Skip to main content

Mitt Romney flip-flopping
Pointing out that Mitt Romney has flip-flopped on something is like pointing out that water is wet, but this one is a real doozy, even for Mitt.

In a meeting with the editorial board of the Des Moines Register, he was asked whether health insurers should cover birth control. Here's his jaw-dropping answer:

It’s a question as to, should you get a car painted, you know, red or blue. I mean you can decide which you’d like. People who want to have contraceptive health insurance can choose that in their policy. Those that don’t have — that choose not to can buy a policy with or without. It depends on the kind of policy you buy of course.
Well, no. Whether health insurers should cover birth control is actually nothing like deciding whether to get a car painted red or blue. Nothing. In fact, that just might be the worst simile in the entire history of similes. Boy, do you suck at this, buddy.

Now get ready for the flip:

My own view, by the way, is that an employer should say to an employee, "We're going to provide to all of you, let's say, I'll make up a number, $12,000 worth of coverage, and you can use that to choose the policy of your choice. And you can choose a very expansive policy, comprehensive, or you can choose a narrower policy, and you keep the difference. And you can use that to cover your other expenses or health care as you feel appropriate." I do believe that we're far more effective having people make their own choice than having government tell them what they have to choose.
Well, gosh, that sounds like a nice idea, letting people decide what kind of health care and coverage they want, doesn't it? Of course, it is the exact opposite of what Romney said earlier this year:
Of course I support the Blunt Amendment.
The Blunt Amendment, you may recall, would have given employers the right to decide what kind of health coverage and care their employees can receive; in other words, it would have done the exact opposite of what Romney now claims to support by denying people the right to make their own health care choices.

Of course, Romney was at the time a little confused about whether he supported the bill. First, he said, "I'm not for the bill." Then his campaign insisted that he did support it. Then he explained that, despite his Harvard education, he "didn't understand" and "simply misunderstood" the simple yes-or-no question of whether he supported it because he thought the interviewer "was talking about some state law." Then, just for added measure, Sen. Roy Blunt himself came to Mitt's rescue to defend his confusion, saying the yes-or-no question "was about as confusing and disjointed as you could be."

But once Blunt and the Republican Party and the Romney campaign explained to the candidate that of course he supports the bill to allow employers to choose what kind of health care and coverage their employees should have, Mitt was completely in support of taking that decision away from employees.

Except now his "own view" is that employees, not employers, should get to make their own health care decisions. Which is exactly what opponents of the Blunt Amendment argued at the time. Which is exactly the opposite of what Blunt and the Republicans were trying to legislate.

So what's Mitt Romney's position on birth control coverage? All of 'em.

Originally posted to Kaili Joy Gray on Wed Oct 10, 2012 at 08:49 AM PDT.

Also republished by Daily Kos, Pro Choice, Sluts, and Abortion.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  If he ever does stop flip flopping (12+ / 0-)

    someone should check real quick if he has a pulse .

    "Drop the name-calling." Meteor Blades 2/4/11

    by indycam on Wed Oct 10, 2012 at 08:52:29 AM PDT

  •  Romney puts out nothing but puffs of chaff (6+ / 0-)

    to obscure his real positions.

    What does that say about America that such a  dishonest and deceptive person can be a serious candidate for president of our country?

    If cats could blog, they wouldn't

    by crystal eyes on Wed Oct 10, 2012 at 08:58:22 AM PDT

  •  This is a serious problem. The media needs to (13+ / 0-)

    start asking, what is your REAL position?

    Will he once again GAG the International family planning service?

    Will he sign bills that come to him restricting women's rights?

    The media needs to begin to explain to people that he has NO POSITIONS because of "all of them
     = none of them.

    •  The Problem (0+ / 0-)

      While figuring out what Mitt's REAL position on any given issue is certainly a problem, he isn't really flip flopping on this specific issue.

      This diary is deploying a bit of WND tactics with the headline.

      Mitt never said he thinks employers should be FORCED to offer birth control coverage.

      Saying employees should be able to pick and choose what they want is NOT the same thing as flipping on the Blunt Amendment.

      When I shop for a new car, I have a choice of car colors... but that choice is limited to what the dealer provides.  You can support people choosing their car color without saying that all dealers should be required by law to make pink cars.

      I mean, seriously folks, Mittens flip flops on sooo many real things, do we really want to muddy the discussion with diaries with misleading titles & content like this one?

    •  So what did the Editorial Board SAY (0+ / 0-)

      about this?

      Did they even remember him flatly saying he supported the Blunt Amendment?

      Did they perceive the magnitude of the flip?

    •  The media will have to ask every hour on the hour. (0+ / 0-)

      Don't be surprised if the answers keep changing.

      "The battle, sir, is not to the strong alone; it is to the vigilant, the active, the brave." -- Patrick Henry November 6, 2012 MA-4 I am voting for my friends Barry, Liz and Joe (Obama, Warren and Kennedy)

      by BornDuringWWII on Wed Oct 10, 2012 at 01:04:06 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  This is why Mitt (7+ / 0-)

    should never be allowed to volunteer for duty on a suicide hotline.

    Do it.
    Don't.
    Go ahead, better than being a moocher.
    Stop! It's a sin.
    Life is hard.
    Stop it, jump back in the ring.

    But I, being poor, have only my dreams; I have laid my dreams under your feet; tread softly, because you tread on my dreams. – Yeats

    by Bill O Rights on Wed Oct 10, 2012 at 09:01:08 AM PDT

  •  On one hand, the right-wing base (6+ / 0-)

    should be and probably will be furious with him for abdicating far-right dogma in favor of whatever the majority wants to hear.  

    On the other hand, as we saw with the debate, nothing succeeds like success; they were exhilarated that his shrinking chances edged back towards striking distance.  Anything to get the Kenyan muslofascist out.  

    Superb headline, BTW.   Says it all.

    "The extinction of the human race will come from its inability to EMOTIONALLY comprehend the exponential function." -- Edward Teller

    by lgmcp on Wed Oct 10, 2012 at 09:04:49 AM PDT

  •  Post-modern, plutocrat-enabled, Schrodinger strate (10+ / 0-)

    gy.

    it actually makes sense to me.

    Perfect example of the plutocrat-enabled reality distortion field in effect.

    Wink at the base, confuse your opponent, attempt to assuage indies and women, count on a soft media to let it slide, move on.

    Makes sense.

  •   I'm pro-choice, my opponent is multiple choice. (8+ / 0-)

    Ted Kennedy in reference to then Senatorial adversary Mitt Romney.

    Mittiple Choice - 2012

    by kitebro on Wed Oct 10, 2012 at 09:05:24 AM PDT

  •  I would love to pick my own insurance! (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Lying eyes, shoeless, JerryNA

    But ALL of the protections of the PPACA would have to remain in place.  Since Rmoney would never go for that, everything he says is moot.

    David Koch is Longshanks, and Occupy is the real Braveheart.

    by PsychoSavannah on Wed Oct 10, 2012 at 09:06:14 AM PDT

  •  He has no plans for anything, seems congress (4+ / 0-)

    will send him things to sign, since he says he has no plan for anything really...

  •  Vouchers for employee health insurance? (6+ / 0-)

    Really, Mitt?

    Same as Medicare?  Same as tax deductions?

    Throw the poor some cash, let them manage.

    Answer for everything.

    Ryan lies; seniors die.

    by NCJan on Wed Oct 10, 2012 at 09:09:11 AM PDT

  •  Why Can't The Media F/U On His Flip Flops (5+ / 0-)

    by asking him if he this was a real change from his previous position.  A simple question would be "Do you support the Blunt Amendment"?  Either Mitt Romney does or doesn't.  My assumption would be he does, and he better answer truthfully or the real conservatives will have something to say.  If he says no the Catholic Bishops will be flip flopping all over their church pews.

    "Don't Let Them Catch You With Your Eyes Closed"

    by rssrai on Wed Oct 10, 2012 at 09:09:52 AM PDT

  •  These are the issues we need to emphasize now (4+ / 0-)

    Anything with numbers gives Romney and Ryan a chance to play the usual Republican game of three card monte. And these guys are really good at it, because they have no conscience about lying --

    "What Jimmy really loved to do, what he really loved to do was steal. I mean he actually enjoyed it." -- Henry Hill

    There's no such thing as a moderate Republican.

    by maksutov66 on Wed Oct 10, 2012 at 09:11:25 AM PDT

  •  Employer Voucher Care! (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    shoeless, JerryNA

    If it is good enough for the elderly, it's good enough for you working stiffs!  I use to have crappy private ins. that cost me 12-grand a year with a 10,000 dollar deductable!  CRAP INSURANCE for EVERYONE!

    “It's a terrible thing to look over your shoulder when you are trying to lead - and find no one there” ---Franklin D. Roosevelt

    by vmckimmey on Wed Oct 10, 2012 at 09:12:04 AM PDT

  •  Goddamit, the Obama campaign is pissing me off. (4+ / 0-)

    Where are the flip-flopping ads, were are the ads calling out Romney for his constant shifting positions? I always thought Romney's constant flip-flops were his biggest liablity. Come Chicago, go after him on his flipping flopping ways.

  •  Off topic (0+ / 0-)

    The GOP hate me! I'm black, a woman, disabled veteran, divorced mother and liberal. THEY SUCK!

    by secret38b on Wed Oct 10, 2012 at 09:14:18 AM PDT

  •  This nonsense about being able to choose the (11+ / 0-)

    insurance you want is such bullshit.  When a politician makes this claim, it just proves once again that they have no idea how the real world works.

    My husband and I have had private insurance for years. Every couple of years, the company we have decides they don't want to cover us anymore, so they raise the deductables and lower services covered.  So we switch to another company.  Then it happens again. As we age, it's getting harder and harder to afford any policy.  Mitt may have pulled the $12,000 figure out of his ass, but believe me, we pay more than that now and there is no chance we'd have any left over.

  •  I still don't get why employers (6+ / 0-)

    are put in this position. It's extra overhead and headache for them. The whole system is fucking Rube-Goldberg-ridiculous.

    The GOP can't win on ideas. They can only win by lying, cheating, and stealing. So they do.

    by psnyder on Wed Oct 10, 2012 at 09:17:24 AM PDT

  •  Can't wait for Republicans to pass this (4+ / 0-)
    "We're going to provide to all of you, let's say, I'll make up a number, $12,000 worth of coverage, and you can use that to choose the policy of your choice. And you can choose a very expansive policy, comprehensive, or you can choose a narrower policy, and you keep the difference. And you can use that to cover your other expenses or health care as you feel appropriate."
    Ha ha ha ha.   I'm sure the Republican legislators are just on the very brink of mandating that all employers provide $12,000 worth of cashable healthcare coverage.    In the first 90 days, ha ha!  

    "The extinction of the human race will come from its inability to EMOTIONALLY comprehend the exponential function." -- Edward Teller

    by lgmcp on Wed Oct 10, 2012 at 09:18:10 AM PDT

    •  state by state? (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      lgmcp

      Can you just see this happening state by state?  In "right to work" states where you can be fired for any or no reason whatsoever, states that have stripped employees of collective bargaining rights and cut safety protections to the minimum?  Oh yes, right after they get to their important goals of outlawing rising sea levels and closing the last public school.

    •  $12K? (0+ / 0-)

      Is Romney talking about a $12,000 cap on what insurance pays, or is he saying people won't pay more than $1000/month for an insurance plan?

      Both suck, but my money is on the former, and that's ridiculous. My medication costs more than that annually.

      •  12k is what the employer will pay for premiums (0+ / 0-)

        The magic plan is for the employer to give you a $12k check. You then pick an insurance policy. If it costs less than $12k, then you keep the difference. (Most dummies stop paying attention right here at "duh free money".) If it costs more, then you're stuck paying the difference. Four points that R-Money avoids: 1. He wants to change the law to tax the check as income.  2. Most insurance plans cost a lot more than $12k. 3. So this will save your employer lots of money. 4. It probably won't be indexed to medical inflation (if any increase at all), so over time you pay more and more (just like Ryan's Medicare voucher-coupon plan) saving your employer even more money.
        Of course, this is the current R/R plan, which may be corrected/contradicted by the campaign, or contradicted by R-Money or Ryan tomorrow, or even today.

  •  Dear President Obama: (2+ / 0-)

    Here you go....this man has no core beliefs or standards and practices.  

    "...and horse prom is black tie, Mother F&?&@/$" Jon Stewart, July 16, 2012

    by KellyB on Wed Oct 10, 2012 at 09:18:30 AM PDT

  •  his supreme court nominees (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    OldDragon, word is bond

    Any chance he would nominate someone who wouldn't be pro-life? Can we nail that jello to a wall? I think the "R" next to his name disqualifies him from nominating anyone who believes in a right to privacy. Bye-bye birth control.

    Stay-at-home-Moms: Hard working unless they're on welfare, then they're lazy. Just ask any Republican.

    by musicsleuth on Wed Oct 10, 2012 at 09:19:03 AM PDT

  •  That isn't how employer provided health care works (4+ / 0-)

    Although it is possible, and I have seen executive compensation polices that work that way, that is not how the vast majority of employer provided plans work.

    It really shows how Romney doesn't understand how the real world--the real world of business--works.  He's a fraud.

    "Well, I'm sure I'd feel much worse if I weren't under such heavy sedation..."--David St. Hubbins

    by Old Left Good Left on Wed Oct 10, 2012 at 09:19:31 AM PDT

    •  More and more this is exactly how it works. (0+ / 0-)

      There are over 13 million Health Savings Account as of 2012.

      NPR - As Big Employers Pinch Pennies, Health Savings Accounts Take Off

      This allows the employee to spend the employer-provided deposits into those accounts on whatever the government deems eligible.  And contraception is, I'm sure, an allowable expense.

      More and more, employers are being forced to use HSA's because the price of health insurance is rising so fast.  This allows them to purchase higher-deductible plans.  And even though they are depositing funds into their worker's HSA accounts to cover deductibles, etc., it is still cheaper for the employer, and more flexible for the employee.

      I work for a fairly small employer ( < 30 employees) that does this and it has worked out well.

      So.. yeah.. you are wrong.. more and more this is exactly how the real world is working.  But I won't call you a fraud.. just misinformed.

      •  problems with HSAs (0+ / 0-)

        A big problem with high deductible health insurance plans (those with HSAs) is that they cover much less than other more expensive policies.  They are often bare-bones, which works out well for younger and healthier people, but a lot worse for people as they age or get sicker.  It would be a lot cheaper to move to a single payer health model, like most of the developed industrialized world, and cut medical costs by 40-50%.  Those other countries also have significantly better health statistics than the U.S.  It's cheaper because it is simpler, for the most part.  It's better (and more humane) because the population as a whole gets medical care.  No one has to go bankrupt or lose their home due to medical bills.  Few people in the U.S. understand statistics and simply do not want to believe that we're not "number one" at something, but at medical coverage, we suck. (Not medical technology, where we do well for individuals who are rich, but medical coverage.)

        •  No they aren't (0+ / 0-)

          These are full service plans.

          You are perhaps confusing these plans with the cheap catastrophic plans for young individuals.

          These new high deductible plans are full coverage, often Cadillac level coverage, plans.  They simply have a fairly high deductible.  They are great for younger employees who do not regularly use doctor services, because when coupled with an HSA the HSA account can grow from year to year and used later if an illness or accident occurs.

          For instance, my Blue Cross/Blue Shield plan covers everything.  However, the first $2500 must be paid by me.  But since my employer contributes $2000 to my HSA, my total out of pocket for the year is $500.

          That aside, I agree with you that our medical system sucks.  Access is spotty at best.  Single payer is likely the best option, but I would settle for universal catastrophic coverage.. a safety net, if you will, for all Americans.  Covering the gap medical expenses would be dirt cheap through qualified private plans.

          One more thing.. American statistics on most types of cancers are second to none, or at the very least right up there with other countries wit single payer.

    •  Agreed but therein lies the problem... (4+ / 0-)

      A low information voter is vulnerable to this pitch because it essentially boils down to this:

      Voter: Instead of you deducting hundreds of dollars a month from my paycheck for Medical/Dental/Vision benefits, you are going to GIVE me $1,000 in my paycheck monthly?!

      Employer: Yes, and then you are free(tm) to make your own healthcare choices. At the same time, I as an employer do not have to be hassled by government meddling.

      Voter: I get a $12,000 raise AND I save hundreds at the same time, which is almost like another raise?!

      Employer: You can use that money as you see fit.

      Voter: Sign me up!

      ------
      The only people who don't see this pitch as appealing are people who know that $1,000 a month doesn't buy much in healthcare these days and realize that it would result in a net savings to the employer and a net loss to the employee.

      But it sounds good and that's the part that makes it effective and dangerous. Romney has been adjusting his pitches on everything lately to seem more appealing.. I am afraid that if effective counters to these sugary sales pitches arent developed quickly, many people will fall for them.

      Citizen, Sergeant, US Army (Former), Veteran OIF 1

      by liquidbread on Wed Oct 10, 2012 at 09:46:04 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Oh, oh... (0+ / 0-)

    Rmoney better get Maaco.

    The Republican brand: "Consequences, schmonsequences, as long as I'm rich"

    by D in Northern Virginia on Wed Oct 10, 2012 at 09:20:24 AM PDT

  •  As the former head (0+ / 0-)

    of the Salt Lake Olympics, some group needs to start awarding him "points" and "medals", depending on how well he has flipped and twisted on each position.... The complete flip on taxes, for example, certainly warrants a Gold. The abortion issue is a tad nebulous, given the RNC's response... perhaps only a bronze? A great way to mock and bring attention to his latest lies.  "Mitt only warrants a Bronze in the his abortion stance, as we feel his twist and spin was not quite precise enough, and he stepped back on his landing, losing points.".......

  •  I need to wear a whip lash collar (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    OldDragon

    to just keep up with Rmoney's statements!

    Seriously, is there ANY issue he hasn't flip-flopped on?

    YES WE DID! November 4th, 2008 ~ and we'll do it again Nov 6th, 2012.

    by Esjaydee on Wed Oct 10, 2012 at 09:26:11 AM PDT

  •  I believe the full quote is: "All of 'em! Any..." (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Julia Grey
    So what's Mitt Romney's position on birth control coverage? All of 'em.
    "...of 'em that's been in front of me all these years."

    And that certainly is what Romney supports, on ANY issue.

    A PALINDROME: Slip-up set in Utah. Trail, no? M. Romney -- odd! Elder an AMC man, a Red-led doyen. Mormon liar that unites pupils?

    by Obama Amabo on Wed Oct 10, 2012 at 09:29:58 AM PDT

  •  Please find a better way. . . . (0+ / 0-)

    It is singularly unsatisfying to keep reading about Romney's faults here.

    Can we get to the heart of the matter?

    Why shouldn't it be OK to say anything and everything to get elected if it's in what one thinks is a good cause?

    What is the message WE should be sending to voters who need to have their hearts (and minds) moved?

    Recently I read somewhere (lost the link) that the higher echelon is given a pass for making repeated mistakes......It's considered a feature, not a bug, in them.

    I'm grappling with this question:  Must a leader demonstrate a moral core that becomes like the pole star for the nation to follow (to paraphrase the Ancient Chinese Lord Zhou)........
    ..............or can a leader be, say, 'pragmatic'?

    Why isn't Romney's shifting position considered 'open-mindedness'....which might be a good thing.....?

    I'm not defending Romney. I think he's a hypocrite and an air-headed opportunistic front man for some really bad guys.

    I'm just trying to get to 'zinger' of the message that we need to be putting out. Not just hand-wringing and documenting the step-by-step sinking of the Titanic of America's promise.........

  •  OK, Mitt (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    JerryNA

    Call my boss and ask him about the $12,000. And while you're on the line, how about a raise, a company Porsche with elevator and a couple of houses.

    Given the business situation, I'm sure he can use a good laugh.

    What about my Daughter's future?

    by koNko on Wed Oct 10, 2012 at 09:39:23 AM PDT

  •  It's more like (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    JerryNA, AdamSelene

    ...whether you want to buy a car with or without seat belts.  There are certain minimum standards to be met to sell a car in this country.  Whether you use the seat belt or not, it has to be in the basic package.

    And yes, the government is right to mandate that.

    America, we can do better than this...

    by Randomfactor on Wed Oct 10, 2012 at 09:39:37 AM PDT

  •  Like Bush, not interested (0+ / 0-)
    In a meeting with the editorial board of the Des Moines Register, he was asked whether health insurers should cover birth control.
    It’s a question as to, should you get a car painted, you know, red or blue. I mean you can decide which you’d like.

    And as it turns out, winning a debate is surprisingly easy when a candidate decides he can say anything and expect to get away with it. -Rachel Maddow

    by mrobinson on Wed Oct 10, 2012 at 09:40:53 AM PDT

  •  This guy is something! (0+ / 0-)

    "Rick Perry talks a lot and he's not very bright. And that's a combination I like in Republicans." --- James Carville

    by LaurenMonica on Wed Oct 10, 2012 at 09:42:29 AM PDT

  •  New Romneybot subprogram (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    JerryNA

    New Moderate Mitt sure does pull a lot of numbers out of his ass.  "I'll make up a number..."--he's been going to the Paul Ryan school of Republican serious guy.  He did the same thing with his ceiling on deductions, in which he gave no fewer than three wildly different numbers.  So he provides an impression of "specifics" without any actual specifics.  

    If you parse out Romney's above statement, he says people should buy the policy they want, that his "personal view" is that employers should let employees make a selection, and that government shouldn't tell people what they have to choose.  None of those statements necessarily conflict with a government law allowing employers to limit employee options--especially coming from a slippery bullshitter who believes corporations are people.

  •  I'm still fuzzy about this 'employer decides' idea (0+ / 0-)

    Does not health insurance companies provide package deals that have nothing to do with the employer. My school district just provided us with 4 options. The district didn't decide for the health provider what should be covered (as far as I know).

    Only the weak & defeated are called to account for their crimes.

    by rreabold on Wed Oct 10, 2012 at 09:52:22 AM PDT

    •  4 out of thousands (0+ / 0-)

      Your employer selected 4 insurance policies out hundreds of plans sold by dozens of companies.  They picked those 4 plans for you primarily based upon lowering their share of the cost of your medical coverage (most businesses do).  There may have been other criteria, including arbitrary ones in the minds of your HR insurance specialist and the insurance sales agents, but you will never know what they were.  Your HR person may not "believe" in abortion or not see the need for fertility assistance or weight loss or smoking cessation plans.  The insurance sales agents may be motivated by commissions to push certain higher-profit plans.  You will never know what they were.  Likewise, a small company may be run by an owner who does not "believe" in contraception, and so asks for cheaper plans that coincidentally happen not to cover that.  Does not knowing that make you feel better?  

  •  Obama should (0+ / 0-)

    EXCORIATE this lying sack of bleep.  Instead of having the unintended benefit of making Romney look maleable on social issues, he should depict him as confusing and diffuse and pandering recklessly while he is steady and consistent and trustworthy.  This punk is trying to do nothing but obsfucate his way to the WH, throwing bones to his base and the centrists at the same time.  He is a monster!

  •  Good news (0+ / 0-)

    Gallup now shows a tied race with LV, Obama up by 5 with RV.

    •  Yep, today's numbers show a continuation of the (0+ / 0-)

      trend where the post-Friday numbers are roughly as good as the pre-debate numbers.  That's 3, maybe 4 (if you count Saturday--it's a little unclear how good/bad that day was) data points now for Gallup that show poll numbers back where they were.

      We should see some very favorable numbers in the 7-day tracker starting Friday, and especially on Saturday, when post-debate Friday drops off.

      Sunday was a big outlier in Obama's favor though, so Monday might be a better snapshot of the steady-state that exists post-debate and post-jobs-numbers.

      The VP debate is something of a wildcard, but if Joe even merely just holds his own it shouldn't make a big difference IMO.

  •  Poor Mitt suffers from cognitive dissonance (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    JerryNA, mayim

    On the one hand, he likes the Blunt Amendment because he believes employers should be in control of compensation, including benefits. This is the side of Rmoney that wants to empower corporate or small business management.

    On the other hand, he likes the idea of giving people money (vouchers) to spend as they please.  This is the side of Rmoney that loves the unfettered free enterprise system and individual responsibility: he believes that the marketplace will always respond efficiently to any situation if it is given the chance.

    How to reconcile these two conflicting viewpoints? Poor Mitt clearly hasn't figured that out. Does he really want to compel every employer to provide a fixed amount of health insurance money to each employee? Sounds like the kind of mandate he would oppose. Back to square one, Mitt.  

  •  the stores are going to have to (0+ / 0-)

    start selling romneys rather than flip flops for the beach goers.

  •  This is a very important issue (0+ / 0-)

    and for him to be that clueless is extremely disrespectful to all women.  

    We want to know - is he for employers deciding what kinds of coverage their insurance can provide their employees or isn't he.

    We NEED to know.

  •  And you see why it is hard to prepare to debate (0+ / 0-)

    He makes up new positions everyday.

    On this one, my immediate rebuttal would be, a couple months you said you supported x, y, z.

    The ask him how he intends to get employers to offer multiple plans (they usually contract with one). Or is he saying he just wants to give a voucher to go buy non group rate insurance?  or buy insurance in the state exchanges that he has just repealed?

    Ending with Teddy's comment seems best. Steal it if you have too...most people have never heard it.

    Anyway, it is very difficult to think on you feet and come up with all that crisp,y within seconds, with a long uh or a pause.

    VERY difficult indeed.  

  •  The thing about an insurance pool is that (0+ / 0-)

    it acts to spread costs down across a large number of people. If one has the option of choosing a policy that has provisions that will overall increase the cost of medical care to those who choose it, shouldn't the price of that policy be significantly greater?

    People who try to claim that they "shouldn't have to pay for anybody's contraceptives" are insisting that they be given a policy that will result in significantly higher costs for those who have that policy from pregnancy, childbirth, and medical care of children. Therefore, they should be willing to pay higher insurance costs.

    Employers who try to claim they should be able to provide such a plan should not see a savings but a steep increase. To compensate those who are impacted they should have to pay into a tax fund. And people who were negatively impacted (read women denied reproductive services by those who think women shouldn't have sex) ought to get a special tax break to directly compensate them.  

  •  employee selected plans? (0+ / 0-)

    So did anyone ask Romney what he thought the employer voucher approach would do to those who were happy with the group insurance policies provided through their employment?  It's difficult to imagine group policies surviving such a shift in how employers would support health care for their employees, and good luck finding a policy in the individual plan marketplace.

  •  Another dodge (0+ / 0-)

    That's the kind of answer you give when you don't want to be honest -- if he says he supports coverage, he pisses off the Right; if he says he doesn't support coverage, he loses women voters. So best to sound squishy and sorta dumb.

  •  Sounds like a voucher to me, but I doubt the $12K. (0+ / 0-)

    "We will give you X amount of money, and then YOU ARE ON YOUR OWN."

    Whoopie!  (Good luck, because you will need it.)

    "The battle, sir, is not to the strong alone; it is to the vigilant, the active, the brave." -- Patrick Henry November 6, 2012 MA-4 I am voting for my friends Barry, Liz and Joe (Obama, Warren and Kennedy)

    by BornDuringWWII on Wed Oct 10, 2012 at 01:01:57 PM PDT

  •  Water, wet? (0+ / 0-)
    Pointing out that Mitt Romney has flip-flopped on something is like pointing out that water is wet
    Here we go again, my friends--yet another liberal loser insisting that water is wet. Where is the proof that water is wet? Science? Again?

    It's ridiculous what these people want us to believe! God made the water, but goshdarnit, nowhere did America's God say that the seas were WET.

    Democrats want to foist their hypotheses on our children and brainwash them with their Science, contradicting what we god-fearing conservatives know to be true!

    Fight back against their liberal lies. We'll keep them from raising their god, Science, above the true god--Ours.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site