Election 2012

Paul Ryan Hates Obama's Policies. What Would Romney/Ryan Offer Instead?


Rep. Paul Ryan, the GOP's vice presidential nominee, delivered a forceful keynote speech  at the Republican convention last night. Ryan, the top Republican on the House Budget Committee, is known for his policy chops, and his speech was framed as an attack on the current administration's poor economic policies: He went after President Obama's health care plan, the stimulus bill he signed, and the debt reduction commission whose recommendations he ignored.

But what Ryan didn't talk about what was he and Mitt Romney, the man at the top of the Republican ticket, would offer instead. Which is problematic — not just because of what was left unspoken, but because of what both men have already said and done. If you dislike Obama's health care overhaul, his stimulus plan, and his refusal to endorse the recommendations put forth by the debt commission, it's hard to see how the Romney/Ryan ticket would be much better.

Yes, Romney has promised to repeal ObamaCare. But as governor of Massachusetts, Romney not only passed the state-based model for the president's health care plan, he repeatedly touted it as a "model for the nation." Those who know his campaign operation say he remains proud of RomneyCare. And he still touts the Massachusetts plan—not only as evidence of his legislative leadership but as proof of his ability to provide effective health policy solutions for his constituents. Just last weekend, Romney responded to a question about women's health by telling Fox News, "Look, I'm the guy that was able to get health care for all of the women and men in my state. They're just talking about it at the federal level. We actually did something, and we did it without cutting Medicare and without raising taxes."

It's a telling remark. Romney is not just bragging about RomneyCare.  He is not just suggesting that despite the many ways in which it is virtually identical to ObamaCare, it is a good policy. He is saying that RomneyCare is better than ObamaCare, and that he is better than Obama, because he put his health policy plan into action. That's why he believes people should vote for him: because he made his version of Obama's health reform a success. He doesn't sound like someone who wants to repeal Obama's health care law. He sounds like someone who wants to tweak it, streamline it, and try to make it work.

As for stimulus, Romney has made much out of his opposition to the president's $800 billion economic adrenaline shot. But he's not exactly opposed to similar stimulus plans. Not only did he praise the $150 billion stimulus passed by President Bush, he also declared shortly after that "a second stimulus was needed." When that stimulus arrived under President Obama, Romney quibbled with the tax, spending, and implementation details, but agreed that "the stimulus that was passed in early 2009 will accelerate the timing of the start of the recovery," just not as much as if the plan had been designed differently. When I brought this up with his campaign at the end of last year, a policy staffer confirmed that Romney does support stimulus in certain circumstances.

And what about the president's record on debt? It would be hard to be worse than Obama, who, despite griping about Bush's deficits has managed to outdo his predecessor. But Ryan didn't simply criticize the president's overall record on debt. He complained that Obama ignored the recommendations of his own bipartisan debt commission. "He created a bipartisan debt commission," Ryan said. "They came back with an urgent report.  He thanked them, sent them on their way, and then did exactly nothing." But Ryan was a full-fledged member of that commission. And he voted against its recommendations.

Like Chris Christie, Paul Ryan's speech touched on the need for leaders to communicate difficult truths with the public, to speak fairly and honestly about the problems facing the nation. But it's not enough to simply to simply identify the problems and criticize the current administration for failing to solve them. Ryan knows this, and has taken considerable advantage of it. He rose to prominence in large part because of his willingness to put forth relatively detailed budget plans and entitlement reform proposals. But the Romney campaign has done no such thing and in fact has gone out of its way to distance itself from Ryan's signature plans — while playing up opposition to Obama's.

"We will not duck the tough issues," Ryan promised last night, "we will lead. We will not spend four years blaming others, we will take responsibility." Maybe that's what he and Romney think they will do. But in the campaign so far, that's not what they are doing.


NEXT: Mitt On the Spot With Tonight's RNC Appearance

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. They offer the world order!

    Well, not really, but I couldn’t resist.

    1. In place of a Dark Lord, you would have a queen! Not dark, but beautiful and terrible as the dawn! Treacherous as the sea! Stronger than the foundations of the earth! All shall love me, and despair!

      1. This is the fallacy of power: ultimately it is effective only in an absolute, limited universe. But the basic lesson of our relativistic universe is that things change. Any power must always meet a greater power. Paul Muad’Dib taught this lesson to the Sardaukar on the Plains of Arrakeen. His descendants have yet to learn the lesson for themselves.

        1. Or the Sith, who desire galactic domination for no discernible reason other than because they like the gratification of power. I think one of the Empire’s biggest flaws was a lack of ideology, at no point do we understand why anyone would want to support the regime other than personal gain.

          1. I dunno, why do people run for office here?

            1. You think the stormtroopers get like a signing bonus when they enlist? I guess I can’t see the appeal of putting on clunky white armor that limits your vision, doesn’t protect against blaster bolts, and then they equip you with rifles that are obviously faulty.

              And if you join the Air Force they stick you in cheap TIE fighters with bad controls, no life support systems, and no deflector shields.

              1. Come on, they’re all clones anyway. Who gives a fuck if a million clones get destroyed? They’ll just grow more.

                1. Depends on the time period. Most Stormtroopers were natural-born by the end of the Imperial era.

                  1. You know, fuck the prequels. I hereby declare them and the Ewoks non-canon.

                  2. Well it was too late for them. By then all of the Imperial rules and regulations had been set. The manufacturing industry was at full capacity churning out plastic armor and defective rifles. The labor unions were full ensconced and there was no way to change their methods.

              2. I guess I can’t see the appeal of putting on clunky white armor that limits your vision, doesn’t protect against blaster bolts, and then they equip you with rifles that are obviously faulty.

                Why do you think they missed so much? They weren’t really that “into” the whole imperial thing. I suspect that most of them were probably just conscripts anyway. Either that or criminals who were given a choice: join the army, or go to one of Palpatine’s rape dungeons.

                Who knows? Maybe missing on purpose when they had a chance to stop the rebellion in their tracks by taking out Luke Skywalker (pre-Jedi) was their only way of rebeling that wouldn’t get them force choked by Vader or hate fucked by a Rancor.

      2. In place of Dark Lord, I’ll take a Stone Imperial Russian Stout, or a Dark Horse Plead the Fifth, or an Oskar Blues Ten Fidy, or a New Holland Night Tripper.

        In other words, Dark Lord is overrated.

        1. Dark Lord Days was fun.

    2. I’ve done far worse than kill you, ProL. I’ve hurt you. And I wish to go on hurting you. I shall leave you as you left me, as you left her; marooned for all eternity in the center of a dead thread…buried alive! Buried alive!

      1. Say, Khan, ever wonder why your wife betrayed you at the end? Let’s just say I helped her come to the right conclusion. Several times.

        I’m laughing at the “superior intellect.”

        1. There he is! There he is! Ah…not so wounded as we were led to believe. So much the better!

          1. She told me that they neglected to augment your, er, size. Really, it’s quite embarrassing. No wonder you need that giant, compensating Genesis torpedo.

            Spock, set phasers to guffaw.

            1. This thing only goes up to chortle.

            2. ProL, ProL, ProL…save your strength. These commenters have sworn to live and die at my command twenty years before you ever posted at HitUndRun. Do you mean he never told you the tale?

              1. You lie! In Hit and Run version V there was life! A fair chance!

                1. THIS is HitUndRun version 5!!!

              2. Time counts and keeps countin’, and we knows now finding the trick of what’s been and lost ain’t no easy ride. But that’s our trek, our Star Trek, we gotta’ travel it. And there ain’t nobody knows where it’s gonna’ lead. Still in all, every night we does the tell, so that we ‘member who we was and where we came from… but most of all we ‘members the man that finded us, him that came the salvage. And we lights the city, not just for Epi, but for all of them that are still out there. ‘Cause we knows there come a night, when they sees the distant light, and they’ll be comin’ home.

              3. Khan, tell me, when your wife got the ear thingee, she was obedient to all of your whims, right? I mean, before she died and all. What kind of perverted shit did you make her do? It’s okay, I’m Russian.

        2. “His pattern suggests 2 dimensional thinking*.”

          *An issue I’ve always had with Wrath of Kahn is, if Kahn is supposed to be some kind of genetically engineered superman, with super intellect, how is it that he has trouble thinking in 3 dimensions? Lazy ass screen writers couldn’t come up with a more plausible way for Kirk to beat him?

          1. Kirk plays three dimensional chess against a Vulcan…and wins. Khan only played two dimensional chess* and wasn’t prepared.

            *completely pulled out of my ass

          2. Lack of experience in space. Intelligence alone only goes so far.

            1. This a culture that protects ships from hacking using a code with only 10,000 combinations. Khan should have beat them.

              1. Know how things work on a starship, Lieutenant NutraSweet.

                1. In a starship. The outside is exposed to the vacuum of space. It’s very cold in space, Episiarch.

                  1. The override. Where’s the override?!?

              2. It’s a trusting society.

              3. SF, your post indicates base ten thinking. With alphanumeric options, there were actually about 60 million combinations.

                1. They only used numbers (1630). There’s is no evidence the prefixes were alphanumeric.

                  1. Whoops, I thought you were referring the self-destruct codes.

                    1. How many positions were in the self-destruct code? It was long, maybe 12 or 15?

                    2. Yeah, they had four or five each. So it’s orders of magnitude beyond even my first estimate.

          3. I think as soon as he entered the nebula, despite his first officer telling him how obviously it was a trap, we can throw out any expectation of rational thinking on his part since he was blinded by his desire for revenge.

            FULL POWER, DAMN YOU!!!!

            1. This goes to show the danger of reading. Without exposure to Moby-Dick, Khan would’ve skipped the whole revenge thing and thanked Chekov for rescuing his people.

              1. Really, as First Contact showed with Picard all Khan needed was a plasma rifle, a black woman foil, and a display case to smash.

              2. Star Trek movies would be better if the universe of the setting operated on principles that resulted in heavy, brute combat — Halo or Star Wars-style. Two phaser farts and a proton lightbulb hitting a ship and causing a console to blow up, killing Nameless Ensign Nobody Gives A Fuck About #12, really doesn’t cut it for me.

                1. Sure, YOU may not care about Redshirt #12, but Kirk did.

                  He mourned for her for all of 3 seconds.

            2. We’re all with you, ASM. But, consider this. We are free. We have a ship, and the means to go where we will. We have escaped permanent exile on HitUndRun V. You have defeated the plans of ProL. You do not need to defeat him again.

              1. That’s the greatest compliment ever–you called me Kirk.

                I’m going to tear my shirt and go hit someone with my two-fist club.

                1. I thought you were going so say “go hit something with green skin”

                  1. I’m married. However, my wife could go green, I suppose.

          4. I think it’s not entirely unreasonable. Presumably, Khan’s experience in space combat is severely limited. Even if he were intellectually aware of the 3-D business, which I’m sure he was, it’s something else to start baking that into your tactics on the fly.

          5. ow is it that he has trouble thinking in 3 dimensions?

            “He’s intelligent, but lacks experience.”

    3. After the election, I hope someone at Reason publishes a piece on exactly why ST: WoK is the most quoted movie on these boards. Not that I mind – I’m just curious.

      1. Used to be Planet of the Apes. Or, really, any Heston movie involving something apocalyptic.

        Also, Dune was a biggee at one time.

      2. Lucas is fucking retarded. It’s taken him this long to allow the creation of a Star Wars TV show. But if they pull it off and it’s done well, it might replace Star Trek. At least for a little while, anyway.

        1. RPA, that supposition needs about 20 more “if”s.

          About the only thing that would work is 1) Lucas has nothing whatsoever to do with it, like doesn’t even get to make sandwiches for the craft services cart 2) it is dedicated to never mentioning even the most minor and insignificant character that already exists in canon 3) they never have a plot that even remotely resembles something already canon 4) they stop giving characters names designed for a 4-year-old to think is clever and 5) every time someone from a toy company comes on set to consult they are torn to bits by werewolves.

          1. So it will never, ever work. Which is what I said in the thread we were discussing this in last time. Why waste resources on something that is literally guaranteed to be fucked up? Use those resources to create a scifi show that Lucas can’t ruin.

            1. You mean ruin some great book or other idea instead?

              Though if Lucas could be restrained somehow, maybe something could be done with his universe.

            2. Is it wrong to suggest that they wait for Lucas to die before they attempt it?

              1. No, but you’ll be waiting a LONG time.

            3. It’s going to be done. No network is going to pass on revitalizing Star Wars, it’s guaranteed to be a ratings juggernaut if hyped properly. I just pray it isn’t done by the suits at Fox and NBC. Sci-fi, AMC, or HBO should be do it.

              1. HBO? If Star Wars had started on HBO, the whole Luke-Leia thing would’ve gotten ugly.

                1. HBO? If Star Wars had started on HBO, the whole Luke-Leia thing would’ve gotten ugly.

                  So Luke would have pushed R2-D2 into the ship’s trash compacter?

                  1. No. He’d have had sex with it. And his sister.

                    1. Yeah, but Han Solo is pretty cool with incest.


          2. I agree with (1), but that’s about all you need to ensure the show at least has a chance. Without Lucas fucking things up, I’m pretty confident you could assemble a team and a budget awesome enough to make it good. It’s Star Wars, after all.

            However, if Sebulba or Jar Jar Binks are involved in any way, I’ll castrate myself with a rusty fork and jump off of the Empire State Building.

            1. You agree with one? That’s it? I agree with all of them, except for the curious omission of the Ewoks.

            2. 6) No races introduced after Empire or before New Hope

              1. I don’t know. I think a show about some Empire troops hunting down and killing all of whatever race Jar Jar was would be popular in a lot of places.

                1. I don’t know. I think a show about some Empire troops hunting down and killing all of whatever race Jar Jar was would be popular in a lot of places.

                  Isn’t that what happened on Naboo after the Clone Wars?

              2. Why not?

          3. I’d hire Ron Moore to do it and work his magic. He already saved two franchises with DS9 and BSG.

            Focus on the time period between III and IV by showing the power struggle between crime syndicates, the consolidating Empire, and the nascent Rebel Alliance. There’s plenty of fertile material right there.

            1. So you want him to create a show that is great until the second half of the last season, and then the final episode is so stupid that it kind of makes you hate the whole show?

              Because I don’t want that.


              2. All shows need to adopt the current JJ Abram’s model in at least one aspect: Plot the show for five seasons after the pilot is picked up but before shooting the initial order run. Lost and BSG had no idea what they were doing, and it showed in the short-, medium-, and long-run.

              3. Maybe he’ll learn from his mistakes. Even the disappointing last season had the riveting mutiny storyline. The man’s work on the whole is excellent.

            2. No, no. They should set it in the feudal anarchy that follows the destruction of the Empire. Either that, or have it follow Jar Jar Binks on his erotic adventures.

              1. Jar Jar Binks on his erotic adventures

                “You-sa says-sa some women-sa are-sa squirters? Ohhhhhhhhh…”

            3. There’s plenty material in pretty much every era, mainly because Lucas fucked up I, II, and III so spectacularly and absolutely.

              A serious, live-action TV show set during the Clone Wars would work, even though they’ve already crapped it up with that shitty CGI show.

              The Mandalorian Wars. The Jedi Civil War. The Separatist Crisis. The Dark Age. The New Sith Wars. The Old Sith Wars. The Yuzhaan-Vong War. The Second Galactic Civil War. There’s decades worth of media right there to develop.

              1. The era of the Knights of the Old Republic could work. They could do basically anything without worrying about the movies.

                1. In the interim, I’m hoping a decent director gets in on the Halo movie/show project(s), whenever the fuck they’re (re)launched. It’s got potential I’d like to see realized.

            4. Focus on the time period between III and IV…

              So would this include some background on how Skywalker/Vader went from being a whiny pussy barely fit to kill children to being the source of utter dread across the galaxy?

              1. So would this include some background on how Skywalker/Vader went from being a whiny pussy barely fit to kill children to being the source of utter dread across the galaxy?


                I’ll never forgive Lucas for that shit. Anakin Skywalker was supposed to be Jedi General Uber Badass. Instead, we get Hayden fucking Christensen.

                1. We don’t talk about the prequels.

                  1. We don’t talk about the prequels.

                    The first rule of George Lucas Hate Club is we do not talk about the prequels.

                2. Someone will fix that once Lucas is out of the picture.

                  1. Imagine if the guy who did the Dark Knight films had done the Star Wars prequels.

                3. And then if that wasn’t enough he threw the “NOOOOOOOO!!!!” into the Blu-ray Return of the Jedi when Vader throws the Emperor off the balcony. You know, because we’re too stupid to appreciate his unspoken, inner conflict as he watches his boss zap his son with Force lightening.

                  1. And then if that wasn’t enough he threw the “NOOOOOOOO!!!!” into the Blu-ray Return of the Jedi when Vader throws the Emperor off the balcony.

                    Another pet peeve of mine (I have several): the fact that every fucking time George Lucas re-releases Star Wars on a new medium he insists on going in and “tweaking” (IOW fucking up) something else. Note to George Lucas: if you do this again, I’m going to smite you into oblivion. I shit you not.

                  2. Can I get the unedited original movies, please?

                    1. Sure, do you have a VCR?

                    2. I have the DVD release that includes the original unedited movies as “bonus” discs. Even though they have a lot of technical problems, they’re the only ones I can stand to watch. And these are only the 2004ish releases, before even more “tweaking” was done.

                    3. Yes. Of course, Lucas couldn’t help being an asshole, so the DVD version only has the original Dolby 2.0 soundtrack. From what I’ve heard he did that on purpose. Fans were clamoring for a dvd version of the originals, so he released them literally as they were in 1977. “What, you said you wanted the original theatrical version.” Dick, there’s a big difference between technical changes such as remastering the soundtrack into Dolby THX, and making stupid random edits that at best add nothing to the story.

                      The only way to get the original trilogy with the THX sound upgrade is on the old VHS set that was released back in the 90’s (I forget when exactly).

                    4. So you get to choose between quality sound and quality images?


                    5. The only way to get the original trilogy with the THX sound upgrade is on the old VHS set that was released back in the 90’s

                      I have that set sitting on top of my DVD bookcase. No VCR…

              2. Vader could be a character in the show. I mean it’s not like James Earl Jones can age out of the role, you’d just need his voice and someone who is tall to wear the suit.

                A serious, live-action TV show set during the Clone Wars would work.

                No, no, no. I think we just need to forget about the Clone Wars completely as well as everything that has to do with the prequels.

                1. Agreed. You could go after Star Wars, too. Luke’s available.

                  1. Pro,

                    Wasn’t there supposed to be three more after Jedi? Make those without Lucas being involved. Let Hammel play an older Luke.

                    1. That’s what I heard for quite some time. Until Lucas got tired of fans who demanded less crap.

                  2. You’d have to either set it way after RotJ or have Luke mauled by another wampa since Hamil hasn’t aged very well.

                    1. Plus with all the books and comics that are set after RotJ, continuity would be a nightmare. Although a lot of that stuff can be ignored because it’s not “official” canon, some of it is, so you’d still have to tread lightly.

                    2. Yep, Lucas would be pissed if anyone (besides him) retconned SW.

                    3. Loki,

                      If you made the movies, you would own the cannon. Go through all of the stuff, pick the best of it and make the next three.

                    4. BTW, Lucas may be “retiring”. Of course, he’ll still own the IP for Star Wars, and I doubt if he’ll sell those anytime soon, but still.

                      Money quote (about Star Wars): “Why would I make any more, when everybody yells at you all the time and says what a terrible person you are?””

                      Translation: “Waaaaahhhhhh!!!!! Fanboys are big meanies!!!!!1 Waaaaaahhhhh!!!1” Maybe you should have thought about that before shitting all over them you fat slimy walrus looking piece of shit.

                    5. Good. Let the hate flow through you.

                    6. Dark side, baby, dark side.

                    7. 146+ comment thread. 2/3rds of which is completely devoted to OT science fiction banter.

                      I LOVE you guys! * wistfully wipes tear from outer corner of left eye*

                    8. How is it off-topic? Romney-Ryan offer, Khan offers.

  2. That hilarious 2nd Alt-Text: you didn’t write that – someone else made that happen.

  3. Just what Reason needed, another “sure Obama is bad, but…” article. Suderman is still pushing the canard that MassCare was “the model” for ObamaCare, a claim which has been offered without evidence time and time again. If there had never been a MassCare program, Obamacare would still exist and would probably look roughly the same. If anything MassCare provided a cautionary tale, not a “model” for Obamacare.

    1. Oh good, Tulpa’s back, and he’s still sucking Romney’s cock, and he’s still bitter that the rest of us are not joining him! How fresh and original! If it was a cautionary tale, why has Romney not admitted that it was a mistake?

      1. When you read him, you get the punishment you deserve.

      2. Mothers have a very hard time admitting their children were a mistake.

      3. Probably because his reform might have actually saved someones life, and they personally thanked him for it.

        A lot of folks honestly believe he will repeal Romneycare when elected President. He wont, we all know it.

    2. Tulpa,

      You can’t defend Romney on this. It is appalling that he won’t repudiate Romney care. And people have every right to suspect he won’t really repeal Obamacare. You can’t square the statement “I want to repeal Obamacare” with “I am proud of Masscare”.

      1. Agreed, but it is puzzling that Suderman continues to post these types of pieces with nary a mention of how Ryan’s Medicare/Medicaid reforms work. It is irritating to see ill-informed attacks on a proposal that is almost identical to what libertarians and libertarian-leaning think tanks have been suggesting as reforms for both programs.

        If someone read nothing but Reason, they would come away with the idea that Ryan was a hack fraud — but no idea of what the hell Ryan’s Roadmap is. For all that Reason cauterwails about the shallowness of the media, they sure do a good job of contributing to it.

        1. If someone read nothing but Reason, they would come away with the idea that Ryan was a hack fraud. And they would be right.

          1. 0.5% forever! Keep up the spirit!

            1. ??

              When someone says they support limited government and actually supports even bigger government, they are a hack fraud.

              What does that have to do with LP vote totals? I’ve long been one of the LP’s biggest critics.

            2. You know, actions speak louder than words. Ryan’s voting history is available for all to see. He isn’t free market. He isn’t smaller government. He probably couldn’t even be called a Republican by most standards. A Neocon more than anything else.

          2. True, but not because of his Roadmap. Bending the cost curve for the federal government in general, and doing so by liberalizing markets for large ticket government items, would be a significant achievement. The entitlement reforms that Ryan advocates for are both significant and positive changes, even if they are far from the ideal, and even if the man advocating for them is a fraud.

            If Bernie Sanders had spent the last six months attempting to make marijuana legalization a high profile and high priority agenda item for the Democratic party and he were nominated as B Obama’s running mate, wouldn’t you want at least one timely Reason article examining a) the details of the proposal, b) realistic chances of legalization happening, and c) some support for the initiative, even if it falls short of full drug legalization? I’ve seen far kinder obituaries for out and out unrepentant Stalinists on this website than comments on Ryan’s Roadmap since he’s been nominated. Consistency in editorial tone, and some attempt to inform beyond the obvious, would be appreciated.

      2. I wish MR would repudiate MassCare. I don’t think it would hurt him politically if he did it correctly.

        But it’s pretty dishonest to say it’s the same as OC.

  4. OBAMANEY’s policies are terrible. Vote for OBAMANEY instead!

    1. Vote ROMAMA!

      1. I’d rather vote for Dr. Who‘s Romana.

  5. I am savoring the irony of this article demanding details, right after David Harsanyi telling us that voters don’t want that.

    1. Peter’s always been a little behind the curve.

    2. Voters, in general, don’t want details. Some of us do. Most voters are low-information voters, since Dunphy says we can’t call them idiots, and will vote for TEAM over anything. That does not mean that Reason will pander to those voters, as most of the readers and commenters here do not fall into that category.

    3. I find it ironic that the article demands details without providing its readership with same for what’s out there (namely, the Roadmap and Simpson-Bowles).

  6. For all my hopes of a semi-decent administration from these guys, I’m pretty sure they’ll commit enormous fuck-ups in plenty of other areas of governance, even if they successfully put ObamaCare out of commission.

  7. I just loved how bizarre it was last night to have Rand Paul schmooze the crowd into cheering for his dad’s talking points and then 10 minutes later they bring Colonel Tigh out to completely contradict them.

    1. When all you are going to give them is a sop it’s only polite to wipe their face off afterwards.


    3. ADAMA!! NO!

  8. This fellow lists 20 reasons Obamacare is better than Romneycare, all of them either an added benefit or regulation:


    So, a supposed fan of Romneycare and Obamacare found 20 differences and the best we get is:

    “He is not just suggesting that despite the many ways in which it is virtually identical to ObamaCare, it is a good policy.”

    And we show the many ways it is “virtually identical”…

    1. I can think of one reason Romneycare is better than Obamacare: It only affects Massholes.

      1. I disagree.

        RomneyCare enacted; RomneyCare fucks shit up; Massholes move to escape shitty shithole their own shitty shit created; invade surrounding states; fuck up aforementioned surrounding states; profit.

        New Hampshire’s their latest hunting ground.

        1. Also it is theoretically easier to repeal Romneycare being that it is just one state than to repeal Obamacare.

          1. Just nuke Massachusetts from orbit. It’s the only way to be sure.


            I think you missed your calling sarc.

            RomneyCare isn’t going anywhere but deeper here.

            1. You would think at some point it would get so bad there people would demand something better. But that never seems to happen ever.

              1. “You would think at some point it would get so bad there people would demand something better.”

                “Still, according to Beacon’s Hill’s state competitiveness report on March 6, Massachusetts is the top state in the country for economic growth and income.

                Massachusetts health care is also often criticized for being too expensive: The premiums are higher than anywhere else in the country.

                McDonough argues that although those figures are correct, they don’t give the full picture. ‘You get a revealing portrait when you look at it based on ability to pay,’ he says. Massachusetts premiums are higher, but so is household income ? and when measured as a percentage of income, health insurance is cheaper in Massachusetts than in Texas, which has the highest share of uninsured residents in the nation.

                Moreover, the high-priced premiums in Massachusetts predate the state’s health-care reform law, McDonough says. Although health-care costs are increasing everywhere, the rate of increase has slowed significantly in Massachusetts in the past two years.

                ‘Don’t assume we’re a basket-case on costs,’ says McDonough. ‘We’re probably better off than you are.'”


            2. Did you ever think Maine would elect someone like LePage?

              Like I said, it’s theoretically possible.

            3. Oh, and your godde$$ has a pu$$y so big she needs two hands to carry it.


                1. That cat looks unhappy. It’ll claw her eyes out soon enough.

                  1. Cats don’t like to be drug around in public.

                    1. The cats I jam with drug around in public all the time.

              1. That thing looks like it’s just waiting for a chance to break free.

                1. Also, there’s a much better link on the right.


                  1. I already posted that one Warty.

                    The pussy link was for Sparky. He goes “woof woof!” for Ke$ha.

                    1. Do you get paid by the Daily Mail or something?

                    2. I wish.

                      No, I consider my Daily Fails to be a public service to the Reason commentariate.

                      Like most public services it is neither wanted nor needed and done anyway.

        2. “Massachusetts also had a dysfunctional individual market. In 1996, the state had instituted rules requiring community rating (premiums could only vary by a certain amount based on age, geography and occupation) and guaranteed issue (no discrimination based on preexisting conditions)”

          And from this interference in the market proceeded a proposed solution to the self induced problem: the mandate to buy insurance.
          But somehow we’ve bundled all this shit together and called it Romneycare and it’s “virtually identical” to Obamacare.

          1. Well, other than the dead babies.

  9. Someone on here a few days ago referenced protein wisdom nailing what the plan is. I respect the hell out of the guy at protein wisdom. So I looked it up. I hadn’t paid any attention to the rules changes. But perhaps they are a precursor. Here is what he says.

    Which brings us to the question of why. Is it purely an instinctual move to consolidate power ? and to do so at the expense of the grass roots and conservatives? Because if that’s the case, one wonders why such rule changes are not more common. Or is there something else operating here ? some signal being sent that the national party is looking to insulate itself from some potential challenge down the road?

    That is, what is the Romney camp ? and the non-existent GOP establishment ? trying to insulate itself against, particularly if it wins the election? Or rather, going back to interest in why rather than what, why, if they are preparing for an election win, would they be working preemptively to weaken the state delegations and the grass roots movement?

    1. And the answer that keeps occurring to me is that the GOP must already fear a challenge to its authority from the TEA Party and the movement conservative base ? they can see what’s happening at the state levels to any number of incumbents who have been defeated by upstarts and political outsiders ? and they are concerned enough about such a challenge going forward that they were willing to alienate the conservatives now, at a time when We Simply Must Defeat Obama, essentially daring the base to walk away and give Obama another term, which they’ve calculated the base won’t do.


      1. John, after talking to some establishment Repub stalwarts here in Texas, you cannot exaggerate the loathing that establishment Repubs have for TPers. They hatesss them, yes they do.

    2. I think the in people know that Obama is probably going to lose and Romney will have the house and a small majority in the Senate. So what are they doing to plan for that? My guess is the McCain’s and the Graham’s and the rest of the centrist crap weasels in the Senate are setting up a grand bargain to sell out the grass roots and look “practical”. Being called Practical is like crack to those people.

      Are they stupid enough to think they can just change the rules and the Tea Party and Grass roots will go away but still vote for them? Probably.

  10. So, when are we going to see the post on Reason comparing the Roadmap, Simpson-Bowles, and the other plans on the deficit? I keep hearing about how Romney/Ryan won’t provide details — but why should some hack politicians do it if a libertarian flagship periodical refuses to do so?

    I’ve read Suderman, and while it’s clear that he’s not an economist he has written some good pieces on the ACA and some other proposals. It is understandable that other Reason contributors less knowledgeable on the subject would defer to the Generic Libertarian Critiques of politicians, but an article on Ryan’s Medicare/Medicaid reforms is more marginally useful at this point than yet another THEYRE ALL THE SAME ARGH article from someone who can do better.

    1. They’ve compared Ryan’s roadmap, Bowles-Simpson, Obama’s budget, the CBO predicted, the CBO adjusted for likely extensions of sunsetting spending, Gillespie’s plan, Rand Paul’s plan, Johnson’s plan, etc. multiple times. Ryan’s plan is slightly better than Obama’s yet doesn’t balance the budget for 20 years, worse than Bowles-Simpson. And none of the plans balance the budget or cut spending anytime soon, unlike Gillespie’s, Paul’s or Johnson’s.

      1. Have they done any of that in this news cycle? All I’ve seen from the staff is that Ryan’s Roadmap and Obama’s plan are essentially equivalent.

        BTW, Ryan’s plan is *not* slightly better than Obama’s in anything but an accounting standpoint as it pertains to smaller government — to use an example, President Obama’s method of controlling Medicare’s costs rely on preserving all its functions and status as a government-controlled program, but instituting price controls and freezes for what they pay for doctors and medication. In contrast, Ryan’s plan for controlling costs transitions Medicare into an HSA-style program over a 10-year period, and allows the price mechanism to control costs where the unlimited government fee-for-service model will not.

        1. cont.

          and of course, Pres Obama’s plan includes assumptions that ACA will be deficit reducing on net (an errant assumption), as well as other unjustified assertions.

          Simpson-Bowles is significantly better than Obama’s plan, and some of its suggestions (esp on military spending) are better than those in Ryan’s Roadmap — but IMO its entitlement reforms are somewhat weaker than what is suggested by the Roadmap.

          There are legitimate libertarian critiques of Ryan’s plan — its cuts to the military are paltry compared to the other main plans — but the critiques I’ve read here since his nomination are lazy and unfounded. I don’t expect policy papers from Reason, but I do expect current reporting on pertinent topics from a libertarian perspective. As far as I’m concerned, they have failed on that count when it comes to the Roadmap.

        2. The main difference between the two plans are the social aspects. One takes the upper class and gives them what they want, and the other takes the lower class and gives them what they want.

          Those inbetween bend over.

  11. “But he’s not exactly opposed to similar stimulus plans.”

    No, he LOVES stimulus, just like all neo-cons. Its stimulus through defense spending and war.
    Just listen to McCain’s speech last night. Many options for the Romney administration to inject defense stimulus into our economy. Dan Senor will see to it.

  12. “GOP hate Obamacare…what would they offer instead?”

    what type of question is that?

    It is obvious, Romney care is the same thing.

    1. This looks like a set up for a South Park episode.

  13. This Ryan chap, he’s against men with guns taking my money and giving it to Tony in exchange for Tony’s allegiance, yes?

    Well then he has my support.

  14. That’s why he believes people should vote for him: because he made his version of Obama’s health reform a success. He doesn’t sound like someone who wants to repeal Obama’s health care law. He sounds like someone who wants to tweak it, streamline it, and try to make it work.

  15. Till now these two guys are playing blame games and did now show their policies sign, this is not the right way to address the public.

  16. I am sure this film is going to be famous in youtube, that officer is in serious trouble and have to face trial in court.

  17. Too bad we couldn’t just let Massachusetts try ObamaCare for 10-15 years and any other states that got their citizens to support it and then wait and see if it failed or not.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.