Rick Haymow - Right Side News
Mitt Romney has committed political suicide and will not win the Republican nomination for President of the United States. There are three critical issues conservatives stand firm on, and that is pro-life, pro-business and keep government the hell out of healthcare. Romney gets up to the plate on thiese 3 issues and misses the ball on each one. He is a RINO, big government man and if by some miracle, he is nominated, our country is toast. Romney and Gingrich should start a consulting business in D.C. somewhere.
.
STRIKE ONE: Global Warming
Mitt Romney reaffirmed his view that global warming is occurring and that humans are contributing to it, a position that has been rejected in recent years by many Republicans as the issue has taken on a greater partisan tinge...........Boston Globe
Related Video from November of 2007, almost 4 years ago he had the exact position and this is BEFORE the global warming fraud was exposed and the famous hockey stick debunct.
The question comes to my mind is simple. If he believes in man-made global warming, is he going to shut down coal plants like the EPA is currently doing in Obama's committment to bankrupt coal? He further stated he put his belief in man-made global warming on paper in writing in his own book. He touts "investing" huge amounts of your tax money into alternative energies and uses the same "speak" as the global warming useful idiots. You can't stand on these beliefs and be pro-business, as believing in a fraud and taking action to decrease carbon emissions has a direct and negative impact on business. Professional politicians that believe in frauds need to be voted out of office.
STRIKE TWO: Pro Choice or Pro Life
Does Mitt Romney Support Planned Parenthood? Article by David Daleiden of Live Action provides a disturbing event. Romney REFUSED to sign the Susan B. Anthony List's 2012 Pro-Life Presidential Leadership Pledge. He REFUSED. American's are looking for a leader of conservative issues, and Romney has committed political suicide for his chances to win the nomination and run against President Obama. The more time that passes, the more Mitt moves LEFT.
It’s a provocative headline, but it seems like the Romney camp issued a, well, provocative statement today. According to Politico, Romney has refused to sign Susan B. Anthony List’s 2012 Pro-Life Presidential Leadership Pledge. Trying to explain this blunder, Romney spokeswoman Andrea Saul said this:
Governor Romney pledged in the last campaign that he would be a pro-life president and of course he pledges it today [...] However, this well-intentioned effort has some potentially unforeseen consequences and he does not feel he could in good conscience sign it. Gov. Romney has been a strong supporter of the SBA List in the past and he looks forward to continue working with them to promote a culture of life.
Most damningly, according to Politico:
Saul said that Romney, who publicly supported abortion rights in his 1994 Senate and 2002 gubernatorial campaigns, was concerned that the pledge would “strip taxpayer funding from thousands of health care facilities” and that it “strictly limits the choices” in appointing federal officials.
Would any of those “thousands of health care facilities,” by any chance, be Planned Parenthood clinics? Because Saul is doing a good job of paraphrasing the Planned Parenthood-supporter argument against defunding the biggest abortion business in America: “But look how many good preventative services they provide!” Look up any pro-PP op-ed. I guarantee you, the main argument will be one of “unintended consequences.”
Romney was the last of several potential presidential candidates to come out in support of Planned Parenthood defunding when the issue was live in Congress. Said one commenter: “about time. [...] He would make an awesome economic adviser, but the man isn’t a leader.” As I have said before, we need a president who will lead on abortion.
Even more shocking is the stated “concern” that the pledge “strictly limits choices” in appointing officials to the federal bureaucracy. Here’s the text of the pledge:
FIRST, to nominate to the U.S. federal bench judges who are committed to restraint and applying the original meaning of the Constitution, not legislating from the bench;
SECOND, to select only pro-life appointees for relevant Cabinet and Executive Branch positions, in particular the head of National Institutes of Health, the Department of Justice, and the Department of Health & Human Services;
THIRD, to advance pro-life legislation to permanently end all taxpayer funding of abortion in all domestic and international spending programs, and defund Planned Parenthood and all other contractors and recipients of federal funds with affiliates that perform or fund abortions;
FOURTH, advance and sign into law a Pain-Capable Unborn Child Protection Act to protect unborn children who are capable of feeling pain from abortion.
If SBA List is asking for pro-life appointees for all relevant federal positions, and Romney insists that would too “strictly limit” his choices, I guess that means that Romney doesn’t intend to appoint pro-life officials to positions that deal with abortion?
NIH has control over stem cell and fetal tissue research, the Department of Justice would be involved in investigating Planned Parenthood, and HHS under PP go-to-gal Kathleen Sebelius is a pie the abortionists are just waiting to slice into more deeply (because they’re very good at slicing things, you know). Not to mention the audacity of refusing to appoint originalist justices. Not to mention the cowardice of shrinking from a Roe-challenging, federal Pain Capable Unborn Child Protection Act.
Yo Mitt! Wrong way, dude..........move the other way! Even if he did, he has grease on his shoes to slide any direction the audience of the moment is.
STRIKE THREE: RomneyCare
ObamaCare was modeled after RomneyCare, what more can you say. Romney is a big government man, a RINO in the true essence of the definition and Right Side News does NOT endorse Romney, no sir!
A great CATO peice by Michael Tanner Lessons from the Fall of RomneyCare
Romney denounces Senator Clinton’s plan as "government run health care," but there really is very little difference between the Romney and Clinton plans.
In addition, several states have been seeking to use Massachusetts as a model for their own reforms. In California, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger added an employer mandate to a plan that otherwise looked very much like the Massachusetts plan. Other states considering similar proposals include Alaska, Kansas, Louisiana, Maryland, Michigan, New York, Oregon, and Washington, as well as the District of Columbia. Although none of these proposals has made it into law, several remain under active consideration.
No one can deny that the U.S. health care system needs reform. Too many Americans lack health insurance and/or are unable to afford the best care. More must be done to lower health care costs and increase access to care. Both patients and providers need better and more useful information. The system is riddled with waste, and quality of care is uneven. Government health care programs like Medicare and Medicaid threaten future generations with an enormous burden of debt and taxes. Given these pressures, the temptation for a quick fix is understandable.
But, as Massachusetts has shown us, mandating insurance, restricting individual choice, expanding subsidies, and increasing government control isn’t going to solve those problems. A mandate imposes a substantial cost in terms of individual choice but is almost certainly unenforceable and will not achieve its goal of universal coverage. Subsidies may increase coverage, but will almost always cost more than projected and will impose substantial costs on taxpayers. Increased regulations will drive up costs and limit consumer choice.
The answer to controlling health care costs and increasing access to care lies with giving consumers more control over their health care spending while increasing competition in the health care marketplace- not in mandates, subsidies, and regulation. That is the lesson we should be drawing from the failure of RomneyCare. This article originally appeared in the January/February 2008 edition of Cato Policy Report.
And then there is the RELIGION part.......
----------------------------
