Tuesday, February 1, 2011

Good Morning America: Mitt Romney (02-01-11 video)





Mitt Romney discusses Egypt, health care, running again, and other issues on ABC's Good Morning America Vote 2012 series:

Try viewing the video below first. If that tells you it is unavailable, view the second video:


Right click the photo below. Choose "Open Link in New Window":

28 comments:

Bill589 said...

I thought he did pretty well explaining Masscare. Still is a difficult subject to explain. IMO, overall this was a good interview.

zappo said...

I thought he got a little testy when he explained it and was asked about it again. The second explanation was more specific and to the point.

He seems to get sharper the more mad he gets.

I also thought he did pretty good. Not good enough though to change my support from Palin.

Right Wingnut said...

He's going to have to do a better job of explaining how his plan is different from ObamaCare. That did not happen in this interview. Simply stating that states have the right to do what they want will not be enough for primary voters.

Doug NYC GOP said...

"Simply stating that states have the right to do what they want will not be enough for primary voters." - RWN
--------------

Some or all? Since you have your finger on the pulse of the primary voters, what answer are they looking for?


A little data to support your answer would be appreciated.

Right Wingnut said...

what answer are they looking for? - Doug

How are the two plans different? So far he has not adequately explained this. "The residents of MA like it....ultimate conservative plan....didn't raise taxes(highly debateable)...78 pages...personal responsiblity...blah, blah, blah...." will not get it done.

Noelle said...

Great interview.

Romney 2012

zappo said...

I'm starting to understand Romney's thinking.

Saying that, I'm not changing my support of Sarah Palin. What it does do though, is make supporting Romney easier to swallow if Sarah doesn't run or runs and loses the nomination to Romney.

Anonymous said...

zappo, that's funny because I'm just realizing that the mandate was able to be passed, In Mass due to 'police powers." The connotation of that phrase makes me less likely to support him.

jerseyrepublican

Anonymous said...

Where is there a link saying the use of police powers or is that some bone head bloggers term?

Anonymous said...

No, that is the provision in the Mass. Constitution that gave Romney the power to enact a mandate in Mass.

jerseyrepublican

Anonymous said...

The 10th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution gave him the right.

Are you against the 10th Amendment or the fact that MA used it to give their citizens what THEY WANTED?

Anonymous said...

Anon, I am not questioning their right to do it. I agree with the 10th Amendment. I also hate mandates and I do not like the fact the "police powers" clause of the Massachusetts Constitution was used as cover for such a freedom draining concept such as mandates. SO, you're saying that the people of Mass. wanted mandates...any links to that tidbit? You seem to be for mandates...so why don't you support them on the Federal Level if they are such a good idea?

jerseyrepublican

Anonymous said...

BTW, I don't think you understand the difference between the 10th Amendment granting state's their rights and then the specific provisions a state must have to deem an idea constitutional on the state level.

Just as the Obama Administration attempted to use the Commerce Clause as cover for the mandate, Massachusetts, led by Romney, used "police powers" as cover for MassCare. If that doesn't bother you...then cool for you. I personally do not like the sound of it. I don't live in Massachusetts but I can have an opinion on their legislation...especially when a potential Presidential nominee enacted the aforementioned legislature under "police powers."

jerseyrepublican

Anonymous said...

Cricket...cricket...

jerseyrepublican

Anonymous said...

Jersey republican,

A poll taken in 2010 says that 68% of MA residents like Romneycare.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/01/22/AR2010012203167_2.html?hpid=topnews&sid=ST2010012203176

Cricket...cricket...

Anonymous said...

ROMNEY GOT SUPPORT FROM THE CITIZENS IN HIS STATE, HE WORKED WITH BOTH SIDES OF THE AISLE IN HIS STATE GOVT, I THINK ONLY 2 PEOPLE IN THE STATE LEGISLATURE OPPOSED IT AT THE TIME, AND HE DIDNT RAISE TAXES TO DO IT. HE HAD SEVERAL ITEMS IN THE BILL HE TRIED TO VETO BUT WAS OVERRODE EACH TIME BY THE HEAVILY DEMOCRATIC LEGISLATURE. FINALLY I THINK HIS BILL WAS LESS THAN 100 PAGES LONG COMPARED TO OBAMACARE BILL. IF ROMNEY WAS STILL GOVERNOR IT WOULDNT BE AS BAD AS IT IS NOW.

FINALLY MY OPINION ON SARAH PALIN, SHES GREAT AS A VP CANDIDATE AND FOR ENERGIZING AND FUNDRAISING IN THE GOP. OUR GOAL IS TO UNSEAT OBAMA AND EVERY POLL SUGGESTS OBAMA WOULD WIPE THE FLOOR WITH PALIN. I WOULDNT VOTE HER AS GOP NOMINEE. ROMNEY IS THE ONE WITH THE EXPERIENCE TO GET THE ECONOMY GOING.

Anonymous said...

So, does that mean you agree with health insurance mandates? Are you fine with the fact that the healthcare law in Massachusetts is deemed Constitutional by the clause of POLICE POWERS? Just trying to get an idea of how you think.

jerseyrepublican

Also, you can sign your name to your posts. We like to know who we're talking to around here.

Doug NYC GOP said...

Police Power - Legal definition, for our readers to educate themselves on the term:

http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Police+Power

Anonymous said...

I have said this before, and I will say it again. The mandate to buy insurance--which was offered after Mitt's idea to have people submit a bond in lieu of purchasing insurance was not given traction in the MA legislature--is a bad idea. However, I find the mandate that NO ONE CAN BE TURNED AWAY WHEN SEEKING HEALTH CARE BASED ON ABILITY TO PAY a worse and more abhorrent mandate than one where people must buy insurance! At least one tries to get people to BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THEMSELVES!! The other mandate is insidious, but makes ME (responsible citizen, frugal wife and mother, and LOVELY, I might add...) RESPONSIBLE FOR PEOPLE WHO LACKED THE PRUDENCE TO PURCHASE INSURANCE FOR THEMSELVES. Those who refuse to purchase may profess to be freedom loving--they might even be Libertarians, but when they are diagnosed with cancer and have no health insurance, I am a sitting duck, or at least am supposed to become the golden goose. I dislike this scenario more than I dislike the individual mandate to purchase health insurance.

Now, I believe that the mandate in Obamacare IS unconstitutional. Why? Because of federalism. I even believe that many Americans, including people voting in the Republican primary, understand this concept better than JR implies. We will see who is right.

AZ

Anonymous said...

Doug, did you know that the police powers is derived from Britain's old law known as ROYAL PREROGATIVE or the KINGS PREROGATIVE?

I actually do understand that the police power is what gives the State's its power to delegate laws for the public safety of the residence but just as the Commerce Clause can be bent to include mandates, I believe Police Power can be as well. In recent times, States attempt to include eminent domain under the same clause.

My explanation is really just an example of how Government, at any level, can do what they deem necessary under the Police Power...in some instances, with most legislation it would be deemed appropriate...I'm not so sure as far as mandates go. IMO.

I actually think that there should be an amendment to the US Constitution stating that it is illegal for a government(Federal, State or Local to force a citizen to purchase a private good or service.

Good catch though.
jerseyrepublican

Anonymous said...

AZ, I understand your point and I would never argue that the Massachusetts mandate is unconstitutional. I would argue that you seem to believe in mandates...at the very least philosophically...since you said, in not so many words, that you do not want to pay for the freeloaders. I get that...who wants to pay for someone else's medical bills? Do you know how much the average Mass. citizen was paying, in taxes or higher insurance premiums, due to the freeloaders? Does anyone know? SInce the mandate was enacted, did taxes go down in Mass. Did insurance premiums go down? Did the cost of out-of-pocket healthcare go down?

Who knows but screw them damn freeloaders!!! RED HERRING ALERT

jerseyrepublican

Anonymous said...

I have heard Mitt say that the purpose of the Massachusetts health care plan was not intended to bring down health care costs, but it was instituted to get everyone insured utilizing the free market. Now, as you can see, that's not an exact quote. I'm not about to go looking for it, either. Maybe someone who has fewer children at home would like to take on that task.

The plan was not intended to cut health care costs, and it didn't. No surprises there.

AZ

Anonymous said...

AZ, I had heard that, I think that was probably a backwards way of looking at the problem. IMO.

jerseyrepublican

BOSMAN said...

AWH!

Can't all you non-Rombots be happy for us?

Our guy is on all the major networks and you guys seem a little edgy.

Afraid Mitt might be cutting in on your candidates 24/7 air time and viewers?

Lighten up! watch a few of these EXCELLENT INTERVIEWS.

Ann said...

Another GREAT interview. Mitt's on a roll!

Anonymous said...

its great fun to have mitt on the media circuit again, its been too long! Zaloom

ConMan said...

Be interesting to see if this marathon on tv plays out in any polls over the next week or two.

Anonymous said...

Your right Bosman, enjoy!

jerseyrepublican