> “I’m thinking whether or not Romney will repeal, let-stand as-is or extend Obamacare will depend entirely upon the collective desire of the congressional majority.”
Romney has already said he will keep parts of the bill.
And he said this to the press at a time when a large majority of Americans were against the entire bill.
Romney is a liberal, a democrat in republican clothing.
There is a ruling class and it’s no conspiracy to believe that there is one. People behind intellectuals such as Kissinger, financiers such as Soros and many others are rulers, think themselves as rulers, or part of the ruling class. The DNC and the GOP-e are two networks dug in on the same campground. They select who will be the next President, never the People.
The way they do it is to ensure that they have their two candidates on the ballot. They don’t care who wins. Each network will still get its perks, its share of the spoils.
If you can’t see what they did to popular GOP candidates this last Winter and Spring, then you’re blind.
As hard as it is to accept, it bears repeating:
“Romney is a liberal democrat in republican clothing who will say whatever you want to hear but when decision time comes, he always decides in favor of liberal positions.”
The ruling class is content with either Obama or Romney.
What you think does not matter.
...Romney is a liberal, a democrat in republican clothing. (followed by a bunch of political trivia we already know)...Thank you, Capt Obvious! I would have never guessed Romney was a RINO, or that Pols are only in it for themselves, or that the whole electoral system is legally (or otherwise) biased to perpetuate the status quo. Tell us something else we already know!
My point stands -- Romney as "risk-taker", "maverick", "tough-guy", "authoritarian" and/or "congress-skirter"!? That's patently laughable. Romney won't be *deciding* anything, he will merely sign legislation that congress sends him and then poach the credit for it. That's why, as futile as some may think it is, voting down-ticket as conservative as you can is *really* important this time.
What really stinks is that as bad as he is, he is still *FAR* more preferable than Obama. If you disagree, then all you need to do is make your case for a more viable opponent to Obama and I'll vote *your* way. Otherwise, you're just wasting time & bandwidth griping and carping about the crap-hand we've all been dealt to no avail.