OK political junkies: who wrote this?

Some of my libertarian friends balk at an individual mandate. But is it libertarian to insist that government pick up the tab for those without insurance or means to pay? An uninsured libertarian might counter that he could refuse the free care, but under law, that is impossible -- and inhumane.

Answer: Mitt Romney, in 2006!

...in an e-mailed first draft of WSJ Op Ed he penned in 2006. His staff deleted e-mails from a server when he left the Massachusetts governor's mansion...thinking that with one high-tech shake of the etch-a-sketch they could invent a new Mitt. But they reckoned without server backups and public records requests...

And now that Mitt wants everybody to forget he ever was the governor of Massachusetts, I am sure he is chagrined to see this Freudian slip come to light, as his cynical Republican colleagues attempt to sabotage health care reform with help from the activist court that elected George W. Bush for us.

Jun 5, 2012 -- 4:34PM, arielg wrote:

So, what are you saying?   That he believes what he said then but now he has to tow the Republican line?

That is exactly what I am saying.

The courage of one's convictions is an admirable trait in a leader. Too bad Mitt does not have it.

Mitt and his party do not have anything, in fact, except their own fear, and the fear which they are trying to inspire in the voters.

Jun 5, 2012 -- 4:34PM, arielg wrote:

So, what are you saying?   That he believes what he said then but now he has to tow the Republican line?  A politician woudn't go anywhere if he doesn't at least pay lip service to his party's positions.

Mitt was towing the republican line as the individual mandate was intellectual property of the Heritage Foundation but depending on what line is drawn in the sand by the Tea Party Republicans or the Corporate owned Republicans that line changes on a frequent basis.   Mitt is nimble but the amusing one to watch is Orrin Hatch the 80 year old,  never thought he was so light on his feet.

Jun 5, 2012 -- 4:38PM, Jasr wrote:

Jun 5, 2012 -- 4:34PM, arielg wrote:

So, what are you saying?   That he believes what he said then but now he has to tow the Republican line?

That is exactly what I am saying.

The courage of one's convictions is an admirable trait in a leader. Too bad Mitt does not have it.

Mitt and his party do not have anything, in fact, except their own fear, and the fear which they are trying to inspire in the voters.

A courage that bankrupts the nation, is not an admirable trait. Of course, I could also bring up Bush the younger, who used his convictions to fight in Iraq and Afghanistan, and is/was despised by the left for it.

And the right has the very likely fear that a) Obamacare will not only not bend the cost curve down, it will drive it almost vertically up, b) that due to a, rationing will happen, exactly as it does everywhere else there is nationalized care, and the problems associated with that.

Jun 5, 2012 -- 9:43PM, aarroottoonn wrote:

It doesn't matter what Romney said as Governor. He has said repeatedly that what is/was good for MA, is not necessarily what is good for TX. It is federalism, pure and simple. Until the left understands that simple concept, there isn't much else to talk about on this topic.

In 2004, your ilk called this degree of nuance and context-sensitivity 'flip-flopping'.

Do you remember, if I may ask?