Obama’s Team Hoping to Face Mitt Romney 2012

by Stacy Drake on Monday, February 14, 2011 09:55 EDT

I don’t pretend to read the minds of those in charge of re-electing Barack Obama in 2012. I can however, read their signals and through deductive reasoning, make an educated guess what situation will benefit them the most in the upcoming election.

One of those signals was given last Friday by the outgoing Press Secretary, Robert Gibbs. Politico reports (emphasis mine):

Gibbs took the bait when asked about Mitt Romney’s speech at CPAC, in which the former Massachusetts governor didn’t exactly dwell on health care. “I don’t know why he wouldn’t,” Gibbs said, smiling, also remarking that it will be “interesting to see throughout the next two years if the two words ‘health care’ come out of his mouth.”

Ouch.

Now, keep in mind what Obama told Bill O’Reilly during the pre-Super Bowl interview last week. He said:

Here’s what I think is true. Over the first two years of my presidency, we had a complete disaster. Right?

Right.

Then Obama went on to blame the economy, saying:

The financial markets were breaking down. We were slipping into a Great Depression.

Now what did the Obama administration spend the first two years of his presidency doing? Getting his health care legislation passed and signed into (unconstitutional) law, that’s what. He wasn’t focused on the economy. His administration spent the bulk of their time trying to repackage and resell a bill that Americans did not want, no matter how the administration spun it. What better scenario for Team Obama, then to have that prickly issue taken off the table for 2012, in a bid to hold on to the White House?

Although Romney has taken to reworking his position (again) on health care, he cannot escape reality. The Obama people know this too. In fact, they credit Mitt Romney for the “blueprint” to the bill. As Politico reported:

Democrats have consistently pointed to the Massachusetts plan Romney signed into law as a forerunner for national legislation.

Last year, Steve Kornacki from Salon gave a pretty good overview of how the left perceives Romney’s attempt to redefine himself on the issue. He wrote:

It’s not news when man bites dog, so why should it be any different when Mitt Romney makes a brash and insincere pronouncement?

And yet there was the one-time Massachusetts governor forcing his way into Monday morning’s headlines with what may have been the most over-the-top of all of the over-the-top Republican reactions to the House’s passage of Barack Obama’s healthcare plan.

“An unconscionable abuse of power,” Romney declared while asserting that the president “has betrayed his oath to the nation.”

When Mitt starts talking like this, it’s usually because he knows his own past record makes him vulnerable on the issue at hand.

And when it comes to healthcare, his hypocrisy is particularly galling. Romney is actually the only governor in American history ever to impose an individual health insurance mandate on his citizens. And an individual mandate, of course, is at the heart of Obama’s reform package.

Nor is the mandate the only common ground between RomneyCare and ObamaCare; the Massachusetts plan that Romney signed into law in 2006 is essentially the blueprint for Obama’s plan. Both rely on the same basic formula: a requirement that everyone purchase insurance and government assistance for those who can’t afford it.

As I noted in the recent post I wrote about Mitch Daniels, the left loves to exploit hypocrisy. It is a vital part of their game-plan to take the focus away from them, and put it back on to their Republican opponent. It is even common for them to invent hypocrisy where there is none, but in Mitt’s case, that wouldn’t be necessary.

Governor Palin fought against Obamacare from day one. She took many hits from the left, and even from some in her own party for taking such a strong stand. This issue would be alive and well in a hypothetical Palin versus Obama campaign. Considering the shellacking the president has taken in his approval rating, and the “disaster” that defined his first two years, Team Obama doesn’t want the match-up. They would much rather see Mitt Romney standing across from Obama in a debate, spouting more of that hypocrisy they so love.

Print Friendly

Tagged as: 2012, 2012 Presidential Election, mitt romney, obamacare, romneycare

Article written by

Stacy Drake is the editor and publisher of: http://mightyserf.blogspot.com/ and is a conservative political activist based in San Diego, California. Stacy is graphic artist and animator in the world of the national news media. She has worked for over ten years in the field of graphic journalism. Stacy has been a supporter of Sarah Palin's since before her selection as John McCain's running mate in the 2008 presidential election. She originally read about Governor Palin's energy policies in 2007 and has followed and supported her ever since.

  • Susan

    Interesting deductions but I don't buy them. Heritage Foundation gives a more plausible look at the Massachuett's health care than any I have seen on blogs or in media clips. I would recomment going back and looking at the reviews of 2006 when Massachuetts was formulating the bill and the outcome. I appreciate the Heritage Foundation. The tide has turned because people have twisted the issues until they are non-recognizable any more. People are inclined to write to persuade. This article was just that and nothing more

    • Ron Devito

      I’ll leave it to Stacy to address some of your points, but in my unvarnished opinion, RomneyCare is ObamaCare Lite. Stacy is correct in saying that Romney has little basis to debate Obama on healthcare for the reasons she stated. Gov. Palin had been against ObamaCare out of the starting gate. That’s not a matter of Stacy’s opinion – it’s public record.

      I would also submit that of all the 2012 POTUS hopefuls, the Obama administration fears Gov. Palin the most. None of the others in the field of hopefuls is attacked with the ferocity and frequency she is – also a matter of public record.

    • http://mightyserf.blogspot.com/ Stacy Drake

      Heritage changed their tune.

      Here's a more recent report from them then the 2006 piece you cited.

      Published on September 17, 2010

      "In implementing the Massachusetts health care reform, officials have let down the small business community. While the plight of the small business community was a central concern of former Governor Mitt Romney (R), the state’s administrators, executive branch, and legislature have paid little attention to the pressing problems of small businesses. Worse, current Massachusetts officials have exacerbated the situation in how they have implemented the reform.

      Small businesses in Massachusetts, especially those with 10 or fewer employees, remain close to the national average of employer-offered coverage of 67 percent, compared to 98 percent for the rest of Massa­chusetts businesses.[1] The Massachusetts Employer Survey shows the gravity of the situation for small companies with 50 or fewer employees. For exam­ple, the median monthly premium for a family health plan for small firms (50 or fewer employees) has risen 46 percent since 2001.[2] After adjusting for variations in geography, demographics, and bene­fits, small employers pay higher premiums on aver­age than mid-sized and large-sized companies, and their premiums are rising more quickly.

      The strain on small businesses has been docu­mented in recent published accounts of small firms beginning to drop coverage.[3] While Common­wealth Care,[4] the state’s subsidized program, has seen annual premium rate hikes of around 5 per­cent, rates for small businesses have increased 15 percent per year over the past five years, according to a survey commissioned by the Retailers Associa­tion of Massachusetts.[5] State-collected data from 2007 and 2008 also show a small decrease in pre­mium contributions by small employers as costs continued to rise. [6] This trend could help to explain declining employee participation in employer-offered insurance at small companies.[7]

      Given that 90 percent of the roughly 185,000 businesses in Massachusetts are small companies, which historically create two-thirds of all new jobs in Massachusetts, state officials’ failure to consider the needs of small businesses is bad economic pol­icy, especially during a downturn.[8]

      An estimated 97.5 percent of Massachusetts res­idents are now covered by health insurance. For low-income persons, particularly those who previ­ously had no health insurance, the 2006 law has been a positive experience. Yet the state’s decision to offer virtually free insurance to these residents has come at the expense of helping small businesses, which could employ these same individuals if they had received rate relief in their health insurance. These implementation decisions have cost the state millions in additional subsidies that could have been averted if some of these individuals were cov­ered under an employer-sponsored plan. Other states should closely examine Massachusetts’s deci­sions during implementation to avoid making the same mistakes when designing and implementing their own reforms.

      How Implementation Undercut Original Intent

      Implementation of the Massachusetts health care reform has largely failed to address the needs of small businesses and their employees."

      …………………………………………………………………………………….

      You can read more here:
      http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2010/09/…

      There is no denying that the left will use Romney's role in creating mandated insurance against republicans, if he were to be nominated.. I believe that repeal of Obamacare would be in jeopardy if Mitt is selected.

      Just something to consider.

  • wendyreyees

    You may look at the premium amount and think that there is no way that you can afford it. You cannot afford to be without health insurance! shop around you may find it easy to find an affordable premium, I always find health insurance through wise health insurance network.

  • Pingback: Why Healthcare is Mitt Romney’s Jeremiah Wright – The Root « Healthcare Reform

  • Scott

    President Obama goes to bed and dreams he is facing Palin. If She gets the nomination America might as well hand Obama another 4 years. Every Candidate has something against them, however I want a President that is experienced enough to lead a country, irregardless of an issue that I might not agree with 100 percent. I cannot stand when people think the whole body of work of an individual can be summed up with one issue. This article slams Obama for focusing on healthcare instead of the economy his first two years, but then continues to make that the issue. People need jobs, they need to be able to provide for their family, we need to be out of debt, I want someone who can direct us out of the mess that were in. Sarah Palin is absolutely not that person.

    • http://us4palin.com Ron Devito

      Why is Sarah Palin absolutely not that person? Who is? Mitt Romney – with his ObamaCare Lite? Pawlenty who can't get 100 people to sit in a room with him and not fall asleep? Michele Bachmann – the conservative version of Obama – no executive experience? Who, Scott? Who? Have you studied Gov. Palin's accomplishments? I think you should read them, go see The Undefeated, then return here with your opinion.

Previous post:

Next post: