White House still avoiding calling health-care mandate a tax

Does that also mean we all need to call it a tax? Ohhh...I see what you're saying. You want Big Brother to regulate our thoughts. When the Supreme Court makes a ruling, then all of us need to believe and say the same thing.

Let us all be equal! Power to the collective! Thank you Comrade Hightop for enlightening me with your communist ways!

 

If the Supreme Court declared ACA constitutional, it is constitutional, right?

 

You've convinced me that collectivism is the way to the light. I dare not disagree with High Father.

 

Mitt Romney sticks his foot in his mouth AGAIN....

He and his party has their collective asses handed to them by John Roberts..

Spin control?..... harp on it being a "tax".....

Romney's camp?

"It isn't a tax." .......... *HEAR THE HUGE SUCKING SOUND*

Now Romney has destroyed his only talking point..... all he can do is say nothing on HCR or be exposed as a flip flopping liar....

Seriously.... has anyone ever consistently destroyed his own campaign as well as Mitt>?

 

TODD: It sounds like Governor Romney though agrees that it’s not a tax. So what you just said is that Governor Romney agrees that it’s not a tax. You guys called it a tax?

FEHRNSTROM: The governor disagreed with the ruling of the court. He agreed with the dissent written by Justice Scalia which very clearly stated that the mandate was not a tax.

TODD: Okay. Which -- so I guess -- we're -- I think we're talking around each other. The governor does not believe the mandate is a tax? That is what you're saying?

FEHRNSTROM: The governor believes that what we put in place in Massachusetts was a penalty and he disagrees with the court's ruling that the mandate was a tax.

TODD: But he agrees with the president that it is not -- and he believes that you should not call the tax penalty a tax, you should call it a penalty or a fee or a fine?

FEHRNSTROM: That's correct.

 

Jesus...... his handler was given 2-3 outs and failed to take any of them...

 

It's only July, and the Romney campaign is already looking like a deer in the headlights. Can't wait until the debates begin!

 

I'll take "a lie" like this (really an argument over semantics) than say:

"Iraq has weapons of Mass destruction" - Bush 2003

Thousands of lives later and TRILLIONS of dollars cost on that LIE.

 

I don't even know if the Romney camp has a choice, this is what happens when a moderate has to pretend to be a conservative candidate. Although, I can't recall a candidate ever having to rail so strongly against a specific policy that they originally enacted. The real question is whether the Democrats can capitalize on this. The Republicans are constantly winning the message war with their dumbed-down slogans and talking points, so it wouldn't surprise me at all to see them somehow come out on top in this one as well. Obama needs to hammer this home during the debates, it should definitely be interesting, that's for sure.

 

"As we’ve said from the beginning, Gov. Romney’s problem is that his approach on health care was very much the model for the Affordable Care Act. His case for the mandate was as cogent as any. His explanation then of the penalty on “free riders,” who game the system and let taxpayers and the insured pick up their freight, was right on target.

So now, as the Republican Party and their SuperPacs try to depict this narrow, freeloader penalty, that would touch less than 1 percent of Americans, as a broad tax on the middle class, they’re sliming their own nominee, as well."

--David Axelrod

 

Lol, ok it's a tax BFD -- Obama is reelected in November.

 

Why is Obama a liar for disagreeing that the mandate penalty is actually a tax? Because the Supreme Court said so? If that's your view, then Mitt Romney must be a liar for disagreeing with the entire ruling, right?

You do know that he can disagree with semantics such as what to call the penalty/tax but still agree that his legislation is constitutional?

 

My point exactly. Just because something "can be regarded" as a tax "in effect," doesn't mean it must be a tax or referred to as one in perpetuity.

I think you're a little fuzzy on what the Supreme Court did. It made a ruling on the constitutionality of PPACA, not on whether the penalty is a tax or not.

 

Not enough intellectual capability to answer my question, thought so.

 

Red herring.

The fact that a cow is a cow isn't really open for interpretation.

Whether the penalty can be characterized as a tax will vary depending upon whom you ask.

For someone that constantly rails against collectivism, you're quick to accept Chief Justice Roberts statements as immutable truth.