Categorized | Commentary/Editorial

Was That Michael Dukakis at the Iowa Republican Debate Last Thursday or Just Mitt Romney?

Michael Dukakis lost the 1988 presidential bid because of his liberal beliefs; he lost in a landslide because of a single reply to a question at one of the debates.

At the Dukakis-Bush debate the moderator, Bernard Shaw questioned Dukakis:

 "If Kitty Dukakis were raped and murdered, would you favor an irrevocable death penalty for the killer?"

Dukakis replied with a cold no and reiterated his stance against the death penalty, ultimately portraying him as soft on crime thus marking the end of his candidacy.

I am explicitly not comparing Dukakis to Romney, though I am drawing a comparison of Dukakis’s reply and the effect of it to a reply Romney  made at the debate last Thursday.

Romney, if and when defeated, will lose because of his support of many liberal issues and flip flops. The defining moment which may cause a landslide loss, may have already occurred. August 11th at the Iowa Republican debate, Romney responded to Pawlenty’s attack of Obamneycare, that Obamacare and Romneycare are equal, in the following manner:

ROMNEY:There are some similarities between what we did in Massachusetts and what President Obama did, but there are some big differences. And one is, I believe in the 10th Amendment of the Constitution. And that says that powers not specifically granted to the federal government are reserved by the states and the people.

We put together a plan that was right for Massachusetts. The president took the power of the people and the states away from them and put in place a one-size-fits-all plan. It’s bad law. It’s bad constitutional law. It’s bad medicine. And if I’m president of the United States, on my first day, I’ll direct the secretary of HHS to grant a waiver from Obamacare to all 50 states.

WALLACE: But, Governor — and this is — this is your one-minute question. Do you think that government at any level has the right to make someone buy a good or service just because they are a U.S.mresident? Where do you find that authority, that mandating authority, government making an individual buy a good or service in the Constitution?

ROMNEY: And let — and let me tell you — where do I find it in the constitution? Are you familiar with the Massachusetts constitution? I am. And the Massachusetts constitution allows states, for instance, to say that our kids have to go to school. It has that power.

Oh. So Obamacare is bad because the federal government is imposing on all citizens of all fifty states to purchase health care. On the other hand, Romneycare is good because it imposed health care mandates only on all the districts and all the citizens of the single state of Massachusetts.  And Obamacare is wrong because the tenth amendment in the federal constitution bans it while Romneycare is good because the state constitution allows it. Got it? So if he could only find some loophole to impose his will on all the people of the entire country, then he’d go for it without any doubts.

Yes, the constitution limits the control of the federal government. The reason the founding fathers have done so was not to limit their own power; they had no intention to expand the size of government. It was done as a measure of safeguarding the freedom of the people of future corrupt politicians.

At a time of too much government, do we need a president who wants to limit and shrink the size of government regardless of what’s written in the constitution, or do we need a politician who has expanded the size of government to the greatest degree permitted according to the state constitution?

And have you noticed his example of kids being forced to attend school? Firstly, isn’t homeschooling an option? (MA happens to be one of the only two states which require parents to obtain approval prior to homeschooling but parents still have the option.) Additionally, education is provided by the government at no cost to the recipients (tax-funded of course!)  Most importantly, has Romney decided to extend the “kid” aspect onto all citizens with the government playing the role of the “parent” forcing its “kids” how to live their lives?

All voters should be infuriated to discover that Mitt Romney’s only reason for not snatching your freedom is because it’s forbidden according to the constitution. I am a young writer and will admit that I’m not familiar with the constitution of Massachusetts. But if a candidate runs as a conservative and the only issue he has of stripping citizens from their freedom is if it’s permitted according to the constitution, then how can such a candidate claim to serve in the interest of the people?

And although it’s difficult to believe that the constitution of Massachusetts explicitly allows the government to force its citizens to purchase something, with liberals in control anything may be possible.

Tags: , , , ,

Comment Policy: The Editors reserve the right to delete any comments which in their sole discretion are deemed false or misleading, profane, pornographic, defamatory, harassment, name calling, libelous, threatening, or otherwise inappropriate. Additionally, the Editors reserve the right to ban any registered poster who, in their sole discretion, violates the terms of use. Do not post any information about yourself reasonably construed as private or confidential. Conservatives4Palin and its contributors are not liable if users allow others to contact them offsite.

  • AmsterdamExpat

    O’s running mate Mitt Romney gives him a run for his money in obfuscation — with the assistance, intentionally or not, of a stupid journalist. I can only hope that people see through him and remember that the problem with Romneycare is not its legality under the Massachusetts constitution but its wisdom as policy, which anyone with a modicum of commonsense ought to be able to assess.

    MR still claims the it was the right legislation for his state: that statement should be used to skewer him.

    The analogy with auto insurance that’s often used to justify O-Care’s — and, presumably, Romneycare’s as well — individual mandate is obviously very flawed; but MR’s invocation of primary and secondary education as being akin to a government mandate, in defense of Romneycare, is just inane — though perhaps quite telling, insofar as it reduces citizens to the status of children or minors relative to government.

    And let’s not overlook the gaffe in this sentence (assuming that the transcription is accurate): "And the Massachusetts constitution allows states, for instance, to say that our kids have to go to school." States?! A master of his own tongue MR is not.

    • dave7777

      It was a dodge answer. It would never pass scrutiny, assuming the questioner really wanted to know the answer.

  • wodiej

    OUCH….great article.  I didn’t watch the debate so this was news to me.  Excellent points made here.  Can you see Mittens on a stage with Barracuda with an answer like that? She’d take him apart.

    • John Norton

      hes a big promoter of centralized goverment cant fool most of us Mitt…

  • mistah charley

    My late father, a former resident of Massachusetts, often called it "Taxachusetts."

  • BostonBruin

    There are those in the Massachusetts state legislature who are going to start pushing for a total government takeover of the healthcare system, eliminating the insurance companies with a single-payer government system (similar to what Vermont recently passsed).

    As with ObamaCare, RomneyCare opened the door for this to occur.

    • AmsterdamExpat

      Thanks for alerting us to this — the timing of it could not be worse for MR. Have these state legislators perhaps received their marching orders from David Axelrod?

      • BostonBruin

        It may be the liberal Democrats see a window of opportunity while we have one of Obama’s buddies as our Governor (Deval Patrick) who has three years left in his second term.

        • AmsterdamExpat

          From that point of view, it’s also a cautionary tale (as if we needed another!) of things that could conceivably happen in a second term for O.

    • BostonBruin
      • dave7777

        That is a classic example of logic vs emotion. How can you reduce the logic to a catchy bumper sticker because that is the depth the average voter reaches? Democrats are better at this than the GOP.

      • RebinTexas

        BB – thanks for the link – I "assume" you follow or keep up with Holly Robichaud….as you do, please keep us and C4P editors alert to the goings on there.

  • justice_four_all
  • icenogle

    Even though I believe the mandate is unconstitutional, the biggest problem with it is the fact that the government will mandate that people have to buy the most expensive Cadillac insurance that will cover everything under the sun. Democrats try to compare health insurance mandate to the mandate to carry car insurance. Other than the fact that you have to own a car to get insurance, a big difference is the fact that with car insurance you can pick and choose the level of insurance you want. If you have a new car you can choose comprehensive insurance to be able to replace it if it is totaled or if you have an older car you can choose just collision insurance to cover the cost of an accident. You also can choose other services in your insurance policy like roadside assistance or rental car if you want to pay the extra. With the government mandate you won’t have that choice,you’ll have to buy the coverage the government tells you to.
      I’d like to add that a friend of mine works for a company that has a national charter to sell auto insuranceto anywhere in the country. He says that it enables the company to sell insurance alot cheaper.Funny how that works. It would be nice if health insurance could be sold that way.

    • BostonBruin

      This is what I hate the most about RomneyCare – you can’t get catastrophe policies any more.

    • colint

      The reason health insurance costs are lower in some states is because labour and other costs are lower in some states. An Arkansas insurer basing its rates on local costs is not going to pay in full the higher cost charged by say an NY city hospital for the same procedure. So called interstate competition would add to costs. A health care provider, instead of dealing with a few local insurers, would be claiming from companies all over the US, each with different rules and procedures.

  • Christopher Backa

    Mittens needs to just quit now with some class. His other choice is to be taken out by Sarah the RINO hunter. Although it might be fun to see his reaction. Sarah’s motto should be "one post, one kill". LOL

    • Quiet_Righty

      Sure. Romney should quit while Sarah isn’t in the race. Uh-huh.

  • Mike_D_Yeager

    I got this idea from conservativemama so all credit goes to her and Rush Limbaugh.

    I would like to see thousands then millions of these videos online.

    I think this could be one of those John Doe moments a moment where we
    stand up for Sarah Palin because she is America as are we and it’s time
    we stand together or fall divided.

    Please any of you who have a webcam just record a few moments of video using conservativemama
    original post as a guide and you can send the recording as a attachment (25mb or less) to and I’ll post it.

    Begin Quote
    "I’m thinking for when Sarah’s a candidate.  I love the "I am Sarah
    Palin" theme that we have on this website.  Plus, I’m tired of hearing
    about Obama’s billion dollar campaign.  I just don’t think money alone
    will matter this time.

    How about a series of "I am Sarah Palin" videos on You Tube?  Short
    videos.  People can just voice why they support Sarah, maybe give a peek
    into their lives.  Tell why they are Sarah.  Maybe tell how this
    economy is killing their dreams.  Maybe tell what they love and know
    about our country. Give a specific reason for their support for Sarah,
    highlighting her record of achievement.

    I know I’m all over the place, but it’s a thought that came to me
    today.  I think it should be positive, no name calling or anything like
    that.  Put the videos out there, package them.  I don’t know how all
    that works, but I know others here do.

    I just think that Obama’s cold dollars should be met with our money, but
    also with our lives, our voices.  There’s no way his campaign will have
    anywhere near the passion that Sarah’s will.  No way.  And you can’t
    put a price on passion and love of country.  Corny?  Maybe.  But I
    believe it. " End Quote

    Post them on your channel, then if you want send them to me and I’ll put them on this channel.

    A Way to make a difference lets do it.

    P.S. DJY is my brother

  • dave7777

    Like the law of gravity….it’s impossible to defend the indefensible.

  • TSM_Admin

    His last answer is really bad.  Wallace asked about the Constitution – the US Constitution.  Mitt answered the Mass. Constitution.  Then he says the Mass. Constitution allows the "states" to do this!  Huh?  It allows other states also, Mitt?

  • Mrl Tav

    I literally stopped talking to a friend bc of this very point that you’re making & you’ve laid it out perfectly here. He was & probably still is a Romney supporter.  like a zombie over & over he kept telling me "it’s not the same, it’s state level, not nationwide, 10th Amendment, blah blah blah." I just couldnt take it anymore. Mr.L

    • RebinTexas

      Mr L – I listened to your audio regarding IF Sarah does not become the Repub Candidate. I, too, do not even see a reasonable 2nd choice to this amazing woman. I’ve even admitted, as tough as it might be for a ‘guy’ that Sarah is "the best ‘man’ for the job". I say this, with the thought that MB does not have the exec experience, the leadership skills, or the servant’s heart that we need and that Sarah possesses in spades. Sure, if required, I’ll hold my nose and vote for ABO.

      Thanks for all you share via your audios… is a privilege to be in this fight with you and so many others here and across the country.

  • porttopalin

    Romney’s rhetoric about repealing Obamacare is just that. Given his fondness of individual mandates, if elected President, it’s likely he would try to reform instead of repealing it. Pretty smart of him to use the State’s rights/Massachusetts constitution to argue the individual mandates in Romneycare were a good enough idea to sign into law, but that is the problem … his instincts were all wrong. Should she decide to run, Gov. Palin will make an individual liberty argument that it is fundamentally wrong for government to force citizens under the commerce clause to buy health insurance, and the circuit court just backed this up. Romney believes he can run a general election in 2011, but Romneycare undercuts the Individualism over Collectivism argument, which will dog him in the 2011 primaries.

  • Doc Yeager

    Socialism, Communism, Liberalism their days are numbered. The day of reckoning is upon them! They may mock us, and make light of us, but it will be to their own destruction. There is fire in our belly,  lightning in our eyes, thunder in our voices, wings on our feet! No exaggeration here! Not empty hollow words! But deeds, actions, sweat and work. They may think that the tea party is dead, and I am glad they think so. They have under estimated Sarah Palin. And by golly they have underestimated us. Ready or not here we come!

  • socon

    Stick Myth in a tank and put a helmet on him and I’ll be able to tell you for sure.

Open Thread

Governor Palin’s Tweets