Mark Levin’s rebuttal of Ann Coulter’s “Three Cheers for RomneyCare” article

Ann Coulter wrote an article today called “Three Cheers for RomneyCare” where she defended Mitt Romney and RomneyCare. Mark Levin decided to read her article, fresh off the presses, on the air and go through it line by line, “reeducating” her on why RomneyCare is not only wrong, but a big problem for Mitt Romney and all of Massachusetts.

This is the rebuttal in its entirety. It runs 30 minutes:


If you are on a mobile device or would like to download the MP3 directly, you can get it here.

Comment Policy: Please read our new comment policy before making a comment. In short, please be respectful of others and do not engage in personal attacks. Otherwise we will revoke your comment privileges.
  • Anonymous

    Ann needs educating. Levin is the MAN to do it…as opposed to MANdate. Think on that Ms. Ann!! You are an”individual”with an individual brain…aren’t you??

    • Anonymous

      Kudos for the nice twist in MANdate. You are absolutely correct.

      Love is blind and she falls in love too often! This is starting to look ridiculous!

    • Anonymous

      Ann will not learn anything, she gives credence to the stereo-type of blondes and intelligence.

  • Anonymous

    The Great One has spoken! Sit down Ann!

    • Mark missed her point, and he broke her column up so that his listeners could not discern her argument either. Read her column yourself, and you will see she is simply making the case that Romney is not more liberal than Gingrich.

      • Anonymous

        I discerned her argument just fine. Levin discerned it even better.

    • Anonymous

      And Levin did all that on one reading, basically off the top of his head. He is a national treasure.

      But no one is post of the patter. Ann
      endorsed Hillary over McCain
      never endorsed McCain over Obama
      endorsed the liberal Christy over everyone
      endorsed Romney over everyone
      and now endorsed socialized medecine.

      She’s gone totally RINO, and is not in the vanguard of the conservative movement any more.

  • The biggest difference between Romneycare and Obamacare is Obamacare is specifically designed to put insurance companies out of business so Democrats can have the excuse to go with a single payer government plan. Mark Levin has said it and so has Rush limbaugh.

    Obamacare tells the insurance companies that only 20% of their premiums can be used for overhead and that is why so many companies are opting out because if they have to comply with it they will go out of business.

    • Anonymous

      There is no difference Romney-bot. Romney is going down.

      • Anonymous

        Really? Sure doesn’t look like it based on what I saw Tuesday night.


        • Anonymous

          I don’t speak Japanese.

          Suck it up, because watch Romney slowly but surely succumb to his record, and the lack of Conservative support/attacks. Ask John McCain and Bob Dole. You are informed enough to remember who they are, right?

      • Really, since all the Anyone-But-Romney group states that they will stay home if Romney is nominated, why not us Romney-bots stay home if your candidate is elected. Your misguided anger is immature. Romney was Governor of a state that had a 85% Democrat Congress. What do you think he was supposed to do. He is catching the blame for every dumb liberal idea that the liberal majority of people in Mass. tried to or had passed into law even before Romney became Governor. I never realized that conservatives could be so immature to just give four more years to the worst president America ever had. You’re not going to hurt Romney, he will still have his 200 million, his excellent family, his faith, you are not going to hurt the “GOP” establishment” whoever they are only going to hurt yourselves for many years to come.

        Romney’s biggest problem is that he is not a politician. He doesn’t walk around think about abortion and family values all the conservative talking point. He just lives them. Romney can fix the economy. I don’t need him for anything else thank you.
        Why is our government full of liars and crooks? Because that’s what the people of America want. They want people to lie to them, promise things, yes even conservative talking points that will never happen. Sales tax, never going to happen, why, because you have to pass a constitutional amendment repealing the 16th amendment, has to go to congress and then be voted on and passed by 2/3 of the states. “For those in Rio Land”. You don’t want both on the books because we will
        end up with both taxes.

        Romney understands this, many of you do not. Conservatives, you had your chance to save America and you blew it. Tell that to your kids and grandkids.

        • Anonymous

          Please Susan, you need to take away your tilt and look at facts.

          Lets address your misguided points:

          1. Romney was Gov. of a liberal leaning state. And? So were other Governors such as Scott Walker, but Walker stands on principals and leads. Issues came up and Romney sought to capitulate and not fight. Let us remember he didn’t run for a 2nd term because he wouldn’t have won. How could these be if he ran as a “progressive” and to the Left when he ran against Kennedy during his Senate run?

          2. Conservatives are not attempting to “hurt Romney” personally or politically but we will not accept another milk toast Republican after McLame. Do you realize that in Presidential elections, candidates that do not offer contrast in their own perspective policies to the incumbent lose every time. Don’t take my word for it.

          Why should I vote for Romney, tell me? “He’s electable MJS”, “He’s the most electable MJS”, etc. Those are not feasible or logical arguments. Susan, please for me defend RomneyCare. Please tell me what his message is. Running on “I’m not Obama” is not sufficient this around.

          3. Romney has deliberately ignored Conservatives, and many of his surrogates are out there (Coulter, Christie, etc) defending RomneyCare and his “Conservatism”. Anyone who has 1/2 a brain knows this is insane. Why doesn’t he run on his record in MA: raising fees, gun restrictions, cap and trade, etc?

          4. Romney’s not a politician? So how about this? Romney is a MA insider with DC insider support, does that sum it up? Why do all the moderate/liberal/John Boehner Republicans support him? Weird, isn’t it?

          5. Romney can fix the economy? Why does he support “the middle class” rather than ALL Americans? Why does he support automatic minimum wage increases? Why does he continue to defend RomneyCare that is bankrupting his state of MA? That’s not fixing the economy.

          6. If Romney doesn’t support a fair or flat tax he supports no meaningful changes. Anything else is tinkering around the edges. Any major economist, Forbes, etc. knows the tax system needs an overhaul. Yes an a Constitutional Amendment is feasible and does not start with Obama, it starts with Congress.

          7. Conservatives had our chance? When was that? We haven’t had a Conservative President since Reagan because we have screwed by the Established in DC and “sucked it up”. We’re not doing that anymore.

          We either receive a Conservative nominee, or we do not give our votes for someone like Romney. Romney’s biggest problem is that he is not Conservative, and stands for big government corporatism. Replacing Obama with someone is is slightly less horrid than Obama is unacceptable, and frankly will destroy the GOP and result in a third Party for 2016.

          What does the GOP stand for today-can you tell me? So how would electing someone who still stand for nothing help our our situation? Because he has a (R) besides his name?

        • K-Bob

          Translation: Vote for Romney, because you’re immature and not very smart, but Romney understands because he’s smart.

          Somehow I’m not getting the message you care about our kids and grandkids, here.

  • PFFV

    Who was it the other day that called Ann “Coultergiest”?…lol! Ann has lost her marbles and lost all credibility with true Conservatives. She reminds me a lot of the Obots with her spoiled bratty refusal to see that she is supporting a liberal in republican’s clothing. Ann shut up and go eat a double cheese-burger meal, your anorexia has affected your thought process.

    • Anonymous

      She has gone the way of Peggy Noonan and Kathleen Parker. Why they lose common sense is beyond me. Ann’s about face was fairly abrupt. When she decided to partner with GOProud (special interest group) she opted to forget the way of Conservatism and the GOP – we are ALL ONE PEOPLE… not hyphenated, special interest anything. Then and after that – she swayed further and further left. Sad.

      • So GOProud is some insidious special interest group and the entire religious right wing of the GOP is what exactly?

        • shawn S

          Umm the general population?

          • Anonymous

            LOL!!! You uber-conservative loons really do believe that, don’t you? What a hoot!

            The fact is that only about 15% of the general population agrees with your hard-core right-wing agenda. Maybe one day you people will wake up and realize that you can’t win elections by appealing to just 15% of the population.

            • Anonymous

              Like the left believes they can appealing to the small populations of hard lefties and racist blacks that vote for Bam at a 95% level because he is black? Yeah, that.

        • Anonymous

          GOProud is a “republican” homosexual group. The “religious right wing of the repub party” is a myth.

      • Anonymous

        She has gone the way of Peggy Noonan and Kathleen Parker. Why they lose common sense is beyond me.


        A progressive psychological disorder caused by spending too much time in DC socializing with “bigshots” leads to the delusion that you and they really are smarter than those outside the bubble.

        The only cure is removing oneself from the bubble for an extended period of time.

    • Anonymous

      After so many years of following Coulter I am flabbergasted that she would self-immolate in such a manner.

      Gotta wonder who is going to buy her books now? Do RINO’s even read politics?

      • Anonymous

        Maybe she finally woke up and got tired of rubbing elbows with the ignorant, intolerant, absolutist pitchfork-wavers on the extreme right wing.

        • AdamSmithWasRight

          You display and incredible dexterity for namecalling and ad hominem attacks. Sad and unfortunately typical of liberals. And yes, when conservatives do this as well I can’t stand it and call them out. Try providing some kind of retort that a 5th grader could not have come up with.

      • Anonymous

        After so many years of following Coulter I am flabbergasted that she would self-immolate in such a manner.

        I’m not.

        Coulter has long been a scamster trolling the right wing for major bucks.

        Her long term ‘friendship’ with Bill Maher should have tipped everyone off.

      • Anonymous

        Maybe she’s done writing books.

    • Ann Coulter has an agenda to infiltrate and change the GOP from with in, disguising herself as a consevative. She is partnering with a gay group to try and change the GOP into a gay friendly party and her friend Christie is a great example of this, just look at his recent appointment of an openly gay advocate judge in New Jersey a few weeks back.

    • “she is supporting a liberal in republican’s clothing”.

      You must be referring to that cry baby, sore loser, Newt Gingrich.
      Read the below link to see how he defended Obamacare. Yes the
      phony conservative really is a Liberal.

  • Anonymous

    I am truly weirded out by what Ann has become. I read her book Demonic last summer, and I finished reading knowing a whole lot more about Democrats than I ever did. It was a good tool to fight with my many liberal friends. She put herself out there, and I think history will judge her very unkindly because of it!

  • Anonymous


    • Joseph ewing

      While you are correct on a Federal Level, as Ms. Coulter states in her column (reading comprehension…not just for English Teachers anymore!), States are not bound by it.

      The Constitution was written – brilliantly – to restrict what the Federal Government can do.

      Hate Romneycare if you like – in fact, I do. But it easily passes Constitutional muster as a State program. States Rights allows us to vote with our feet and leave States that do stuff we don’t like.

      • Anonymous

        If only it were that easy. Leave states that do stuff we don’t like. We are in our house for quite some time now and my husband’s job is here and, well, I could go on, but you see, it’s not that easy to just leave your state.

      • Anonymous

        “The Individual Mandate and Slavery.”

        Prior to the Civil War, the issue of slavery was argued in a frighteningly similar way that the individual mandate is being defended today. Slavery was argued as being acceptable for any state that chose it, and pro-slavery advocates pointed to the Constitution to endorse that “moral” right of statehood. Others disagreed.

        As history has shown, slavery was an immoral practice of desecrating and controlling human beings for economic gain, and the practice was rectified… massively and tragically… by the War Between The States. The “morally correct” anti-slavery faction, the North, prevailed, as it were… and the Constitution was clarified to outlaw slavery.

        Likewise, the individual mandate is defended today as a “moral” right among states by some, with the Constitution being looked to for justification. Others disagree, particularly on moral grounds. Because, like, slavery, the individual mandate controls human beings for a greater economic purpose… in this case, to supposedly provide affordable universal health care to all citizens. On a federal level it is Obamacare, and on a state level it is Romneycare.

        Like slavery, the individual mandate has all-controlling implications over human beings… allowing a state or federal government to completely control their health care, including one’s medical records, patient-doctor relations, prescriptions, and, ultimately the exact procedures citizens receive under a doctor’s care, having a direct impact on life or death. If this is not the closest thing to federal-run, or state-run, slavery… the complete physical control over a population… I’m not sure what is.

        Most importantly, the individual mandate, which is being inaugurated in a health care context, opens the door to mandating any other product a government might want to force on its citizens. This opens the door to tyranny. I’m hopeful that people, such as those calling themselves “conservatives” these days, will take a long hard Constitutional AND moral look at this issue. The individual mandate is the most intrusive, abusive government tool ever devised to take away our basic rights.

        • Anonymous

          “Prior to the Civil War, the issue of slavery was argued in a frighteningly similar way ”

          And for exactly the same reason. The American Revolution is the permanent struggle. The rights of the individual vs the power-hungry statist.

  • Wow. Apparently Levin can’t even talk to the people HE considers friends without being a condescending ass. (And no, I don’t agree with Ann’s conclusion. I think her column was a good, defensible effort to defend Romney’s *intentions*, but she should have gone out of her way to distinguish those from RomneyCare’s *results.*)

    • Well, Ann Coulter comes across as the condescending ass lately…Levin is just fighting fire with fire here. 🙂

    • Anonymous

      Oh my! Isn’t that “intentions” excuse one Democrats have used like since forever as an excuse for their failed policies? I’m quite sure I’ve heard Coulter say that more than once about Democrats.

    • Anonymous

      One’s not a condescending ass when you’re RIGHT!

      • Anonymous

        Then, you’re just condescending! And the other person is an ass!

    • Mark Levin is The Great One because his only “friend” is America. He couldn’t care less about these petty acquaintances.

  • Anonymous

    I love Coulter, I really do. But I’ve been trying to figure her out lately. I’m stumped! That leaves me with only one question:

    Is she being paid by someone?

    • Well, Romney is a rich bastard afterall 😉

    • I was wondering that myself.

    • poljunkie

      Either that or she has an addiction problem.

      • Anonymous


      • Bigfoot Steve

        Apparently she’s addicted to big government, NE RINOs, lol.

    • PFFV

      I doubt it, she had a thrill running up her leg over Chris ‘Krispy Cream’ Chrisie too. I believe she has caught the Bill O. disease and thinks being a moderate will gain her more success and fortune.

      • Anonymous

        PFFV, you may be ON to something…O’Reilly IS a pompous ass! Can’t stand him anymore…

      • Anonymous

        You should check out the YouTubes of her endorsing Hillary.

    • wassup402

      George Soros comes immediately to mind.

    • She is a person without principle, she has always been that way, she dated Bill Maher, so what does that tell you?

    • Yes she is and a woman who takes money for her “services” has a name and it is not a nice one.

  • Anonymous

    I’m so done with Ann Coulter. I don’t what her problem is anymore. Maybe, she’s let her success go to her arrogant little head. Nice rebuttal Mr Levin. Lets see if Annie the shill comes back with a redirect.

    • Anonymous

      I look forward to hearing her ‘show’ tomorrow!

  • You have got to be kidding me. First Coulter is all over Chris Christie’s nuts saying that if the republicans don’t nominate him than Romney will win the nomination and he will lose. Now she is all over Romney and she is trying to defend his liberal policies? I guess liberals are right about Coulter. She is either stupid, or she is only a “Republican” and not a conservative.

    • Please, listen to me.. Ann Coulter is neither a republican or a conservative. She’s a neo-con, neo-cons are NOT conservative, they are Trotskyites, they’re Marxists who decided to infiltrate the republican party and destroy it from within and create their own power base. Neo-cons want the US looted, and global government imposed. Coulter might have appeared to have some conservative bonafides back in the day, but she was faking them. David Brock was a neo-con, they despise conservatives and the republican party in their hearts. Eisenhower saw the threat of neo-conservatives, they are anti-American, and only out for themselves.

      • Mary Rose Lalli

        I don’t know what is going with Ann Coulter but you have no idea about the true definition of a neo-con. The term is tossed around with all sorts of definitions but originially it refered to people such as Jeanne Kirkpatrick and Michael Novak. They were people who thought the best way to help the poor and mistreated was to use government handouts, etc. But as communism grew and they began to understand the true menace, they realized the small government and capitilism that conservatives preached was the only thing that would really help the poot.

        • Anonymous

          I don’t know what is going with Ann Coulter but you have no idea about the true definition of a neo-con.


          The neo-cons were (are really) big government progressives that were repulsed by the new-lefts anti-American pacifism. And moved en-masse to the republican party in the late 70s -mid 80s.

          They are not conservative in any way. The are war-mongering Democrats that think America’s highest calling is policing the World and nation building – including here.

          • jeremiah black

            That’s 100% correct- except they mostly moved earlier- in the 60’s and early 70’s, not the late 70’s and early 80’s.

      • Anonymous

        Ok listen to me carefully. This is important. File this under “break glass in case of emergency”. If your head starts rotating more than 270 degrees, start worrying. If a pea green substance starts projectile-exiting your tonsil tavern/cake cavern, continue worrying. When your bed starts hopping up and down, call an exorcist. Aaahhahahaha.

        P.S. Have someone hide the scissors right now. Is Mary a pseudonym for Linda?

        I’m just messin’ with ya’ though. This is just kind of way out there in the nether regions of the extragalactic whatchamacallit Mary. Care to elaborate?

        : – D

        • Anonymous

          When your bed starts hopping up and down,

          Guffaw! Man that was good…. You crack me up.. or make my head spin… don’t know which is better.

          I was about to answer her Pat Buchannan Neo-Cons are Trotskyites nonsense, but thought I would turn on Cary Grant and Myrna Loy’s “Mr. Blanding Builds his Dream House”… just to comfort me yet again on what America used to be like.

      • Be careful with the term NEO-CON as it is actually anti semetic code for Jew, it all right to dislike Ann but do not make yourself into a racist to do it.

        • jeremiah black

          Don’t argue like a liberal- thinking everything is a “secret code word” for racism. Oooooo- secret racism! Awesome- now I don’t have to actually make a logical argument! Note: When you find yourself arguing like a liberal- you probably need to back up a few steps and rethink.

          Neocon, or neo-conservative, is a real political category, actually. They were big government, pro-war progressives who, in the 60’s and early 70’s, migrated to the Republican party from the Democrat party, because the Democrats had become too anti-war. The final break was the nomination of McGovern in 1972, which told the big government, Wilson/Roosevelt styled, pro-war progressives that the Democrat party wasn’t their home anymore, and they all decided to move to the GOP instead and take their aggressive foreign policy designs there. It bears remembering that the “let’s make the world safe for democracy” war cry was the slogan of liberal democrats of the first half of the 20th century- the Republicans were fairly anti-war, actually, and thought America was better served by staying out of international conflicts unless we were attacked.

          We conservatives today are told that an aggressive, expensive, global American military presence is conservative, but, historically, it’s not at all. It’s a neo-conservative position that’s only a few decades old and was originally a democratic platform that was brought to the GOP in the late 60’s/early 70’s. The GOP is still divided over this, actually. Reagan, more of a traditional conservative, was actually heavily criticized by neo-conservatives who wanted him to be far more aggressive in waging war, as Reagan was actually quite reluctant to use troops and get too deeply involved in foreign conflicts. Bush Sr., his VP, was far more of a neo-conservative and had no qualms about domestic big government programs (such as expanding the EPA) and pushed for heavy involvement in foreign wars. Bush Jr was the same. And now in 2012, people aren’t sure what’s “conservative” anymore…

          Jewish neoconservatives such as those at Commentary magazine who want a dominating military presence in the Mideast because of the benefits it brings (theoretically) to Israel, love to call any conservative who questions this a racist- kind of like democrats do to anyone who opposes food stamps. Racist, racist, racist! But that’s garbage. It’s perfectly ok for a good conservative to question welfare spending and subsidies at home and abroad, as well as question any other government program, foreign or domestic.

          • K-Bob

            Careful, that’s the usual description played by the anti-semites. The little trick is they ignore the entire Cold War, as if it never happened.

            Somehow we went from post-WWII directly to some mythical state where we somehow eliminated bases all over the world, gave up hegimony earned by being victorious, and never had an arms race with the Soviets (and a war waged almost entirely by proxy to restrain the USSR from further world conquest).

            Yes, it is a “real category,” used by very few people. Especially today. Yet somehow it’s trotted out to tar anyone supporting any form of national defense actions in the Middle East.

            • jeremiah black

              Oh my goodness! Are you so brainwashed so as to call everyone an anti-Semite? The fact is, what I wrote is 100% historical fact- you can happily look up the history of Commentary magazine, The Weekly Standard, neo-conservatism, or biographies of Irving Kristol or Norman Podhoretz, if you actually like to learn history instead of name call like a lib.

              I remember quite well the cold war. And I also remember neoconservatives such as Norman Podhoretz constantly criticizing Reagan for not pushing harder to make it a hot war with actual battles when Regan instead wanted to talk to the Soviets and build up defense instead of attacking first.

              And yes, the US gained a global hegemony of sorts after WW2. The question was: should this hegemony be permanent state of affairs and expanded upon? Or should the US reject seeking global hegemony and return closer to its founding roots of primarily promoting liberty at home instead of seeing its chief purpose as being the policeman of the world?

              And neo-conservative is only used by few people because (a) people are ignorant of history and (b) neo-conservatives like pretending that this new movement is “real” conservatism even though it flies in the face of Robert Taft and Russell Kirk and the original founders of post war conservatism.

              Don’t throw around the “antisemitic” charge so lightly. Our current policy in the Mideast is not beyond debate or questioning- especially given (a) its tremendous cost in the face of our current bankruptcy and (b) the fact that a nation at war is a nation that holds the constitutional freedoms of individuals as a lesser priority when weighed against the corporate war effort. In every war in our history, from the Civil war, to WW1, to WW2, to the wars today, the constitution has been suspended for the sake of the war effort. And some temporary wartime measures, like the federal income tax, remain permanent even after the war is over. This is the strongest argument for defining a clear war aim and getting it over as soon as possible. Every conservative should think hard about this instead of just shouting “racist” like a brain-dead lib and thinking an actual argument has been made. Our founders shouted “give me liberty or give me death!”. Let’s not hide behind the cry of “take away my liberties as long as you might perhaps keep me alive!”.

              It’s also worth noting that the charge of “anti-Semite!” was also used against people in the 30’s and 40’s who were anti-communist. Like neo-conservatism, many Jews were prominent in the American Communist movement, and used the accusations of “anti-Semite” against anyone who spoke out against the Communist party or its aims. Neo-conservatives, many who were ex-communists themselves, also employed this tactic. Don’t get suckered in. We conservatives need top make clear arguments if we’re ever going to get this country back on constitutional track.

              • K-Bob

                I always wonder about folks who jump into a website, having spent so little time there, suddenly knowing so much about what people who comment there regularly are thinking.

                I’m up on my history, thanks, and anti-semitism is not a light subject with me. All of this Ron Paul stuff is just another re-run of the same old arguments.

                We’ve already had plenty of these weak-sauce, head-in-the-sand Foreign Policy talking points posted here before, and everyone here knows you can find it at the Ron Paul sites if they are curious. If you want to re-write history, find a group of people who aren’t already serious history fans to argue with.

                • jeremiah black

                  This is pretty poor. You didn’t bring of a SINGLE point to say why I was wrong, nor cite any history points or bring any counter arguments to bear. You just merely asserted it as if it was already proven. Given this, your use of the term “head in the sand’ is fairly ironic. Make an argument or concede points. Remember: when you start arguing like a liberal, chances are your position is incorrect.

                  It’s completely logically irrelevant as to WHY I’m here on this website, but if you must know, it’s because Ann Coulter has gone delusional nutso with all this defending Romneycare, and I came to hear Levin take it apart. Levin is not a man I agree with many times, but he did a great job cutting down her nonsense, so I came to enjoy it.

                • K-Bob

                  Why yes, I did make a single point about why you are wrong: your assumptions about what people believe, especially having never interacted with them before, are repugnant and boring. Whipping up a batch of Ron Paul talking points as though we’ve never seen them before is no call for rebuttal. So don’t expect one. It’s all been done before. Here, all around the conservative web, by me, by lots of people. If you want to see the rebuttals, feel free to search for them.

                  I didn’t ask you “why” you were here, nor do I care.

                • jeremiah black

                  Typical. NO arguments. Just attacks.

                • K-Bob

                  Attacks? You don’t have to like a factual description of your comments, but it’s not an attack.

    • Anonymous

      Don’t worry there Jim… Mary’s just drivin’ by. She’ll be back out in the traffic soon nuf.

    • Anonymous

      No-no. FIRST, it was Coulter endorsing Hillary. THEN it was Coulter endorsing Christie.

  • Anonymous


  • Anonymous

    I find it amazing that anyone will support ObamneyCare/individual mandate/Affordable Carrot Act at all, whether Ann Coulter or Pam Bondi (THAT REALLY wow-ed me).

  • Anonymous

    Levin & Coulter > Two sides of the same coin. Both neocon establishment warmongers. These kind of people have said the same thing for 20 plus years, and big gov. has been the result, but of course by no fault of their own. Mr Paul is a strict constitutionalist, neither of these two are.

    • K-Bob

      Your dictionary is broke.

    • Anonymous

      If Paul is our savior, I don’t want to be saved!

    • What would Paul have done to save the kidnapped American Jessica Buchanan in Somalia? Say, “Oh, I’m sorry, you get what you get when you travel to such places to try and help people”.

    • I agree! Most of these morons think Newt is the answer. Except he is just as liberal as Mitt, and twice as corrupt!

    • And a racist anti-semite to boot just like Dr. Paul

  • Dax

    She’s just not believable anymore. She picks a side and then says the most outlandish things. Ann you are ruining your career and credibility. I know she respects Mark so this has got to hurt. Nice job Mark.

    • Anonymous

      She knows whose back she is stabbing. Or she went nuts.

  • Linky1

    Ann may be (technically) blonde, but her progressive roots are showing if she can endorse Mittens and ROmneycare.

  • Anonymous

    folks critized newt for questioning romney’s private sector experience and called it an attack on capitalism called it a leftist attack and yet romney’s policy is to focus on the middle class what could be more leftist than that.

    • Anonymous

      folks critized newt for questioning romney’s private sector experience and called it an attack on capitalism

      Free enterprise! “Capitalism” is a word coined by a socialist and made famous by the guy who wrote Das Kapital. Just sayin’

      Also, I’ve said it then and I say it again. Newt’s criticisms will help shield him and the GOP ticket down the line from the type of campaign Obama is going to run. Newt’s astute political acumen is unmatched.

    • Anonymous

      I like your comment but wish you’d learn to PUNCTUATE!

  • Anonymous

    I saw Coulter on Redeye on Fox the other night. She was even getting thorns from those guys and you could just see her seething. The stuff was coming out of her ears. I don’t think she will ever go on that show again.

  • Ana

    Three Cheers for ANN getting schooled by the Great One!

    • Linky1

      I triple dog-dare Annie to go one on one with Levin.

  • K-Bob

    Maybe Ann just wants someone to make sure the minimum wage goes up automatically, so we can all stop talking about it all the time. Or something.

    • ah you beat me to it lol..

      • K-Bob

        I found it after following one of your links!

    • Romney’s emphasis there was that he wanted minimum wage to go up more gradually instead of in big leaps like the Democrats a prone to doing. Surely you aren’t in favor of the minimum wage being $3.50 like it was in the 80’s.

      • Romney also drew criticism from the anti-tax Club for Growth. “Indexing the minimum wage would be an absolute job killer,” the group’s president, Chris Chocola, said in a statement. He called the proposal “anti-growth.”

      • Surely you aren’t in favor of a $10 8 oz jar of mayo, are you Brian?

      • Loren Louthan

        There should be no minimum wage – at least not at the Federal level. Maybe I missed it the couple of hundred times I’ve read the Constitution. Is there somewhere in that guiding document, Brian, that allows the Federal government to mandate a minimum wage? Since anything not listed in the Constitution as a responsibility for the Federal government to take care of is then left to the various States, it’s a States’ rights issue. If a State wants to mandate a minimum wage, that is their right. The Federal government does NOT have that right. Again, maybe I missed that one.

        • If we tried to get rid of the minimum wage the Democrats would have a coniption and Demagogue it . It would hurt Conservatives politically. I am against the minimum wage at the federal level too but it is just the same as repealing the 17th amendment. Politically it can not be done. Very similar to why it took 70 years to outlaw slavery in this country. If the minimum wage was somehow tied to inflation it would not be a political issue any longer since Democrats would not be able to say “hey we need a new law to raise the minimum wage so I look like I care about the workers and the Republicans don’t” There could also be a provision that says if the unemployment rate goes above a certain level that the minimum wage can go down.

          • Anonymous

            The latest Rmoney Central talking points.

          • Anonymous

            Employment is a contract between two consenting parties. if the employee is too young, parents or guardians are available, to sign off or deny same.
            Otherwise, “ain’t nobody’s bidness but yur own”. Anything else is essentially statist interference in private contracts and is Im-moral plus,has little credibility to any freedom-loving citizen. Worth is always a two-way street. The agreement is what you, the employee, get, after negotiations. F I N I S !

        • Anonymous

          Loren, watch out when you start mentioning The Constitution *in mixed company*. Next thing you know you get put on a no-fly list, audited or all your mail arrives pre-opened.
          You know as well as I what precisely the Constitution was supposed to do, and how it was bastardized. Realitivism crept in,starting with W. Wilson, ,”what was written was not what it really meant” and off we went. It was meant as a list of DO NOTs for statists. If it was not mentioned it was for The States or “The People” to hash out. {OHHH, that pesky 10TH!!!)
          Loren, we as a nation got L A Z Y . It took years/decades to get here and years will be needed to swing back. {if ever, in my lifetime}
          Now is the time, and Here is where we stand pat, to move no further. ‘AMEN”, anybody?
          { “Freedom’s just another word, for nuthin’ left to lose…”}

      • KenInMontana

        The minimum wage is in itself a contributor to inflation, educate yourself.

      • K-Bob

        Minimum wage ought to be set, permanently, at one cent.

        After all, that IS the minimum you can pay people using legal tender. (Zero cents isn’t really paying, so it doesn’t qualify.)

        Better still, get rid of the concept all together.

  • See Mitt Romney doesn’t hate the very poor: Romney supports automatic hikes in minimum wage

    • Anonymous
    • shawn S

      MW hikes do not help minium wage workers. In a few months prices of goods do the higher labor costs catch up to the increase in the minium wage and/or jobs are eliminated

      The bottom is always the bottom Unskilled labor is always unskilled labor

    • Anonymous

      Good link. Romney tried to cover his blankety-blip with the original gaffe and instead, just dug his hole a little deeper.

  • Maxsteele

    Coulter has firmly shown herself as a complete hypocrite now and is firmly part of the Romney propaganda machine.

    • Anonymous

      Rapidly becoming the woman everyone loves to hate in conservative circles. Keep on going Ann, you’ll soon be on the D.C. cocktail circuit with all your progressive friends.

  • LOL..awesome Mark…Ann Coulter lost any respect I had for her opinion. ALOT of conservative “pundits” have lost my respect.

    • Anonymous


  • poljunkie

    Mark Levin is awesome.

  • Anonymous

    Maybe Ann should re-marry Bill Maher again. She has no credibilty in the Conservative arena now.

  • Anonymous

    I saw through Ann long before this primary, and so I’m not the least bit surprised by her crazy statements.

  • Anonymous

    Ann Coulter is a metaphor for all those conservatives who support Willard.

    They have to twist themselves into pretzels in order to justify their support.

    • Jim Botts

      I’m not going to twist myself into a pretzel voting for Romney. I did that with Bush, never again.

      I’ll vote for Romney if he is the nominee, and I’ll verbally bash him upside the head whenever he needs it.

      We can’t carry water for these guys when they stray, we can’t push them to the right that way. We just shoot ourselves in the foot by blindly following their agenda just because we think Democrats will be worse. The strategy really hurt us under Bush and where did it lead? Obama!

      You don’t have to be a Romney fan to vote for Romney. My vote is simply a protest/rebuke of the status quo.

  • Ann Coulter you never damn well you would be destroying Romney and Romneycare if your boyfriend Crispy Creme Christie was running against Romney.

  • Anonymous

    She lost me when she was salivating over Chris Christie. If I know about his Sharia judge appt. she darn well does. I used to have a lot of respect for her and loved her acerbic wit, but now I can hardly stand to listen to her.

  • Anonymous

    Money talk, She either got paid by Romney or she wanted Obama re-elected.
    Obama re-elected will give her more talking points and sell more books!

  • Anonymous

    How does coultergeist know that Obamacare is unconstitutional? The court hasn’t ruled on it yet. And btw, the court (and when I mean the court, swinger kennedy) will vote in favor of allowing it to remain constitutional. That fix is already in, so there’s no need in losing any sleep on that one.

    Good lawd Annie, you’re embarrassing yourself now. I now how you broads get frisky at that age, but this is beyond silly. Your infatuation with Flip is sickening.

    See, this is why you women can’t be president. Your emotions get the better of you.

    Honestly ann, wipe the drool off your face. I don’t want to see you and Jennifer Rubin fighting over Flip’s underwear.

  • Anonymous

    Levin worked for the US Department of Education. He has a scary closet. ’nuff said.

    • Anonymous

      Most assuredly I’ll take everything IN his closet and lend him som-ma mine. I note you just drive-by a comment { a one liner, no less} with no appreciable back up nor facts to discredit Levin. So what was the point? You’re scared of the dark?
      {Da Boogey Man, gonna get YOU….!} There, was that e-’nuff?

  • Anonymous

    As for Romney Care, conservatives loved it until Obamacare.

    Witness Newt:
    “Massachusetts leaders are commended for this bipartisan proposal for creating a sustainable health system.”

    And Newt on Obamacare:
    Mandate: “We believe that there should be must carry – that is, everybody should either have health insurance or if you’re an absolute libertarian, we would allow you to post a bond, but we would not allow people to be free riders failing to insure themselves and then showing up at the emergency room with no means of payment.”

    Gingrich’s past support for an individual mandate has been well reported — but these comments are much more recent, and they further undermine his ability to hit Mitt Romney on his health care positions.

    And Mark Levin must have once loved it.
    It was passed in 2006.
    In 2008 he backed Romney for President.
    No mention of Romney Care being bad, or anything.

    Another unprincipled ‘conservative’ talking head book huckster?

    • Anonymous

      RomneyCare was a state issue only in 2008. Now, we have ObamaCare (which was founded on the blueprint of RomneyCare) for the whole nation AND we are hearing from Bondi that Romney is going to push for RomneyCare for all of the states.
      Get your timeline and facts straight. We also had different candidates and were facing different fiascos.
      We now have a country overrun by Marxists trying to create another failed European economy out of one of the most successful countries in history. We need someone who will dramatically change the direction of this country – as the test FAILED. DRAMATICALLY.
      That is why different topics and focal points are being addressed.

      • Bondi did not say Romney was going to make Romneycare nationwide. Romney himself said he will repeal it.

        • KenInMontana

          He can say he would repeal all he likes, however without a majority in the Senate and the House, it won’t happen. Presidents cannot repeal anything, except an EO.

    • Anonymous

      Allow me this somewhat lengthy response. “Conservatives loved (Romneycare) until Obamacare”? Quite a stretch on the truth while failing to inject facts, pingston. First of all, it is well understood that many conservatives in the early 90s (like those at Heritage and Newt) originally supported an individual mandate precisely because of the inclusion of the word “individual” in that phrase. Why? Because at the time, they considered it a somewhat “moderate” proposal against HillaryCare, which promoted socialized govt enforcement of employers – as opposed to the individuals themselves – purchasing healthcare insurance for each employee. Simply put, conservatives proposed it as a bulwark against HillaryCare, as viewed it as “the lesser of two evils” in a hotly debated issue. Obviously, Heritage and previously-aligned conservatives have since seen the error of such twisted logic, knowing such a mandate inevitably leads to full-blown, govt-enforced socialized medical care.

      So at the time, conservative support for the “individual” mandate, including Newt, was premised upon the assertion that anyone who needed healthcare would be required to prove they had insurance or other funds to pay for such care, otherwise they would be forced – by the govt – to purchase a bond which would inevitably require such debt to be paid in full later on. This is why Newt, in your Politico link, specifically references the word “bond”. As stated, a completely flawed proposal but unlike Romneycare or Obamacare, the “individual mandate” did not require the individual to engage in commerce by purchasing insurance, or force the insurance companies to engage in commerce by selling to the individual.

      Further, Newt has now, on two recent occasions, admitted his error in supporting the individual mandate – while debating Santorum and during an interview with Bret Baier on Fox’s Special Report. The Politico article which you reference includes remarks made by Newt in 2009 – when the early drafts of Obamacare were still being cobbled together and long before it’s final proposal which the “individual mandate” as a euphemism for govt-enforced commerce in order to create a pathway for a socialized, govt-controlled single-payer system. So according to Newt’s thinking, his reference to the “individual mandate” had nothing to do with Obamacare (or Romneycare) but everything to do with the original proposals which forced “freeloaders” (his words) to pay their fair share. Again, flawed logic but worlds apart from govt-takeover of the healthcare system through punitive regulation and penalties on the private insurance market and enforcement of commerce.

      Of course, govt should not be in the business of forcing commerce for anything, let alone exerting control and regulations over what or what not to purchase in the healthcare market, which is why Newt must clearly outline – like Levin – his point-by-point objection to Romneycare/Obamacare in the next debates – thereby destroying the false meme which you and others, are now disseminating.

      As for Levin supporting Romney in 2008, let’s remember the pertinent issue at the time was illegal immigration and McCain’s literal support of amnesty. Romney was the lesser of two evils on that point, which is why conservatives rallied behind him during that campaign. McCain had also proven himself to be a habitual Democrat-bootlicker throughout his Senate career, who also helped enact federal laws which promoted socialist policies – thanks to his ability to “compromise”. As Romney had not served in D.C, it was again, a matter of the lesser of two evils. But four year have passed (eons ago in political matters) and since that time, we now a president who has enacted a socialist health care law which will allow the federal govt to control over one-sixth of the US economy, and which also will provide that same govt unfathomable abuse of power against the American citizenry by re-writing its clearly defined enumerated power in Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution – the Commerce Clause. Simply put, as fellow commenter Dolphieness correctly points out, Romneycare was but a blip on the screen as it was a state issue – not federal – in 2008 and unlike today, socialized medicine was but a theory.

    • shawn S

      Out of context

      Newt was talking about someting entirely different, not a mandate to buy insurance, but a requirement to have an persoanl healthcare account which is a surety bond

    • Anonymous

      In 2007/08, nat’l health care was not an issue, hence just maybe one reason Levin supported willard. Mix and match your facts and timelines enough and you ,of course, can get the answer you desire. Just not an objective, or correct one. ‘Nuff Said!???

    • Anonymous

      Lot of misinformation there. Levin supported Thompson. Gingrich sais he agreed with the “goal.” I agree with liberal “goals” all the time, just none of the “solutions” Newt’s other comment is not about Obama-care.

      Do you notice that your quotes are no full sentences? You take a few of the person’s words and surround them with someone else;s. Maybe I wasn’t supposed to notice that..


  • I don’t get free healthcare. I don’t get many things for free. So I don’t see what the big deal is in these other states. If I have to be harassed for not paying the entire bill immediately, even when in a financial pickle, than why should Donald Trump be taxed extra just so some deadbeat from Massachusetts isn’t harassed for not being able to pay the bills?

    • You don’t get free healthcare but you PAY for free healthcare for people in Mass. Because Romneycare is 50% funded with federal tax dollars.

  • Anonymous

    Coulter has always been a bit tightly wound and an attention seeker by trade. Apparently, the attention is more important than the content.

  • Anonymous

    too bad Newt had such high praise of Romneycare back in 2006…

    • Anonymous

      old news and Newt testified against it in front of congessional committee. That’s a drive-by like Mittens uses

    • K-Bob

      Back then many Republicans bought into the notion that “we ought to do something” about medical costs escalating in the face of large numbers of uninsured.

      Forget about the obvious problem with that entire scenario (ie, that the problem was already that Government had destroyed the free market in medical services). Instead, think about the things people were saying back then. The idea was that most public figures on the left and right were calling for some way to “get everyone covered.”

      Many different variants of mandate were put forward. Romneycare and Obamacare represent the worst form of those variants. Requiring people to buy their own if they EXPECT coverage (which is what Santorum called for) is vastly different from the government telling everyone they have to buy it.

      Newt and Santorum wanted to end “free riders” by requiring folks who expected coverage to pay for it. This means that those who didn’t want it, and who were willing to face a big bill in an ER, wouldn’t be forced to buy it.

      Newt wasn’t the only Republican saying Romneycare was good. But few people–like Newt, obviously–studied the mandate aspect of Romneycare as well as the folks who wrote Obamacare. To a lot of Republicans, the intention driving Romneycare was considered good when he was working on it, but what they came up with–like everything government does–was not good.

      • Anonymous

        I was about ready to reply, but could not have stated it any better than that. Well said.

      • Anonymous

        Excellent k-bob. Just read your rebuttal after posting my own – so apologies if it looked like I “cribbed” anything.

        • K-Bob

          No worries!

  • wassup402

    Must have gotten back with Bill “hermainsqueeze” Maher – and he must be whispering sweet nothings in her ear again.

  • Anonymous

    I stopped reading Ann’s column since she became a liberal.

  • Anonymous

    Mark is a genius, and I thank God every day he’s there….

  • Anonymous

    It must be the testosterone that’s affecting her brain and adam’s apple.

  • Coulter, Ingraham, Malkin, Erickson all have lost my respect in this election cycle.

  • Anonymous


  • I have 3 of Ann’s books to toss in the garbage. I wonder how soon she will be back on MSDNC next to Megan McCain.

    • Anonymous

      The latest thing is Coulter Book Burning Parties. She’s toast. I hope she paid that mortgage off in full on that Palm Beach mansion.

    • Anonymous

      Her numerous appearances on cretin Bill Mahr’s show already rang alarm bells for me, seanjohnson.

  • sgallion1

    Ann Coulter is rooting for Romney for one reason……..and his name is Chris Christy. She is echoing Christy’s words. Why?? Because if he won’t run for president…maybe he can be VP. I have little doubt that Romney has promised Christy first dibbs to the VP position IF Christy will campaign for him. That being the case….Coulter is now salivating and will delude herself in any way she has to……to help get Romney elected. To put it bluntly, Coulter has sold out. she is no longer objective. Something I’d never thought I’d see. She is off my good republican list for good.

  • The biggest difference between Obamacare and Romneycare is who started it…. If our country is shocked by the hhs mandates coming upon the Church they only need to look at what happened under Romney as governor.

    • Anonymous

      Technocrat Romney opens mouth – inserts foot.

  • The biggest difference between Obamacare and Romneycare…. who started it! If our country is shocked by the hhs mandates coming upon the Church they only need to look at what happened under Romney as governor.

  • Ann has sold out to the establishment, sad.

  • ApplePie101

    Mark Levin knows that sooner or later conservative pundits lose their conservative perspective when they swim with the beltway insiders, one reason he stays in the Bunker. Ann Coulter has become what she used to excoriate: a Washington liberal.

  • shawn S

    Finally, Ann Coulter has been exposed for who she is. …….and it’s NOT a conservative.
    She’s just a ex lawyer who makes a living in political commentary

  • I can’t stand Levine…. WOW….

    HE rails on Ann and Dr. Michael Savage while he himself is an intellectual lilliputian with the voice of Graucho Marx…

    • K-Bob

      Huh. You’d almost wonder how he could manage to put on a radio program.

  • Anonymous

    She made a career out of trolling liberals, now she’s trying it with conservatives. She needed a new act.

  • Mike Lee

    This is a masterpiece. Levin has such a capable mind. Sometimes I like what he has to say, other times I think he’s way off, but regardless, I’m glad he does what he does.

  • Anonymous

    Hahahaha! Coulter you hypocrite “the failure even statewide” hahahahaha! My my she is embarrassing herself.

    Ann Coulter: Romneycare “shows the failure of even statewide universal care”

  • Anonymous

    Now I know Annie is a verified nut.

  • Anonymous

    ( if Christie doesn’t win )”Romney will be the nominee and we’ll lose.” 2010. 2/12/2011. -Ann Coulter.

    The good ‘ol days when Ann still had some sense, though her love affair with Christie (…urp, yuck…) was an early sign of her mental illness.

    • Anonymous

      Here’s the actual video of that… look what else she says:

      “I DON’T LIKE TO ummm… ATTACK REPUBLICANS …. but I think, well I’ll put it in a nutshell, if you don’t run Chris Christie Romney will be the nominee and we’ll lose.”

      • Anonymous

        So much for not attacking Republicans. She’s openly and consistently attacked all of Romney’s challengers.

  • Newtie and the Beauty

    Bravo, bravo, BRAVO, Mark! Bodacious analysis!

  • Anonymous

    Ann needs counseling, she has succumbed to some bizarre sexual fantasies.

    • K-Bob

      What is that supposed to mean?

  • Anonymous

    Don’t agree with Ann here. Sorry sweetheart but I still love you. She is the only conservative left with any stones and she’s a woman. Go figure. She makes liberals minds spin. I’m with you Ann on Chris Christie though. It would have been a dream come true to have him in this race. Paul Ryan too. Sarah too. But no we get what we have here today.

    Ann you can’t sell romneycare. No matter if you were right or wrong. It won’t work.

    • Anonymous

      there are many other, true conservatives left, don’t forget Michelle Malkin, among others!

    • Ann Coulter has an agenda. She is partnering with a gay group to try and change the GOP into a gay friendly party and her friend Christie is a great example of this, just look at his appointment of an openly gay advocate judge in New Jersey a few weeks back.

  • wodiej

    While not everyone is offered health benefits through an employer, most are. A person should buy something or their health care costs are passed onto those who do buy coverage. The answer isn’t giving away free health care-it’s not working in Europe and it wont’ work here. The answer is first to get the economy rolling with more jobs. Second, control the illegal immigration problem. Third, cut out all of the waste and silly programs and projects we pay for like the Nevada Cowboy Poetry contest. There are billions of dollars of waste that could be cut and no one would lose their home or miss a meal because of it. Fourth, make some changes that affect the health care industry like tort reform and being able to purchase health care plans across state lines making it more affordable. When that is in place, then the overwhelming majority of people would be able to purchase some kind of health care coverage. There are too many in the pool and not enough people contributing. There should be some sort of provision that if people do not buy coverage from an employer that they must sign a waiver acknowledging that they will be responsible for any health care costs they may incur as a result of any health problems. People could also reduce many health problems by just exercising and eating right. Put the responsibility on the individuals-not the country as a whole. Our country has a severe lack of personal accountability.

  • Anonymous

    “romney-zombie” That line gave me a belly laugh….seriously, watch coulter’s numbers start to dwindle and deservedly so. Levin is a true defender of our Constitution. Thanks, Mark!

  • The Republican Party is becoming more and more like a circus freak show! Are there any real Conservatives even left in the party? A healthcare mandate whether unconstitutional at the national level is still a mandate at the state level with historically the same destructive consequences! Romney’s open contempt of free market forces is rivaled only by Coulter’s total absence of logic and commonsense!

  • Anonymous

    Coulter is another Establishment Sycophant and NOT a TRUE conservative. It’s glaring once you understand the difference b/w Republican establishment and conservative. So turning this Titantic around can only be accomplished by conservatives.

  • Anonymous

    Wow… love IS blind! What the heck happened to Ann? Is she such a “chubby-lover” with Christie that she’ll say ANYTHING to get Mittens elected? What on earth happened to this person who I once held in such high esteem?

  • What Mitt did when he passed Romneycare was to advance the progressive agenda, there is really no if’s,and’s or but’s about it.
    Do states have the right to do as Mitt had done?
    I will say no, they don’t.They mandated that private citizens had to buy a product or face a fine, I would resist that premise until the day I die “and” it advanced the progressive agenda.
    Here we are in the primaries, Mitt may win it and face Obama and then it will be who’s mandated state/federal health insurance plan is best.Ways to bring down health care costs via the free market will probably not even be discussed, it advances the progressive agenda.
    I think even if Mitt goes up and defeats Obama, it advances the progressive agenda.
    I will still vote against Obama and pray whoever takes his place will do as they said out of the side of their mouths that are saying they will roll this garbage back,I’m far from convinced.

  • Anonymous

    1.) If Romeny gets the nomination, and then loses to Obama, what will Ann, Rove, the Bush’s, and Christie say then? Are we still expected to take their political opinion seriouosly in the future? I won’t. I’d rather lose to Obama with someone who may not be the perfect Conservative but can at least articulate Conservative principles, than have a moderate candidate picked for me and lose anyway. If actual Conservatism is rejected by the American people when sharply contrasted with the Statist Utopian vision of the left, then so be it, but let’s not blur the line and suggest that the terms “Republican” and “Conservative” are some how interchangeable.
    2.) Until we can, as Conservatives, have the guts to stand firm and denounce the idea of mandates as a way of making sure that people are “covered”, and hospital bills get paid, we’ll never squash this ridiculous idea. “What if someone chooses not to purchase insurance and then goes to the hospital. How are they expected to pay their bills?”… First you have to counter that question, by asking the obvious question, “Why should other people be infringed upon becasue one person chose to be irresponsible?” Then explain in those cases, you garnish wages, or seize assets to square the bill. For those who maybe don’t make wages substantial enough to garnish, you allow private charities (religious or otherwise) to partner with local hospitals to help these individuals, but require some kind of repayment, more than likely paid off in some kind of labor equivilant to the charity to help them keep costs low so that the majority of the contributions they take in actuallt go to assisting these people. What we should be doing is flipping the argument and explain why medical costs are so high. We should explain clearly that medical costs rise due to govt overhead (whether it be direct taxes, or compliance with govt regulations) imposed on these private entities trying to provide a service. Medical services, are just that, “services”. And as with any business the higher theoverhead, the higher the cost of providing the service. You then piggy back that onto the virtues of the Free Market economy in which private entities retain most of their monetary assets to expand businesses, thereby creating good jobs so you reduce the number of citizens that are in a situation where they can’t afford to take care of themselves. I think this argument is a good one because you practically force the liberal to admit that they believe that there are ALWAYS a class of people that could never take care of themselves. You force them to admit that, but for the bleeding heart of the liberal redistributing the private property of other citzens, these people are lost causes, and either too stupid or too lazy to take care of themselves. Then explain that this train of thought runs antithetical to the Conservative philosophy in which every person is capable of achieving their goals.

    • You act like if Romney gets the nomination then it is all up to him-people will have to vote after that as a whole and it depends on how much the people in this country want to be independent or dependent on the government.

      There is no way Romney and Obama are the same. One is a capitalist the other is well, more along the lines of a socialist…this isn’t difficult. Santorum, Paul, Gingrich and Romney all are capitalists compared to Obama-but which one will convince the majority that his ideas are what will turn things around…and also has the money to do so against the O machine! Most people don’t think like those on conservative blogs or talk radio-it is easy to get tunnel vision and think most do.

      If O gets in office you can bet you won’t have a voice anymore!

      • Anonymous

        Are you replying to my post? Because nothing you said here seems to begin to acknowledge what I wrote, or you severly misunderstoo what I was saying. As for your reply:
        “You act like if Romney gets the nomination then it is all up to him-people will have to vote after that as a whole and it depends on how much the people in this country want to be independent or dependent on the government.”
        I never said it was all up to him to do anything, becasue the fact is, he can’t do it on his own.

        “There is no way Romney and Obama are the same”
        Where in my orginal post did I say Obama and Romney are the same?
        BTW I’m not voting for a “Capitalist” I’m voting for a “Conservative”, there’s a difference. A Conservative belives in Capitalism and a free market that is as liberated as possible so it can ebb and flow as freely as possible. The problem with squishy moderate Republicans who are “Capitalists” is they end up being mostly crony capitalists who end up using the levers of govt to manipulate free market forces. “I have abandoned free market principles to save the free market system.” George Bush, right before he initiated the series of bailouts to save big banks and poorly managed auto companies. W was a Republican, and surely a “capitalist”, but he was NOT a conservative. That policy was picked up and ran with by Obama who continues to spend and manipulate the market by abondonning free market principles in order to “save” the frre market.

        “but which one will convince the majority that his ideas are what will turn things around…and also has the money to do so against the O machine!”
        1.) What are Romney’s ideas on turning things around? Yuo think the “public” is going to sift throught that 59 point economic plan? No, of course not. We don’t need someone to “convince” people. We need someone who can articulate the common sense conservative values, that if clearly outlined would enlighten, the public will agree with the majority of the time. The problem in Romney is not a conservative, and therefore will not be able to articulate conservative principles. However, what he will do is buckle anytime a tough question is posed to him by the liberal press. Rather than stand up for conservatism, he will cave in and come up with yet another govt controlled program to solve whatever problem is put before him. RomneyCare is the best example. He defends it to this day. The argument about RomneyCare is not whether, as a state, they have the authority to do it, but instead the argument is why do it at all rather than support a market based system to resolve the problem. We here that he had a Dem legislature in a blue state so this is what he had to work with. What this tells me is that he is truly not confident in the free market system enough to successfully articulate a free market solution. Instead he immediately buckled and brought in Ted Kennedy to construct a top down govt controlled system. A true believer in Conservatism would have taken the measuresd I posted above to the people and illustrated how it will benfit them, and they in turn would make their voices heard to the legislature. Rather Romney prefer the public sit back and just take whatever solution the masterminds came up with.

    • Government mandates are not conservative, and we should not encourage or justify them. Point well taken, and well elaborated upon.

      Of course you recognize Ann is not arguing against that. She is making a nuanced yet important argument that Romneycare should not be equated with Obamacare.

      Ann’s position is not that Romney is a conservative champion, rather she simply argues that Romney is not more liberal than Gingrich and that Romney is the better candidate to run against Obama.

  • Good thing he has not talked to Ann C in a month-dont talk to her AT ALL.
    She is, and always has been a LIBERAL/leftist.
    NO woman that is supposed to be conservative Christian would EVER date/engaged to liberal men.

    I am SICK that people believed in this snot-rag.

  • Anonymous

    How is it she convinced people she was a conservative? For money, from books. Look at her past ‘dates’ to see if she was a conservative. Plainly was not. Presstitute, for money, yes.

  • HJR

    We’ve been losing Ann for a while now, it’s really sad to see. Anyone know what happened to her? You used to be able to count on her to be a die hard Conservative.

  • Anonymous

    I don’t get Ann. Isn’t a primary supposed to be about finding out about canidate & how they will run the country? He is a guy that has pushed for an individual mandate partially paid by the country, not by the state, pretended to be against raising taxes by raising fees, never once bucking the system by using the ‘the Democrats control blah, blah’ excuse and he was so unpopular that he didn’t run for a 2nd term and lost to lame John McCain?

    Her arguement doesn’t work, because of one simple thing: Romeny isn’t going to repeal Obamacare! Everything else she says is just nonsense to me.

    Then to top it off, he’s playing the ‘the middle class’ class warfare thing. He’s going to keep the programs for the poor and add some for the middle class or what?

  • Anonymous

    I’m learning a whole new language here—Coultergeist, presstitute, Mittwit—LOL! I’m swiping every one of them! Classic!!!I won’t claim them as my own, but I will use them! 🙂

  • Anonymous

    ann is now openly part of the republican establishment and she over estimated her “value” in my opinion.

  • Andy Miles

    Take Romney care in the context of the Mass. Environment-the home Kennedy and strong liberal minds. The role of Romney was to edit the Liberal agenda as much as possible. If you think Romney did not get some points for the Mass. Healthcare law, just look at Obama care to see how BAD it could have been. All things in CONTEXT! Mass. it a liberal haven, you are not going to get anything conservative, just the opportunity to edit the liberals as much as possible in their backyard. Open YOURS eyes and close your mouth on the critisism of what a conservative can do in Mass. Thank goodness for small steps in LiberalLand.

  • Andy Miles

    Furthermore the states have the power to madate the purchase of things like car insurance and health insurance and go to school. The Federal government DOES NOT. That is the issue. If Mass. wants this as they voted, then let them cook in their own stew, but get off Romneys back!

    • KenInMontana

      Auto insurance is avoidable, just take the bus. You cannot compare the two “mandates”, that’s comparing apples to oranges.

      Buy a policy from a agent who is in another State.
      Auto: Yes
      Health: No
      Most every State limits your choices on Health Insurance to companies operating within your State. You can buy your car insurance from any agent anywhere in the US.

      Get off Mitt’s back? Not a chance.

  • bobemakk

    Mark Levin is 100% right. Ann Coulter shocks me in her support for Romney/RINO.

  • Thats something she had coming.

  • Anonymous
  • Levin likes socialism, when it is forcing every household of 3 to pay the equivalent of $10,000 each for $1,000,000,000,000+ wars 8,000 miles away against cave dwellers, when we could simply be neutral and have a strong civil defense against invaders, like Switzerland, and draw much less hostility. We’ve set up permanent squatter camps in foreign countries (military bases), and they’re attacking us because of it. Switzerland and Japan don’t set up permanent squatter camps in foreign countries, and have no foreign terrorist attacks because of it. Levin believes in limited socialism, the type he wants. Just another neo-con hypocrite, crying about socialism of being forced to pay for services you don’t want, while supporting wars that benefit nobody but another Middle Eastern country.

  • Anonymous

    Coulter has lost all credibility. Does anyone even listen to her incoherent ramblings anymore. I don’t think she’s emotionally stable.

  • From the Heritage Foundation website:

    Doesn’t look like backing away to me.

  • Anonymous

    I wouldn’t think of defending all or even most of romneycare or obamacare. But one item, IMO, needs to be separated from the rest and considered by itself – the individual mandate.

    Levin derides Ann’s examples of governments requiring people to do things by saying the examples are not “entering into a contract” with someone. Maybe not, maybe so, at least on a technical level. I think Levin missed the point: there are some situations which require certain actions by people, which many people won’t do unless required to by law, with penalties for non-compliance. Auto insurance is the most relevant example I can think of. We’re required to buy it, and that’s good. No one can say for certain that they will never be at fault / liable for damages in an auto accident, and accident costs can be too high for individuals to pay. Therefore on behalf of the potential victims, we are required to enter into a risk-sharing agreement that we call insurance. Lien holders also have a right to demand auto insurance.

    The individual mandate is the exact same thing. Someone has to pay for the admittedly exorbitant costs of medical care. It’s gotten so out of hand that even the cost of medical insurance is getting beyond the reach of many people. (Which is why I’m uninsured at the moment.) Those crippling costs (and my uninsured state) need to be fixed, preferably immediately. But there are legitimate costs to health care, and if Levin would apply his capitalist common sense to the problem, he’d realize that’s why some doctors and hospitals have closed, left the field, stopped accepting medicare patients, or are planning to when obamacare kicks in. Also there have been reports that illegal aliens are presenting a severe financial burden on some hospitals.

    Someone has to pay. People get unexpectedly ill, or suffer unexpected injuries. Most of the time they’re not able to pay. Enter insurance. Many people (pray for my health) still don’t buy insurance, so an individual mandate is necessary. What’s the problem?

    • sonofliberty

      westernman your example of auto insurance is VOID. Operating a vehicle is considered a privilage by the state. One does not have to drive or buy insurance if they the individual chose not to drive. so please rethink you logic. thank you.

      • Anonymous

        Oh, right. Sure. Try existing above the hobo level without driving. You can choose not to have medical treatment, too. You don’t have to pay taxes, either.

        Get real.


    This is the amicus brief that the Heritage Foundation filed in FL against Obamacare. Oddly never ONCE mentions Massachusetts nor Romneycare. It does advocate against an individual mandate – though one can imply by it’s case for Federalism and its omission of complicity in Romneycare that this brief is in total regard addressed solely to the Federal level mandate, not a State one.

    The fact remains that Heritage Foundation endorsed and helped create Romneycare. If they see it as a mistake now, they are just as reluctant to openly express it as Mitt Romney is.

    The bottom line is this: Romneycare was Constitutional. Obamacare is not. Will Mitt Romney repeal Obamacare if possible? Do you believe his promise to do so?

    Mitt Romney should win the nomination and advocate against Obamacare due to the fact that it is unconstitutional and contains horrible provisions. He also at that point should be willing to concede some level of error in the Romneycare plan, it was an experiment in a state that was desired by the majority of his constituents.

    It was Constitutional. Obamacare is not.

    • Anonymous

      Karl, as a party, Republicans fought TOOTH AND NAIL against Obamacare. To now nominate the godfather of Obamacare as our nominee and start trying to defend Romneycare is a Twilight Zone style absurdity. The GOP would lose all credibility. It would prove the obstructionism narrative, that Republicans only cared about one thing the past 3 years, and that was to make Obama a 1 term president.

      Obamacare was modeled after Romneycare. Research it a bit. They even use the same tiered system (with labels and all) for defining “acceptable” levels of insurance coverage. Yeah that’s right. The government tells YOU what is acceptable coverage. OMFG. This is an unmitigated disaster.

      If Romney really believed that Obamacare was bad for medicine and bad for the economy, then how could he possibly defend Romneycare? It’s the same thing on a smaller scale, and he doesn’t deny that. His argument is that it’s a state’s right. And no moderator has called him out on this obvious lie.

    • Anonymous

      Heritage Foundation’s position on an individual mandate and Romneycare boggles my mind. I don’t understand them.

      I read through their complaints about Obamacare, and many of them could equally apply to Romneycare. Yet, they still say the two are entirely different.

      Massachusetts residents can certainly debate the success or framework of his efforts at health care reform, but it is disingenuous for the White House or anyone else to pretend that Obamacare is one and the same.

      Dear Heritage, Looks like a duck. Walks like a duck. Talks like a duck. It’s a duck.

    • No, I don’t believe Romney will repeal ObamaCare. He has signalled as much by his selection of advisors who say no to repeal and his admonition “not to get mad about Obama care.”

  • Ann Coulter has turned into her new book title… “DEMONIC”.!

  • Anonymous

    Levin is just a loud mouth and thinks he knows everything!! Why doesn’t he talk about Newt’s federally mandated insurance he wants. Oh yeah, that’s before Newt said through the state and then not at all.

  • Anonymous

    Well it’s finally official. Coulter has completely lost it. I would be surprised if she doesn’t lose most of her conservative readership. This is just the last in a long line of sorry pieces she’s published to justify Romney’s nomination.

    And this is the problem with Romney. It’s going to force Republicans to defend Romney’s indefensible policies. At this point, a lot of conservatives have got to be thinking: “I didn’t leave the party, the party left me.”

  • Cav Mort

    Dissapointed in all the hate against Ann. She is a great conservative voice in the lions den. If there was a truly conservative candidate she would probably endorse them. Now she is like the rest of us, trying to pick the candidate that sucks the least. If she thinks that is Romney then fine. Only the Newt/Paul/Rick Bots are going to spew that much hate against her because of it. There can be a civil debate on the points she makes in her article. Perhaps it’s liberal trolls spewing all the hate.

    • Cav Mort, it isn’t hate for Ann. It is calling her out when she is wrong. Do you think Mark Levin ( a great Conservative voice) engages in hate? No.

      Are you a Romney bot? Is there such a thing? It’s funny really. I’ve never heard the term bot applied to anyones followers as a “bot” except Ron Paul’s, and I agree.

    • Anonymous

      Hate? You used the word three times. It’s old already. Characterizing a difference of opinion as “hate” is an empty and despicable mechanism of the left. It attempts to blunt any real thought in order to appeal to emotion. When you don’t have a counter argument, you characterize your opponent as “haters.” It’s nothing more than mindless sloganism.

  • You knew at a glance Ann’s column would provoke people to exclaim that Ann is endorsing mandates and or endorsing Romneycare. People: Read. The. Column.

    The title is SARCASTIC. Just look through the list of her past titles. And anyway you would know that if you _read the column_.

    Mark–who at no point does his listeners the service of representing Ann’s argument–says “Ann concedes that [a federal mandate] is unconstitutional, but her point is ‘what’s the big deal?'” That is NOT her point–and it is obvious that that is not her point. She is saying a STATE mandate is a small concern relative to a government takeover of the healthcare industry.

    Simply read the whole column carefully, and you will see she is arguing that it is fallacious to equate Obamacare and Romneycare. Why is that relevant? Because equating the two is often the primary grounds for calling Romney more liberal than Gingrich.

  • Coulter is off the reservation….. Mittens is a RINO, Newt is a Big Government, Power hungry mostly-conservative but, unelectable candidate. Ron Paul is Care-less(blind to worldwide dangers), and crazy enough to believe that the population of this nation can handle the legalization of narcotics(good man! i like him. would love to hear all his theories with lots of beer and pretzels.) Not as our president(FAR better than Obama) though. Santorum is the only choice. He is a great conservative, A Reagan Conservative. If he gets the nomination,? He’ll crush Obama.

    • Do more research. Rick Santorum is an earmark guy. He’s taken part in his share of wasteful govt. spending. Only a SOCIAL conservative.

  • Anonymous

    Sorry Ann. You finally lost me
    Great analysis Great One

    • Anonymous

      Just the name great one shows Levin’s attitude. Rush has the same view of himself…it’s counter-productive! You should take levin’s only advice that will help you right now, “Get off the phone you big dope!”

      • Anonymous

        Awwwww, Is that whining I hear?

  • mghradmgh

    Levin missed the point of the article. It was not meant to be a defense of Romneycare (the title is sarcastic). She is not advocating that Romneycare was a good idea or that it should be started in other states. She is pointing out that the assumption that Romneycare and Obamacare are the same is an incorrect one. One is unconstitutional and one is not. One is a 2000 page monstrosity and the other is not. She points out that in fact Romneycare has failed due to it being used as a structure by liberals to add measures that lead to redistribution of wealth and more government control of healthcare. So her conclusion is that it is a failure, but not even in the same ballpark as Obamacare. She also points out that in fact the mandate per se is not the worst part of Obamacare or Romneycare as it has been portrayed recently. It is the government control of healthcare.

    She also supports Romney despite his mistakes because she knows he is way better than Obama, that there is no reason to believe whatsoever that he will do nothing other than repeal Obamacare and he is the only candidate that can beat Obama in November. She is dispelling the myths about a complicated issue so people can understand what happened more clearly and not just assume he is the same as Obama, which could not be further from the truth.

  • no romney no wrong in place of no woman no cry

  • Anonymous

    How bout those Florida results, huh Mark??? Guess maybe “the conservative base” doesn’t have as much clout as you like to think it does.


    ROMENY IN 2012, BABY!!!!

    • Yep It took Newt and rick splitting the vote to let the disgusting liberal Romney to win.

    • Anonymous

      Why don’t you just vote for Democrats? Why do you need to run one as the GOP nominee?

    • Anonymous

      That’s because some people DO NOT do their homework and fall for the elite in the establishment. After all that’s who supports Romney.

      Romney had 13,000 ads to Newt’s 200 ads to Santorum’s 0 ads.

  • Anonymous

    “massive triumph for conservative free-market principles”: it was not viewed by anyone but the 80% in Mass as a triumph.

    Ann is illustrating the differences between Romneycare and Obamacare.
    One is unconstitutional and one is not under the federal or state model.
    One is an over 2000 page crap sandwich passed int he middle of the night with no one reading it, the other much shorter and easier to read.
    Mass voters overwhelmingly approved the act by 80%, the other opposed by the people by 70%.
    Ann further illustrates how Romneycare was used as the skeleton on which the left pinned redistribution of wealth and government control of healthcare and insinuates itself between the individual and their rights.
    She finds that
    She finds both a failure, not on the same scale….but for the same reasons.

    As usual, she is being sarcastic and facetious.

    • Anonymous

      The car insurance argument is a red herring. First you don’t have to get it unless you want to drive a car. Plenty of people are allowed to choose not to drive and are still citizens, not so with Obamacare. Second, the reason you have to get the insurance is not to protect yourself or your family which you would be responsible for but because of the damage and cost you may inflict on someone else driving down the road. Same reason the state can make you get a vaccination for a contagious disease it’s protecting the common good. Not the false conception that by not buying health insurance your effecting the commerce of the country.

  • Ann, you have now lost all credibility with true conservatives. Romney defends individual mandates on healthcare, and it is simply unconstitutional. He argues it is a state’s issue. That’s like the KKK arguing segregation was a state’s issue. When you trounce people’s rights laid out in the constitution, you cannot justify it with state’s rights. We fought a Civil War and suffered from the race riots of the 1960s because of this backward thinking.

  • 30 min of ripping Romneycare apart, but not a single alternative to it. The problem with Romneycare was the the dysfunctional connector. It may have been much more effective, but the dems wrecked it. Its easy to pick apart failed policies, but its much harder to give a viable alternative, which Levin doesn’t do. Not even close. Also, Newt has been pro-individual mandate for 25 years, so why are we even talking about this, whether Newt or Romney gets the nomination it wont matter because both have similar opinions about healthcare.

    • Anonymous

      The alternative is to keep government out of it. And while Newt has supported an individual mandate in the past (he doesn’t anymore), that’s still a far cry from the bureaucratic nightmare that is Romneycare, which Romney STILL STANDS BEHIND and thinks “it’s not worth getting angry about”.

      Do you realize that in Obamneycare, the government decides what is or is not an appropriate level of insurance for you to carry? This goes well beyond just requiring people have insurance to telling people what to purchase. It is a historic level of government intrusion not only in the private sector but into people’s lives.

  • Anonymous

    Levin has been negative on Mitt Romney, tearing him down at every opportunity and tryingntonvirtually make himself a one man Romney wrecking crew. His behavior has been as bad as Limbaugh’s this election season! The only thing their destructive comments can do at this point is re-elect Obama. They refuse to see that, but anyone looking at this situation can clearly see it’s Levin and Rush’s personal pride in the way…they think they are smarter than anyone else, and that’s a person out for nothing more than to glorify the self! The republican party is giving them a correction, telling them they’ve tried to push too far to the right and be too much of an idealogue, and it’s out of touch with the American people. We see this situation for what it really is, and their “my way or the highway” attitude is not helpful. Romney sees the wisdom of including people and using common sense in the changes that must be made. He is not a destructive or vindictive person. Romney doesn’t perch himself out in far right field and insist that everyone bat and throw the ball to just where he is. Romney knows that he is able to move to get the ball and work to get the ball in the direction he wants it to go. That’s how it’s done! Romney did angreat job in Massachusetts, he did what they wanted and needed, made a lot of improvements for conservatives and realized that everything didn’t have to be exactly his way that day. Levin and Rush should follow Romney’s example…but they won’t, they’re too prideful to learn anything and people will continue to tune them out and leave them behind. Florida to their credit didn’t listen to Rush and voted for Romney, seeing Gingrich for the deceptive person he is. Now Rush is upset Trump didn’t come on his show and endorsed Romney…..Rush is getting left behind because he has a trash Romney all the time agenda just like Levin, and republicans know they’re damaging themselves and have left them to their personal destruction.

  • This guy is very convincing in his delivery only the substance of what hes saying is very wrong for instance he keep saying that Obamas health insurance is socialism and its not and he talks about individual mandates which we should want to be a part of because it will cut because according to the cbo it will cut medical cost premiums and reduce the fast growth of insurance and last and mostly it will insure over 40 million americans and we should be willing to sign on to having health insurance because it contribute to the common good of the american people instead of look at the individual mandate as a bad thing design to take away our freedoms because it does so much good for all of us to have health insurance now I can agree with levin with romney care’s failure but the Obama plan has financing and that is the removal of the bush tax cuts for the wealthy which even replublicans have said has led to the budget problems we have today with the lack of revenues being collected by the federal government and democrates definitely know what to do with the additional revenues otherwise we would not have had a budget surplus under Bill Clinton. So even though levin scares you with his shouting and snarlling speech he is still short on facts.

    • Anonymous

      Mark Levin is a Constitutionalist. This is what he has studied. I think I’ll take his word over yours.

      Ever hear of Hillsdale College?

  • WOW. Slavery is JUST like having to pay for your own insurance, is that a joke? The government forces people to buy auto insurance in order to drive, is that slavery? The government forces us to buy auto insurance to protect the people we drive next to in case of an accident. If the government were to force us to buy health insurance, it would be a similar concept, instead of protecting other people it would protect the tax payer from picking up the tab on people who refuse to pay. What rights are we losing here? the right not to have health insurance? were is that in the constitution? Im not saying i think the government should do this, but if the people of a state want it, let them have it. Oh, and what part of an individual mandate allows the government to control your healthcare? You are confusing a SINGLE PAYER SYSTEM with an individual mandate, although one includes the other, they are not mutually inclusive.

    • Driving is a choice. Living and breathing isn’t.
      The bottom line is that it’s unconstitutional for the federal govt. to require anyone to buy anything.

      • Anonymous

        Living and breathing aren’t: but can you sure enough bet if they were, they would be taxed and regulated, as well. Well, with Obamacare they probably will be when they become to much of a burden on others to be economically viable. Eugenics anyone?

        • Anonymous

          In Obamacare it refers to the elderly as “UNITS”. Sounds like some Sci-Fi movie.

          There is a death tax of 55%.

          • Anonymous

            Bastards. Like pirates….”people are easy to search [or loot] when they are dead.”

    • Anonymous

      Except probably a large portion of the people on the road (here in Texas, anyway) there are toooooo many people driving without insurance and you have to protect yourself from them. THEY won’t be paying for your costs if they are the cause of an accident for you. You don’t buy insurance to protect them, you buy it to protect yourself. In the case of healthcare, people who do not have healthcare are a problem, so is it also a problem that you and I have to pick up the tab for them to use the healthcare system as well as those who get CHIP or medicaid. We are paying for them, too. I don’t like it, and I darn sure don’t want to pay for anyone else but mine. Let the free market run it’s course and healthcare costs will come down and people can choose to buy their insurance or not. If not, they need to bear the consequences of that choice, not me, not you. I buy my insurance out of work, the plan isn’t great, but I have one. Every individual can do the same. Every CareNow or Urgent care has small policies they offer, every phyisician has a Cash discount they give; there ARE ways to get healthcare done, but the government, both state and federal need not be involved in order for it to work. Hell, the same poeple that allow the USPS to operate with a deficit annually and cannot balance their own books need not be in charge of much of anything, in my opinion.

  • Mark is sometimes loud, obnoxious, and difficult to deal with but he is almost always correct. He is in this instance as well. Coulter has prostituted herself for Romney and should be called to account for it in public.

    • Anonymous

      Ron, just stop listening to her. Don’t buy her books. Don’t subscribe to her columns. Don’t watch her interviews. Relegate her to irrelevance and she’ll understand.

    • Mark missed her point, and he broke her column up so that his listeners could not discern her argument either. Read her column yourself, and you will see she is simply making the case that Romney is not more liberal than Gingrich.

      • Anonymous

        That’s bull. Why did she leave out the architect and only list so called conservatives that approve of Romneycare. She also should have mentioned that The Heritage Foundation no longer supported their decision about Romneycare. She stated what so wanted you to hear and conveniently left out the negative. That’s a snow job.

  • Its scares me to think that some of these people are representing the conservative movement when they don’t support the constitution.

  • Anonymous

    Just proves how Romney is destroying the GOP. People have to contort themselves into pretzels to defend the man and redefine conservatism in the process. No man is worth selling out our principles over.

    Anne has spent so much of her “reputation capital” on Romney that it’s no wonder she feels like he owes her. I just heard her say that on Hannity’s show last night – RCP also has it up. That’s really all you need to know about the presstitute Anne at this juncture.

  • Well stated! Half the people on this thread haven’t read, or don’t understand the constitution! They would support big gov bush while simultaneously bashing Romneycare.

  • Anonymous

    Ann Coulter does and says whatever it takes to promote herself. She loves to shock and use names but the bottom line is she cares more about herself and staying in the fray and invited to talk shows then she does about promoting any conservative principles.
    I hope this kills her career and money machine.

    • Anonymous

      That’s the truth. I will never listen to her rhetoric again.

  • What part of Romney will repeal Obamacare people do not understand? I know Mark Levin is not a big Romney fan but didnt he endorse Romney back in 2008 together with Rush and Sean Hannity? He said he will repeal it so many times.

    • Anonymous

      Because at the time Romney was the lesser of the two evils. McCain or Romney and they all chose Romney. Romney is not going to repeal Obamacare. He is going to offer waivers to all states to “opt out”. My state doesn’t know if it is going to “opt out”. Now what?

  • Anonymous

    Maybe Ann was promised to be a ‘Sister-Wife’ if she endorsed him…

  • Michael Casella

    As usual the Great One is right on target. I am sick and tired of seeing her on tv whining and twitching on Romneycare!! She supported another moderate Christie and when he said no she pivoted to Romney. Why???? Bye Bye Ann.

  • Anonymous

    What’s his point, you ask? Mark Levin is his point. That, and ratings, are the only things that matter to him. He, like Rush, Sarah, Bill, et al, are not so much interested in the country as they are in their own stardom. Look closely and you will see how formula abounds. Their passion is simply to keep the discussion alive so that they may weigh in with their salty opinions – which they may or may not believe. Even Krauthammer has succumbed to the ratings parade. Look to thy selves for guidance, and do not fall for the big guru trap.

    • Nonsense! These are important issues whose resolution determine the direction of the country. What should be the “point” of what we say? Only what will help the ESTABLISHMENT imposed candidate? No way!

    • Anonymous

      You could not be further from the truth. Levin doesn’t need this to make $. He has best selling books. You are just jealous that he has called out your messiah.

  • Anonymous

    What part of “I was wrong about Romneycare” does Mittens not understand? None of it! He is too damn proud to ever admit he was wrong. Ever. Just like Obama. This is Obama Lite – “tastes great, less filling”. It will taste better than Obama, and be less dangerous than Obama. But it will be a version of the same product.

  • Anonymous

    Jimmy: I read her column, and I’m a pretty smart guy, but I did not get that basic argument. What I got was “Romney is not as liberal as you all are making him out to be.” And my response was “Sorry Ann, but he sure the hell is!”

    • Anonymous

      Ann is on video saying, “If Christie does not run then Romney will be the nominee and we will lose.” She is a hypocrite.

  • DisqusRight

    wow… didn’t know there were so many people that shared my thoughts exactly! I stumbled across this site out of curiosity after reading Ann’s column… my first impression was ‘what happened to Ann… has she lost her mind?’ I’ve read some of her books but no more. Likewise ran through my mind that ‘perhaps she’s been paid a ‘commission’ for her endorsement (a lot of big money floating around the Romney team) or ??? but in reflection think more likely an ‘at the moment’ infatuation (insanity?) with the Mitt as witness by her recent flirtation with the NJ gov.

  • Anonymous

    wow… didn’t know there were so many people that shared my thoughts exactly! I stumbled across this site out of curiosity after reading Ann’s column… my first impression was disillusionment / disbelieve, then just disappointment. I’ve read her books but no more. Likewise occurred to me that ‘perhaps she’s been ‘paid a commission’ for her endorsement (a lot of big money floating around the Romney team) or ??? but in reflection think more likely an ‘at the moment’ infatuation (insanity?) with the Mitt as witness by her recent flirtation with Christie.

    • Anonymous

      Ann was on Hannity a few days ago and she said that she better have Romney’s ear. Pretty telling isn’t it? Then she made some comment about “pea in their pants soccer moms”, which is a jab at Sarah Palin. Can’t stand Ann and was getting her emails. I cancelled them right away.

  • T S

    Thank you Mark Levin for setting the record straight. Romney is a statist and was a terrible governor.

    Love the show and loved your book.

  • Augustus

    Levin’s correct that all government mandates – whether local, state, or federal – are statist and therefore inherently “unconservative”. But “unconservative” isn’t “unconstitutional”.

    Coulter’s point isn’t that RomneyCare was some great conservative achievement. She’s merely arguing that unlike ObamaCare, it’s constitutional and a far less intrusive piece of legislation than the overwhelmingly liberal Massachusetts legislature might have enacted if Romney had not been governor.

    • Anonymous

      She conveniently left out the architect.

      • Augustus

        The MA House and Senate each passed their own bills. They also added a slew of provisions to Romney’s bill, including an employer mandate, which he vetoed but they overrode. Healthcare was going to happen in MA with him or without him.

        • Anonymous

          He still praises Romneycare. That’s pretty telling. He’s on video praising Ted Kennedy at the signing of Romneycare. I don’t care how you sugarcoat it. It is what it is and he still backs it.

          Romney is NOT going to repeal Obamacare. He is offering waivers to the states to “opt out”. My state doesn’t know if it is going to “opt out” or not.

          • Augustus

            Repeal depends on how soon we can complete the purge of the Senate that began in 2010. Until then it’s up to your state to opt out. Otherwise, move. Read Liberty and Tyranny, Chapter 5, “On Federalism”.

  • Unbelievably we are about to repeat the fundamental mistake which lead to Obama’s election. We simply are not listening to what the candidate is actually saying. Romney is a RINO – a Republican In Name Only. If Romney is the nominee the 2012 election is reduced to two Democrats running against one another.
    The only stance Romney has not vacillated on is Romney Care…”the decision of a mandate should be pushed down to the States. The decision should be left to the States.” Every other position he has taken, he has changed for political expediency. But like Obama, Romney sees his Health Care mandate as his signature achievement.
    Actually listen to what Romney says:
    1. Romney says he will repeal Obama Care.
    a. Well in point of fact a President doesn’t have the authority to repeal a law. So this statement is meaningless.
    2. The decision on Health Care mandate should be left up to the States like we did in Massachusetts.
    a. He does not say there should not be a Health Care mandate, only that it should be mandated by the State.
    3. The US Supreme Court decision on Obama Care is irreverent.
    a. The primary basis for the ‘legal challenge’ to Obama Care is the ability of the Federal Government to issue this mandated purchase by the US Citizen’s across state lines IN THIS MANNER.
    b. The Federal Government in fact requires mandate behavior all the time. It simply ‘pushes it down to the States’ to mandate. This action has been upheld in the US Supreme Court over and over.
    – The Federal Government will simply attach the Romney/Obama Care mandate to one or another federal funding source.
    – Just as the Federal Government does with Highway Tax funds, if the State wants the Federal Funds it must MANDATE the Romney/Obama Health Care – JUST LIKE MASSACHUSETTS.
    If Obama is reelected Democrats win. If Romney is elected Democrats win. Either way we will see a SOCIAL HEALTH CARE MANDATED. Returning to the sports metaphor; the immediate play is beating Obama and/or defeating the Federal Health Care Mandate. The endgame is much greater than that – it is the fundamental restoration of our government in accordance with the Founding Father’s vision and away from the creeping Socialist model which is fuelled by the Politian’s self interest.
    How easy it is to manipulate us. – Electability. The most powerful motive for voting for Romney, electability. A designation the GOP establishment bestowed upon Romney BEFORE WE HEARD FROM THE CANIDATES and BEFORE ANY VOTING TOOK PLACE. Of course the media picked it up and has repeated endlessly. The general population hearing this repeated ad nauseam takes it up thoughtlessly. Even though every poll shows the GOP voters will consolidate behind whoever is the nominee. I don’t care if it is a Democrat or a Republican buying off an election, I don’t know about you, but being manipulated like this really ticks me off!
    We should be focused upon what is the quality of the President we elect.
    Is he able to perform the huge job ahead? Obama was not and four years later is not.
    We need someone who can repair the immense damage done to our fundamental constitutional / governmental system. Of these candidates only Newt Gingrich has that ability.
    When my house is on fire the only thing I care about is the skills of the firefighter. I don’t care anything about their personal life.
    In this instance we need someone to save our country. We don’t need Romney with his hollow feel-good statements. We don’t need Santorum to tell me what my spiritual values should be. We don’t need Paul who is unable to understand why it is beneficial to fight wars on foreign soil rather than in our neighborhoods.
    We need Newt Gingrich to return our country to the fundamental constitutional foundations. We need Newt Gingrich who thinks outside the current lockstep self-serving establishment. We need Newt Gingrich who has sharp elbows and can fight the inside political fights. We need a President who clearly, thoughtfully and unapologetically puts America first.

    • Great synopsis until you got endorsed Newt and his expansion of the federal debt. He is also a RINO, calling himself an “FDR” republican. Look it up.

      Ron Paul would avoid expensive wars we can’t afford.

  • Anonymous

    if we use obama’s calculation method for bush years. What will it be?

  • Anonymous

    What is the matter with you people?
    Ann has it all over you guys!
    YOU need to see the BIG picture!
    Do you REALLY think a Big Mouth Fig Newton will appeal to ALL Americans?
    You don’t really think this will be a FAIR election with the Chicago Thug occupying the White House…. Do You?
    There are PLENTY of Dem’s who are disgusted with what Barry O’BoutME is doing…. but do YOU really think they will vote against him…. if the OTHER side is ranting “He!!s of Fire” at them?
    Newt has diarrhea of the mouth….. and constantly says the most NEGATIVE things, that turns OFF the Other side!
    What is the biggest problem with Americans….
    It’s the ANGER…. which both sides have against each other!
    Who is best likely to get the OTHER side to take a look at what our side is saying?
    The FOUL-MOUTHED blatherer….. who puts himself in the middle of EVERY great thing, that has EVER happened in our country!….. Wow…. doesn’t that sound like something the Teleprompter Reader Occupying the White House …. would have coming out of his own mouth???
    Or Mitt…. the guy who goes after Obama’s RECORD…. not calling him names! How many times has Newter said that Obama is a Marxist?(Maybe it’s true, but don’t we all already know that, and aren’t you bringing yourself down to THEIR level when you go with “I know you are, but what am I” remarks?)

    It isn’t Ann who is causing Hate towards our candidates…. it’s the Likes of Levin, FoxNews and Rush Limbaugh!
    Lest you forget….. it WAS Rush who made us HATE our candidate John McCain…. and “I” was one of the ones he brain-washed!
    There seems to be something wrong with Rush! Rush seems to forget ALOT of things… when it comes to Mitt Romney!
    How about the fact that RUSH… along with his beloved Heritage Foundation… was FOR… RomneyCare!!!! Did Mitt NOT kiss his ring?
    Mitt Romney was in the high 30’s in the polls…. until Rush decided to take Mitt out!
    What is it Rush….. are YOU afraid that if we get a Republican President in the White House … control the Senate and Congress…. that YOUR radio ratings will go DOWN?
    Are YOU really an Republican? Because…. YOU have certainly FOOLED me!
    I couldn’t believe it when you were railing for Herman Cain…. Herman Cain???…. are you kidding me? We already have a guy in the White House who knows NOTHING about running the country…… AND… when YOU started bellowing about how UNFAIR it was, that these women dare say anything bad about Herman…. and how YOU started DEMEANING them…. just like Hitlery Clinton did to the women who charged Bill(WhiteTrash)Clinton with being… you know what already… it’ll take too long to spell it all out!
    I find it very funny that Mitt is NOT allowed to change his mind…. but Ronald Reagan flipped on a several things. How many people know that Reagan used to be a DemWit?
    Have you EVER heard Rush mention that? And you know the way Rush rants about Illegal Aliens…. has he forgotten that Reagan was the one who gave Illegals “AMNESTY” first…. just like McCain tried to do AGAIN!….. and wasn’t that one of the MAIN reasons Rush was against McCain? Rush and the rest of Republicans need to take OFF your blinders…. NONE of our candidates are perfect!
    Sooooo….. I’m going with the one who makes the most sense…. MITT!
    The one with ONE wife…. and no cheating.
    The one who actually DID create jobs…. and made his OWN money.
    The one who saved the Utah Olympics from total collaspe and embarrassment(Read about it)
    The one who can get O’BoutME voted off American Idol.(Come on people… we ALL know Obama won….. because McCain… looked like the candidate Hitlery Clinton, who Rush said “Are We Ready To See Hillary Age”!) The Media created a candidate who was “Too Cool” and they said he looked like he stepped off the pages of GQ!
    ….. Well…. so does Mitt! But…. Mitt has a BRAIN to go along with the looks…. and Mitt can answer a question, unlike O’Dumbo who gets the HARD questions 2nd…. soooo…. he can say… “I agree”!
    I’m sick of people saying Mitt is boring….. it’s called MANNERS…. and sad to say…. Americans don’t seem to have them anymore….. including me….. BUT …. I can still see MANNERS, when someone has them!!!!!!!

    Wow…. Having Manners….. is that a BAD THING?

    • Anonymous

      Romney sucks. He lies about repealing Obamacare and if Ann’s article doesn’t prove that to you, you are blind.

      All the elite establishment Repubs back Romney. Hello? Is anyone home in that brain of yours?

      Also, go to youtube and watch Romney dance around the truth of a lobbyist working on his campaign.

  • Mark Levin is a hypocrite, despite bashing Romney in 2012 and calling him a RINO over the same issues that he supported in 2008 even despite Romneycare already in effect since 2006 by stating, “The only one left standing who can honestly be said to share most of our conservative principles is Mitt Romney.”

  • You will vote for Romney.
    You will smile and act like you like it, through gritted teeth.
    I am not putting up with 4 more years of that idiot in the white house because you are too petulant to pull your heads out of your asses. This pouting “Not Red enough” crap is what Liberals do. Conservatives are just that: We do what makes sense.

  • nickeldoor5

    Pam Bondi AG of Florida will be helping Romney put Romney care in States once Romney is elected.