FISKING RIGHT WING NEWS' STUPID ATTACK ON MITT

HERE'S WHAT JOHN HAWKINS WROTE - ALONG WITH MY CORRECTIONS:

1 Mitt Romney is the bailout king of American politics: Just about the only thing that the Tea Partiers and Occupy Wall Street agree on is that they really hated the bailouts. Yet, Mitt Romney is the bailout king of American politics. You could fairly argue that he took a bailout when he was at Bain, he supported TARP, he's now comparing what he did at Bain to what Obama did at GM and Chrysler, and he has noted in a debate that he's open to future bailouts.

(A) WHY ARGUE WITH SUCCESS:  TARP WAS LARGELY PAID BACK WITH INTEREST, AND IT WORKED.


(B) I GUESS HAWKINS IS TOO DENSE TO UNDERSTAND HOW MITT WAS USING THE GM ARGUMENT, SO LET ME MAKE IT SIMPLE: MITT WAS COUNTERING THE ARGUMENT FROM OBAMA'S CAMP THAT MITT FIRED PEOPLE AFTER A BUYOUT. MITT POINTED OUT THAT OBAMA DID THE SAME THING VIS A VIS GM AND CHRYSLER - COMPLETELY NEUTRALIZING THAT LINE OF ATTACK.  MITT WAS NOT ENDORSING THE BAILOUTS.

2  He's not a flip-flopper, we swear: John Kerry's campaign in 2004 was hurt badly by the charge that he was a flip-flopper. Mitt Romney is also a flip-flopper -- a far worse one than Kerry ever was. 

MITT IS NOT A FLIP-FLOPPER. LET ME EXPLAIN TO THE DENSE HAWKINS WHAT A FLIP-FLOPPER IS: A FLIP -FLOPPER SOME ONE HOLDS ONE POSITION, THEN SWITCHES, AND THEN SWITCHES BACK.


ON ABORTION, MITT IS NOT A FLIP-FLOPPER, HIS POSITION HAS EVOLVED FROM PRO-CHOICE TO PRO-LIFE.  AN EVOLUTION I WENT THROUGH AND ONE WE WANT MORE AMERICANS TO GO THROUGH. SO WE SHOULDN'T RIDICULE PEOPLE WHO'VE SEEN THE LIGHT - AS THE DENSE HAWKINS DOES.

3 - Smearing capitalism to help Mitt Romney: 

HAWKINS THEN SMEARS BAIN WHILE CONTENDING HE  LIKES CAPITALISM. AS IN HAVING HIS CAKE AND EATING IT TOO. A LOGICAL FALLACY.


I SUSPECT HAWKINS IS IGNORANT BECAUSE LIKE NEWT AND PERRY AND SANTORUM HAS NEVER RUN A BUSINESS.


BOTTOM-LINE: NOTHING BAIN DID WAS BAD OR WRONG, AND WRITING LAWS TO CURB IT - WHICH HAWKINS SEEMS TO DESIRE - WOULD BE SOCIALISTIC.

4 - Read Mitt's lips: He wants a VAT: Like Barack Obama, Mitt Romney is open to the same sort of value added tax that has helped drive the tax rates of Western European nations into the stratosphere. 

He says he doesn’t “like the idea” of layering a VAT onto the current income tax system. 

But he adds that, philosophically speaking, a VAT might work as a replacement for some part of the tax code, “particularly at the corporate level,” as Paul Ryan proposed several years ago. What he doesn’t do is rule a VAT out.

IF RYAN CAN SUPPORT A CORPORATE VAT UNDER SOME CIRCUMSTANCES, THEN IT SHOULD NOT TO BE RULED OUT.


DOES HAWKINS THINK HIS CRED'S ARE BETTER THAN RYAN'S!?
I DON'T. BUT SINCE HAWKINS IS ATTACKING RYAN I CAN SEE WHY HE LIKES NEWT - WHO ALSO ATTACKED RYAN.

5 -  Why support Romneycare and oppose Obamacare? Obamacare is nothing but Romneycare on a larger scale. "Even Mitt’s consultants on Romneycare, like Jonathan Gruber, have admitted that Obamacare is just Romneycare writ large," 

So, if Mitt's the nominee, we go into the election with a nominee who fundamentally agrees with all the principles behind Obamacare and is opposing it (Ehr...we hope) for the sake of politics.

Since Mr. Romney mentioned a consumption tax, would he rule out a value-added tax?

The truth is that the Affordable Care Act is essentially based on what we accomplished in Massachusetts. It’s the same basic structure applied nationally.

DOE HAWKINS THINK THE PEOPLE OF MASSACHUSETTS DON'T HAVE THE RIGHT TO DO WHAT THEY DID WHEN THEIR ELECTED STATE REPS PASSED ROMNEYCARE?

THERE IS NOTHING IN THE US CONSTITUTION TO BAN IT, SO I WONDER WHAT HAWKINS IS APPEALING TO HERE. DOES HE THINK CONSERVATIVES IN SOUTH CAROLINA HAVE THE RIGHT TO VETO WHAT PEOPLE IN MASSACHUSETTS WANT TO DO IN THEIR OWN STATE?

THAT'S NOT CONSERVATIVE - NOT BY A FREAKIN LONG- SHOT.

AND PRITHEE TELL ME OH WISE BLOGGER HAWKINS: WHAT MAKES ROMNEYCARE A GOVERNMENT TAKEOVER OF HEALTHCARE!?

AND WAS IT AN UNREAD 2000 PAGE BILL?

NOPE.

ALL IT DOES IS BASICALLY TWO THINGS: 

1 - ORDER THOSE WHO CAN AFFORD TO BUY PRIVATE HEALTHCARE TO DO SO OR BE FINED 220 BUCKS.

2 - SET UP A STATE COMMISSION TO ACT AS A CLEARINGHOUSE FOR INDIVIDUALS TO BUY PRIVATE INSURANCE.

THAT IS NOT SOCIALISM.

HAWKINS SHOULD WAKE UP AND SEE THE LIGHT OR STFU.