Bingo. In fact, what Romney did may be wrong philosophically, but it is still constitutional. If the yahoos in Massachusetts want this - all well and good, and they apparently do. Romney has been very clear that the Federal Government has no right under the constitution to enact Obamacare - and THAT is the important issue here.
sometimes I wonder if the people who post this are just too stupid to understand the enormity of the threat posed by an Obama victory in November, or are active trolls, working for the Democrats.
Thank you for being clear headed.
So you are okay with communism as long as it’s Constitutional. You will vote for any candidate, no matter how left wing, as long as they are allegedly Constitutional?
“Bingo. In fact, what Romney did may be wrong philosophically, but it is still constitutional. “
BS! RomneyCare, like ObamaCare, was an unprecedented theft of the freedom of the citizens of Mass! There is no basis for RomneyCare within the constitution of MA, a document written by John Adams. It is as statist and fraudulent in MA as it is for the entire country.
Wow, Zulu. Please answer me this: You are claiming state Romneycare is Constitutional and federal Romneycare is unconstitutional. Because Romney said so. But the Supreme Court ruled that federal Romneycare IS CONSTITUTIONAL . Once again: The Supreme Court ruled federal Romneycare is Constitutional. Q.E.D. FEDERAL ROMNEYCARE IS CONSTITUTIONAL!
Please explain your theory of the Constitution that Romney can decide what is Constitutional, but the Supreme Court can't?! That is a preposterous argument. The Constitution doesn't give presidential candidates more authority to decide what's Constitutional than the Supreme Court. And you know that.
So when you are voting, you are not voting between what candidates think is Constitutional. You are voting whether they think Romneycare is a good idea. And they both think it's a good idea. And don't try to sell me that something Romney is proud of, he wouldn't be okay making national. Expand the pride. The fact is, he's have to be dead set against it to combat it on the federal level.
The federal/state argument is a sham. It's either a good idea or it isn't. Vote on that.
Romney has not been clear on any issue. We are being told that we have to elect Romney to see what he will really do. Sound familiar. Stupid is voting for a pig in a poke. The devil you know etc.
I don’t want to re-invent this wheel that has been carved over-and-over here, but the blueprints seem to have been dropped down the memory hole.
The scotus ruled that Obamacare was constitutional as a tax pursuant to congress’ power to raise taxes.
Left lingering like a stale but potent fart was the invitation to `toss the rascals out’ (guess who? that’s right!) who made their intentions clear to raid our bank books: There is a solution and it is political.
Why do you think the Rats took such pains to have the costs described as “penalties” rather than taxes? Because they know Americans hate taxes. We broke from England over taxation. Still with me?
http://2012.republican-candidates.org/Romney/Issues.php
Mitt’s Plan
“Romney has been at pains to point out that the Massachusetts health care reform that he actively pushed for - alongside the late Senator Edward Kennedy - and subsequently signed into law as Governor of Massachusetts, was a state-level solution for a state-level problem - and in no way does it endorse a federal health care mandate.”
“On his first day in office, Mitt Romney will issue an executive order that paves the way for the federal government to issue Obamacare waivers to all fifty states. He will then work with Congress to repeal the full legislation as quickly as possible. In place of Obamacare, Mitt will pursue policies that give each state the power to craft a health care reform plan that is best for its own citizens. The federal government’s role will be to help markets work by creating a level playing field for competition.”
What do you think the chances are of Dear Leader repealing the only jewel in his shabby, tarnished crown?
For conservatives, Mitt is the wallflower at the dance who makes his own clothes, has a, uh, wonderful personality and all the other girls really like him.
Well, the `prom’ is in shouting distance and you can take him, or the foreign exchange student who combs her hair with a fork and uses English as a second language.
The GOP-e is the stupid party—except when a real decision has to be made then they do it. The Democrats live in cloud cuckoo land—except when they smell tax dollars, then they’re all business. Reality suspension time is over.
Time to cowboy up conservatives. Bite the bullet, run the rustler out of town and give the new sheriff a four year contract—renewal subject to about 4 or 5 dozen stringent conditions.
As representative Pence put it, fiscal conservatism is incompatible with social “progressivism”: so, life, period. Restore our border, boots on the ground. Rebuild our economy, energy and spending policies. Pink slips to several dozen “czars” and a peach basket-full more to beltway `Bureaus of Compliance’ and `Compliance Agencies’ (EPA, Education, Energy, the new one I can’t even remember because it’s too much like the CPSC, but with even more nanny-bell.) That is what is usually called a `good start’.
Or you can sit on your damn hands and bitch, “Why can’t things be the way they used to be under Reagan?” Exit whaaambulance, cue angelic choir and fade to dark.
Obama has got to go.... nothing else is rational.
Romneycare coerced upon the 50 states at the state level is no better than Obamacare, as they’ll end up in the same place, which is one nationalized system.