. A vote is not binary. Never has been and never will be, no matter how much you may wish it so.

However, if in the aftermath, the vote tally comes out 45-33-20, what does that mean? Doesn’t matter the partisan distribution (play the scenarios each way if you like) of the aforementioned ratio, other than that one of them is 3rd party conservative that wants to counterweight the GOP to the right more than Mittness is willing to take it given his druthers.

Does it mean that the 20% pissed it away for the other side? Really? That is the most shallowest of thinking and of the same sort that got us to this mess of entitlements and deficits.

Or does it mean that 20% aren’t buying what the other two are selling and that maybe one of the other two needs to realign themselves to pickup that 20%? Like I said before, Perot’s 20% in ’92 forced a realignment of sorts that Clinton was forced to the center, even center-right, hence the higher popularity rating compared to his actual electoral %. That means plenty of those who didn’t vote for him approved of his performance. Newt also used that same dynamic to force Clinton to the right, while the rest of the GOP leadership was more concerned with maintaining their bi-partisan friendships across the aisle.

All in all, if 20% vote for a conservative 3rd option, it will shake up DC and everyone of those congress critter will be thinking ahead to 2014 & 2016 with the realization that conservatives and the Tea Partiers are a force to be reckoned with. They will either have their road to Damascus moment or they will be looking for a new job.

Now imagine if a majority of self-professing conservatives gritted their teeth, girded up their loins and broke away from the GOP on the top-ticket and let themselves be counted and instead of 20%, there were 30%? Now we’re in a “GOP ousts Whigs” redux a la 1856 – 1860, when a come from behind GOP beat both Whigs and Dems by standing on principle.

There is no better time than now, because even the donks are in turmoil between the moonbatty progs and the centrist members. Stand your ground and let the bodies hit the floor.

Coincidently, can anyone point to just one bold contrast that Mitnness has offered up, other than “NOT-Obama”? Not one instance of vowing to abolish this or that pet progressive project? Just like 1980, Pappy Bush wanted to patch and manage things while Reagan offered up bold ideas to move us forward.

AH_C on June 4, 2012 at 11:09 PM

lovingmyUSA on June 4, 2012 at 10:08 PM

I wasn’t replying to you. My reply was to :Terrye on June 4, 2012 at 7:36 PM because Terrye and I have debated before. I can’t relate to you.

bluefox on June 4, 2012 at 11:10 PM

I completely understand and respect your position.

Tim_CA on June 4, 2012 at 11:04 PM

Thanks.

Is something going to happen at the GOP convention we should know about??..Inquiring minds want to know..:)

Dire Straits on June 4, 2012 at 10:14 PM

Only that I think it will be an unconventional convention. Especially since there will be “pledged” delegates whose votes are not set in stone, neither “morally” nor by GOP rules. And given the heat of this primary season, something is bound to break loose.

I plan on stocking up on popcorn.

AH_C on June 4, 2012 at 11:16 PM

The only thing hurting right now, is my sides from laughing at the hypocrisy…

So, whenever any of us challenge Romney on his supposed Conservative credentials, because we want actual substance to a candidate beyond “Not Obama”, you lot are quick to tell us to basically “Shut up and vote for Romney, or just shut up”…

…and yet we’re the ones who are “touchy”? Uh-huh,…. riiiiight

Razgriez on June 4, 2012 at 10:43 PM

Criticizing Romney and not voting for him are two different things.

But if you decide not to vote for him, you have to accept the fact that it indirectly helps Obama.

Gelsomina on June 4, 2012 at 11:17 PM

It’s not that you don’t call people names, as well.

Gelsomina on June 4, 2012 at 10:57 PM

Sorry that you’re so shallow that you can’t conceive of responding in kind.

MadisonConservative on June 4, 2012 at 11:21 PM

Typical double standards.
If beloved Sarah Palin was working on the exchange program for health providers and the citizens in Alaska, the right would be gun-ho on the idea – but because it’s Romney you plug your nose.

c.j.ammenheuser on June 4, 2012 at 10:45 PM

Say what? You don’t read here much, do you? The generic term “the right” does not apply to the commenters on this site. There are at least two factions, or even three or four, here.

I worked in the medical profession, and I wouldn’t endorse that type of program if Jesus Christ was “working on it.” It’s only Mitt’s staunchest supporters who aren’t plugging their nose at his health care plan, and they CLAIM to be part of “the right.” Epic fail with the generalization, pal.

JannyMae on June 4, 2012 at 11:21 PM

You’re kind of missing the point, Butch. She didn’t, and she wasn’t. And here’s yet another rombot appearing from out of the mist to invoke Sarah Palin’s name for absolutely no reason at all. You guys kill me.

gryphon202 on June 4, 2012 at 10:49 PM

Dear Butch. You’re right of course. Palin quit.

The pragmatic necessity of what the exchange programs aims to do might be above your pay grade to understand but its goal is to help people buy insurance from their choice of providers, choose the prices and services. If Obamacare is shot down the exchange program will be part of the free market system.

c.j.ammenheuser on June 4, 2012 at 11:24 PM

Thanks for the memories ya’ll.

Flora Duh on June 4, 2012 at 11:03 PM

What memories, good lady? It’s now. It will be now for at least 4.5 years.

Schadenfreude on June 4, 2012 at 11:25 PM

Typical double standards.
If beloved Sarah Palin was working on the exchange program for health providers and the citizens in Alaska, the right would be gun-ho on the idea – but because it’s Romney you plug your nose.

c.j.ammenheuser on June 4, 2012 at 10:45 PM

Squishy

Hot

Gas

This place reeks of squish vibe.

I predict my own banishment before we take back the WH.

This place is really starting to get on my last “gun and bible clinging” nerve.

Tim_CA on June 4, 2012 at 11:26 PM

Criticizing Romney and not voting for him are two different things.

You might want to tell your Rombot buddies this. They do not seem to see a distinction. Anyone who criticizes Romney is automatically attacked and called nasty names.

But if you decide not to vote for him, you have to accept the fact that it indirectly helps Obama.

Gelsomina on June 4, 2012 at 11:17 PM

Then you finally acknowledge that a non-vote for Romney is not “the same as a vote for Obama?” Say! , We are making progress here. Why don’t you also inform your Rombot buddies of that?

JannyMae on June 4, 2012 at 11:27 PM

Nom de Boom on June 4, 2012 at 10:43 PM

Ha! You like to dish it out but can’t take it, can you. How dare anyone criticize Newt Gingrich! That’s blasphemy! Only our nominee can be criticized! Oh well, toodles and all that.

Not one instance of vowing to abolish this or that pet progressive project?
AH_C on June 4, 2012 at 11:09 PM

If you took the time to go to his website which lays out his plans to do just that in numerous ways you’d know how asinine this claim is.

Buy Danish on June 4, 2012 at 11:28 PM

Criticizing Romney and not voting for him are two different things.

But if you decide not to vote for him, you have to accept the fact that it indirectly helps Obama.

Gelsomina on June 4, 2012 at 11:17 PM

You Mitt-bots need some better material. Just because you drone on and on about how my non-support for empty words with, funny enough, more empty words about how I’m really just helping Obama isn’t going to change my views (Again, as others have stated, by that “logic” in that case, a non-vote for Obama, is thus, a vote for Romney. In other words, I help neither of the two) Doesn’t mean I’m going to go “You know what, you’re right, I am totally convinced to vote for Romney now, because he’s running as “Not-Obama”, as a Liberal Lite”

Quite differently actually. I’ll look at as just further proof, that even Romney’s staunchest supporters can’t actually give me a real reason to vote for him. Just more annoying, mindless blind loyalty chants of “Anyone but Obama”, that’s no different than the Liberals chanting “Anyone but a Republican”.

Razgriez on June 4, 2012 at 11:29 PM

AH_C on June 4, 2012 at 11:16 PM

Sure the Ronulans will make a little noise..That will be about it..If you think someone besides Romney is going to be the nominee then you need something besides popcorn..:)

Dire Straits on June 4, 2012 at 11:34 PM

This place is really starting to get on my last “gun and bible clinging” nerve.

Tim_CA on June 4, 2012 at 11:26 PM

You cling tight to both and take a deep breath. You can’t leave. The ‘barricades’ need you.

This thread tells all you need to know about the Romney coalition.

Schadenfreude on June 4, 2012 at 11:35 PM

Tim_CA on June 4, 2012 at 11:26 PM

Don’t take it so serious..It is just a comment section..:)

Dire Straits on June 4, 2012 at 11:35 PM

This thread tells all you need to know about the Romney coalition.

Schadenfreude on June 4, 2012 at 11:35 PM

You can also add some others to that mix also!!..:)

Dire Straits on June 4, 2012 at 11:36 PM

TxAnn56 on June 4, 2012 at 9:19 PM

I was born in Galveston, Fort Crockett, and as a kid I also lived in El Paso for awhile. Years later I was stationed at Ft. Hood.
I am indeed trapped here in California because that is where my kids and grandkids live. But for that I would move back to Texas.
I hope Cruz gets the nomination. I worked with him a bit before I retired, and he is the real deal in my opinion. I have sent him some California dollars.

GaltBlvnAtty on June 4, 2012 at 11:37 PM

The pragmatic necessity of what the exchange programs aims to do might be above your pay grade to understand but its goal is to help people buy insurance from their choice of providers, choose the prices and services. If Obamacare is shot down the exchange program will be part of the free market system.

c.j.ammenheuser on June 4, 2012 at 11:24 PM

Oh my! Such big words and deep meaning! I think we have ourselves a real “in-tuh-lek-shoo-uhl,” here.

Dear Arrogant HotAir Noob,

Sorry, but I read up on the program in Massachusetts, and you don’t understand it. What it does is shift federal and state public funds around, that are already designated for Medicare and Medicaid, to make it appear as if the state has insured more people. So far it has done exactly what Obamacare will do, increase the costs of insurance and medical care for everyone, because the solution to the problem is not MORE government subsidies and control, but LESS. As it stands now, with the government controlling so much of medical care via Medicare and Medicaid, and fixing prices, there will never again be a free market exchange program.

JannyMae on June 4, 2012 at 11:37 PM

lovingmyUSA on June 4, 2012 at 10:08 PM

I wasn’t replying to you. My reply was to :Terrye on June 4, 2012 at 7:36 PM because Terrye and I have debated before. I can’t relate to you.

bluefox on June 4, 2012 at 11:10 PM

Well, duh…I know that, I was commenting on your comment. Why is that so hard for you to see? You were whining about Romney spending money wining the primaries, in the exact same way Axle would slam any of our primary winners. If they couldnt stand against Romney…how the hell did you think they would make it against Axle’s machine?

lovingmyUSA on June 4, 2012 at 11:38 PM

If you took the time to go to his website which lays out his plans to do just that in numerous ways you’d know how asinine this claim is.

Buy Danish on June 4, 2012 at 11:28 PM

I said “name one” project that he’ll work to abolish. Ethanol? He’s for it. Subsidies? He’s for it. Gun control? He’s still for it. ObamneyCare? He’ll replace it. SS? He’ll fix the holes in the net tighter.

Once again, you fail to defend his policies beyond just words.

AH_C on June 4, 2012 at 11:38 PM

If you took the time to go to his website which lays out his plans to do just that in numerous ways you’d know how asinine this claim is.

Buy Danish on June 4, 2012 at 11:28 PM

FFS mittbot….you’re not helping.

Conservatives are uncomfortable enough having to vote for the Mass. Moderate….slinging juvinile insults and platitudes help exactly zero.

How about you just STFU and vote for your candidate?

All you mittbots do is poison the friggin’ well.

You won. Your boy is going to be the next President.

How about you show some friggin’ grace in your victory…..and let the adults figure out what to do next?

Tim_CA on June 4, 2012 at 11:39 PM

All you mittbots do is poison the friggin’ well.

You won. Your boy is going to be the next President.

How about you show some friggin’ grace in your victory…..and let the adults figure out what to do next?

Tim_CA on June 4, 2012 at 11:39 PM

If I were Mitt I’d fire them all because they’re rotten marketeers, as they were during the primaries.

Now, don’t ask for grace where there is none. You’ll only be disappointed. The Mitt folks are some of the nastiest creatures, right after the Obama goons. Don’t be deterred by style. Just fight, but calm down. Don’t want to lose you.

Schadenfreude on June 4, 2012 at 11:43 PM

It’s weak, but I’m offering Mitt my vote as a counter weight to this “how to create an exchange” consulting guy and the money of the varied interests that will reap ,I’ll make a guess, billions from these exchanges.

How can gov dominating and defining the healthcare market(1/6th of gdp) be called moderate, TrueCon or libertarian? It’s marxist. It’s a huge change to the status quo. Bigger then the trillion dollar TARP or 800bill in Porkulus which were also big changes in how gov had previously operated.
In 1980 we were arguing over a tiny 1.5 billion dollar government bailout of chrysler and no one but proud red leftists argued for GovHealth. Now we throw around trillions of imaginary dollars and fantasize about “free” health care on both sides.

We won’t be able to go back. Who is going to run on taking away peoples “healthcare” in 2020?

BoxHead1 on June 4, 2012 at 11:45 PM

Squishy

Hot

Gas

This place reeks of squish vibe.

I predict my own banishment before we take back the WH.

This place is really starting to get on my last “gun and bible clinging” nerve.

Tim_CA on June 4, 2012 at 11:26 PM

I’ve read Hotair for 5 years, but now I remember why I stopped reading it every day earlier this year. Since the primaries, the commenters here have become as rude and obnoxious as liberals- sometimes worse.

If you have any interest in facts, or in learning, the Washington Post and the WSJ explain the purpose of the exchange after Obamacare is shot down, or if it moves forward

c.j.ammenheuser on June 4, 2012 at 11:46 PM

FFS mittbot….you’re not helping.

[...]

slinging juvinile insults and platitudes help exactly zero.
[...]
How about you just STFU and vote for your candidate?

Tim_CA on June 4, 2012 at 11:39 PM

Tim_CA, why don’t you take your own advice and stop with the juvenile insults? Commenters like BuyDanish, Crosspatch and others have offered facts and numerous thorough, thoughtful responses to many of these ridiculous comments posted by the same handful of tiresome, habitual Romney bashers.

bluegill on June 4, 2012 at 11:49 PM

Others have pointed out how weird it is that Mittbots are the ones throwing around “conservative” as an epithet…and then calling everyone else “socialist O-bots” and the like.

ddrintn on June 4, 2012 at 9:39 PM

While others are completely oblivious to the concept of irony.

Chuck Schick on June 4, 2012 at 11:49 PM

If you took the time to go to his website which lays out his plans to do just that in numerous ways you’d know how asinine this claim is.

Buy Danish on June 4, 2012 at 11:28 PM

You’d better get used to checking that “website” frequently…..with Mitt’s history, there will be changes to those “plans” pretty regularly.

tencole on June 4, 2012 at 11:49 PM

Don’t take it so serious..It is just a comment section..:)

Dire Straits on June 4, 2012 at 11:35 PM

dunno….seen the new lineup? read the recent Blog Posts?

Combine that with the chatter.

This place is getting squishy.

Hot

Gas

“Conservative Blog”?….LMAO….not so much.

Squishy

Center-Right

Hot

Gas

Breitbart Lives!!

Tim_CA on June 4, 2012 at 11:49 PM

Sure the Ronulans will make a little noise..That will be about it..If you think someone besides Romney is going to be the nominee then you need something besides popcorn..:)

Dire Straits on June 4, 2012 at 11:34 PM

Nope, just watching to see what happens. Also interesting will be Sarah’s event and whatever comes of that.

If Romney cruises to the nomination, then I’m off to the conservative party. If Romney struggles but wins, I’m might write-in for the one that gave him fits. If he chokes and fails, I’m voting for that bone in his throat.

If the CP endorses Mittness, then it’s off to another stand-in. On the other hand, if Mittness shows up blind due to a Road-to-Damascus event, then I could be persuaded to vote for him.

AH_C on June 4, 2012 at 11:50 PM

Breitbart Lives!!

Tim_CA on June 4, 2012 at 11:49 PM

Indeed, he does. Make him proud.

Schadenfreude on June 4, 2012 at 11:51 PM

AH_C on June 4, 2012 at 11:50 PM

Good luck..:)

Dire Straits on June 4, 2012 at 11:53 PM

Concern troll’s concern is noted. I warned my fellow Palinistas ad nauseum that I thought the chances were pretty good she wouldn’t run, so I was not surprised. No sour grapes here. But that’s neither here nor there, as Sarah Palin has NOTHING to do with my distaste for Mitt and his rombots. Refrain from insulting me (personally or otherwise), and I’ll refrain from calling you out on the carpet.

gryphon202 on June 4, 2012 at 7:30 PM

You mean, besides calling me a concern troll in the very same post?

Chuck Schick on June 4, 2012 at 11:53 PM

Breitbart Lives!!

Tim_CA on June 4, 2012 at 11:49 PM

Good deal!!..:)

Dire Straits on June 4, 2012 at 11:53 PM

Tim_CA, why don’t you take your own advice and stop with the juvenile insults? Commenters like BuyDanish, Crosspatch and others have offered facts and numerous thorough, thoughtful responses to many of these ridiculous comments posted by the same handful of tiresome, habitual Romney bashers.

bluegill on June 4, 2012 at 11:49 PM

LMAO mittbot…how about you read my last 20 posts then STMFU…I have so had it with pathetic d-bag, squish romney-worshpers tonite.

lol….your spinelessness, leftiest tactics, and squishy douchiness disgust me.

Tim_CA on June 4, 2012 at 11:53 PM

bluegill on June 4, 2012 at 11:49 PM

Play this for a while.

Schadenfreude on June 4, 2012 at 11:54 PM

AH_C on June 4, 2012 at 11:50 PM

By the way..I know of some other HA posters who have joined the Conservative Party..Seems like a good Party..:)

Dire Straits on June 4, 2012 at 11:56 PM

Tim_CA on June 4, 2012 at 11:49 PM

so true. hot gas. the new “center right” which 10 years ago were called liberals. my how the paramaters change.

renalin on June 4, 2012 at 11:56 PM

Exit question: Can he really afford to alienate his base on something this huge and visible? C’mon.

-Allahpundit, pot-stirring pessimist blogger

It seems like Allahpundit goes out of his way to try to stir the pot in order to get more page views/comments for his posts.

This habit of his, along with his non-stop pessimism and his annoying habit of injecting his own persona into ALL blog posts (including posts about serious topics), has led me to skip over much of his work in favor of other HotAir bloggers.

I find Ed Morrissey’s work a lot more empowering, and Jazz Shaw has an upbeat, likeable style and has a fresh way of looking at things.

bluegill on June 4, 2012 at 11:58 PM

I have wondered about this myself. It would be interesting to see some speeches and debates re that election.

LazyHips on June 4, 2012 at 9:20 PM

Easy to find his 2002 Debates on You Tube and other video from back then.

You can watch as he debates he is the better Democrat. That Republican Registration is just a Technicality.

No one here denied it because is is simply fact and easy to verify.

Steveangell on June 4, 2012 at 11:58 PM

If you have any interest in facts, or in learning, the Washington Post and the WSJ explain the purpose of the exchange after Obamacare is shot down, or if it moves forward

c.j.ammenheuser on June 4, 2012 at 11:46 PM

Hot

Gas

Tim_CA on June 5, 2012 at 12:04 AM

I’ve read Hotair for 5 years, but now I remember why I stopped reading it every day earlier this year. Since the primaries, the commenters here have become as rude and obnoxious as liberals- sometimes worse.

If you have any interest in facts, or in learning, the Washington Post and the WSJ explain the purpose of the exchange after Obamacare is shot down, or if it moves forward

c.j.ammenheuser on June 4, 2012 at 11:46 PM

Indeed.

It is like a ton of Democrats started posting here.

Mitt’s supporters are almost all Saul Alinsky all the time. They do tone the language but other than that they act just like on the Daily Kos.

This is why I checked out the Marxist Mitt Romney. Yes his father was a Marxist friends with Saul Alinsky and went to North Vietnam with Mitt his spokesman at the time. He came back praising North Vietnam Republicans started calling him Brainwashed George. I have heard Mitt praise his father in his speeches back in 2002.

Steveangell on June 5, 2012 at 12:08 AM

bluegill on June 4, 2012 at 11:49 PM

Play this for a while.

Schadenfreude on June 4, 2012 at 11:54 PM

; )

Bmore on June 5, 2012 at 12:10 AM

bluegill on June 4, 2012 at 11:58 PM

You don’t have to do much heavy lifting when Rmoney™ screws up this royaly. He like you is not the favorite. Try to not read anything of Allahs if it doesn’t suit you. No one is forcing you. For that matter if I were you I’d stop reading this site all together. Its not a big pro Rmoney™ place. Bread Ball?

Bmore on June 5, 2012 at 12:13 AM

Typical double standards.
If beloved Sarah Palin was working on the exchange program for health providers and the citizens in Alaska, the right would be gun-ho on the idea – but because it’s Romney you plug your nose.

c.j.ammenheuser on June 4, 2012 at 10:45 PM

Squishy

Hot

Gas

This place reeks of squish vibe.

I predict my own banishment before we take back the WH.

This place is really starting to get on my last “gun and bible clinging” nerve.

Tim_CA on June 4, 2012 at 11:26 PM

.
I feel ya’, Tim’.

If Sarah were to do that, I’d have to ask her: “Who are you, and what have you done with the real Sarah Palin?”
.
If Sarah were to do that, it would be the biggest disillusionment I will have witnessed in my lifetime.

listens2glenn on June 5, 2012 at 12:15 AM

It seems like Allahpundit goes out of his way to try to stir the pot in order to get more page views/comments for his posts.

This habit of his, along with his non-stop pessimism and his annoying habit of injecting his own persona into ALL blog posts (including posts about serious topics), has led me to skip over much of his work in favor of other HotAir bloggers.

I find Ed Morrissey’s work a lot more empowering, and Jazz Shaw has an upbeat, likeable style and has a fresh way of looking at things.

bluegill on June 4, 2012 at 11:58 PM

We are polar opposites on Allah. Although you probably agree with him more. The strike out part.

On the first part I agree. But what makes you not like him makes me like him. Every one has their beliefs though they all change over time. I know where the RINO Allah stands but love hearing his reading on things. Insightful well said and thought out.

Although I like Ed Morrissey’s work a lot more he is just more talented. I have read him for years since shortly after he started Captains Quarters perhaps before on Free Republic Post.

I actually like most post promoted to here as well. I think the senior editors do a great job.

Steveangell on June 5, 2012 at 12:16 AM

royaly=royally

Bmore on June 5, 2012 at 12:18 AM

I said “name one” project that he’ll work to abolish. Ethanol? He’s for it. Subsidies? He’s for it. Gun control? He’s still for it. ObamneyCare? He’ll replace it. SS? He’ll fix the holes in the net tighter.

Once again, you fail to defend his policies beyond just words.

AH_C on June 4, 2012 at 11:38 PM

No, you didn’t say “Name one”; you said “Not one”:

Not one instance of vowing to abolish this or that pet progressive project?
AH_C on June 4, 2012 at 11:09 PM

I responded to that blatantly false and “asinine” claim by suggesting you go to his website. And FTR, I don’t support ethanol subsidies, but then again I don’t support making Iowa the first stop on the nomination trail.

How about you show some friggin’ grace in your victory…..and let the adults figure out what to do next?

Tim_CA on June 4, 2012 at 11:39 PM

Making a false claim as part of an angry rant is acting like an adult, but my responding to part of that rant with the reasonable suggestion he check his website is not? Alternate universe time.

Buy Danish on June 5, 2012 at 12:18 AM

LMAO mittbot…how about you read my last 20 posts then STMFU…I have so had it with pathetic d-bag, squish romney-worshpers tonite.

lol….your spinelessness, leftiest tactics, and squishy douchiness disgust me.

Tim_CA on June 4, 2012 at 11:53 PM

Ah, so this is how adults are meant to behave! This is the paragon of gracefulness!

Buy Danish on June 5, 2012 at 12:21 AM

Typical double standards.
If beloved Sarah Palin was working on the exchange program for health providers and the citizens in Alaska, the right would be gun-ho on the idea – but because it’s Romney you plug your nose.
c.j.ammenheuser on June 4, 2012 at 10:45 PM

Pure projection here.

The Democrats now demand 100% loyalty.

Now they are coming here and demanding it from us.

Sorry. But we actually believe in GOD given unalienable rights. You know the Constitution.

Sarah would never disrespect the Constitution. But to Romney the Constitution is old and can be twisted to mean anything. Well you as well it seems.

Steveangell on June 5, 2012 at 12:22 AM

Easy to find his 2002 Debates on You Tube and other video from back then.

You can watch as he debates he is the better Democrat. That Republican Registration is just a Technicality.

No one here denied it because is is simply fact and easy to verify.

Steveangell on June 4, 2012 at 11:58 PM

Thanks, I’m probably the only person on the earth that doesn’t look at youtube much so I think of it as where current stuff its. I will do that this weekend. :-) It will be interesting to match up what he said in the debates/speeches and how he proceeded to govern. Maybe some clues to what he will do in 2013?

LazyHips on June 5, 2012 at 12:23 AM

Making a false claim as part of an angry rant is acting like an adult, but my responding to part of that rant with the reasonable suggestion he check his website is not? Alternate universe time.

Buy Danish on June 5, 2012 at 12:18 AM

Danish…your a boorish douchebag mittbot.

If you knew half of what you think you know….you’d realise how truly stupid and arrogant you really are.

You embody everything I detest about Establishment Republicans.

How’s that for a “rant” sweetheart?

Tim_CA on June 5, 2012 at 12:26 AM

Contrast and compare:

Now you can argue as to whether this is a wise strategy but I hardly see this as an endorsement of Federal oversight. Obviously the states (like Utah) who have established exchanges should be allowed to keep them if they wish, with or without ObamaCare.
fwiw, a sound endorsement of the Utah Health Exchange, as well as an argument why the states should go ahead and design these plans in order to weaken the federal stranglehold, can be found here at Forbes.
Buy Danish on June 4, 2012 at 4:51 PM

Why did you put a sarc tag after the last sentence? High deductible plans with HSAs are gaining in popularity and are a great option for some but we need a menu of choices. It is unwise for older people to choose this option as they don’t have the healthy years to build up a savings account to cover expenses they will inevitably incur later on.
Buy Danish on June 4, 2012 at 5:53 PM

Timmy:

LMAO mittbot…how about you read my last 20 posts then STMFU…I have so had it with pathetic d-bag, squish romney-worshpers tonite.

lol….your spinelessness, leftiest tactics, and squishy douchiness disgust me.

Tim_CA on June 4, 2012 at 11:53 PM

Danish…your a boorish douchebag mittbot.

If you knew half of what you think you know….you’d realise how truly stupid and arrogant you really are.

You embody everything I detest about Establishment Republicans.

How’s that for a “rant” sweetheart?

Tim_CA on June 5, 2012 at 12:26 AM

Good night.

Buy Danish on June 5, 2012 at 12:31 AM

If you took the time to go to his website which lays out his plans to do just that in numerous ways you’d know how asinine this claim is.

Buy Danish on June 4, 2012 at 11:28 PM

You’d better get used to checking that “website” frequently…..with Mitt’s history, there will be changes to those “plans” pretty regularly.

tencole on June 4, 2012 at 11:49 PM

Yes and also better know what the meaning of is is.

His site is useless. It is garbage. Examine his record in Mass that is exactly what he will actually do as President. In other words Mitt will be Obama on steroids. Mitt is an administrators administrator. He is the best at it I have ever heard of in a Politician.

But no one can argue with a straight face that Mitt would be willing to be President and get very little done for two or even four years waiting to get enough Republicans in the Senate. With the Press 100% against him with his record of bending over backwards to please Mass Democrats.

No Mitt will work with the Democrats to get things done. He will bring over enough Republicans to get things into law but the Democrats will be setting the agenda. Just like he did in Mass.

Why is this so hard for you Mitt supporters to understand. All liberal Politicians lie like Clintons signature Middle Class Tax Cut. Or GHW Bush read my lips no new taxes. Mitt is lying.

Steveangell on June 5, 2012 at 12:33 AM

Good night.

Buy Danish on June 5, 2012 at 12:31 AM

LMAO…are you mad?

cuz…um….you seem mad.

Tim_CA on June 5, 2012 at 12:33 AM

Bump..We have reached the magical # 700..Congrats all!!..:)

Dire Straits on June 5, 2012 at 12:36 AM

Comment pages: 1 5 6 7 8