National Review Online, having burned through every establishment
hack trying to excite the American people with their favorite RINO, is back to
their old standby, Mitt Romney. Little did they know by giving Mitt a
couple of paragraphs he could call his own, they were allowing the man to
declare his seriousness as a political candidate a thing of the past:

If I Were President: Obamacare, One Year In

By Mitt Romney

If I were president, on Day One I would issue an executive order paving the
way for Obamacare waivers to all 50 states. The executive order would direct
the Secretary of Health and Human Services and all relevant federal officials
to return the maximum possible authority to the states to innovate and design
health-care solutions that work best for them.

As I have stated time and again, a one-size-fits-all national plan that
raises taxes is simply not the answer. Under our federalist system, the states
are “laboratories of democracy.” They should be free to experiment. By
the way, what works in one state may not be the answer for another. Of course,
the ultimate goal is to repeal Obamacare and replace it with free-market
reforms that promote competition and lower health-care costs. But since an
outright repeal would take time, an executive order is the first step in
returning power to the states.

I’ll admit. I had to read this several times because I’m reading it and
thinking how can one single person pack so much fail in so little space. I mean
seriously. This is not the sort of plan one would expect from a supposed “educated
man.” It’s sure not a plan one would expect from someone who
believes in the Constitution.

First, let’s look at Romney’s plan to just give all of the state wavers, by
Executive fiat. For one thing, Executive orders aren’t worth the paper they are
written on, as any law Congress makes would supersede them. This is simply no
way to govern.

While Romney is gleefully issuing wavers by Executive Order, ObamaCare is
still the law of the land, assuming the United States Supreme Court hasn’t
stricken the bill down as unconstitutional before January 20, 2013.

And here-in lies the problem. As long as ObamaCare is still law, parts of it
are being implemented. Romney could give a waver to every man, woman, child,
dog and cat in the country, and ObamaCare, the law, will just keep on keepin’
on, until it is either repealed or declared unconstitutional and void. Billions
of dollars will be spent while Romney plays “executive.”

There is only one way to make sure ObamaCare doesn’t destroy the best health
care system in the world, and drag down our already ailing economy with it:
Kill it. Put it out of our misery!

As we move on, Romney is still using this tired old talking point:

Under our federalist system, the states are “laboratories of democracy.”

Now this is true enough, but it doesn’t mean states should embrace
destructive ideas and socialist plans. At least not if they expect to succeed!
And by every measure humanly possible, RomneyCare is a complete and total
disaster. It’s bankrupting the state and has screwed up their health care
system beyond salvation.

Romney goes on to say that repealing ObamaCare is the “ultimate goal”
and he wants to “replace it with free-market reforms that promote
competition and lower health-care costs.” That’s all well and good, but if
that’s Romney’s REAL position, why didn’t he do that as Governor of
Massachusetts, instead of instituting a socialist form of health care, one that
would serve as the blueprint for ObamaCare!

One is left wondering if Romney even understands the meaning of the words he
wrote.

Mitt could have looked to the Lone Star State. Texas took on health care reform
well before Romney was elected Governor. Instead of cooking up a European style
socialized system, Texas made reforms to the insurance industry, and more
importantly, addressed tort reform. Texas used to be a haven for ambulance
chasing lawyers. The worst in the nation. With lawsuit reform, the Texas health
care system has thrived, with thousands of doctors relocating to the state.

Of course, our beloved Governor, Rick Perry, isn’t one of those Ivy League
educated “though leaders” so prized by the Republican elite. He’s just
a good old boy who went to Texas A&M, served as a Captain in the Air Force,
flying C-130s overseas, and went back to cotton farming after serving his
country. In other words, the man uses Common Sense to solve problems, not Big
Government schemes.

Romney could have looked to Texas, rather than socialist Europe for
solutions, but how would that have looked to the rest of the country club set?

Another problem with Romney is one of believability. Let’s face it, Romney
is well known as a human windsock. The absolute, ultimate, finger-in-the-wind
politician. You name the issue, and Romney will have taken both sides at one
point or another.

Now one could simply say he’s grown and matured, learned. That would be
valid in several cases, but on many issues Romney famously flip-flops from one
side to the other, depending on the prevailing political winds.

So here’s the thing, even though Romney is saying anything he has to in
order to seem “electable“, will he really stay true to his word? Why
should we believe he’ll even attempt to stop ObamaCare, let alone actually do
it?

Long before ObamaCare was ever signed into law, the America people were
rising up by the millions in protest. Leaders, like Sarah Palin, Michelle
Bachmann, Allen West, and many more, stood up and fought against this disaster
with everything they had. They laid it all on the line. Took all sorts of heat
from the media, and even the hacks in their own party. But they fought anyway.

In the end, it was Palin, Bachmann, and the rest, who inspired the hard
working patriots in the Tea Party, resulting in the largest shift in political
power in over 100 years, with the 2010 elections. Republicans didn’t just win
big in the national contests, the state elections saw massive Republican
victories as well over 600 democrats were sent packing!

Where was Romney though? We are constantly told by the Ruling Class
of the GOP that Romney is the bestest they have to offer. The leader of their
pack. Indeed, Romney has name recognition and even a bit of credibility, among
some. Romney’s voice would have been not only welcomed, but much appreciated.
Romney’s strong voice in opposition to ObamaCare might have been the one that
made the difference. He could have stood strong with Palin, Bachmann and the
others, but that’s not the way Romney does things.

Had Mitt Romney stood up with the rest of America as we fought to stop
ObamaCare from ever becoming law, he might have even been celebrated as a
leader. Instead, Mitt decided to sit it out. Obviously Romney has his own
demons to deal with, having screwed up his own state, but still, he could have
stood up and took his lumps, then helped stop the Obama regime. Alas, Romney is
not a leader, and doesn’t have the backbone for the real fight.

So again, how is it he will have the backbone as President?

Here’s another problem with Romney’s credibility. Far from admitting he
jumped the shark with RomneyCare, Mitt has been bending over backwards to
defend his mess ever since the nation learned what a total disaster it is!

There are thousands of instances like the one Sasha Issenberg describes for
the Boston
Globe, almost a year ago, to the day:

Romney defends Mass. health care law

AMES, Iowa — Mitt Romney offered an enthusiastic defense last night of the
comprehensive health care law he helped create four years ago in Massachusetts
…

“Overall, ours is a model that works,’’ Romney said in response to
a question after a speech at Iowa State University. “We solved our problem
at the state level. Like it or not, it was a state solution. Why is it that
President Obama is stepping in and saying ‘one size fits all’’’?

[ .... ]

Yesterday, Romney proudly acknowledged that his bill included a set of new
insurance regulations that “President Obama always likes to talk about in
his health care plan — the good stuff.’’ Romney trumpeted the achievement
of near-universal coverage in Massachusetts, while declining to acknowledge
that the mechanism he used to achieve that goal — a requirement that
individuals buy private insurance — is the same as the much-criticized mandate
of Obama’s plan.

The accounting of “some similarities’’ and “some differences’’
between the two systems was a more delicate comparison than Romney has offered
recently, when he wholly rejected the idea that the two had anything
significant in common.

“People often compare his plan to the Massachusetts plan,’’ Romney said
in an interview last month. “They’re as different as night and day. There
are some words that sound the same, but our plan is based on states solving our
issues; his is based on a one-size-fits-all plan.’’

In the last week, many health care policy specialists, Democrats celebrating
the bill’s passage, and Republicans condemning it have come to another
conclusion. The difference between the two systems, they say, is slim.

“Basically, it’s the same thing,’’ said Jonathan
Gruber, an MIT economist who advised the Romney and Obama administrations on
their health insurance programs. A national health overhaul would not
have happened if Mitt Romney had not made “the decision in 2005 to go for
it.He is in many ways the intellectual father of national
health reform.’’

I’d like to hear Mitt describe, in detail exactly how “Overall, ours is
a model that works.’’ That would be a performance worthy of an Academy
Award, if he could pull it off.

Mitt was still out there taking victory
laps for RomneyCare just one month ago:

Mitt Romney is ‘proud’ of Massachusetts health care plan

“Mitt Romney is proud of what he accomplished for Massachusetts in
getting everyone covered,” Romney’s spokesman, Eric Fehrnstrom told the
Globe’s Matt Viser. “What’s important now is to return to the states the
power to determine their own healthcare solutions by repealing Obamacare. A
one-size-fits-all plan for the entire nation just doesn’t work.”

It’s unclear how that talking point will play with GOP primary
voters, who may find it tough to distinguish Romney’s plan from President
Obama’s health care proposal given both included individual mandates for
coverage. In an attempt to perhaps undermine a rival, the White House
has gone out of its way to link Obama’s plan to what Romney passed. “We got
some good ideas from him,” Obama adviser David Axelrod said last month.

The question of whether Romney can distance his plan from Obama’s seems
potentially crucial to his campaign. A Kaiser Family Foundation poll
released Thursday found that 84 percent of Republicans polled have an
unfavorable view of “Obamacare.”

Will someone please explain to me, with a straight face, exactly how Romney
has any credibility on this at all.

There’s still more troubling issues with Romney. His publisher recently
released his book in paperback. This isn’t unusual. What is unusual is
the revisions Mitt made. Now it’s not uncommon for an author to add more
content when a book comes out in paperback. Something to add to the story.
However, it’s most curious that Romney took the occasion to actually edit the
content and change positions on key issues, including RommneyCare. That’s
right, not only does Romney flip flop in person, he flip flops in print as
well!

Romney edits Romneycare out of his book

Multiple Choice Mitt strikes again. Romney is putting out a paperback
version of his book, No Apology, but has edited out references to the
individual mandate contained in health care legislation he brought into law in
Massachusetts.

In the original hardcover, Romney tried to carefully distinguish between the
Massachusetts law and the national version that was nearing passage as he
wrote.

But the Massachusetts model has become Romney’s bête noire among
conservatives, who loathe the national reform they call “Obamacare.”
The rewritten paperback swings much harder, proclaiming that “Obamacare will
not work and should be repealed,” and “Obamacare is an
unconstitutional federal incursion into the rights of states.”

Read more here.

Sorry, but Romney trying to play the tough guy, on ObamaCare, or anything
else, just isn’t an image that’s believable.

Something else that is destroying Romney’s credibility: Obama thinks of Mitt
as a “useful idiot” when he talks about his health care plan. Recently
Obama cited Romney’s stance on RomneyCare to claim his own “bi-partisanship”
and announce a change of course on how he’d like to see ObamaCare shoved down
our throats. I mean “implemented” [sorry]

The Obama regime constantly “thanks” Romney for giving them the
blueprint for their own program.

In effect, this neutralizes any attack on ObamaCare Romney can make. There
are only two people in the United States with a socialist health care system
named after them. In a political contest it will be hard for one to attack the
other, especially when the challenger, Romney, was the first one to create such
a system!

In other words, with Romney as the nominee, it takes ObamaCare off the table
as a campaign issue.

President
Obama praises Mitt Romney’s health care plan

“I know that many of you have asked for flexibility for your states
under this law. In fact, I agree with Mitt Romney, who recently said he’s proud
of what he accomplished on health care in Massachusetts and supports giving
states the power to determine their own health care solutions,” Obama said
in an address to the National Governors Association today. “He’s right.
Alabama is not going to have exactly the same needs as Massachusetts or
California or North Dakota. We believe in that flexibility.”

It’s the second time in the past several weeks that the White House has gone
out of its way to praise Romney, who is expected to launch a bid for the GOP
nomination. In January, Obama adviser David Axelrod said the administration had
gotten “some good ideas” from Romney, who has come under fire for the
plan, which, like Obama’s bill, mandates that individuals must have health insurance.

It’s Romney’s weak position that allows Obama to single him out, and use him
as a shield. It allows Obama his “reach across the aisle” moment.

People in Massachusetts are still very upset with Romney, and articles like
this recent piece from Howie Carr in the Boston
Herald are all too common, and will be repeated often in 2012:

No Rx for Mitt Romney’s Bay State headache

Mitt keeps trying to explain how it seemed like such a good idea at the
time. But Romneycare follows him around like a dark cloud over his head, just
the way Chappaquiddick haunted Ted Kennedy’s 1980 presidential campaign. If
only those rascally Democrats hadn’t ruined it, Mitt keeps saying, as the crowd
uneasily makes its way toward the exits.

No, Mitt says, really, I mean it, seriously, please, come back . . .

As Ralph Waldo Emerson once put it, “The louder he spoke of his honor,
the faster we counted our spoons.”

Romney has had years to do some sort of mea culpa, to come clean, admit he
screwed the pooch, and ask for forgiveness. A sincere apology, several years
ago, might have helped, instead, Romney has been doubling down. Romney has even
called his boondoggle “the
ultimate conservative plan” and has encouraged other Governors to
adopt it as their own!

I’ll give Mitt this, he and his team sure know how to spin disaster!

Now I think we all agree that allowing the several states to be in charge of
creating their own destiny, and health care reform, is exactly what the
Founding Fathers intended for our Republic. In the Federalist system, each
state is a sovereign entity, and the intent is to allow each state to create
conditions that work for their citizens.

Romney is right in this case, but the conditions he created as Governor are
far from “conservative“! Seriously, the individual mandate, forcing
every citizen to buy insurance, is not Conservative in any way, shape, or form.

Now some will bring up mandatory automobile insurance as a counter to that
argument, but that dog won’t hunt. Driving a car is NOT a right, it’s a
privilege.

One can choose not to drive a car, and thus not be mandated to buy
insurance. The act of driving a car is voluntary, and the required insurance is
designed to protect other drivers and property owners, not the insured. [unless
they purchase "full coverage", which is not mandatory]

On the other hand, RomneyCare, like ObamaCare requires every citizen to
purchase insurance, simply because they are alive, and penalizes anyone who
doesn’t.

This is NOT a Conservative way of doing things. Conservatives respect individual
rights, and the concept of limited government. RomneyCare, like it’s spawn,
ObamaCare are the exact opposite of these concepts. They are the ultimate Big
Government intrusions on our lives.

The elections of 2012 are going to be the defining moment in American
history. It’s going to be the event that determines whether we stay on our
current path, and become nothing more than a failed socialist experiment, or
change directions and get back to First Principles, those time honored
solutions to problems that made this nation the greatest ever created.

One of the real chances the United States has to right itself lies not in
the presidency, but in Congress. There are a lot of democrats up for
re-election in the Senate. There is a once-in-a-lifetime chance to fill those
seats with principled Conservatives. A strong leader on the Republican ticket
for President will have long coattails and bring about this change in Congress.

I mention this because it brings us to the answer Mitt Romney should have
given, instead of the one he did in the NRO editorial.

You see, the new Congress will be sworn in weeks before the new President.
This means Congress will have plenty of time to draft, and pass legislation
repealing ObamaCare in it’s entirety. This legislation can be sitting on the
new President’s desk, ready for their signature on day one.

Romney should understand, that after watching many of their fellow travelers
go down in the elections, many of the remaining democrats will be all too happy
to vote in favor of repeal, especially those up for re-election in 2014.

All of this will be possible with a strong leader at the top of the ticket.
It’s telling that Romney can’t envision this. Mitt’s answer shows he is not a a
leader, nor is he a serious candidate for the office of the presidency.

RomneyCare was always going to be Mitt’s Waterloo, the bridge too far, this
just seals his fate.

(No Ratings Yet)

 Loading …

About Gary P.

Gary P is editor and publisher of A Time For Choosing as well as a
contributor to Red State, Digital Journal, The Sarah Palin Web Brigade,
The Sarah Palin Information Blog, and other conservative sites. A Time For Choosing is a website based on solid Ronald Reagan/Sarah
Palin conservatism. We give no apologies, and accept no substitutes.This website is named after Ronald Reagan’s iconic 1964 speech at
the Republican National Convention of the same name. Although, A Time
For Choosing is the speech’s official title, it is so iconic, so well
known, and so highly quoted, it is simply known as “The Speech.”It’s time for all Americans to choose the nation they wish to live
in. do they want to continue to live in a free nation and retain their
God given liberties, or do they want to allow someone to take it all
away?Do Americans want a nation where they can live their lives as they
see fit, or do they want a totalitarian, oppressive government?It is a time for choosing.

• Mail

|

• Web

|

• More Posts (519)