What Happened on the Sunday Morning Talk Shows
By Mark Kilmer Posted in Elections — Comments (11) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »
Sunday, January 26, 2006
Interesting, anyway. On MTP, Representative Peter King charged that there has been no review of the sale of port operations to the government of the UAE, and he and Russert to into a discussion about the wisdom, vis-à-vis Hillary's comment, of selling our ports to the Arabs. Senator John Warner told them to cut it out, we were not selling our ports to foreign governments.
John McCain on TW declared that the Iraqi factions had "looked into the abyss" and opted for a sane solution. Fran Townsend on FNS said that the only way to conduct another review of the situation would be for DP World to request one. Warner on MTP read from such a request.
Mitt on FNS said that he became pro-life when he considered stem cells, and he basically called himself a secular Mormon. Biden on FNS said that the Administration had botched everything but had another chance to save their sorry behinds. (He says this with almost every appearance anywhere.)
Cal Levin on TW complained that the Bush Administration had not sought the permission of the 9-11 Commission, whose report Russert waved like the Bible on MTP, to sell approve of the sale of port operations to the government of the UAE.
Wolf Blitzer scratched his head repeatedly and attributed all head-scratching unnamed others.
(Read on the show-by-show review…)
WARNER AND KING ON MTP. Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman John Warner and House Homeland Security Committee Chairman Peter King were host Tim Russert's first guest's on NBC's Meet the Press. Russert asked King about the 45-day delay deal with DP World, and he called it a "good step." He said that it would provide the opportunity to conduct a "real investigation." King said that we should have had a "real investigation" to begin with, which is a tacit declaration that the review conducted by the exectuve agencies was not real.
Russert asks if the investigation were done and said that it was okay, would that be enough for him? He said he had to see the details, and he attacked DHS Secretary Michael Chertoff for claiming that a full investigation had been conducted.
Russert confronted King with his confrontational comments on the Laura Ingraham radio show last week stating that by allowing DP World to run the ports, we were basically allowing the terrorists into our "defense perimeter" to see how the ports operate. This would allow them, he had insisted on the radio, to infiltrate and to wreak havoc. King told Russert that for him to be confident that the DP World deal was not dangerous, he would have to be shown that no one involved in the government of the UAE or DP World has had any ties to the Taliban or to al Qaeda. Russert proposed U.S. government monitors in the company reporting back to us on a bi-monthly or bi-yearly basis. King suggested that courts could monitor it, because the government of the UAE could flip back-and-forth between friendship with Qaeda and the U.S.
Senator Warner said that he thinks "the President has taken the right step." He's reviewed it, and he said that there is a consensus in the US government that they would review it for 45-days. He said he was invited over to talk to the President of DP World, who gave him a doc, from which Warner read. It has DP World requesting a 45-day review before the deal goes forward. He said that the US part was only 10% of DP World's business. "We're in a global situation," he explained. He's talked to the Pentagon. We're docking military ships in the UAE, using their air fields, and we "can't treat this country as a second-class citizen." He said that we are "dependent" on countries like the UAE for their assistance in fighting the war against terror.
Russert countered with an AP piece suggesting that DP World would "manipulate manifests and other records to frustrate Homeland Security's already limited scrutiny of shipping containers and slip contraband past U.S. Customs inspectors." The UAE's banking system, after all, was involved in the transfer of money to the 9-11 hijackers. The attacks were planned in the UAE, the AP insists. One of the hijackers was born in the UAE. Etc. Russert then held aloft his prop: "The September 11 Commission Report!" (Holy writ to the lazy.)
Warner said that those facts were before the board when it reviewed it. It would be reviewed again. And we had to support our troops in fighting this war against terror, and the UAE was essential to the battle. He didn't know what the UAE would do if they had their feelings hurt, or whether or not anyone would step in to fill that role after we had dissed the UAE.
King accused Warner using "moral equivalency," of comparing "Tony Blair to the Emir of Dubai." He said that the investigating committee's reviewers did not speak to a single member of the 9-11 Commission about the UAE officials the 9-11 Commission claimed might have tipped off Bin Laden when Clinton tried to kill him. Are they still in the UAE government? He said that for convenience, the UAE has decided to side with us, where at one time they thought it best to side with the Taliban.
Russert played a clip of the President declaring that we must not discriminate against countries merely because they are Arab, and he reminded King that he had accused the President of doing the equivalent of "playing the race card." King did not back down. He said that the President was wrong and "inappropriate." He seems to resent being accused of objecting to the company because they're Arab.
Russert asked Warner if he thought there ware anti-Arab bigotry, and the Senator said this should be investigated in a way which dismisses charges of racism. He has Frist on board as helping to prove over the next 45-days that the Administration's initial review was correct. King said that if he gets the complete review and it is proven that there is no problem, he won't vote to block.
Russert stated that Hillary has said that there should be no foreign ownership of U.S. ports. King disagreed, stating that there should be no automatic, across-the-board ban on foreign ownership. Warner basically told them to stop it, to cut it out, that there would be no foreign ownership of ports, that they would remain owned by the United States.
"We're not selling our ports to the foreigners."
King countered that foreigners would have access to what goes on inside the ports.
Russert asserted that the Dems have tried repeatedly to increase funding for port security, yet the Republicans and Representative King have blocked it. "Do you now regret...?" King said a lot more has to be done, but a lot has been done.
Russert (full gotcha): "So the Democrats were right?"
King explained that you cannot just throw more money at a problem.
Warner exaplained that this is the "one good thing" which can come out of all this: we'll review our port security and the funding levels.
Russert showed a Time magazine cover -- BREAKING POINT! -- and asked Warner if Iraq were at the brink of a civil war. Warner said no one can answer that for certain. He did point out that it was a good sign that the political leaders, the religious leaders, and the tribal leaders have joined in condemning the terrorists and calling for calm.
ARNOLD ON MTP. Russert spoke next to California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger. At one point, as he and Arnold discussed the problems of the war, Russert asked him if he were concerned that he could be "swept up in an anti-Republican tide" this November. Arnold said no, that Californians were better off than they were four years ago.
Russert asked Arnold if he were going to run as a "Bush Republican." Arnold replied that he was going to run as an "Arnold Republican," which ticked off some in the "right wing."
JOHN MCCAIN ON TW. On ABC's This Week, host George Stephanopoulos first talked to John McCain about... well, what he thinks in regards to DP World and the ports. Said McCain: "I think our priorities this week have been misplaced." After all, we've got the mullahs in Iran, the attacks in Saudi Arabia, the mosque in Iraq... and we're worried about a company buying a company operating ports in a situation not unlike other situations, etc.
Since 9-11, he insisted, "Dubai has been a good ally." Yes, the "UAE has been with us." (Before that, they were buddies with the Taliban.) All that being said, McCain said that he would favor an outside board to review the situation.
Steph wanted to know how close we were to civil war in Iraq "right now." McCain called the situation "dangerous," but said that leaders of the various Iraqi factions had "looked into the abyss" and decided not to go there. Steph wanted to know if it be right for Americans to give their lives "to keep the Sunni and the Shi'a apart." Senator McCain said that we had to train Iraqi forces and to "get this government up."
FRANCES FRAGOS TOWNSEND ON FNS. Homeland Security Advisor Fran Townsend visited host Chris Wallace on FOX News Sunday and tried to reassure him on DP World running the ports. She explained that the more of the situation they explain to members of Congress, the more comfortable they will become with it.
Townsend said that the only way to reopen the completed review of the arrangement would be for DP Word themselves to request that it be reopened. She said that the review itself began last October and the deal was formally approved by the Treasury Department's Committee on Foreign Investments in the United States on January 23rd of this year. Wallace asked about Scott McClellan's assertion that the President learned about this sale only through the MSM. Townsend said nope, Andy Card had told him on February 16. The President had not been told of the situation before this, she argued, because it did not "rise up to that level." She contended that this was something which could be managed at the "expert level," thus avoiding politicization.
Fran is a lot better to look at on a Sunday morning than, say, Carl Levin.
CARL LEVIN ON THIS WEEK. To pull of such dourness and grumpitude with such a stunning lack of grace is really something. Or other.
Levin reminded host Steph that the government of the United Arab Emirates had been a close personal friend of Mullah Omar and the Afghan Taliban. He doesn't care how close an ally they have been since 9-11, as everyone else had been repulsed by the Taliban but the government of the UAE.
Burqas in port.
Levin told Steph that we should ask the (erstwhile) 9-11 Commission for permission to have those half dozen ports be run by the Taliban in the UAE.
He is not down with the Sadr-Murtha-Pelosi-Dean plan to get our troops out of Iraq now, but he said we have to damn well tell the Iraqis that if they don't get their own act together really quickly, we're out of there. (Words to that effect.) It's not an incredible thought, really: pressure the Iraqis to get their situation in order. But what if they are doing the best they can? Levin would have us insult them, spit, and leave.
JOE BIDEN ON FNS. Joe Biden got to show the world that he's the Dem foreign policy guru. Not, per se, why.
He expressed incredulity that the DP World sale could not have been more thoroughly reviewed: "We have had reviews for the last 40 years!" He explained that this was an issue because Republicans and Democrats "have no faith" in this Administration's ability to conduct foreign policy.
Host Wallace played a clip of NJ Governor John Corzine explaining that the government of the UAE was comprised of "dangerous men" spending "tainted blood money." Biden snapped that House Homeland Security Committee Chairman Peter King (R-New York) "has said the same thing." Underlying this whole issue, he said, was that the 9-11 Commission had given the Bush Administration failing grades on everything.
Wallace asked about "anti-Arab bigotry." Biden blamed the Administration for this, say that "they created the diplomatic problems" with their "tone deafness."
Biden said that the events of the last week have "diminished my optimism" for Iraq. He wonders if the militias are actually running Iraq, and if so, "who controls the militias?" The problem was created, he explained, when Bush went into Iraq with too few troops. Biden said, as he always does, that the Administration is inept but has one last chance to pull this off. He declared that the Iraqis need Interior and Defense ministries up and running in the next few months, and they need a constitution by December.
As for his Presidential run, Biden said that the only way for him to catch Hillary and Edwards would be for him to "say what's on my mind," be straightforward, and "let the public decide." Joe Biden on the Straight Talk Express! If we get McCain going with the Republicans and Biden with the Dems, this coming Presidential campaign could be on the Sunday Show junkie can relish.
MITT ON FNS. Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney was the next guest on FNS, and there was no clear reason for him to be there. Unless it was the hair. He said that he's good with conservative Democrats in Massachusetts. He told Wallace that he became pro-life when he was studying the stem cell issue for Massachusetts. This studying helped him to realize that society has to respect life from the beginning; for scientific reasons, not religious, he has concluded that life begins at conception: "My position has evolved."
Wallace told him that some evangelicals think Mormonism is a cult and asked him if he believed in the Book of Mormon. Mitt said that he wasn't going to talk about such things. Mormonism was his father's religion, his grandfather's religion, and he was proud of it. (This seems to indicate that he might be a "secular Mormon." It's kind of funny, if you think about it.)
HADLEY ON FTN. On CBS' Face the Nation, host Bob Schieffer first spoke to National Security Advisor Stephen Hadley, with the New York Times' Tom Friedman along to help him ask questions. Hadley said that Iraq was in "tension" and a "time of testing," with diminishing violence. What's important, he said, was the universal condemnation and calls for calm and unity. Schieffer can't recall "a time when things were worse." Hadley reminded him of the situations in Fallujah and Najaf. He pointed out that Zarqawi has tested the society for a while by trying to stir up sectarian violence.
Schieffer said that Hadley was saying they stared into the abyss, and he asked, incredulously, if Hadley were trying to suggest that this could bring the Sunnis and Shi'a together. He compared the situation in Iraq with that before World War I. Hadley explained that the hope was that this would bring them together and "make progress against the terrorist attacks."
Friedman asked about "Shi'ite Death Squads" out of the Ministry of the Interior. Hadley said that it was troubling, and that they had to better vet, to make sure that these people "don't have ties to the militias." Friedman pointed out that Iran had blamed the U.S. for the bombing in an attempt to stoke violence. Hadley pointed out the Iranians "theme" and contrasted it with that if the Iraqi leaders, who blamed the terrorists.
Schieffer asked if this would cause us to delay our planned drawdown. Hadley explained that this has increased enlistment in the Iraqi forces, which is key to them stepping up "so we can step down." He sees that this might "incentivize the Iraqis to do more."
Schieffer hissed that the Pentagon said that not one Iraqi battalion could fight on its own, down from one at Christmas. We're going backwards. We can turn anyone into a Marine in sixteen weeks, Schnieffer said citing Mark Shield, so why can't we train Iraqis? Hadley again explained that the number of battalions cited by Schieffer was not relevant. Instead, we look at troops that can work in concert, etc. And we're not going backwards, Hadley insisted.
Friedman cited a report that we needed a face saving measure with DP World, Hadley explained that the sale could go forward; however, he pointed out that they needed time to explain this to Congress. We can't have a "preemptory vote" blocking this before it the questions can be answered, he insisted.
Schieffer asked if the President would veto legislation blocking the sale, and Hadley responded that this is what the President had indicated.
GRAHAM AND CHUCKIE ON FTN. Schieffer and Friedman next spoke with Senators Lindsey Graham and Chuckie Schumer about the ports. Chuckie, with smoke coming out his ears, plans to introduce legislation forbidding the ports being operated by DP World. Schieffer was smiling when the segment began.
Schieffer explained that Hadley had said that the President has expressed that there are no outstanding security concerns. Tom Friedman agreed. Graham "respectfully" disagreed with Friedman, he said (implying that there might be no respect for the President?). Lindsey said we need "further investigation." He read aloud what terminal operators are required to do, and he said that they do have to handle security. If they are "infiltrated by a terrorist organization," he said, there will be trouble.
Schumer said that his legislation would not block the transaction. He said that a 45 day investigation is not enough. He needs time to look at it. "The way it works Constitutionally," he said, would be to give Congress an additional 30 days to disapprove of this.
Friedman asked Chuckie if this were about the A-rabs. Schumer blamed the "nexus with terrorism." He wants to study whether or not security at ports should be run by foreign countries. He said that no matter what happens with the UAE, if this draws attention to port security, this will be worth it. (In this, he agreed with John Warner.)
Graham attacked interrogation of enemy combatants, how long we hold them, and who runs security in ports. "People get afraid," he explained. He said that we should look at this. The UAE is an ally and should be rewarded, he explained, but we have to look at it.
Friedman asked Graham if this were another massive failure by the Administration, much like Katrina. Schumer tried to answer, but Friedman interrupted and redirected back to Graham. Graham called the Administration "tone deaf," and he will vote for a 45 day investigation if it comes to that.
Schieffer suggested "rethinking" the Department of Homeland Security, as they "fell dead" with Katrina. Schumer said it was a "question of competence." It raises questions, he said, about the little group that approved the deal. He wants to look into the Department of Homeland Security.
HADLEY ON LATE EDITION. Host Wolf Blitzer first interviewed National Security Advisor Stephen Hadley about the situation in Iraq. Hadley repeated that the Iraqis were blaming the terrorists for the bombing of the mosque, and that Zarqawi was trying to exacerbate tensions. Blitzer mentioned that Iyad Allawi had told him that Iraq was in a "Situation One Civil War," and that they could move to a Situation Two or Situation Three. Hadley said that he was pleased that the current Iraqi prime minister, Ibrahim al-Jaafari, had pointed out that there was no civil war.
Hadley pointed out that General Casey is concentrating on the Iraqi police and being sure that the leaders were competent and professional with no ties to the militia. Hadley said that the militias have to be disarmed and dissolved, which will take time, and replaced with security forces loyal to the central government.
Blitzer brought up the Level One forces, capable of operating without US assistance, and Hadley explained that "those are not the trendlines which matter." He said that the numbers which should be going up, and are, are the numbers of troops who can operate with US support and can hold territory. He explained that independence includes all aspects, such as their own air support, etc. The main thing, he said, was that the Iraqis were "getting into the fight" to fight the terrorists.
Blitzer asked Hadley if the President were ready to give the DW Port deal another 45 days to be vetted. Hadley explained that it has been reviewed and decided, but that they needed more time to educate the Congress about it. (He did not use the term "educate," which would have prompted fits on Capitol Hill.)
Blitzer quoted Senator Rick Santorum expressing fear that the UAE would go terrorist again. (Rick's in a tough reelection campaign, and this concern was also expressed by Representative King on TW this morning.) Hadley explained that we had reassurances and checks. The first line of defense, he explained, is overseas. The UAE had been a close ally on that front.
Hadley said he found out about the DP World sale when the President did and he conducted his own review, which, he said, satisfied his concerned. He said that it is important to treat our Arab allies as "the kind of good and stalwart allies" that they are.
Blitzer said that everyone was "scratching their heads right now," because the 9-11 Commission had determined that the UAE was linked to the Taliban. He said that everyone is asking how he could possibly say that there were no national security concerns. Hadley explained that Pakistan had their own problems, but they had changed since 9-11 and we need their support to prevail in the war against terror.
Blitzer asked Hadley if he were saying that if Pakistan wanted to operate ports in the United States, they could. Hadley said that Pakistan would be checked as the UAE was here.
HUTCHINSON AND FEINSTEIN ON LE. Blitzer next spoke to Senators Kay Bailey Hutchinson in Dallas and Diane Feinstein in San Francisco. Feinstein said she doesn't care that Chairman Warner had reached agreement for a 45 day delay. She does not want "our national security assets to be sold to foreign governments." She asked about foreign governments buying security at our nuclear power plant.
Blitzer again said that everyone was scratching their heads that Bush could think that there were no national security concerns. Hutchinson talked about her port security measure, and she said that more should be done "at the point of embarkation." Blitzer wanted a sold "yea or nay" on DP WOrld. Hutchinson said she'd like to no more about it. Feinstein wants to know if a full scale CIA investigation had first taken place. If the secretaries of Defense and Homeland Security were told. She bitterly complained about the "secret Treasury Department" decisions.
Feinstein said that when she was at the CSX-run port in Hong Kong, it was much more sophisticated than what we have. She said that there is a "slip between the cup and the lip," but I had long since finished my coffee.
Blitzer scratched his head and argued again against an unmade contention that there were no nation security interests at stake here
-----
Have at it!
If you watched any of the shows, what caught your eye?
« Question and answer time: the Wes Clark thing. — Comments (50) | The Sunday Morning Talk Shows - Lineup — Comments (5) »
What Happened on the Sunday Morning Talk Shows 11 Comments (0 topical, 11 editorial, 0 hidden) Post a comment »
QAEDA CLAIM: WE 'INFILTRATED' UAE GOV'T
By NILES LATHEM
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
February 25, 2006 -- WASHINGTON -- Al Qaeda warned the government of the United Arab Emirates more than three years ago that it "infiltrated" key government agencies, according to a disturbing document released by the U.S. military.
The warning was contained in a June 2002 message to UAE rulers, in which the terror network demanded the release of an unknown number of "mujahedeen detainees," who it said had been arrested during a government crackdown in the aftermath of the 9/11 attacks.
The explosive document is certain to become ammunition for critics of the controversial UAE port...
You know how many people I heard use this phrase in the last 24 hours? It's like someone called all the Iraqi and US leaders and told them this was to be used in every question about a possible civil war. On a side note the Iraqi security minister guy was on Wolf Blitzer's show and he said it would take at least another 2 months to form a government. This just isn't good. People in the US are starting to lose their patients. From my point of view the Iraqi army is starting to look great but the government is very very bad right now.
How is Mitt Romney a panderer?
And how is he more of a panderer than Giuliani, McCain, Allen, Clinton, Warner, Biden, Kerry, Edwards or Bayh? Because he appeared on a Sunday talk show?
Is it his fault that FNS didn't ask him any questions about the RGA meeting? After all, he is the head of the RGA, and I'm sure would have had a lot to say has Wallace asked him something about the RGA agenda. Russert did a good job with Arnold, who's in town for the RGA meeting.
Almost all the top Republican candidates have some trouble on abortion, but not all of them are fighting gay marriage and other social issues on a daily basis. So, please, explain that statement.
He's maneuvering away from who he is, and that is dangerous (John F. Kerry can tell you that). I wish Ehrlich was running, he sounds like the right stuff to me, or even Bill Owens (does his private life hurt him? maybe not).
Our candidate will win handily though, because we'll be running against Hillary or Gore, and that will make for some seriously funny TV commercials!!
How you feel if he gets the nomination. You prefer Clinton or Warner? I'll tell you this: I wish Bush was half as articulate and quick on his feet right now as Romney is. Not that I'm necessarily a Romney supporter, but I think the whole primary process will help us flesh out how "secular" or "conservative" he is.
Romney's social conservatism has been consistent and vocal throughout his governorship (marriage, family issues, morning after pill veto, etc.). During his political campaigns in an ultra-liberal state, he didn't emphasize his pro-life views. He said, as a compromise, that he wouldn't force the overturning of MA's abortion related laws. So what? He's been one of the most outspoken social conservatives while in office and blocked any attempts to strengthen or expand abortion.
Everyone's thinking, including politicians, does and should change over time. You want them to be smarter, more exact in their thinking and why they believe what they believe, etc. What indicates Romney's view on abortion is "opportunism" or he's doing a 360? One comment 10 years ago in a Kennedy debate? What in his background makes you think he is not authentically conservative? You think that once he's in office in 2008, he'd shephard in or start advocating for abortion?
I've never seen anyone fight harder for traditional marriage and traditional family values than Romeny. Everything he has done in office points to conservatism, not liberalism. He is one of the best spokesman for sensible conservatism in major politics today.
On an unrelated note, Many, if not most, conservatives were not lifelong conservatives. Some of the most famous conservatives were former radical lefty liberals - Michael Medved, Larry Kudlow, David Horowitz et al.
Most people think Romney is pro-choice, and that he's remaking himself into a pro-life conservative to get elected in 2008. The truth is, he's pro-life, and he "modified" his opinion to get elected in 2002.
If crafting your stances to fit your audience disqualifies you from being President, we may go leaderless for the next century.
"Everything he has done in office points to conservatism, not liberalism."
I guess you have not paid attention to his healthcare plan that would create a system similar to Hillary Care from the early 90's. I live in Massachusetts (unfortunately) and I and the few conservatives in the state are wholly disappointed in his lack of leadership. During Romney's term, he has done absolutely nothing to lead the debate and use his position to force an issue into the public debate and win the argument and thus legislation. He's given lip service to lowering the state tax rate from 5.3% to 5% as was promised in the early 1990's, he has never pushed the issue. He's given lip service on the gay "marriage" issue in Massachusetts. Has he suggested the impeachment of the 4 judges who usurped the people of the state and the legislature and created a law that did not exist? Is he helping the group collecting signatures for the repeal of gay "marriage"? The corrupt and grossly blotted bureaucracy of the Mass Turnpike Authority (who is responsible for the Big Dig, a $16 billion dollar road from the initial estimate of $3 billion) has been status quo. He has done nothing to fire the incompetent chairman of the authority other than a few PR moments. Just last week the chairman received a COLA and now makes over $230,000 per year to run a road! He was sitting on his arse when the defense attorney's in the legislature tried to gut the drunk driving bill, talk radio and even the Boston Globe did more to publicize the issue and get the tougher bill passed. I could go on for quite some time on how empty his term as governor has been.
Mitt Romney is a like a bubble floating in the air, shinny and perfectly shaped by without substance.
Mitt Romney is a panderer. If you want another George H.W. Bush, they Romney is certainly your person. He will not lead the fight but will capitulate and support watered down liberal policies. Romney's intelligence, academic success and business background is impressive but he is a weak political person. Romney is the exact opposite of Reagan and the current Bush in that he wants to be liked. He cares what the MSM liberal think of him and wants the good PR like a business CEO. Romney is the Republican version of John Kerry, very PR conscious and will flip flop with the wind. Whether you like their views or not, you cannot question the leadership abilities of both Giuliani and McCain. Giuliani could careless what the liberal and the NY times said about him when he cleaned up the streets of NYC in the early 90's. All the criticism of tough police, "heartless" policies on the homeless, welfare reform, etc were brushed off because he knew he was right and led the way to reform. McCain, as we all know, has never been swayed by the pressure of the WH or other members of his party.
Above all, Romney is not a strong campaigner. His 2002 democratic opponent was pathetic. For a very Democratic state, Massachusetts has, for 12 years, put up completely incompetent nominees. Romney was handled easily in 1994 by a stuttering, incoherent Ted Kennedy. For someone from his state who should be inclined to support his candidacy, I would only support him in (god forbid) the general election. Romney would be a disaster. Like Bush 41 and Dole he would be an uninspiring nominee who would not get people to the polls.
I guess you have not paid attention to his healthcare plan that would create a system similar to Hillary Care from the early 90's.
His plan features people buying health insurance from the private sector, and results in less overall state spending. It's nothing like Hllary Care, and is an example of the leadership you say he lacks. He's trying an innovative solution to a seemingly insurmountable problem. That's exactly why he should be running for President.
Nice try.
. . . of "Hillary (Clinton)" as IMO there seems to be a pathological obsession with her amongst some on the Right that many on the Left seem to have for Karl Rove, Halliburton, etc.
That being said, I agree that Governor Romeny seems both smart and able which alone makes him a serious contender IMO. I would like to learn more about his health care plan for Massachusetts and ideas for what sort of reforms can be enacted at a national level as (a) health care reform (including Medicare and Medicaid) is perhaps the most important domestic policy issue and (b) one where Democrats appear to have an advantage, a problem made worse since the POTUS and Congress rogered us with Medicare Part D.

No matter how much Hugh Hewitt, and Katherine Jean Lopez at the corner hype up the opportunist governor of massachusetts, I will not vote for him. Romney's to be Greek for panderer!