It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Is the SCOTUS decision a move to insure Romney gets elected?

page: 1
5

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 28 2012 @ 12:29 PM
link   
I have the strangest feeling that the whole reason behind the SCOTUS's ruling on the Obamacare law is to essentially force the populace of the United States to elect Romney. This decision has set Romney up to become their savior. With Romney promising to repeal on his first day in office, most everyone will vote for him. I just feel that the PTB have shown their hand with this decision.

So, what do you guy's think?




posted on Jun, 28 2012 @ 12:32 PM
link   
At first I also thought this made Romney a shoe-in for November. But, if you think about it, it takes the health care issue off the table because there is very little difference between Obama's legislation and Romney's Massachusetts legislation. The last thing Romney wants is to have to talk about that.

Don't get me wrong, I think the GOP PTB will try to spin it, but, ultimately, Romney won't want to discuss it.



posted on Jun, 28 2012 @ 12:41 PM
link   
ATS Thread - Romney makes big $$$ after SCOTUS ruling

Not much difference between Obamacare and Romneycare ...
But the fact is that Obama said this wasn't a tax and the SCOTUS says it absolutely is.
And Obama said he wouldn't raise people's taxes.
This is going to cost people BIG TIME ... it's a mess.
(and are they going to jail the poor people who can't afford to pay the new tax????)

Apparently this is a big boost for Romney's contributions coming in.



posted on Jun, 28 2012 @ 12:49 PM
link   
reply to post by kosmicjack
 


I see your point about Romney not wanting to discuss this issue, but I still am wondering why the promise to repeal. If Romneycare and Obamacare being the same thing isn't common knowledge, and I think the majority of people will blindly vote for Romney based on this promise. I hope I am wrong, but they believed every lie that Obama sold. So I'm not going to hold my breath that they will see through Romney's promises.



posted on Jun, 28 2012 @ 12:53 PM
link   
I do agree with your thinking, OP, but in the end, what will it matter? I sense things going downhill fast no matter which imbecile is chosen.



Besides, when has any candidate actually kept a campaign promise that didn't benefit big business?



posted on Jun, 28 2012 @ 12:53 PM
link   
reply to post by FlyersFan
 


I being one of those poor people this will effect, am very upset about this law. I am worried about going to jail eventually because I can't afford to pay this new tax. I have been saying it's a tax since it passed, and now the SCOTUS has agreed with me, but they stabbed every American in the back today by upholding this oppressive new law. SMH



posted on Jun, 28 2012 @ 12:57 PM
link   
reply to post by FissionSurplus
 


Exactly my point. We see this reality and see through the lies, but I don't think that the majority of people do. If they did, would they keep buying the lies, time after time? I just don't have any confidence in this system at all anymore, but it will take everyone waking up and feeling, and expressing the same emotions, before anything will change. IMO



posted on Jun, 28 2012 @ 12:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by georgiaboy
I see your point about Romney not wanting to discuss this issue, but I still am wondering why the promise to repeal.


It's called pandering. Romney doesn't care one way or the other about this. Or he'll care about it tomorrow but not the next day, or something.

But saying he'll do something about it might gain him a few votes from people who aren't paying attention.



posted on Jun, 28 2012 @ 01:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by Open_Minded Skeptic

Originally posted by georgiaboy
I see your point about Romney not wanting to discuss this issue, but I still am wondering why the promise to repeal.


It's called pandering. Romney doesn't care one way or the other about this. Or he'll care about it tomorrow but not the next day, or something.

But saying he'll do something about it might gain him a few votes from people who aren't paying attention.


I understand it's just pandering and political posturing, but I don't think most people do. This decision is designed to force the hand of the general into electing the establishment's choice for president. IMO



posted on Jun, 28 2012 @ 01:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by Open_Minded Skeptic

Originally posted by georgiaboy
I see your point about Romney not wanting to discuss this issue, but I still am wondering why the promise to repeal.


It's called pandering. Romney doesn't care one way or the other about this. Or he'll care about it tomorrow but not the next day, or something.

But saying he'll do something about it might gain him a few votes from people who aren't paying attention.

It's most certainly pandering, worthless and empty pandering at that - the president has no authority or ability to repeal or offer waivers to laws passed by Congress, especially if they've been substantiated - however wrongly and stupidly - by SCOTUS.

This is an obvious case of all bark, no bite - unless Romney's planning to go full dictator and show us even more wrongful seizure of power by the Executive branch, to do things it has no valid way of doing.



posted on Jun, 28 2012 @ 01:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by georgiaboy
reply to post by FlyersFan
 


I being one of those poor people this will effect, am very upset about this law. I am worried about going to jail eventually because I can't afford to pay this new tax. I have been saying it's a tax since it passed, and now the SCOTUS has agreed with me, but they stabbed every American in the back today by upholding this oppressive new law. SMH


The poor are the ones who benefit. Just like regular taxes, those who have, pay and those who do not, recieve. Right now if you can afford heath insurance you end up in the Hospital when something dire happens and have a bill you can not pay, That cost is then passed on to others who do have insurance by increasing the what the hospital charges, So pretty much the idea is that if the poor had heavily subsidized coverage already minor medical issues could be dealt with cheap and early before they become serious and expensive thus saving everybody money and increasing the health of the poor. So in this case you win. Big Pharm not so much,



posted on Jun, 28 2012 @ 01:14 PM
link   
that's the problem with obamacare.

its mandatory insurance under penalty or fine.

what if you're a health insurance company and the government said everybody must purchase your product.

do you as a corporation, raise your rates and make a killing, knowing your costumers don't have a choice.

or throw a discount.



posted on Jun, 28 2012 @ 01:23 PM
link   
reply to post by georgiaboy
 


Sorry to hear about that, I haven't had
health care for 6 years.
You do know, I hope that if you can't afford it
it's not cost to you at all.
None.

There's no going to jail, no penalties
if you cant afford it etc.
Also this plan is the republican plan.
Of course that was before Obama.
They had a much better name for it though.
It was called "Must Carry" & was designed
"to stop ER free loaders"
before it was called Obama care.

So if that makes you feel better just think of it that way.
So to recap this plan was originally hatched by those hippies
at The Heritage Foundation and by Bob Dole John McCain
and even good ol Romney.

No long communist lines to get care.
Same companies same hospitals same care.
Don't let crazy people scare you.

edit on 28-6-2012 by sealing because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 28 2012 @ 01:28 PM
link   
I hope Romney wins.

Then I hope they follow through on the "repeal replace" nonsense they've chanting.

Then I hope they attempt to replace "Obamacare" with "Romneycare" and the Dems cry and the Rep's hoot.

Because that would just be too damn funny.

Everybody stop voting. They only exist because we still believe. Time to let Tinkerbell die.



posted on Jun, 28 2012 @ 01:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by FlyersFan
ATS Thread - Romney makes big $$$ after SCOTUS ruling

Not much difference between Obamacare and Romneycare ...
But the fact is that Obama said this wasn't a tax and the SCOTUS says it absolutely is.
And Obama said he wouldn't raise people's taxes.
This is going to cost people BIG TIME ... it's a mess.
(and are they going to jail the poor people who can't afford to pay the new tax????)

Apparently this is a big boost for Romney's contributions coming in.


Upon reading you will find that the mandate could be looked at several ways; one of these ways was a tax. It only becomes a tax if you choose to not get insurance (which will be subsidized if you can not afford it) What this finallymeans is that if you choose not to have insurance and you choose to get sick or injured, part of that cost is defrayed. What this means is I don't have to pay as much for your inevitable access to the healthcare system, because you are a freeloader. This kinda brings the US up to the mid 1900's in healthcare. I just spent a week in the hospital with broken ribs, because the damn ladder broke. The bill $33000 -- there is no treatment for broken ribs. -- You choosing not to have insurance would have gotten the same treatment. You would have gone bankrupt or someone else would have paid the bill.

If you are lucky enough to have insurance through your employer -- nothing changes and you don't get "taxed".

But hey keep spitting out the new talking point.



new topics

top topics



 
5

log in

join