Thursday, July 5, 2012

Mitt Romney Interview with CBS (Complete Interview 07-04-12)

This is the interview that CBS released a 52 second snippet of yesterday. This longer version covers a lot more including Romney's GREAT explanation of the differences that seperate ObamaTAX from the Massachusetts Health Care Bill. Notice, CBS didn't give his COMPLETE explanation very much air time:

Please check us out on Facebook and If you like what you see, please "Like" us. You can find us here.


kelly said...

What a great interview and what a great first couple they will make

Lionhead said...

This clip has illustrated his acceptance of the Supreme Court’s (SC) decision. So, nine unelected men in black that are employed by the Federal Gov’t, agree with another Branches legislation on a legal fiction. At least Romney is taking small marginal steps to recognize individual & State sovereignty. Unfortunately, he offers no outline of his ‘replacement’ for ObamaCare.

At some point in time, he will have to finally recognize the ‘principal - agent’ relationship of the individual States as the principal & the Federal Gov’t as their agent. I hope he is aware of this, as he served as the Gov. of Massachusetts & recognized it was within the MA Constitution to pass RomneyCare. The electorate seems to believe it’s the other way around.

Unfortunately, the interviewer veered off course with the Vice Presidential picks & personal issues. Another wasted opportunity after his initial statement. Let’s look at the underlying issues through the lens of a Libertarian to filter out & provide detailed explanations for a “fair & balanced” counterpoint.

In Tom Woods’s, Potpourri video you can contrast between Obama v Romney, the myth of the SC along with Robert’s decision argument, the coercive power of the State, the MSM ‘set up’ for the decision’s outcome, (minutes 1:40 to 15:05).

In the second section, the replacement of ObamaCare, tax issues in general, mid-East policy, the influence of the SC vis-à-vis the Federal Gov’ts role, State nullification, and the ‘principal - agent’ relationship of the States with the Federal Gov’t (minutes 45:00 to 50:19).

No matter which candidate you support, knowing & framing current issues in the context should be most important to your decision. Solutions are available & the electorate should not depend upon SC judges or a President to implement them.

“History is a catalogue of solutions.”
~ Martin Armstrong

Lionhead said...

I'm shocked, shocked, that the WSJ is now attacking Romney in the matter of Romney's Tax Confusion Either Romney doesn't have a command of the issues or he's playing a "smart by half" political game with the electorate. His capitulation & refusal to make or state concrete plans to end this albatross law is showing great weakness for failure to provide solutions to repair the grave Constitutional & economic damage wrought by the SC decision.

""The Romney campaign thinks it can play it safe and coast to the White House by saying the economy stinks and it's Mr. Obama's fault. We're on its email list and the main daily message from the campaign is that "Obama isn't working." Thanks, guys, but Americans already know that. What they want to hear from the challenger is some understanding of why the President's policies aren't working and how Mr. Romney's policies will do better.""


"The biography that voters care about is their own, and they want to know how a candidate is going to improve their future. That means offering a larger economic narrative and vision than Mr. Romney has so far provided. It means pointing out the differences with specificity on higher taxes, government-run health care, punitive regulation, and the waste of politically-driven government spending.

Mr. Romney promised Republicans he was the best man to make the case against President Obama, whom they desperately want to defeat. So far Mr. Romney is letting them down."

The duopoly candidates will never satisfy folks; consider a candidate that understands the Constitutional & economic issues with solutions to restart growth. Live Free!

Terrye said...


I was not shocked to see WSJ stab Romney in the back or you either for that matter.

Just like those snarky journalists out there you are pining for a second term with Obama.

That is why even after the primary is over you are still ragging on the guy.

Terrye said...

Maybe the WSJ could take break from the distortions and hyberbole long enough to actually run a story on what Obama did with all that stimulus money.

He sent two thirds of the money meant for green jobs over might matter to the American people if the media bothered to talk about it.

Anonymous said...

The words I'd use to describe this interview are "refreshing" and "natural." A beautiful couple, a powerhouse in their own right, focused, committed, bright, an aura of joy about them--and they wear it all so lightly. I can picture talking to them over the fence as my neighbors.

Just the opposite of what the MSM, Ingraham (she's off the deep end), WSJ (poisoned by Murdoch's perverse ambitious), and Kristol (forever sulking in his tent) would have us believe. Mitt needs help cutting through the sewer sludge that he is forced to swim in everyday. Aside from that, he's a total winner. And so is Ann.

Lionhead said...

@Terrye, no back stabbin' here Terrye, nor pining for Obama's 2nd term. It should be abundantly clear that I have no ambitions for Obama. The man is disgusting to me, but for your establishment GOP leaders, Boehner & McConnell, I'd lead the charge to remove him before his first term ended.

I'm beginning to have serious misgivings on your candidate; he is resembling Obama more each day. Both muscle out the competition in their primaries, both are very weak with their plans but very good in rhetoric. In essence, 'empty suits' as they say.

The US is in a crisis that is increasing each day. While it's nice to have remembrances of the past, I enjoy them also, our future is uncertain at best. Romney is not exhibiting leadership now. He has boatloads of money, backers in the radio media that pound away each day for him, but he lacks a plan of action. Moreover, he lacks the fundamental understanding how to get growth started again in the US. This is counter intuitive to many here, but being a private equity owner does not qualify one to manage fiscal policy of a country. His political experience in office is mediocre at best with just one term under his belt, the rest is running for office. Again, not a strong qualification. The country needs substance, not style & certainly not another 'empty suit.'

So, here we have a nice, touchy, feely interview, but no substance as to how he will kill this albatross. Right now, most are not analyzing the negative effects on the economy & business. Next year you will begin to see the effects after it's too late. So, I find no reason to back stab or smear Romney; it's very easy to point out the chinks in his policies or lack of them. We need a man of unyielding principle to lead our Nation, who will stand up & do everything in his power to completly repeal this law, shrink Gov't & defend the Constitution. Nothing less will do.

Anonymous said...

I think everyone knows that I am a very strong Romney supporter,and I am perplexed at his team's confused response to the healthcare ruling. I don 't know if he is in vacation mode or what...but he better start aggressively artculating his plans and his approach to healthcare to differentiate himself. He needs to break through to the people who vote,who aren't politically obsessed..ha ha.

Lionhead said...

Now, we have the "rest of the story." At least Ryan has the stones to come out & explain the situation. Unfortunately, he's using coercion, just like the Blue Team:

""It would have been nice for the Supreme Court to repeal it for us,” he said, “but it’s no harder today than it was the day before the decision. We win, we repeal. It’s just that simple.” (got us over the barrel eh Ryan?)


Asked whether Republicans had a plan ready to replace Obamacare, Ryan pointed to several plans that had already been proposed, including his own and that of Rep.Tom Price (R-GA). While there was common agreement on the need for a “patient-centered” system, Ryan said there were “differences of opinion” on the details of an alternative, particularly on the issue of whether to use tax credits to help people buy insurance. (additional coercion through tax credits)


Ryan and fellow Wisconsinites, Gov. Walker and Republican National Committee chair Reince Priebus, have emerged in the last few years as the new standard-bearers for the party. Ryan remarked: “We’re all good friends. We all grew up being educated about the progressive tradition of Wisconsin. We are very familiar with the progressive philosophy, and that’s one of the reasons we are who we are. We also believe it’s a critical moment for our state and our country to deal with problems before they get out of control.""

An outright complete admission, progressive born & breed. Replace not simple repeal. Well good Mr. Ryan. I will work harder against you & your grizzly gang of progressive colleagues. The truth always comes out sooner or later.

Machtyn said...

LH: First you complain that Romney didn't call it a tax. Now you are complaining that he flipped and is now calling it a tax.

Lionhead said...

@Machtyn, sorry did no such thing. I said call it a cucumber if you want, in essence it's a coercion & a fraud in earlier comments. I made no reference to the labeling here in this post.

As to what I did say, Paul Ryan is an out of closet progressive & is planning to use tax policy once again as coercion, only this time by tax credits. Please read the text above on my last comment.

Lionhead said...

"The Devilish Principles of HillaryCare, ObamaCare, RomneyCare, RyanCare, et all"

While Machtyn quibbles over labeling, the eight principles at stake in the national health care matter go overlooked.

"The alleged critics of the Clinton plan also hasten to assure us that they too accept the general principles, but that there are lots of problems in the details. Often the critics will present their own alternative plans (ObamaCare, RomneyCare, RyanCare), only slightly (more or) less complex than the Clinton scheme, accompanied by assertions that their plans are less coercive, less costly, and less socialistic than the Clinton effort. And since healthcare constitutes about one-seventh of the American output, there are enough details and variants to keep a host of policy wonks going for the rest of their lives."

The Principles are:

1) Guaranteed Universal Access
2) Coercive
3) Egalitarian
4) Collectivist
5) Price Controls
6) Medical Rationing
7) The Annoying Consumer
8) The Great Leap Forward

"Lost in an eye-glazing thicket of minutiae, the conservative critics of Clintonian reform, by being "responsible" and working within the paradigm set by The Enemy, are performing a vital service for the Clintonians in snuffing out any clear-cut opposition to Clinton's Great Leap Forward into health collectivism."

By replacing ObamaCare with RomneyCare or RyanCare, the GOP is aiding & abetting the Marxist/Socialists (M/S) in their plans & working with the paradigm the M/S set up. This law needs no replacement; only repeal.

"Appearances to the mind are of four kinds. Things either are what they appear to be; or they neither are, nor appear to be; or they are, and do not appear to be; or they are not, and yet appear to be. Rightly to aim in all these cases is the wise man's task."

~ Epictetus (c. 55 - c. 135 AD) Greek Stoic philosopher