E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSNORTH CHARLESTON, S.C. -- Appearing together for the first time as partners, not rivals, former presidential candidate Tim Pawlenty today announced he was throwing his support behind Mitt Romney for president.
Pawlenty introduced Romney today here, where Romney rolled out his plan for working with labor unions, after the pair toured Boeing’s new plant here -- the subject of a controversial lawsuit filed by the National Labor Relations Board.
Pawlenty, who will become Romney’s national co-chair and will travel with the candidate to Florida for tonight’s CNN/Tea Party debate, was effusive in his praise for his former rival.
“Mitt Romney has the most knowledge, the most capability, the most electability of any candidate in this race,” Pawlenty said.
Pawlenty did not always have such kind words for Romney. He has called Romney a “co-conspirator” on President Obama’s health-care plan, but said today that Romney’s commitment to repealing the program overrode any qualms he had about Romney’s own health-care plan in Massachusetts, often seen as a model for the president’s plan.
“He has also been very clear with me and very clear with the country that when he’s president of the United States, on Day One, he will do everything he can to repeal Obamacare,” Pawlenty told reporters.
Democrats pounced on the apparent contradiction between Pawlenty’s past criticism of Romney’s record on health care and his newfound support for the candidate, but a senior adviser to the Romney campaign told NBC News that Pawlenty's endorsement would help validate "why health care isn't the issue that everyone thinks it is in the primary."
Of course, Democrats have had plenty of former rivals endorse each other, including Hillary Clinton, who went to work as President Obama's Secretary of State.
Romney called the endorsement a “natural fit,” noting that the two have long been friends and their families had recently spent time together.
Both men downplayed the possibility of Pawlenty becoming Romney’s vice-presidential choice, with Romney calling such speculation “presumptuous” and Pawlenty saying he doesn’t want to be considered.
Besides announcing the endorsement, the primary purpose of Romney’s speech was to outline his labor policies. He framed them around the ongoing feud between the NLRB and Boeing, over its decision to locate a billion-dollar plant in non-union South Carolina.
Romney said the NLRB’s suit was an unacceptable example of the board’s interference in private enterprise, and of labor’s political clout with the Democratic Party.
“There is without a question an egregious example of political payback where the president is able to pay back unions for the hundreds of millions of dollars they put into his campaign at the expense of American workers, of American jobs,” he said.
Romney’s plan includes several major points: Appointing “even-handed arbiters” to the NLRB more in line with Romney’s vision for the board; maintaining the secret ballot for workers voting on unionization; and prohibiting union dues from going directly to political causes. Romney would also overturn President Obama’s executive order giving preference to unionized workers for government contracts.
Romney also received a warm response when he said he would push Congress to pass legislation that would prohibit the NLRB from shutting down Boeing’s facility here. Congressman Tim Scott, a local Tea Party favorite here, has already proposed such legislation.
In a possible preview of tonight’s debate, Romney hinted that the “mulligan” he gave Texas Gov. Rick Perry over his efforts to require teen girls in Texas to receive an HPV vaccine might have expired.
Asked whether his own health-care mandate would preclude him from appealing to South Carolina conservatives, Romney defended himself by pointing to a number of less controversial Massachusetts mandates, including for drivers to own car insurance and for children to go to school. And another controversial mandate in another very specific state.
“Some states, Texas for instance, mandate that young girls, or did mandate that young girls, had to get inoculations for sexually transmitted diseases,” Romney said.
“There are a wide range of mandates, so that’s not breaking new ground. But what we did was right for our state, and simply wrong for our nation,” he added.
Leave a Comment:
How quaint!
Timid Timmy sure didn't waste any time hitching his one trick pony to the carnival sidecar!
Now the Teapublican's get 2 pieces of dry toast for the price of one...
Lovely...
He left out that Romney also has the 'most' ideas for both sides of the same questions.
Would that be called the 'most elasticity'? He'll spring from one side of the argument to the other depending on who he's talking to.
Hi, Feisty.
Sorry your ramblings got collapsed this morning, but's it's not hard to understand when you post drivel like this:
"...we will NEVER forget the most horrific attack on American soil happened right under the noses of the Republicans..."
If that's true, Feisty, I'm sure you'll similarly NEVER forget that the 9-11 pilots were trained in the U.S., at U.S. flight schools, by U.S. flight instructors, in U.S. planes...all while Bill Clinton was President of the United States.
Plenty of blame to go around, according to the 9-11 Commission Report.
What happened under which noses again, Feisty?
Go dangle your minnow some place else bag boy - I'm not biting!
Interesting you couldn't carry on the conversation on the original thread...
But not in the least bit surprising... lol
You just bit, Feisty, lol
I wonder how Tim (or, 'Rim', as NJNB called him - Good one!) feels about the fact that Mitt's church will be
re-baptizing him and his family (and his evangelical supporters) after their deaths.
After all, what are 'good friends' for?
Mixed Bag, I though this was the USA were everone is entitled to an opinion, Nothing better than censorship, going to start buring books too. Your opinion seems to be more important than anyone elses. I thought Obama was the Nazi guess I was wrong.
Gee Timmy, you'd better get some Blistex, you're going to need it... Oh, can we refrain from the Nazi references here, people throw that out much too loosely and it's very overblown in this instance.
Yep ... I'm sure she also remembers the original attack on the World Trade Center that killed Americans and the pretty speech Clinton gave after it ..... or the car bombing at US headquarter in Riyadh that killed Americans and the pretty speech Clinton gave after it .....or the truck bombing of US embassise in Kenya and Tanzania that killed Americans and the pretty speech Clinton gave after it .... or the bombing of the USS Cole that killed Americans and the pretty speech Clinton gave after it.
All of those pretty speeches and 9/11 still happened?
Huh? I guess pretty speeches don't solve the world's problems like libs think ....
Kinda funny, you wonder if the terrorists remember any of Clinton's words.
I bet they remember ......
"I can hear you, the rest of the world can hear you and the people who knocked these buildings down will all of us soon."
Mav your opinon not mine and its TIZ not TIM have a nice day now
This is great news for Democrats.
If Pawlenty balances the Romney campaign budget the way he balanced Minnesota's budget, Romney will be broke by Christmas.
Reading comprehension, Tis...
The first sentence of my post outlined my dismay that Feisty's "contribution" to the dialogue was collapsed.
On the contrary, I hope that Feisty's comments are always there, for all to see.
I DON'T WANT her silenced...far from it.
She tells us more about who and what she is far better than I, or anyone else, could ever hope to.
Nice chatting with you, Tis.
I guess this is Tim showing his frustration for TP since they won't back him. Tim and Romney both have very contrasting ideas, ideologically. Another soon to drop out, Bachmann, might do the same thing out of frustration. Perry will make a more merry go round in general election.
Here's a link for those interested on reading about Pawlenty's budget-balancing skills.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702304563104576357531769736832.html?mod=WSJ_hp_LEFTTopStories#printMode
Hi, bob-
Actually, President Obama has made far better use of the anti-terror infrastructure President Bush left him than I would have imagined on Inauguration Day, 2009.
He's dispatched an awful lot of bad guys since then.
Broadly speaking, national security is an area where, in my opinion, President Obama deserves praise, so here's mine.
He's done a pretty good job.
MB,
Surprise Surprise. Only if the truth can be embraced more like this. How about his Job creation even in the face oppositions, distortions, has bettered Bush's 8yrs? Can you summon up courage and say the truth? Common MB.
Yep, all those pretty speeches, and the Bush administration still says they couldn't have foreseen it.
I don't remember Bush running on an anti-terrorist platform. In fact, Bush's National Security Director, Condoleezza Rice, was a noted expert on Russia, not the Middle East. Any thoughts about that?
When Richard Clarke tried to warn Bush about Al Qaeda, he demoted him. Any thoughts about that?
Yep, all those pretty speeches, and one memo entitled "Bin Laden Determined to Strike Within United States" ....
http://articles.cnn.com/2004-04-10/politics/august6.memo_1_bin-conduct-terrorist-attacks-abu-zubaydah?_s=PM:ALLPOLITICS
... and 9/11 STILL happened.
Go figure, huh?
No surprise at all, PEN-24.
You see the world with an ideologue's eye...I do not.
And...
Since you're asking...in my opinion, the Obama Administration's record on economic growth, jobs, and the economy has been dismal.
You wanted my honest opinion, correct?
You just got it.
Anyway...
I do believe that, generally, President Obama has done a good job on issues related to national security.
I agree mixed bag, Feisty Skankhead is the most ignorant, unintelligent poster here and shows us all how people like her think. We should all read her posts to see the true beliefs of the left.
Thanks for the back up Anna Molly!
I have no desire to re-hash their worn out talking points today...
The FACT of the matter is the Bush adminstration had ample warning of a immenite terrorist attck and did NOTHING about it...
MB
Ideologue's eyes? No
Am just some one who respect and listen to a very superior debates, anytime. Yes economically, I expected more from him but the opposition has given no better ideas. Mind you, US economic woes is more of uncertainty created by the political impasse and EU economic problems.
Hey Mixed,
Yea , evidently those PDBs on national security can actually scare some reality / sense into the most liberal.
I can concede that to an extent, I wish he had not announced a pull out date for Afghanistan to appease the left (it in effect cancelled any chance for a real success) and believe it or not ..... his handling of the Bin Laden event - specifically the outing of SEAL Team 6.
Gates was stunned and very worried..... and there are reports / confirmations that it, the shoot down of SEAL Team 6, was a planned pay back operation - not a result of normal operations. Disgusting.
The planned movie about the Bin Laden operation, the Hollywood visits and special access, all to make a movie that was intended to come out 2 weeks before the election is kinda nauseating ....
Obama's handling of Iran and the bomb ...
Obama's subjugating our national security (missile defense) to the Russians isn't too cool ....
Other than that .... I agree he's done a pretty good job.
Enjoy your comments Mixed.
"The FACT of the matter is the Bush adminstration had ample warning of a immenite terrorist attck and did NOTHING about it...'
And that look on his face at the elementary school that day told the whole story about what he was thinking: "Oh, s**t, it's come back to bite me in the ass. Maybe I can tell 'em.....Maybe I can say....... No, wait- it was somebodys' fault, but who? Not ME......Er....Oh, dang".
In that context, I've been meaning to ask you what you think of the current proposals to keep several thousand troops in Iraq after the withdrawal deadline. I'm especially concerned about this:
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/07/world/middleeast/07military.html?pagewanted=2&sq=iraq&st=cse&scp=3
Thoughts?
Anna,
Anything actionable?
Nope.
The system needed to be reworked, there was no communication (Reno's wall between the CIA and FBI), there was no HUMINT, no SIGINT .... no Homeland Security, no director coordinating anything .... on and on ...... incredible amount to sort out while messing with vote recounts, picking and getting a cabinet together, etc.
Did you want the Patriot Act before 9/11? Pretty funny.
Regardless, Bush was working on a few things ..... pretty interesting how he went into Afghanistan and removed the Taliban and Al Qaeda in less time that it took Obama to pick his dog.
BTW - at least he didn't cry and blame Clinton for the mess he inherited ever ..... much less for 3 years.
bob-1805084
"Regardless, Bush was working on a few things ..... pretty interesting how he went into Afghanistan and removed the Taliban and Al Qaeda in less time that it took Obama to pick his dog"
And what happened to the primary target, OBL? Finish your story line.
OBL got through the White Mountains of Tora Bora.
Past the same guys (SEAL Teams, CIA SOG, Delta / ODAs) that eventually got OBL - were the ones he slipped in 2001.
BTW - killing OBL, revenge, was not the primary motive - the primary motive was to protect Americans, to remove them, stop their ability to kill Americans.
Did that.
bob 180 --
Pretty funny, bobby.
And what EXACTLY were the "actionables" before all those other incidents you mentioned?
Yep. Moved the dust bunnies right over to Pakistan, Somalia, and God knows where else.
bob-1805084
Would you for once admit Bush was more occupied with removing Saddam from power. Which happens to be the wrong war in which the entire world was lied to. A war that was never suppose to be. A waste of time, money and personnel.
Would you?
Hay Bag,
Feisty's Post was also restored.
AM-
I'm indeed concerned that insufficient forces will remain in Iraq, and I am ever alert to the presence of political considerations where this issue is involved...after all, the occasional criticism aside, you represent President Obama's base, so I trust you understand my worries with regard to "political considerations".
That said, President Obama is the Commander-In-Chief, and will be until at least January 2013, so it's his call.
That's exactly the approach I took with his predecessors, so nothing's changed there.
So far, he's pretty much done the right thing as CIC, to my eye, anyway.
Not in every detail or particular, but he's been "ballpark", I think.
Let's hope he's got the Iraq withdrawal right as well, AM.
Those are my thoughts, AM.
You have some concerns?
Job1-
In your un-official capacity as Chief Of Redundancy here at First Read, I hereby inform you that it had already been restored when I made my initial comment on this thread.
Try to keep up with your classmates, Job1...
There's "slow"...
And then there's "Job1 slow".
Thanks, bob-
You're a national conservative, just as I am...so, remember the concerns before the new President-elect took office.
Everything is always about context.
I'm largely pleased with President Obama as Commander-In-Chief.
Just as the Feisty Redhead and her minions are.
As I said yesterday, right here at First Read, bob...
Consensus.
Very, very rare at this venue.
bob-
That's national "defense" conservative.
["I can hear you, the rest of the world can hear you and the people who knocked these buildings down will all of us soon."]
That was code for "Hey Dick, maybe we can do these wars off the books...whaddya think? By the time they notice, we'll be loooooong gone!"
Sure, who wouldn't be concerned when there's even a hint that an administration is playing politics with troop levels?
I had similar concerns when Donald Rumsfeld deliberately decided to understaff the Iraq war, which turned out to be a disastrous idea and ultimately led to the "Surge," but only after more than 3,000 soldiers had died. Any two-bit general could have told Bush -- and some got fired for actually telling him -- not to do it that way. Ironically, the only reason we changed course even then was because Bush was worried about the 2006 elections.
So, yes, I'm concerned. Democrat or Republican, makes no difference. Politics should not drive CIC decisions. Unfortunately, too often, they do.
Loooooong gone, Mickey, but not without profit.
W's 1040's were for 28 mill in 1998.
In his last year of office, it was for 950 mill.
The guy must be a genius.
I wonder how Dick has made out?
Bag,
Well excuse me. I didn't get the memo telling me that you are the posting boss.
Not good enough, AM.
You're happy with the prospective troop levels in Iraq going forward?
You trust the President to do the right thing...as I have done?
You're his base, darlin'.
If I trust him, but YOU don't...
Well...
Hmmm.
AM?
You'll just have to work that out for yourself, MB.
You're much smarter than I am. Should be pretty easy for a guy like you.
Please, AM.
As I've previously acknowledged, you're clearly a well-educated professional.
Based on my experience in repeated exchanges with you, my questions shouldn't pose any significant challenge to your intellect.
Hardly.
That said...why would it be easy for me to read your mind?
I wouldn't bother to ask you a question when I already know the answer.
Do you have any concerns with President Obama's plan for withdrawing U.S. forces from Iraq?
Do YOU trust him?
Or...
Not?
You know, I seem to recall, acme three years ago, a candidate getting the backing of a large number of super delegates to one of the parties' conventions.
And I seem to recall that candidate having the overwhelming majority of said super delegates.
Then, as I recall, those super delegates began changing their commitments- to the other candidate for the nomination. So, in the end, none of that mattered.
I'm glad Rim Pawlenty has shared his views. I'm relatively certain that he will back the republican nominee- no matter who wins the nomination. But, thanks for sharing.
"I'm glad Rim Pawlenty....."
Every now and then, a slip-up on the keyboard produces some of the most appropriate words one could ever imagine!
Thanks for the laugh, No Joe. A gem, to be sure.
I'm so glad your adolescent mind got a chuckle out of a typo.
Here's something to deflate that balloon-
I mentioned on Friday that the daily tracking polls would be interesting on Monday. Both Gallup and Rasmussen report daily- but those reports are based on the results of three days of polling. Thus, the polls repotted out today are entirely based on people who gave their opinions AFTER the speech.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/president_obama_job_approval-1044.html
Did not move them an iota.
I guess people are sick of reruns this far into September- and all Obama offered was a rerun of the same boondoggle from 2009.
Yet another fail.
No Joe, why get excited about something you know the republicans are going to say no to. Its the only word the know but do not understand.
NoJo:
"Deflating that balloon" with a link to "realclearpolitics"? And here we thought polls mean nothing (according to you).
...yeah, you keep going with that...you just might be taken seriously someday...
...someday...
All Endorsements prior to the first caucus and primary are of equal significance...
True... But please make me vp Mr. Romney!
"..prohibiting union dues from going directly to political causes."
Romney has a fantastic idea, there.
The circle has to end. End tax money going directly to crooked unions which lobby for more tax money..and so on and so on..
And corporations too, right?
End tax money going directly to crooked
unionscorporations which lobby for more tax money..and so on and so on.Let;'s kick them all out of politics :) Unions and corporations. Maybe the republicans will quit attacking unions once it's no longer a political body, and we can quit babying corps as well once they are forced apolitical.
Yeah. That concept and 2 bucks will get me a cup of coffee.
and now that ...Corporations are people, my friends,...
Perhaps they can't donate $ to campaigns either,...right?
Mixed Bag, "Sorry your ramblings got collapsed this morning, but's it's not hard to understand when you post drivel like this" what did I miss in your comment
This just in: Romney has promised Santorum a slot in his cabinet if elected. Secretary of Sex Education. First order of business: Never google his name or you're fired.
...and NO photo ops with dead newborns!
I have to wonder what Republicans look for in a President, considering they despise government so much they want to shrink it to the point they can drown it in a bathtub. Do Republicans set out to look for a nincompoop for President? That's the only explanation I can find for the dopes they've presented us with so far.
Palin, (stuid) Bachmann (weird) Gingrich (daffy) Santorum (self righteous) Pawlenty (hypocritical) Romney (flipflopper) Perry (crude, rude and shallow).
You want to take on big government intruding on the people?
The beginning of the security state is the IRS. The constitution clearly delegates the power to collect tax to the congress, and not the executive. Think of it, local people entrusted with seeing to it that local business pays its share for things like roads and schools that make business possible. That was supposed to be their job all along.
The idea of stealing money from individual incomes was counter-revolutionary, and intended for the establishment of a database of useful information about private citizens' private lives. Whenever the executive branch wants to disempower the citizenry, they expand the use of this information to deny any of the opportunities of citizenship from whomever they choose.
Why should anyone have to submit a 1040 to a private bank to get a mortgage?
The real power struggle is not between north or south or right or left, but between legislative and executive. The constitution delegated very limited powers to the president, and one by one they have been expanding it into a dictatorship since the beginning. The personal income tax has been an instrument of repression all along.
I've been searching these posts for weeks for something that gets to the real point. The reason government acts like an enemy is because every April 15 folks send them a thank you card, and update the intel on their private lives.
The IRS is a cancer, a standing treason, a parasite, the original secret police. You want your country back?
Stop informing on yourselves.
You want them accountable to the people? Stop being terrorized into accounting to them.
No 1040s in 2012!
Article I, Section 8:
The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes.
Was that a typo?
Did the definition of "collect" get changed?
That is their job. Whatever it is they do all day, they were supposed to be doing that. The whole idea was that revenue collection and allocation not be entrusted to the executive, in order to limit its powers.
What happened?
As for me, I cast my vote on April 15, marked "abstain".
Hopefully, Anyone but Perry will win the Republican-Tea Potty contest. Perry is the most dangerous person running.
I'm a Republican living in Texas, and I agree. I would much rather keep Perry as governor than see him elected as President. The Texas constitution sets up the governor to be a weak figurehead. At least he can't do a lot of harm here. All he has really done the past 12 years is show up at key points and times, say a few words, smile his fake smile, and then vanish and let other people do the real work.
Ron Paul for President! We need someone who will say NO to federal spending -- yes, even to Social Security if need be. Cut back spending so our children might have some hope of a good future.
Romney will shred O'bama in a debate - the country has had enough of the most divisive President in recent history and especially his 9% unemployment, out of control spending, 3yr old housing crisis, credit downgrades etc etc
and oh yeah,...the country hasn't forgotten those early years of out of control liberals jamming O'bamacare down the countrys throat even as we pleaded to focus on jobs...
Nov '10 was part 1 and Nov '12 is going to be part 2....get ready....
None of them will beat the President in a debate, because the President will be the adult on the stage, and the President is smarter than Romney.
"Romney will shred O'bama in a debate"
Romney will never write his notes on his hand.
That's about all he has going.
Other than his well toasted demeanor.
Romney is a soft spoken, respectful, intelligent, even tempered, all-biz professional who will be standing next to O'bama who has shown himself to be a thin-skinned, hyper-divisive narcissist who is responsible for 9% unemployment, an ever-stalled housing crisis, out of control spending with a record # of Americans on Food Stamps, the 1st credit downgrade in history....who had promised he would bring the country together, reduce the deficit and make the economy soar....only to take his eyes off the ball and force fed Obamacare to a country that was begging for jobs...
its not even what Romney has going that's the key...O'bama will have to defend his record...
The Debate Question: President Obama, please explain how throughout your entire administration, despite spending $4 trillion dollars, unemployment was over 8% the entire time.
President Obama: "The Republicans wouldn't help me"
Governor Romney: "During my governorship, unemployment in my state was slightly above 4.5%, and I was able to work with Democrats."
The Question: In your lifetime, have you ever created a single job?
President Obama: "The Republicans wouldn't help me! And this job is really hard".
Governor Romney: I ran a company that restructured businesses, made them profitable, created thousands of permanent jobs in the private sector. Sure, some jobs were lost in companies that were dying anyway, but I never stuck a band-aid on a dying business.
The Question: What about social security?
Governor Romney: "Social Security is an important program that many Americans depend on."
President Obama: "I decreased the payroll taxes that fund social security - so it will be even more insolvent. I did that so that people will vote for me. I had to, though, because the Republicans are mean and this job is really hard."
Yep. It will be very interesting to see during the debate who the adult is in the room.
Candice - continuing the debate:
On the GM and Chrysler bailouts:
Romney: I would have proudly let them fail.
Obama: They are now great possibilities for rejuvenating the American economy and they are making money.
On healthcare:
Romney: I'm ashamed of what I did in Massachussetts - but it is really only a solution for that silly state.
Obama: I thought a change was needed so that 40 million Americans could find insurance and that people with insurance would have help when they REALLY GET SICK.
On what the Government can do to stimulate the economy:
Romney: Essentially nothing - but we can eliminate regulation, which will be a good thing unless we eliminate regulations that save lives and livelihoods.
Obama: The nation's engineers say that the country's bridges are dangerous and we are decades behind on fast rail. We can continue to fund construction projects that the country desperately needs regardless of our economic plight.
BeyondDemocrat: Let me add what you omitted....
On the GM and Chrysler bailouts:
Romney: I would have proudly let them fail…..because with our bankruptcy laws the companies would have continued as companies, with their debt restructured, contracts re-negotiated, and employees would have stayed employed, except it wouldn’t have cost the tax payers $12 billion they will never get back.
Obama: They are now great possibilities for rejuvenating the American economy and they are making money and electric cars nobody wants. But it’s not my fault, --my friend, Ron Gettlefinger didn’t tell me bankruptcy would have had the same result.
On healthcare:
Romney: I'm ashamed of what I did in Massachussetts - but it is really only a solution for that silly state. Having had that experience, though, I know what works and what doesn’t. President Obama could have asked me before he jammed a monstrosity of a bill down the throats of Americans – a bill that makes many of the same mistakes.
Obama: I thought a change was needed so that 40 million Americans could find insurance and that people with insurance would have help when they REALLY GET SICK. I should have read the bill before we passed it. Just wait until people find out they’re gonna have to pay premiums they never had to pay before!
On what the Government can do to stimulate the economy:
Romney: Essentially nothing - but we can eliminate regulation, which will be a good thing unless we eliminate regulations that save lives and livelihoods. So we have to be selective. President Obama said he told his agencies to review and eliminate non-detrimental regulations. Instead, however, no President has ever imposed more regulations at more cost than any other in history.
Obama: The nation's engineers say that the country's bridges are dangerous and we are decades behind on fast rail. We can continue to fund construction projects that the country desperately needs regardless of our economic plight. I already spent a bunch of money on infrastructure and shovel ready jobs –that weren’t really all that shovel ready – hahahaha – and our roads and bridges are still a mess but that’s because the Republicans are mean!
Four GOP candidates remain strong after debate: Perry, Romney, Gingrich and Cain.
To Bachmann, it must be noted she has one goal/focus - repeal Obamacare. Unfortunately there are 1000+ issues, not one (1). Plus, she should be smart enough to know that if there is an "Opt Out", there is no mandate. A mandate is an official command. There is no difference in opting "in" vs opting "out". In either case, parents have a choice. The state of Texas offers the vaccine to young girls to give them, the advantage of protection from HPV caused cervical cancer. If parents don't want it they only have to say, no, We opt out of protecting them. Bachmann argues in such a way (atty stuff) that it would seem it is far better for young woman to have cervical cancer than to take a "free" to them vaccine. That is the same type of garbage Obama uses. Talk in circles and trick the audience. Is it better to have cervical cancer? Well, that depends on whether you want your daughter to die from cancer. If you'd rather have your daughters' lives at risk, Opt out. Does HPV cause cervical cancer? It's the leading cause.
Huntsman and the other fella' offered nothing worth consideration. Paul borders on lunacy. His thoughts are dangerous and so unrealistic.
Gingrich gets shorted on time in every debate, yet his comments are so enlightening. Guess the media doesn't like him, so don't ask him many questions.
Perry and Romney are not that different in views. Perry has the eye of the Tiger and Romney just doesn't. The country needs The Eye of the Tiger to get us turned around and moving toward restoration in every sense of the word. Perry is strong on States' rights, meaning smaller government at the Fed level and who could oppose that idea? ---- Other than the Obamanites?
Obama mandates universal healthcare, which should be up to the states, and Perry goes beyond that and forces children to the doctor for shots, which obviously should be the parents choice. Perry is worse than Obama. And how does he change his position on social security every time he opens his mouth? I doubt he is leading the polls because that would mean we are going to nominate a lunatic ready to take us beyond where Obama has plunged us down the toilet.
Bill you are not wrong. We are in trouble.
Running total- two useless Presidents in a row one on each side of the aisle. I don't see an outstanding repub candidate so far. We are in BIG TROUBLE.
Hillary 2012
I find it interesting that the popular media is already trying to stack the deck, instead of allowing Americans to evaluate candidates for themselves and make their own choices. I don't have a personal problem with Romney, but it is interesting since Bachman and Perry hit the scene, as far as the media is concerned, there is great sympathy for Romney and the raw deal he is getting at the hands of fellow Republicans...Somewhere in the last couple of weeks, as far as media attention is concerned, Romney has achieved sainthood status. Please, everyone, don't allow yourself to be manipulated by popular press to put support behind the weakest candidate, which will only serve to strengthen the position of the candidate that the media thinks should be running this country. We have been duped by the media before, so how about being a bit more analytical this time. I am not sure that any candidate has really emerged as "Top Contender", and we are in the infancy stages of the political spectacle for 2012....watch, listen, research. The most important questions to answer are the ones that the media isn't touching. We are in big trouble if we let the newpaper moguls and network giants determine our political future.
Q.: What did the uninsured citizen say to the Republican?
A.: "You're killing me!" ... literally.