Hey Romney Supporters - 51 Votes in the Senate Overturns Obamacare If It's a Tax

me ^ | 7/3/2012 | vbmoneyspender

[tsowellfan]

Calling it a tax to repeal most of it sides with the SCOTUS (and Roberts) on their decision. Alternatively Romney cant call it a tax because he already is on record saying the mandate in his MA Romney-care bill was not a tax the same as the Obama argument.

Basically RomneyCare is coming back to bite him.

[Suz in AZ]

That’s what I said. :)
Only need 50 pubs in the Senate. Not 51.

[tsowellfan]

My bet is he takes a dive in this election.

Unfortunately I think you're right. I say unfortunately because Obama is the worst pResident in my lifetime. I'd vote for Jimmy Carter over this man we got in the White House. We may have seen Romney's peak. It may be time for that 4 year vacation in Costa Rica.

[sickoflibs]

RE :”Basically RomneyCare is coming back to bite him.”

How could this happen? They said he was the most electable, just like McCain.

[Finny]

Perhaps Romney does not want to help conservatives gain control of the Senate. He may feel too pressured as President with a bunch of conservatives in control. If he calls it a tax then that would encourage conservatives to fight hard for a majority big enough to repeal ObamaCare.

Excuse me, tsowellfan, I say this with the utmost repect and lack of rancor (I've admired many of your posts over the years; I am a Sowell fan as well and my late, very wise, beloved father was well read on Sowell and considered his political mind the best of the best) but ... you're still willing to sanction Romney, consent to Romney, because you think he'd be better than Obama?

When it is abundantly clear that he would only be different?

You are on the verge of giving Romney your blessing -- no matter your intent, your vote for Romney would be perceived and acted upon as your blessing and support for everyting Romney is.

There is much more liklihood of conservatism being dealt a death blow in a Romney landslide than if Obama won on a plurality. (That alone is reason enough to vote FOR a plurality by voting third party.)

I am just dumbfounded reading your true and wise assessments of Romney here and there on FR, and then reading that you are planning to vote for him if it comes down to O v R. Truly, if one need evidence of how deranged ABO is ... it is in abundance here.

Voting for Romney in hopes of even the tiniest improvement, is like drinking salt water while stranded at sea in the hopes that it's better than no water at all. Hard and illogical as it seems, the only option at sea is to hunker down and wait for rain of fresh water; better to vote how you can (and that is third party) to weaken the mandate of whichever statist wins, and hunker down and fight Obama with the fresh water of conservatism.

[I see my hands]

Here is a straight forward answer: Romney is the RINO from Hell. His staff are demons bent on imposing and retaining liberal policies. Personally I despise him as I am aware the vast majority on this board do.

I can't imagine a worse candidate on the Republican ticket. You have no special knowledge nor unique analysis different than that of the others posters on this site. No one here is a Romney supporter so can that BS.

ROMNEY SUCKS AND WILL THINK, SAY AND DO THINGS THAT SUCK.

As America politics has become Hell on Earth it is almost certain that in November either Romney or Obama will be our next president. Now, I'm not asking who you will vote for or if you will vote. I'm asking which of the candidates do you prefer is president after the vote in November? A straight forward answer of one word will do.

[tsowellfan]

The straightforward answer is that you are almost certainly a whining, lying little tool who wants Obama to win the election.

As a person who plans on voting for Romney your answer makes me doubt Romney will win. Your answer mirrors exactly how Romney is running his campaign. Basically, "I am not Obama". I have yet to see any substance from the man.

As someone here in FR said:

"Romney has no attack other than “Im not Obama” pretty much...everything else is generic statements about how bad the economy is and that’s about it and even his statements about the bad economy sounds like he’s making a cheap television commercial with no passion"

Well, that's not going to cut it. vbmoneyspender who started this thread asked some very good questions and not even a Romney supporter can answer it?

How's that html, any better for you?

[tsowellfan]

I cannot argue with anything you said. You are 100% correct!

[HANG THE EXPENSE]

Oh course the bummer is the worst resident ever but the powers that be want him in there again and romnutts is their patsy this time around.Costa Rica sounds great to me for the duration.

[GeorgeWashingtonsGhost]

Watch the Senate pass a resolution that states that 0bamacare is officially ‘a penalty’.

[nathanbedford]

I'd love to get straightforward answers to those questions from Romney supporters.

(From a reply of 2 days ago):

Only Chief Justice Roberts has flip-flopped on calling this penalty a tax more often than has the Commander-In-Chief, Barack Obama.

For Roberts, it is not a tax for the purposes of ripeness but it is a tax for the purposes of constitutional review. Actually Obama did him one better, telling the world and Congress before passage that it was not a tax, sending His Solicitor General to tell the Supreme Court that it was a tax, and now maintaining once again that is not a tax.

Obviously MSNBC is trying to catch out the Romney campaign in an effort to diffuse a potent issue for the Republicans, the braking by Obama on this promise not to impose any new taxes on the middle class. If the Democrats can now upgrade the idea that Romney himself believes that it is not a tax it will be difficult for the Republicans to exploit the issue.

Unless the Republicans draw clear distinctions they will see a nice issue obfuscated. They should abandon this word game in an attempt to exploit the sophistry of Chief Justice Roberts or they are liable to find themselves flip-flopping as often as Roberts and Obama.

In reality the mandate penalty is just that, a penalty and not a tax, of that I personally have no doubt. Romney is correct in maintaining that it is penalty and it is a position consistent with the universally held belief among conservatives that the law is unconstitutional. Put another way, if one accepts that enforcement of the mandate is by way of a tax and not a penalty, the law is constitutional. Therefore, intellectual consistency requires conservatives to maintain that this is a penalty and not a tax.

But intellectual honesty also requires Democrats to concede that if the law is constitutional the extraction of payment in violation of the mandate is a tax. If it is not a tax, Obama care is not constitutional by the vote of five Justices.

However, Republicans can and should draw a distinction between these sums to be paid by a minority of individuals as a penalty for violating the mandate and the mountain of taxes and debts imposed upon the United States taxpayers by this massive new law. There are several taxes within this bill, such as on medical devices, tanning beds, etc. which are in fact taxes and which do in fact affect the middle class. Moreover, the opposition to the law comes from the fact that its extravagance and mismanagement will simply add trillions to the taxpayer's burdens.

Let the Democrats defend the bill on its extravagance and we will win the day just as we have won the public relations battle on this issue to date.

[reaganaut]

The only other alternative is stay home.

- - - -
No, you can vote down ticket for conservatives and vote conservative (not GOP) for POTUS. Many of us are not planning on staying home and voting against BOTH Mitt and Obama.

[TigerClaws]

If it’s a tax, it can’t be challenged properly until there’s an attempt to collect it.

The SCOTUS punted based on politics trumping the Constitution. Who knows what the rules are now?

[reaganaut]

Well said. Another factor with a Romney win and him maintaining the status quo (which he will do) is it will put us in a LOSING position in 2016 and the Dems will put up someone WORSE than Obama.

God help this country.

[tsowellfan]

I live next door to Romney's state. I can say that McCain is very conservative compared to Mitt Romney. Romney is the closest I've seen to our version of John Kerry or even an Al Gore.

Romney will stand on a street corner and tell a conservative that he's for traditional marriage to get his vote then cross the street and tell a gay he's all for gay marriage. That's Romney in a nut shell and without exageration.

[FredZarguna]

The Supreme Court has nothing to say about the rules of the Senate. ACA was passed under a budget reconciliation measure that bypassed the normal process and can therefore be replealed under the same rules.

Roberts' idiotic ruling has NO BEARING on the question. We never needed more than 51 votes.

[FredZarguna]

The Supreme Court has nothing to say about the rules of the Senate. ACA was passed under a budget reconciliation measure that bypassed the normal process and can therefore be replealed under the same rules.

Roberts' idiotic ruling has NO BEARING on the question. We never needed more than 51 votes.

[mylife]

WHO could be worse than Obama?

I thought Bawney Fwank retired.

[tsowellfan]

you can vote down ticket for conservatives and vote conservative (not GOP) for POTUS.

That's true. Actually, some positive could come out of this by doing it as you say.

First of all, I don't see Obama leaving the WH even if Romney won the election. Obama will refuse to concede because "it will be the right thing to do".

And we certainly do not need a liberal republican spending the next 4 years claiming to be a conservative. That would just move center leftward. By the time Romney finished his term even Susan Collins would be considered too "right wing" to ever be President.

[NoLibZone]

No one picked Romney from day 1.

With the exception of Paul , ANY of the others would have been better.

He is a weak conservative.