Milehigh said Obamacare wasn't bipartisan, so just to resolve any other confusion out there:

Quit being an @sshole, Max. You KNOW exactly what I meant. Nice try at deflection but you're nowhere near as good at it as the Democrat party you support.

Here's a clue, lightweight. Question - how many Republicans both in the House and the Senate VOTED for Obamacare?

Before all else, answer the question. You KNOW the answer. It was NOT bi-partisan and the vote shows that.

Besides that, there is, as you well know, a big difference between what a Governor of a STATE and a President can do and a big difference between a state run healthcare plan and one covering the entire nation. You had a moderate Republican as Gov in one of the most liberal states in the nation, with a liberal legislature. If you want to use that man as emblematic of the GOP position, have at it.

We aren't buying the BS you're selling.

(04-03-2012 03:16 PM)MileHighBronco Wrote:  Quit being an @sshole, Max. You KNOW exactly what I meant. Nice try at deflection but you're nowhere near as good at it as the Democrat party you support.

Here's a clue, lightweight. Question - how many Republicans both in the House and the Senate VOTED for Obamacare?

Before all else, answer the question. You KNOW the answer. It was NOT bi-partisan and the vote shows that.

Besides that, there is, as you well know, a big difference between what a Governor of a STATE and a President can do and a big difference between a state run healthcare plan and one covering the entire nation. You had a moderate Republican as Gov in one of the most liberal states in the nation, with a liberal legislature. If you want to use that man as emblematic of the GOP position, have at it.

We aren't buying the BS you're selling.

Romney wasn't governor at that point, and he was endorsing a FEDERAL mandate. And "that man" is about the be the standard bearer of the GOP. So yes, he is emblematic of the GOP position. Try using what few brain cells you have so the rest of us don't have to suffer through your stupidity.

(04-03-2012 03:16 PM)MileHighBronco Wrote:  If you want to use that man as emblematic of the GOP position, have at it.

He's about to be the GOP nominee for President, the head and identity of the party.

That's because once Obama and Dems adopted it the GOP naturally treated it like a pending communist revolution because they're demagogues. The GOP House and Senate had no interest at all in bipartisanship or working together, or even sitting at the same table with Dems in negotiations despite having been invited to do so. They were obstructionists who demagogued and exploited every issue, including this one which many in the GOP once supported, to energize their base and appeal to low information voters worried about "death panels" and "socialism."

And Romney in that video clip is saying we should take what he did in Massachussetts and apply it at the federal level. (And yes, it's exactly the opposite of what he's saying now).

The GOP is a bunch of demagogues who used the individual mandate as an alternative "market based" universal health care solution 20 years ago to Hillarycare and defeat it, and early in this past health reform debate they were using it for the same reason: to help kill the public option, as Romney is doing in the video clip. Then when Obama accepted the idea suddenly it became communism. Come on, you know this is true don't you? It's exactly what happened.

(04-03-2012 03:27 PM)Max Power Wrote:  That's because once Obama and Dems adopted it the GOP naturally treated it like a pending communist revolution because they're demagogues. The GOP House and Senate had no interest at all in bipartisanship or working together, or even sitting at the same table with Dems in negotiations despite having been invited to do so. They were obstructionists who demagogued and exploited every issue, including this one which many in the GOP once supported, to energize their base and appeal to low information voters worried about "death panels" and "socialism."

And Romney in that video clip is saying we should take what he did in Massachussetts and apply it at the federal level. (And yes, it's exactly the opposite of what he's saying now).

The GOP is a bunch of demagogues who used the individual mandate as an alternative "market based" universal health care solution 20 years ago to Hillarycare and defeat it, and early in this past health reform debate they were using it for the same reason: to help kill the public option, as Romney is doing in the video clip. Then when Obama accepted the idea suddenly the idea became communism. Come on, you know this is true don't you? It's exactly what happened.

Exactly right; it's hilarious and sad. Of course these fools either 1) can't see it, or 2) don't care because they hate Obama and everything else is irrelevant.

(04-03-2012 03:30 PM)wvucrazed Wrote:  Of course these fools either 1) can't see it, or 2) don't care because they hate Obama and everything else is irrelevant.

Or you guys are wrong. Which happens the vast majority of the time, so I know where I place my money.

This is another reason I'M NOT VOTING FOR HIM! So Max, what is your point? I think most of us know he is no different than Obama.

This thread was in response to Milehigh and others who denied GOPers/Romney supported the mandate.

I think the mandate is probably the best part of Obamacare. I favor universal health care, at least at some basic level. I do not think health care is a right; I don't consider anything a right that has to be provided at someone else's expense. That's not how I define rights. I support universal basic health care because I have researched the issue extensively, and independently of any talking points from either side, and that research indicates that society as a whole benefits from universal basic health care and it is highly cost-effective to provide it.

With those positions in mind, I oppose Obamacare. I think it is a terrible approach that combines the worst of our current system (tying health care to employment) with the worst of single-payer/single-provider systems (unaccountable government bureaucrats taking health care decisions away from doctors and patients). I consider those bureaucrats to be death panels, despite the glowing self-serving descriptions in the act, because similarly conceived agencies in single-payer/single-provider systems do in fact function precisely as death panels. As for the glowing self-serving language, it pretty much sounds like Big Brother in1984--which is precisely what I expect.

My attitude toward the lawsuits challenging the mandate is that the mandate is probably the weakest part of the bill constitutionally, because Obama, Reid, and Pelosi lied to the people and the congress to get it passed. Tell the truth and call it a tax and it sails through constitutional muster. That being the case, the enemy of my enemy is my friend on this issue. The one result I do not want to see is the mandate overturned but severed and the rest of the bill left in place.

Mitt is still pro-choice, anti-gun, pro-gay, pro-bailout, and anti-Reagan. SMH.

(04-05-2012 09:34 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  I think the mandate is probably the best part of Obamacare. I favor universal health care, at least at some basic level. I do not think health care is a right; I don't consider anything a right that has to be provided at someone else's expense. That's not how I define rights. I support universal basic health care because I have researched the issue extensively, and independently of any talking points from either side, and that research indicates that society as a whole benefits from universal basic health care and it is highly cost-effective to provide it.

With those positions in mind, I oppose Obamacare. I think it is a terrible approach that combines the worst of our current system (tying health care to employment) with the worst of single-payer/single-provider systems (unaccountable government bureaucrats taking health care decisions away from doctors and patients). I consider those bureaucrats to be death panels, despite the glowing self-serving descriptions in the act, because similarly conceived agencies in single-payer/single-provider systems do in fact function precisely as death panels. As for the glowing self-serving language, it pretty much sounds like Big Brother in1984--which is precisely what I expect.

My attitude toward the lawsuits challenging the mandate is that the mandate is probably the weakest part of the bill constitutionally, because Obama, Reid, and Pelosi lied to the people and the congress to get it passed. Tell the truth and call it a tax and it sails through constitutional muster. That being the case, the enemy of my enemy is my friend on this issue. The one result I do not want to see is the mandate overturned but severed and the rest of the bill left in place.

We've agreed on this before. I think that there's a ton of bathwater in that bill and it's drowning the baby. They're gonna throw them both out?

(04-05-2012 10:09 PM)nomad2u2001 Wrote:  

(04-05-2012 09:34 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  I think the mandate is probably the best part of Obamacare. I favor universal health care, at least at some basic level. I do not think health care is a right; I don't consider anything a right that has to be provided at someone else's expense. That's not how I define rights. I support universal basic health care because I have researched the issue extensively, and independently of any talking points from either side, and that research indicates that society as a whole benefits from universal basic health care and it is highly cost-effective to provide it.

With those positions in mind, I oppose Obamacare. I think it is a terrible approach that combines the worst of our current system (tying health care to employment) with the worst of single-payer/single-provider systems (unaccountable government bureaucrats taking health care decisions away from doctors and patients). I consider those bureaucrats to be death panels, despite the glowing self-serving descriptions in the act, because similarly conceived agencies in single-payer/single-provider systems do in fact function precisely as death panels. As for the glowing self-serving language, it pretty much sounds like Big Brother in1984--which is precisely what I expect.

My attitude toward the lawsuits challenging the mandate is that the mandate is probably the weakest part of the bill constitutionally, because Obama, Reid, and Pelosi lied to the people and the congress to get it passed. Tell the truth and call it a tax and it sails through constitutional muster. That being the case, the enemy of my enemy is my friend on this issue. The one result I do not want to see is the mandate overturned but severed and the rest of the bill left in place.

We've agreed on this before. I think that there's a ton of bathwater in that bill and it's drowning the baby. They're gonna throw them both out?

I agree....Obamacare is a failure waiting to happen. We can do much better..and should.

Newsflash..... For you liberal fools....

Gillespie: Romney Will End Obamacare

Friday, 06 Apr 2012 07:31 PM
By Paul Scicchitano

If Mitt Romney becomes the GOP presidential nominee, there should be no question that his top priority will be to end Obamacare, insists the front-runner’s newest key adviser — Republican political strategist and former White House counselor Ed Gillespie.

“The fact is that Gov. Romney has made clear that his top priority if he’s elected will be to repeal Obamacare, and I think people have no doubt about that — and they shouldn’t have any doubt about that,” Gillespie said Friday.

Gillespie, the first chairman of the Republican National Committee to preside over a clean sweep of the White House and both houses of Congress, also predicted that the GOP is likely to reclaim the Senate and hold on to its House majority if President Barack Obama is defeated in November.

“The Senate, I believe, is pretty closely tied to the presidential outcome. I think that if we elect a Republican president, which I believe to be likely, we will gain a majority in the Senate,” he explained. “So I would say it’s likely. But it will be a narrow majority is my sense.”

The arrival of such a high-profile figure as Gillespie into the Romney camp may be yet another signal that Romney is well on his way to achieving the necessary 1,144 delegates needed to clinch the GOP nomination.

“It says that Romney understands that he has to surround himself with people who have an absolute grasp on not only how to be elected, but how to govern,” GOP political strategist Bradley Blakeman tells Newsmax. “Ed is very well respected. He is a great manager. He is a great political thinker and he has the gravitas to attract first-rate talent to the campaign and eventually to an administration.”

While the president may be particularly vulnerable concerning the healthcare reform law, Romney too is seen as vulnerable to counterattacks over his role in bringing healthcare reform to Massachusetts, a program which one of Obama’s top aides gleefully touted recently as a model for Obamacare.

“He may not have to repeal it depending on what the Supreme Court does,” added Blakeman, a Newsmax contributor, who makes frequent appearances on Fox News. “It may be a moot point by the time the convention rolls around.”

Gillespie, who also served as a counselor to President George W. Bush, said that he believes Obama’s greatest vulnerability is his handling of the economy. “I think the American people understand that he inherited a tough economy but he hasn’t made it better and he’s wasted a lot of time in office,” according to Gillespie.

“People want to see a rigorous response to create private sector jobs,” he said. “I think they feel like his focus on healthcare, [the] stimulus — which wasted a lot of money — efforts to try to further regulate energy, and to stop more production — domestic production — have resulted in higher prices.”

Author of the book, “Winning Right: Campaign Politics and Conservative Policies” in 2006, Gillespie predicted that Santorum is likely to win his home state of Pennsylvania on April 24, but said the momentum now clearly favors Romney.

“Every nominee running for the Republican Party’s presidential nomination should be able to win their own home state. That’s a pretty low bar,” he insisted. “I’d be surprised if Rick Santorum didn’t carry his home state in the primary. I think that’s all but a given.”

While Santorum’s appeal — as well as that of former House Speaker Newt Gingrich — has been widely viewed as an anti-Romney sentiment from the more conservative base, Gillespie said he is confident that Romney will be able to bridge the gap between conservatives and moderate Republicans in a general election.

“I’m a conservative and I believe that Gov. Romney will cut taxes, stop the onslaught of federal regulations, protect innocent human life, repeal Obamacare, make our nation stronger and respected again,” said Gillespie. “I think when people see the contrast between Gov. Romney’s pro-growth, pro-life, pro-national security agenda, compared to President Obama’s, you could not have a more stark contrast and I believe that they will rally to him.”

As policy and communications director for the House Republican Conference, Gillespie was a principal drafter of the Contract with America — the 1994 campaign platform that helped the GOP gain control of the House for the first time in 40 years. His expertise as a political strategist will be essential in helping Romney overcome a so-called “gender gap” among women voters and in building support among the all-important Hispanic voters.

He believes that women — not unlike men — have been turned off by the negative tone of the Republican primary. “I believe that when they see the agenda to Gov. Romney’s policies in contrast to those of President Obama that gap is going to narrow,” Gillespie said. “We’ve historically had a gap between the Democrats and Republicans with women voters and there’s been a gap with men voters as well. The question is how big is that gap and can you close it? I believe that Gov. Romney can close it.”

Similarly, it will be critical to attract Hispanic voters in states like Florida, New Mexico, Nevada, Colorado and increasingly in North Carolina, Ohio and in the Midwest, according to Gillespie.

“We have to do better than we did in 2008 with Hispanic voters and I believe we can,” he said, pointing to issues like the economy, jobs, education reform, and the stifling regulatory environment as particular concerns in the Latino community. “The fact is in the general election I think that you will see a much greater effort to communicate those policies to Hispanic voters.”

Gillespie insists that Obama not only “stepped way over a line” in trying to “intimidate” the Supreme Court earlier this week, but he misstated the facts concerning Obamacare in doing so.

“He was wrong substantively in every instance. The fact is it was not passed with overwhelming support in Congress,” said Gillespie, noting that a former law professor should be familiar with the concept of judicial review. “It passed very narrowly. [Sen.] Harry Reid had to resort to a procedural step that was virtually unprecedented in terms of passing legislation of this magnitude, and on top of that, the court has always — since Marbury vs. Madison— had the right to strike down legislation that it finds unconstitutional.”

Nevertheless, the Obama machine has been building a formidable re-election war chest, prompting Gillespie to refer to the president as “fundraiser-in-chief.”

He said he anticipates that the president will “run a relentlessly negative campaign” against the eventual Republican nominee.

“I don’t think it will work,” he added. “I think the views of President Obama are pretty clearly formed at this point, and I think Republicans are ready to put a stop to the massive amounts of debt, the calls for higher taxes on entrepreneurship and small business owners, the excessive regulations that are stifling our energy production, and jobs, and our economy, and the assaults on religious freedom. I think that voters have seen that agenda, and most of them don’t like it.”

(04-06-2012 11:02 PM)SumOfAllFears Wrote:  Newsflash..... For you liberal fools....

Gillespie: Romney Will End Obamacare

Friday, 06 Apr 2012 07:31 PM
By Paul Scicchitano

If Mitt Romney becomes the GOP presidential nominee, there should be no question that his top priority will be to end Obamacare, insists the front-runner’s newest key adviser — Republican political strategist and former White House counselor Ed Gillespie.

“The fact is that Gov. Romney has made clear that his top priority if he’s elected will be to repeal Obamacare, and I think people have no doubt about that — and they shouldn’t have any doubt about that,” Gillespie said Friday.

Gillespie, the first chairman of the Republican National Committee to preside over a clean sweep of the White House and both houses of Congress, also predicted that the GOP is likely to reclaim the Senate and hold on to its House majority if President Barack Obama is defeated in November.

“The Senate, I believe, is pretty closely tied to the presidential outcome. I think that if we elect a Republican president, which I believe to be likely, we will gain a majority in the Senate,” he explained. “So I would say it’s likely. But it will be a narrow majority is my sense.”

The arrival of such a high-profile figure as Gillespie into the Romney camp may be yet another signal that Romney is well on his way to achieving the necessary 1,144 delegates needed to clinch the GOP nomination.

“It says that Romney understands that he has to surround himself with people who have an absolute grasp on not only how to be elected, but how to govern,” GOP political strategist Bradley Blakeman tells Newsmax. “Ed is very well respected. He is a great manager. He is a great political thinker and he has the gravitas to attract first-rate talent to the campaign and eventually to an administration.”

While the president may be particularly vulnerable concerning the healthcare reform law, Romney too is seen as vulnerable to counterattacks over his role in bringing healthcare reform to Massachusetts, a program which one of Obama’s top aides gleefully touted recently as a model for Obamacare.

“He may not have to repeal it depending on what the Supreme Court does,” added Blakeman, a Newsmax contributor, who makes frequent appearances on Fox News. “It may be a moot point by the time the convention rolls around.”

Gillespie, who also served as a counselor to President George W. Bush, said that he believes Obama’s greatest vulnerability is his handling of the economy. “I think the American people understand that he inherited a tough economy but he hasn’t made it better and he’s wasted a lot of time in office,” according to Gillespie.

“People want to see a rigorous response to create private sector jobs,” he said. “I think they feel like his focus on healthcare, [the] stimulus — which wasted a lot of money — efforts to try to further regulate energy, and to stop more production — domestic production — have resulted in higher prices.”

Author of the book, “Winning Right: Campaign Politics and Conservative Policies” in 2006, Gillespie predicted that Santorum is likely to win his home state of Pennsylvania on April 24, but said the momentum now clearly favors Romney.

“Every nominee running for the Republican Party’s presidential nomination should be able to win their own home state. That’s a pretty low bar,” he insisted. “I’d be surprised if Rick Santorum didn’t carry his home state in the primary. I think that’s all but a given.”

While Santorum’s appeal — as well as that of former House Speaker Newt Gingrich — has been widely viewed as an anti-Romney sentiment from the more conservative base, Gillespie said he is confident that Romney will be able to bridge the gap between conservatives and moderate Republicans in a general election.

“I’m a conservative and I believe that Gov. Romney will cut taxes, stop the onslaught of federal regulations, protect innocent human life, repeal Obamacare, make our nation stronger and respected again,” said Gillespie. “I think when people see the contrast between Gov. Romney’s pro-growth, pro-life, pro-national security agenda, compared to President Obama’s, you could not have a more stark contrast and I believe that they will rally to him.”

As policy and communications director for the House Republican Conference, Gillespie was a principal drafter of the Contract with America — the 1994 campaign platform that helped the GOP gain control of the House for the first time in 40 years. His expertise as a political strategist will be essential in helping Romney overcome a so-called “gender gap” among women voters and in building support among the all-important Hispanic voters.

He believes that women — not unlike men — have been turned off by the negative tone of the Republican primary. “I believe that when they see the agenda to Gov. Romney’s policies in contrast to those of President Obama that gap is going to narrow,” Gillespie said. “We’ve historically had a gap between the Democrats and Republicans with women voters and there’s been a gap with men voters as well. The question is how big is that gap and can you close it? I believe that Gov. Romney can close it.”

Similarly, it will be critical to attract Hispanic voters in states like Florida, New Mexico, Nevada, Colorado and increasingly in North Carolina, Ohio and in the Midwest, according to Gillespie.

“We have to do better than we did in 2008 with Hispanic voters and I believe we can,” he said, pointing to issues like the economy, jobs, education reform, and the stifling regulatory environment as particular concerns in the Latino community. “The fact is in the general election I think that you will see a much greater effort to communicate those policies to Hispanic voters.”

Gillespie insists that Obama not only “stepped way over a line” in trying to “intimidate” the Supreme Court earlier this week, but he misstated the facts concerning Obamacare in doing so.

“He was wrong substantively in every instance. The fact is it was not passed with overwhelming support in Congress,” said Gillespie, noting that a former law professor should be familiar with the concept of judicial review. “It passed very narrowly. [Sen.] Harry Reid had to resort to a procedural step that was virtually unprecedented in terms of passing legislation of this magnitude, and on top of that, the court has always — since Marbury vs. Madison— had the right to strike down legislation that it finds unconstitutional.”

Nevertheless, the Obama machine has been building a formidable re-election war chest, prompting Gillespie to refer to the president as “fundraiser-in-chief.”

He said he anticipates that the president will “run a relentlessly negative campaign” against the eventual Republican nominee.

“I don’t think it will work,” he added. “I think the views of President Obama are pretty clearly formed at this point, and I think Republicans are ready to put a stop to the massive amounts of debt, the calls for higher taxes on entrepreneurship and small business owners, the excessive regulations that are stifling our energy production, and jobs, and our economy, and the assaults on religious freedom. I think that voters have seen that agenda, and most of them don’t like it.”

Is this supposed to prove something?

(04-06-2012 11:02 PM)SumOfAllFears Wrote:  Newsflash..... For you liberal fools....

Gillespie: Romney Will End Obamacare

Friday, 06 Apr 2012 07:31 PM
By Paul Scicchitano

If Mitt Romney becomes the GOP presidential nominee, there should be no question that his top priority will be to end Obamacare, insists the front-runner’s newest key adviser — Republican political strategist and former White House counselor Ed Gillespie.

“The fact is that Gov. Romney has made clear that his top priority if he’s elected will be to repeal Obamacare, and I think people have no doubt about that — and they shouldn’t have any doubt about that,” Gillespie said Friday.

Gillespie, the first chairman of the Republican National Committee to preside over a clean sweep of the White House and both houses of Congress, also predicted that the GOP is likely to reclaim the Senate and hold on to its House majority if President Barack Obama is defeated in November.

“The Senate, I believe, is pretty closely tied to the presidential outcome. I think that if we elect a Republican president, which I believe to be likely, we will gain a majority in the Senate,” he explained. “So I would say it’s likely. But it will be a narrow majority is my sense.”

The arrival of such a high-profile figure as Gillespie into the Romney camp may be yet another signal that Romney is well on his way to achieving the necessary 1,144 delegates needed to clinch the GOP nomination.

“It says that Romney understands that he has to surround himself with people who have an absolute grasp on not only how to be elected, but how to govern,” GOP political strategist Bradley Blakeman tells Newsmax. “Ed is very well respected. He is a great manager. He is a great political thinker and he has the gravitas to attract first-rate talent to the campaign and eventually to an administration.”

While the president may be particularly vulnerable concerning the healthcare reform law, Romney too is seen as vulnerable to counterattacks over his role in bringing healthcare reform to Massachusetts, a program which one of Obama’s top aides gleefully touted recently as a model for Obamacare.

“He may not have to repeal it depending on what the Supreme Court does,” added Blakeman, a Newsmax contributor, who makes frequent appearances on Fox News. “It may be a moot point by the time the convention rolls around.”

Gillespie, who also served as a counselor to President George W. Bush, said that he believes Obama’s greatest vulnerability is his handling of the economy. “I think the American people understand that he inherited a tough economy but he hasn’t made it better and he’s wasted a lot of time in office,” according to Gillespie.

“People want to see a rigorous response to create private sector jobs,” he said. “I think they feel like his focus on healthcare, [the] stimulus — which wasted a lot of money — efforts to try to further regulate energy, and to stop more production — domestic production — have resulted in higher prices.”

Author of the book, “Winning Right: Campaign Politics and Conservative Policies” in 2006, Gillespie predicted that Santorum is likely to win his home state of Pennsylvania on April 24, but said the momentum now clearly favors Romney.

“Every nominee running for the Republican Party’s presidential nomination should be able to win their own home state. That’s a pretty low bar,” he insisted. “I’d be surprised if Rick Santorum didn’t carry his home state in the primary. I think that’s all but a given.”

While Santorum’s appeal — as well as that of former House Speaker Newt Gingrich — has been widely viewed as an anti-Romney sentiment from the more conservative base, Gillespie said he is confident that Romney will be able to bridge the gap between conservatives and moderate Republicans in a general election.

“I’m a conservative and I believe that Gov. Romney will cut taxes, stop the onslaught of federal regulations, protect innocent human life, repeal Obamacare, make our nation stronger and respected again,” said Gillespie. “I think when people see the contrast between Gov. Romney’s pro-growth, pro-life, pro-national security agenda, compared to President Obama’s, you could not have a more stark contrast and I believe that they will rally to him.”

As policy and communications director for the House Republican Conference, Gillespie was a principal drafter of the Contract with America — the 1994 campaign platform that helped the GOP gain control of the House for the first time in 40 years. His expertise as a political strategist will be essential in helping Romney overcome a so-called “gender gap” among women voters and in building support among the all-important Hispanic voters.

He believes that women — not unlike men — have been turned off by the negative tone of the Republican primary. “I believe that when they see the agenda to Gov. Romney’s policies in contrast to those of President Obama that gap is going to narrow,” Gillespie said. “We’ve historically had a gap between the Democrats and Republicans with women voters and there’s been a gap with men voters as well. The question is how big is that gap and can you close it? I believe that Gov. Romney can close it.”

Similarly, it will be critical to attract Hispanic voters in states like Florida, New Mexico, Nevada, Colorado and increasingly in North Carolina, Ohio and in the Midwest, according to Gillespie.

“We have to do better than we did in 2008 with Hispanic voters and I believe we can,” he said, pointing to issues like the economy, jobs, education reform, and the stifling regulatory environment as particular concerns in the Latino community. “The fact is in the general election I think that you will see a much greater effort to communicate those policies to Hispanic voters.”

Gillespie insists that Obama not only “stepped way over a line” in trying to “intimidate” the Supreme Court earlier this week, but he misstated the facts concerning Obamacare in doing so.

“He was wrong substantively in every instance. The fact is it was not passed with overwhelming support in Congress,” said Gillespie, noting that a former law professor should be familiar with the concept of judicial review. “It passed very narrowly. [Sen.] Harry Reid had to resort to a procedural step that was virtually unprecedented in terms of passing legislation of this magnitude, and on top of that, the court has always — since Marbury vs. Madison— had the right to strike down legislation that it finds unconstitutional.”

Nevertheless, the Obama machine has been building a formidable re-election war chest, prompting Gillespie to refer to the president as “fundraiser-in-chief.”

He said he anticipates that the president will “run a relentlessly negative campaign” against the eventual Republican nominee.

“I don’t think it will work,” he added. “I think the views of President Obama are pretty clearly formed at this point, and I think Republicans are ready to put a stop to the massive amounts of debt, the calls for higher taxes on entrepreneurship and small business owners, the excessive regulations that are stifling our energy production, and jobs, and our economy, and the assaults on religious freedom. I think that voters have seen that agenda, and most of them don’t like it.”

Something tells me that Romney won't be able to do sh!t. The best bet we have lies with the SCOTUS striking this mess down and a GOP led congress that can put forth a REAL solid HC bill that gives America the BEST HC system in the world.

Honestly though....I really don't believe the the GOP has the ability to script a good bill anymore than the other gang could. I have no confidence in either gang getting sh!t done that really needs doing. They are too damn worried about global warming, gay marriage,abortion,and other social issues to bother with things that actually impact the average person positively on a daily basis. How about get me some damn roads and bridges safe to drive on?..an energy policy that starts to put us on a path to energy independence?.....a HC system that we can be proud of and a much needed revamped tax structure?

I don't know who something is.... but Romney could do the same as Obaffoon on the DOM Act. Not saying that is the right way to do it, but it beats bankrupting the country. He might even call it a National Security Issue.

Bankrupting the country by enforcing a law projected to save us $800 billion?

The difference between Obama's decision not to enforce DOMA and a Romney decision to do the same with Obamacare is that (if Obamacare is indeed still around) Obamacare would have been ruled constitutional by the courts, while DOMA had not been. The executive branch has to enforce constitutional laws (see Massachusetts v EPA).

Romney could just let the courts battle it out, which will take years, So Romney using Obaffoon's play book, would use executive orders to circumvent congress and ObaffoonCare, just like his predecessor. You know how inventive lawyers can be.

That doesn't make any sense. The Supreme Court will rule decisively in June, so Romney can't waste years fighting it in court.