The Five Faces of Mitt (on Obamacare)

In her most famous role, Joanne Woodward starred in the 1957 movie classic, “The Three Faces of Eve” based on a true story of a woman with a multiple personality disorder. The role as Eve won Ms. Woodward the Academy Award for Best Actress. I gravitated toward this movie as I was thinking about the five different positions that Governor Romney, or Mitt since the movie uses Eve’s first name, has had on Obamacare, four of which he has held since early September. Let me set aside the first position before he began his recent campaign for President and come back to it later.

I use this as an example, as our friend Mitt has not been very consistent in his positions, Obamacare being one of them. This has made him very chameleon-like and the vision of the etch-a-sketch as his defining tool is an appropriate image. With respect to Obamacare, let’s go back in time to post-campaign launch through early September. Many campaign commercials have been aired which said very clearly – Day One: Repeal Obamacare. Position #2

Scroll forward to early September. Recognizing that Obamacare was gaining some traction and he was behind, Mitt decided to alter this stance. During an interview, he said there are parts of Obamacare that people like and he likes, so he would not repeal all of Obamacare. Position #3. He noted in particular leaving the elimination of the pre-existing condition exclusion which would prevent insurance companies from denying coverage. He also noted continuing the young adults on their parent plans, even if they were not in college.

He apparently was told by his staff that keeping those provisions would require him to keep the mandate for coverage, otherwise the process would break down. The good risks would avoid insurance and the worse risks would sign up which would put the insurance companies in a bad situation. So, Mitt reversed his Position #3 and went back to the repeal of Obamacare. Position #4.

This position lasted until the night of the first debate, so about four weeks. During the debate, he said he liked the model of Obamacare that he did in Massachusetts. It worked well. Yet, he would leave it to the states to decide to implement Obamacare or a variation on a state by state basis. Position #5. This is one reason the President may have been tentative, as he was trying to figure out which face of Eve was standing across from him.

Yet, let’s set all those multiple personalities aside and come back to the most important Position #1. As I have noted in earlier posts, as governor of Massachusetts, Mitt went to great pains to get an earlier version of Obamacare passed in his state. It is working very well according to many sources, including the current governor and Mitt. He traveled the state emphasizing the need for the mandate of being covered. He said this was an important part of the model and people needed to show personal responsibility. To his credit, he got it through.

The irony here is Obamacare and its earlier version in Mass. are largely a GOP idea. The President used it as a compromise to get people covered, which is the main goal with 46 million uninsured. Mitt’s version actually resonated with Senator Jim DeMint so much, DeMint advocated in a letter to then President Bush that we do this for the whole country. DeMint particularly liked the mandate as did some other GOP senators. These endorsements continued until 2009. Yet, the President, to his credit and after the failure of many before him, got the Affordable Care Act passed. It is not perfect, but it is paying dividends (please refer to for a summary). Cost increases have been tempered, people have received checks from insurance companies who made too much profit, 3 million more young adults are covered, preventive care treatment has gone up and the doughnut hole for senior drugs has gone away. Also the pre-existing condition exclusion and lifetime benefit limits are gone.

Yet, Mitt has decided to run against the Affordable Care Act, joining with the GOP to call it “job-killing Obamacare.” I would add that many who would benefit from Obamacare are in that 47% that Mitt does not care about. To state the obvious, Mitt is running against his greatest achievement as governor. Why? Because the opposing party passed his idea. They made it their own adding many of the above features, yet at its heart, it is the GOP idea which dates back to the late 1980’s.

These total five positions, in all. Yet, there are other policies on which he has altered his stance. I go back to that first debate where many say he won hands down. To me, words matter. Yes, he was the more assertive of the two, yet I found him to be very Machiavellian in what he said. In my mind, his words did not measure up to his assertiveness. Given the above example as one of several, my wife summed it up best. “I just don’t believe a word that man says.” Fact check on that.

I come back to the following. His and the GOP platform are built on a weak foundation. Earlier I said they are based on a foundation of big, hairy audacious lies. Reviewing the GOP stances, whether we are talking about global warming, tax policy, healthcare, gun laws, gay rights, helping our middle class (forget the impoverished as they don’t matter at all), I do not see a lot of well thought ideas. He can be as assertive as he wants, but it does not alter that fact. Our President is far from perfect, but  based on real, non-partisan data, he has done a better job as steward of our economy than he is given credit for. This former Republican, Independent voter will be voting for the President. Mitt will not be getting my vote except for an Oscar in the updated version of “Five Faces of Mitt.” He has been masterful in his many personalities. Even Joanne would be envious of his acting ability.

12 thoughts on “The Five Faces of Mitt (on Obamacare)

  1. Well done, BTG. On most any issue, Mittens will say or do anything that he believes his audience wants to hear. I truly think he believes in his heart and soul that he somehow deserves the White House, that he is pre-ordained to get there, and how that is accomplished is of little consequence. Moderate Mitt, as he appeared two weeks ago, is a counter to severely conservative Mitt of the primary season, as opposed to Tea Bagger Mitt in the early campaign. The man has no center when it comes to this election.

    Unfortunately I had to miss the debate tonight due to a prior engagement, but my wife tells me that Obama came out swinging, and called Mitt out on numerous lies. Thats what the Obama campaign has been missing, a leader who is willing to fight for what he believes in and fight for the truth. Perhaps tonight will signal a new charge to the election. lets hope so.

  2. Do you think this is orchestrated?
    …[Yet, Mitt has decided to run against the Affordable Care Act, joining with the GOP to call it “job-killing Obamacare.”]…

    Job Killing…. Economy Killing….. Terror Management Theory would advise you to use the word “killing” and any other words dealing with death to “remind” the listener subconsciously that they are going to die one day, therefor greatly exaggerating, subconsciously again, their hate and fear of…. “The Other”.
    I know if I was advising Team “Magic Underpants” I would use TMT on every occasion. And, I bet they do.

    Nice article btg5885
    Mrs. N.

    • Unfortunately, it is orchestrated and the people do not know what hit them. Karl Rove and his fellow spindoctors were able to turn John Kerry’s war career into a “Swift boat” when his opponent (who won) dodged the war. The same kind of people derailed John McCain in SC in 2000 with the lies about him fathering an illegitimate daughter. Sadly, she found about these lies years later and had to ask him if she was legitimate. Against, Obama think of “Failed Stimulus” and “Job-Killing Obamacare” as two seeds they have planted over and over in people’s minds. When in reality, both are not really true, it is too hard to unwind the story and get people to see the real data. I believe the median on conservate/ liberal has been purposefully moved to the right, so moderate right is the new median. I believe this is one reason when real news is portrayed, the conservative right calls foul. Yes, it is sadly orchestrated.

  3. Too bad you missed the last debate, much livelier than the first! I heard someone say that Romney “won” the first debate because Obama didn’t play. He most certainly was in it to win it this last go round.

    It is hard to fathom how a man can change his positions and deny his past positions with such aplomb when there is video evidence and actual legislation passed by him that gives lie to his statements. It makes me wonder how on earth any true conservative could confidently vote for him. I don’t get it. I still don’t understand why he was picked to run. I thought at first it was his moderate record to attract the independents, until he went full tea party and got all etch a sketchy.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.