I can't think of anyone who has done more damage to the Republican Party in the past year than that man. He perpetuated literally every negative stereotype of conservatives: bigoted, uninformed, hypocritical about government spending.

I think I might dispute Dan's position on Santorum, but it is now meaningless. What we will have is Romney, who appears to be a RINO. He may be "pro-business" which can be taken as a conservative position, but one spot on a tiger does not make it a leopard.

If the Supreme Court does not disembowl Obamacare, Romney will certainly not be in any postion to criticize it.

"If the Supreme Court does not disembowl Obamacare, Romney will certainly not be in any postion to criticize it."

Why not? It's perfectly logical for an executive at a state level to embrace a mandate that comes from in-state, while fighting the idea that it should be imposed from a federal level.

What I'd like to see is a dramatic rework of the federal tax code that would nullify the advantage that employer-based insurance coverage provides. I want states to be more differentiated from each other, with some running the way they are now, others with individual private coverage mandates, and yet more still that offer state-funded universal care. The reason that never happened was the ridiculous tax code.

Posted by mangeek
"It's perfectly logical for an executive at a state level to embrace a mandate that comes from in-state, while fighting the idea that it should be imposed from a federal level."

I don't think the public subscribes to that division of logic.

Would I like to see the states regain their status of "laboratories of Democracy", sure.

The Tax Code is an awful hodge podge with one game laid on top of another. It is supposed to be about revenue not social engineering. Now we are about to play a little more "soak the rich" and "save the middle class" with the Buffet scheme. If that fails, it can always be "for the children".