« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

FRONT PAGE CONTRIBUTOR

Romney accepts ObamaTax decision: Calls Obama out for broken tax pledge

Mitt Romney tells CBS News chief political correspondent Jan Crawford, that he accepts the Supreme Court’s decision that President Obama’s individual mandate is “a tax.”

In the Crawford interview Romney said there is no way around the Court’s decision:

“I said that I agreed with the dissent, and the dissent made it very clear that they felt it was unconstitutional. But the dissent lost – it’s in the minority.

And so now the Supreme Court has spoken, and while I agreed with the dissent, that’s taken over by the fact that the majority of the court said it’s a tax, and therefore it is a tax. They have spoken. There’s no way around that.

You can try and say you wish [the court] had decided a different way, but they didn’t. They concluded it was a tax; that’s what it is. And the American people know that President Obama has broken the pledge he made. He said he wouldn’t raise taxes on middle-income Americans, and not only did he raise the $500 billion that was already in the bill, it’s now clear that his mandate, as described by the Supreme Court, is a tax.”

The media and many pundits have really messed up this story. They have presented the voters with a false story that The Romney Campaign and the GOP are at odds over the tax versus unconstitutional commerce clause-based mandate. The real issue is that the Supreme Court left Obama with a choice: his ObamaCare federal individual mandate is either a constitutional tax or an unconstitutional penalty.

Governor Romney thought it was an unconstitutional penalty, but accepts the Court’s decision. Team Obama has been pressing hard trying to convince voters that, notwithstanding what the Supreme Court said, the ObamaTax is not a tax, but just a penalty:

  • Stephanie Cutter, Deputy Obama Campaign Manager: “What John Roberts said, we have the power to impose this penalty on people through the taxation clause, it’s a penalty.”
  • David Axelrod, Sr. Obama Campaign Strategist: “Whether you call it a mandate or a tax, what it is is a penalty of the sort I described before.”
  • Obama surrogate, Gov. Deval Patrick (D-MA): “Don’t believe the hype that the other side is selling. This is a penalty.”
  • The so-called Obama Truth Team: “…and the ‘tax’ they are trying to scare everyone about is actually a penalty for the 1% of people who can afford insurance but still choose not to buy it.”
  • During the June 30, 2012 press gaggle, Obama’s White House spokesman Jay Carney said: “It’s a penalty because you have a choice. You don’t have a choice to pay your taxes, right?
  • On Fox News Sunday, White House Chief of Staff Jacob Lew struggled for over five minutes trying to explain why it isn’t a tax.
  • On CBS’s Face the Nation, Obama surrogate Gov. Martin O’Malley (D-MD), wasn’t able to explain why it is not a tax.

Obama should not be allowed, as he has on so many other issues, to get away with having it both ways here. Obama’s federal individual mandate is either a constitutional tax or an unconstitutional penalty.

Obama’s campaign is obfuscating and claiming it is not a tax despite the Court’s ObamaTax ruling in a desperate attempt to argue the ObamaTax does not prove Obama lied his way into office with his promise he would not raise taxes on Americans making less than $250,000:

“I can make a firm pledge. Under my plan, no family making less than $250,000 a year will see any form of tax increase.  Not your income tax, not your payroll tax, not your capital gains taxes, not any of your taxes.” (Presidential candidate Obama speaking in Dover, New Hampshire, Sept. 12, 2008 [video link].)

You can watch video of Obama making his firm pledge here.

I could, perhaps should, stop there, but we need to mention the “it’s not a tax” meme ignited by Romney senior adviser Eric Fehrnstrom on MSNBC’s “Daily Rundown.”:

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

CHUCK TODD: The governor does not believe the mandate is a tax — that’s 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, but again —

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

FEHRNSTROM: That’s correct. But the president also needs to be held accountable for his hypocritical and contradictory statements because he has described it variously as a penalty and as a tax, he needs to reconcile those two very different statements.”

The best explanation I’ve seen for Fehrnstrom’s “shouldn’t call the tax penalty a tax” comment is from CNN. According to CNN, this wasn’t another “Etch-A-Sketch” moment. Rather, it was a shrewd move to assuage worried moderates and independents and draw fire away from Romney:

“It’s still kind of ham-handed, but it served a strategic purpose,” said Trevor Parry-Giles, a political communication professor at the University of Maryland. “What (Romney) has to confront is that he did the exact same thing in Massachusetts. And that he’s not as hard-nosed and doctrinaire as he sounds. He’s trapped in this weird realm where he has to appeal to the base but still attract the center.”

In other words, Fehrnstrom took one for Romney. Health care is a particularly thorny issue. Obama wants you to believe that the tax penalty in the ObamaCare law was modeled after the reform plan passed in Massachusetts under then governor Mitt Romney.

Obama can make that point but it would only be fair to note what Romney has been saying about his Massachusetts healthcare mandates. Romney has repeatedly said that his plan was a state-based plan but one he does not think would work on a federal level. Romney has said far more than just that it was “meant for Massachusetts only.” He has in fact based his position on the 10th Amendment, as he explained during the December 11, 2011 ABC News Iowa Republican debate in an exchange with Gov. Perry and former Speaker Gingrich:

MITT ROMNEY: A good deal of what you said was right. Some was wrong. Speaker Gingrich said that he was for a federal individual mandate. That’s something I’ve always opposed. What we did in our state was designed by the people in our state for the needs of our state. You believe in the 10th Amendment. I believe in the 10th Amendment. The people of Massachusetts favor our plan three to one. They don’t like it, they can get rid of it. (COUGH) That’s the great thing about (COUGH) a democracy, where individuals under the 10th Amendment have the power to craft their own solutions.

By the way, the– the problem with President Obama’s plan is it does three things we didn’t in my opinion, among others. I understand we disagree on this. But among others, one, it raises taxes by $500 billion. We (NOISE) didn’t raise taxes. Two, it cuts Medicare by $500 billion. We didn’t do that, either. And three, it doesn’t just deal with the people that don’t have insurance. It’s a 2,000-page bill that takes over health care for all the American people. It is wrong for health care. It’s wrong for the American people. It’s unconstitutional. And I’m absolutely adamantly opposed to ObamaCare.

And if I’m the President of the United States, I will return to the people and the states the power they have under the constitution and they can craft the solutions they think are best for them…

Romney stands firm on the idea of 10th Amendment as allowing a laboratory in which the states to come up with and their own solutions. Romney tried to solve the Massachusetts healthcare problem. But those solutions he does not want the federal government to try it on a national scale.

In longer interview excerpts released by the Romney campaign, Romney again differentiates  between a state mandate and a federal mandate when it comes to taxation.

CRAWFORD: “But does that mean that the mandate in the state of Massachusetts under your health care law also is a tax? I mean, you raised taxes as governor.”

ROMNEY: “Actually, the chief justice in his opinion made it very clear that at the state level, states have the power to put in place mandates. They don’t need to require them to be called taxes in order for them to be constitutional. And as a result, Massachusetts’ mandate was a mandate, was a penalty, was described that way by the Legislature and by me, and so it stays as it was.”

CRAWFORD: “So at the state level because of … you’re saying the Supreme Court says that’s different, that the federal government — the powers are different between the states and the federal government? Does that make sense to you?”

ROMNEY: “Just take a read of the opinion. The chief justice said that states have what’s known as police power, and states can implement penalties and mandates and so forth under their constitutions, which is what Massachusetts did. But the federal government does not have those powers, and therefore for the Supreme Court to reach the conclusion it did — that the law was constitutional — they had to find it was a tax, and they did. And therefore Obamacare’s a tax. Like it or not, it’s a tax.”

So there we have it. Romney accepts that the Supreme Court has determined that ObamaCare is actually ObamaTax. Obama cannot bring himself to do so.

COMMENTS

  • gflyer3364qt

    • drsandykramer

      Call it a tax. Call it a penalty. But SEE it for what it is: Unadulterated THIEVERY!

  • skorrent1

    Then he has the clearest distinction possible btw Romneycare and Obamacare. The Libs will fight it tooth and nail, but “States have powers that the Fed doesn’t have.” is a winner for conservatives and likely most moderates.

    • reggie1

      Romney is under supervision by a group of people trying to cover their own arses over Obamacare. I saw this movie 4 years ago, and (spoiler alert) the Marxist wannabe wins.

      Get him some guidance from outside of his Massachusetts mafia that can deal objectively with this albatross. Seriously, why does Eric Fehrnstrom even being discussed on TV? That’s enough reason to let him go.

      People don’t care that Obama broke another pledge. Americans will pay more taxes if they think it’s right. Why do you think Obama’s every other sentence is “it’s the right thing to do”?

      Rise above the tax vs. penalty debate THAT EVEN SCOTUS COULDN’T SETTLE ON UNTIL 20 SECONDS BEFORE VOTING.

      Try “13,000 regulations that kill liberty and jobs!” Mitt can rise above the noise by not being part of the argument. He can turn the argument into what really matters.

      Maybe he can even win.

      • jude68

        You know once in awhile I get so sick of this kind of garbage. Get off Mitt’s back!! You know what he said on the day of the ruling…how harmful Obamacare will be on JOBS. In fact, he has run ads talking about how Obamacare will kill jobs and yet people like you constantly slam him because you keep your head up your backside and ignore what Mitt has already done.

        God does it ever stop from people like you! Get off your butt and RUN FOR PRESIDENT if it is so easy!! Mitt has stressed over and over the effect on the Economy!!

        And what press do you live under….No matter what he says the MSM will paint it negative or wrong. We have Conservatives hitting him for not jumping on the word TAX right away…yet in his statement he said it will raise taxes by over 500 billion…but not enough….now people like you crying because he is not saying how much it will hurt jobs…BS!! He has said it several times.

        This is why Romney will lose…CONSERVATIVES…because we pile on our candidates, drag them down, kick them at every chance and then cry when they lose!! I AM SO SICK OF KNOW IT ALLS!

        Go run yourselves since all of you KNOW THE PERFECT WAY TO WIN, WOULD HAVE 75 percent in the POLLS….would be raking in billions upon billions, the MSM would worship your feet and NO ONE AND I MEAN NO ONE WOULD CRITICIZE YOUR PERFECTION!

        It is sickening and I sick of the conservatives doing this!! Instead of focusing on OBAMA who is a MARXIST AND THE WORST PRESIDENT OF OUR TIME….we seek to weaken Mitt and then blame him for the loss. Do not tell me you are trying to help him…YOU ARE NOT…you are blantantly stupid and have no idea how your continued cheap childish shots are hurting Mitt.

        Mitt is not the ideal…I love my conservative principles but I will be darned if I am going to let Obama walk around for the OBAMATAX and give him a free pass and listen to a bunch of self serving conservatives take their anger out on Romney instead of the MAN who has led this country down the path of Socialism!

        Romney has been talking the ILLS of Obamacare for Months….Just because all of us are MAD at Roberts some want to blame Romney..SORRY NOT BUYING….it is OBAMA, OBAMA and OBAMA that must be defined at the TAX MAN and the man with two or three or four messages!

        Get off Mitt’s back and work to defeat this Marxist or you will live under OBAMACARE and sit in line like a good little angry person for the FAILED ATTEMPT TO BEAT OBAMA!

        Romney is doing well with his reponse. Nowhere is there any SPIKE in acceptance of Obamacare!! PEOPLE know it is a TAX by the ruling in the Majority Opinion. We have PACS that will run that again and again!

        Mitt stay focused on the effects, as you have, the Obamatax will have on jobs, freedom, choice and quality of care. You have indeed addressed it and need to address it at every chance you have!!

        • JX12

          NT

        • reggie1

          So, you think Romney should keep attacking it as a tax because “you’ll be damned if… blah-blah-blah”. In other words, because that’s the message YOU want to hear.

          Dude, I don’t care what message you want to hear. And I don’t need a message. Independents need a message, and “It’s a tax” won’t work.

          By the way, “It’s a job killer” will work on a percentage of liberals.

          You saw me attack McCain, and considered that to be coming from me as a Conservative. You haven’t heard me attack from the Conservative angle. I have only discussed the messaging, which is the only context I brought up McCain. Pausing in the campaign to return to DC, calling Obama a “fine American”, not going after the jugular – always reinforcing the image of him as a tired old man.

          Now Romney is reinforcing the image of him being a technocrat by wasting time addressing the tax/penalty debate. “It’s a job killer. It takes away our liberties. It’s un-American.” That’s the guy who will win votes, not just get them by default.

          • commonsenseobserver

            I believe polls found that other clearer labels worked better. In anycase, it does impede job growth. More red tape, more than 10 different new orhigher taxes, Medicare cuts by unelected bureaucrats, higher costs for patients and doctors etc.

          • reggie1

            Now that SCOTUS “settled” Obamacare, more and more businessmen are coming out to bemoan its inhibiting effects.

            More and more voters are seeing this.

            Run the same poll in several weeks, and see how “job killer” does AFTER disseminating so many authorities into the media.

  • conservativecurmudgeon

    Tax, penalty, whatever.

    You see the pretzels we have to tie ourselves in to get the Establishment Republicans to even engage the discussion? The fact that John Roberts blew a hole in the Constitution, and ignored the historical facts of the new law now ALLOWS conservatives to call it a tax… when we’ve spent two years making clear it WASN’T a tax… suddenly gives quarter to the squeamish to start calling Obama a liar?

    Pathetic.

    His entire presidency is a lie. And we are too damned gentlemanly to join the battle to call this arrogant liar out on his non-stop, serial lies. Now it’s so obvious that even the most namby-pamby can’t ignore it.

    Let’s call the “mandate” what it really is: Iron-fisted, totalitarian, tyrannical, systemic, bold-faced theft.

    • ohiohistorian

      This guy lied his way into the campaign, he lied his way into the White House, and he continues to lie to try to keep his job as Hacker in Chief so he can play golf at our expense. The only thing that has kept us from total meltdown is this guy’s laziness. There is normally zero on the White House schedule before 10:30am. W all know he left private practice in favor of “Community Organization”, and I believe a lot of that was his avoidance of the huge number of hours that attorneys generally work.

      But beyond that, the Supreme Court decision is done. Tax, penalty, or screw-job, the mandate is “legal” according to the Chief Justice and the four Communist brethren. There are a couple sops, particularly the opt-out for the states that wish to do so, that I am pretty sure would not have been in there by the Four Apocalypses. But all of this is never-mind.

      What needs to be done is going to be HARD. We need a Congress that has some balls, which Messrs. Boehner and McConnell seems to have lost to Hillary’s Lockbox (who may have lent it to Nancy). Anyway, the real message is that we need to quit negotiating with liberals, and especially with ourselves, and stand fast.

      Boehner is too afraid of losing power. And those who compromise on their freedom lose it, as history repeatedly shows. The only way to work with him is to either show him that he has lost the Speaker gavel regardless of the election outcome. That MIGHT give him desperation to replace his intestinal fortitude.

      As for McConnell, I really wonder what pictures Harry has and who holds the negatives. Only reason I can figure for anyone to argue against his own self-interest the way he does. He USED to be able to pass himself off as a pretty decent conservqtive.

    • reggie1

      and to the way he said it

  • doturule

    It is Semantics and nothing but. Romney signed the same law in Mass. when he was governor. He is a hypocrite.

    He said on his website and at a debate he would appoint Justices in the mold of Roberts. Now he will not? Flip flop.

    He is a man of no back bone. There is also no difference in “outsourcing” vs. “offshoring” unless you talk about the money he hides. Offshore.

    Finally, what plan does he have in place to aid in the health care crisis. None. For those who are not bright enough to know or just sheep, insurance companies, and your employer decide the treatment that is covered or not covered.

    America has the best healthcare in the world if you are in the 1 percent. Otherwise for the rest of us pawns we are over paying now for poor insurance coverage.

    So what plan does Mittens have? To make coverage better and cheaper for the average Joe.

    • gekster

      The HuffPo is that way <———.
      You'll be better recieved over there.

    • runner12

      First, if you think the “1%” have an advantage now, wait until ObamaTax gets implemented. Only the rich will have quality healthcare, the rest of us will be stuck with what the government decides they want to pay for ( which is infinitely worse than an insurance company or employer making that decision, after all they have an incintive to keep you happy, not so the government). For a perfect example in government mismanagement, see Medicaid. If you think private insurance is stingy, you have never worked with Medicaid. I have, and it is not good.

      Secondly, Conservatives have put out many ideas to lower the cost of healthcare, something ObamaCare will not do. Already premiums are skyrocketing under O Care. Ideas such as torte reform and opening up insurance across state lines are some of the practical, common sense reforms that could lower the cost of health care for everyone.

      • Joliphant

        I have a bridge in brooklyn you might like to buy

        • Joliphant

          nt

    • Melody Warbington (rwm52)

      Inquiring minds want to know.

      • doturule

        Melody, Teddy Roosevelt, the Roughrider, not Franklin, first proposed National Health Coverage in 1912. It has taken 100 years. The Affordable Health Care Act is a positive start.

        Is it bad to have no minimum caps? Is it bad to provide coverage for your children until they are 26. Without some plan to cover everyone, ill people without coverage are just going to be thrown back on the tax payer when they have no choice but to seek out ER services, by that time the cost of treatment may be a great deal more then it should have been. Or they are now a permanent total loss which society will have to absorb.

        Unless of course you are in favor of letting people die in the

        • Bill S

          That’s not an idle suggestion. It’s a requirement.

        • gekster

          You must be a lib, because they love to force people to do things, from health care to the enviroment to unwanted or needed regulations
          Like I said, the HuffPo is that way. <———-

          • doturule

            Mass education failed you in spelling and the proper use of the English language.

            Also Government. A law was passed by the legislature, signed by the executive and underwent constitutional review. Three branches of the government found this law to pass muster. Its the Law of the Land.

          • APA Guy

            Here endeth the Political Science 101 lesson, kiddo…now scamper along to the little kos kids table and eat your chicken nuggets and mac and cheese.

          • wintermute
          • gekster

            And spelling and grammer on the internet isn’t nothing to care about.
            You DID understand what I said.
            Nitpicking about that is the sign of a small mind, but you’ve already shown that.

            Although all three branches of government, (in congress, not a single Republican ‘yes’ vote, and signed by a marxist President) still doesn’t mean it isn’t socialist law.

            Our Government is there to protect the people, not force the people.
            Is it your time on the OWS computer?
            You sound like one.
            They are the ones who want to take from the haves, and give to the won’t do’s.
            (and your 6 figure income, since you want to be so generous with other peoples money, why don’t you give it all but the necesarry to stay above the poverty line).
            You want all to be ‘fair’ don’t you.

          • PowerToThePeople

            by your parents when they neglected to instil any honesty in you or common decency in you.

            Funny you would dog him for a lack of education when you lectured us about your love of helping those less fortunate. You know, spending taxes on that….ummmm….”six figures” you make. I noticed you forgot to mention the decimal and the two figures representing coin.

            Gekster with his lacking in education still stands heads and shoulders over you in common sense, decency, and IQ.

        • Melody Warbington (rwm52)

          Since you support the liberal view of wealth re-distribution and are anti-freedom, are we to assume you’ll be voting for Obama? Again?

          I believe in helping people as well, but forced charity by the government isn’t the answer.

          • wintermute

            A more accurate term would be extortion.

          • Melody Warbington (rwm52)

            no text

    • PowerToThePeople

      the 1% should have the best of the best, they can afford to pay for it. See, that is what happens when you have money. Not their fault you can not afford what they can afford, not their job to make the field level for you. It is your job to either be happy with what you have, or earn the level they have.

      More money, nicer things. It is the way it works and it is the way it should work. I have many things nice than many people, have crappier things than a bunch of people. If I want what those people have, got to earn it.

      Pretty sure from your comments, you have no intentions of earning it, you simply want it taken from those who have it and then want it given to you. Not while folks like me are alive!

      • doturule

        I make over 6 figures.

        I believe its morally right to aid fellow human beings. I have not one deduction other then myself on my tax return. I pay a lot of taxes. I have no problem in supporting my government, and helping other Americans.

        Happy 4th of July.

        • westcoastpatriette

          will use your “taxes” to help other Americans.

        • ohiohistorian

          The fact that you have “not one other deduction” means that you are not in favor helping your fellow human beings with YOUR money (called charity, and it is one of the 7 virtues of real liberals) but you believe that money taken out of OTHERS pockets should do your charitable will along with your miserable contribution. You want tho throw your money away on Solyndra, and numerous other failed solar companies, wind turbines made in Spain and China, and maybe contraceptives for that poor little coed at Georgetown? Is THAT what is meant by helping your fellow person? Or maybe paying unemployment to the felon in prison in CA that has been depositing the check in his gangs’ account?

          You don’t even have guts enough to support YOU paying more taxes, it is only the guys that are the “millionaires”. Do you also send the additional 10% tax bill you want them to pay to the Treasury as a donation?

          I believe the real problem with liberals is that they did not receive enough pats on the back as young skulls of mush. Administered low enough and hard enough, of course.

        • PowerToThePeople

          idiot who thinks internet claims impress.

          And 6 figures, even if you do make that amount which I doubt, it comes no where near to impressing me. You really have no clue as to how many on here make or have made a ton of money and are not impressed with 6 figures. We will just leave it at that.

          Next, if you are all for helping fellow Americans, by all means impress us by posting a copy of your tax return showing us how you donated 20%, 30% or more of your net income to charities. If you can not do that, then shove off with the pious lecture. Show us your time cards where you have spent 30 or 40 hours a month at soup kitchens, shelters, drug rehabs, etc or shove off with the BS you are trying to feed us.

          Lastly, government has never helped a soul. All they do is waste our money causing only a small percent to actually make it to the “needy,” they give it out to folks who are more than able to fend for themselves but chose not to, and they cause generations of people to become dependent on the government rather than learning how to become personally accountable for themselves and their family.

          So to sum it all up, no one cares about your silly internet claims as to how much you wish you made, all your “caring” about the downtrodden, your hypocritical “I want to help everyone bet seldom to never do anything for them” lecture. So disappear before you embarrass yourself further.

          PS It is the moral thing to help others, something conservatives pride themselves in. But it is immoral for the government to take from us under the guise of helping the poor and instead breed dependency and waste most of the funds they steal. True human compassion comes from personal decisions to give, not from the government which is something leftist idiots such as yourself will never understand.

    • renl57

      What you just wrote here, sounds like a rationale for a single-payer system.

      But that’s not what ObamaCare is.

      You said you don’t like being the mercy of insurance companies. So how do you defend ObamaCare which *forces* every American–you included–to purchase insurance products from those self-same companies?

      The purpose of the mandate is to enable insurance companies to have more policyholders so that the companies can *make more money*.

      How do you square that circle?

      • doturule

        You are right. I am in favor of a single-payer system. In fact, the Affordable Health Care Act got so watered down, I was for a long time opposed to it.

        But it does contain solutions to problems in the healthcare system that have not been addressed. It is a start and can be modified without the use of a wrecking ball.

        • Bill S

          The magic of Google tells me that you’re a Democrat.

          So there’s no reason to permit you to keep hawking left-wing ideas.

          Sayonara.

          • APA Guy

            They have enough sandboxes to play in…no need to have them fouling up our conservative palace :)

    • APA Guy

      Heh…heh heh…

      :)

  • Tbone

    Nancy Who? Harry Who? Nobodies.

    Is there ever ANYONE in the World besides King Barry?

  • burke

    I don’t think most Americans really care about whether something is called a tax or a penalty — the point is that it is money out of their pockets. Barack and his people are selling the “merits” of Obamacare right now while Romney is tripping over himself on the terminology and appearing to be a flip-flopper. He needs to get it together.

    I’m a lawyer, so I’m not terribly swayed by the “tax v. penalty” point. Just because something is a “tax” as a matter of constitutional law does not compel elected officials to call it a tax if it is more saleable by another name. We don’t use legal terms of art in every aspect of our lives — and thank goodness for that!

    I agree it’s a strong rhetorical point, though, and we should be using it as Romney begins to do here. But remember, a lot of low-information voters aren’t following the exact terminology used in Supreme Court opinions, either. Further, I’m not confident such voters will be paying close enough attention to see the difference between Romneycare and Obamacare on the tax question, either. There’s a danger that even voters who think Obamacare should have been found unconstitutional might end up thinking of Romneycare as a constitutional tax. No bueno.

    TL:DR – we need to remind voters why they didn’t want Obamacare to pass in the first place, and that has nothing to do with labels. It’s the whole program that’s the problem. That is what Romney needs to hammer.

    • renl57

      …was so Republicans could accuse Obama of breaking his pledge not to raise taxes on the middle class. And also because in the past, Obama had denied to ABC’s Stephanopoulos that the penalty was a tax.

      Yes, there are other taxes in ObamaCare too–but the mandate tax-penalty is the one that will be most visible to every American who files a tax return.

      May I suggest that Romney and the GOP–perhaps with input from Rush Limbaugh and other interested parties–come together to agree on a unifying theme here?

      I don’t think the argument “Obama broke his pledge” is going to have much effect on Independent voters. As you say, they’re going to care about ObamaCare itself and the cost to them, not about whether a politician broke his pledge.

      When Bush 41 broke his pledge on taxes, it was not the Independent voters who turned on him. (They turned on him because of the recession and higher unemployment.) It was the base of Bush 41′s party that turned on him for breaking his pledge.

      But Obama doesn’t have to worry about that happening to him. The Dem base wishes he would raise taxes even more.

    • APA Guy

      “Penalty” = something akin to a speeding ticket or late fee to most Americans.

      Yet another “Tax” = the government taking their hard-earned money and giving it to bums who refuse to work for a living.

      This is from the heartland of Indiana…and my sample size is growing by leaps and bounds every day.

      WORDS MATTER…and the word for this is TAX.

  • americanviewpoint

    You could equally say that people are taxed for being childless (that is, having no dependents). This kind of debate is ultimately meaningless, both politically and in terms of what actually best helps the American people.

    Talk about the actual problems we face, identify the root cause of the problems (with legitimate evidence, not just assertions that can be easily shot down), identify solutions that address the root cause, and then say how you will implement.

    Doing anything else is just fodder for beltway politicos who rake in all the $M’s that both of the candidates (and their Super-PACs) will be spending

  • conservativemusician

    Because that’s what it has always been and that’s how it was argued by his lawyers at the SC.

    Allahpundit over at HotAir also had a good post today with some pretty good analysis along the same lines as yours.

    He states:

    “Good enough? He?s not saying that he thinks the mandate is a tax; he reiterates that he agrees with Scalia that it?s a penalty. All he?s saying is that, as a matter of law, ObamaCare is now ObamaTax so The One will have to live with the political consequences. If he doesn?t like it, let him take it up with the left?s newest judicial hero, John Roberts. And if O turns around and says, ‘Well, that means the RomneyCare mandate was a tax too,’ Mitt can always deflect by noting that only one of them has had a pronouncement from SCOTUS on the matter. Not the most convincing retort, but the goal here is to keep the ObamaTax talking point in play. I guess that?ll do it.”

    Here’s the HotAir link:

    http://hotair.com/archives/2012/07/04/romney-if-the-supreme-court-says-the-mandates-a-tax-then-its-a-tax/

    I am much more encouraged today about Romney’s position on this than I was a couple days ago. Since the SC has declared OCare a tax, Obama will not be able to defend his prior campaign promise that he would not raise anyone’s taxes and then going ahead and passing the largest tax increase in history that will effect everyone, not just the “rich” that he constantly demonizes. November can’t get here fast enough.

    Excellent analysis and post Dan.

  • jude68

    He likes to call himself eeyore for a reason. I cannot get over how many conservatives are caught up on the word penalty or tax…WHO THE HECK CARES!!

    God it is like we are in the Twilight Zone fixated on something Romney had NO CONTROL over!! What is with people….it is like conservatives think all the rest of the country is fixated on penalty or tax…Do you notice who has been silent OBAMA….why? because conservatives through their tantrums have put the focus on Romney…WHICH IS FRICKING UNBELIEVABLE….yes conservatives are to blame….and you are getting what you deserve…INSTEAD OF OBAMA being put on the defensive over the MASSIVE TAX AND OBAMACARE we have allowed him to sneak away to Ohio while we continue to GRILL MITT like chicken at barbecue over ONE STINKING WORD!!! GROW UP!!

    God when will conservatives learn their lessons…NEVER!! Too arrogant and proud to get the heck over it and move on….no I WANT TO WIN MY POINT….so I will bash the heck out of our guy and feel my worthless oats and PROVE NOTHING!

    Not one of you in here has changed the mind of a single voter. You look like a bunch of sharks looking to pounce on Romney at any moment….BOY THAT STRATEGY will get him elected!!

    Stop the darn TAX discussion on Mitt and focus on OBAMA and his massive unconstitutional power grab and drive to socialism!

    IT WAS THE SUPREME COURT THAT CALLED IT A TAX!! NOT ROMNEY….yet so many in here act like it was Romney’s call to make!! IT WAS NOT!!

    He is trying to point out all the problems with this and yet conservatives are knocking him over SEMANTICS!! And Obama gets to laugh at you dummies because like always conservatives lose because they cannibalize each other at the drop of a hat!! GOOD JOB guys….keep giving Obama the ability to hide!

    Here is a novel idea when you get done pouting!! TURN YOU ENERGY ON DEFEATING OBAMA!! No your criticism is not HELPING MITT…it looks like a party in disarray!! I am sick of it with this election TOO DARN IMPORTANT with guys running on TESTOTERONE instead of brains!

    It is OBAMA that must defend the bill and OBAMATAX and he is the one that CANNOT run if we would only get off Mitt and direct it against the man who DESERVES IT!!

    • conservativemusician

      You mentioned Allahpundit, so not sure if you were responding to me because Dan didn’t mention the article I linked to in his original post and I don’t see it mentioned in any of the other comments here. If so, use the “Reply To This” button next time.

      First, I don’t care about the tax vs. penalty debate either other than how we can use this to our advantage in November. While many did not agree with the SC decision in calling it a tax (myself included), this is a huge gift to the GOP because it will help to expose the liar that Obama really is. He will not be able to escape it and now that Romney has come out and said it is a tax, he is going to hang it around Obama’s neck.

      Second, I don’t know how you can say Obama has been silent about it when his minions are everywhere trying to spin it and say it is a penalty. Again, this is not going to fly with the public. Look again more closely at the links Dan has provided above in his post.

      Third, on the bashing Romney thing you are yelling about, both he and his advisors say stupid things regularly. A lot of us here have been frustrated with their inability to articulate a position and stick with it on just about every issue. Now finally Romney has clarified what their position is going to be on his most troublesome issue and, for once, it is coherent. Again, this is another huge development for the Romney campaign and a good one at that. Does this sound like Romney bashing to you?

      Finally, in spite of our continual frustrations with Romney and the stupid things he says on a regular basis, we have learned our lessons from 2008. We are not going to desert Romney. The stakes are simply too high and this is our last chance to get rid of OCare, once and for all. If we don’t, future generations will not have a country worth living in for much longer.

      Mark my words. Conservatives en masse, disillusioned Dems, and the majority of Indies are going to start rallying around Romney in droves. It’s already happening and the trickle is going to become a waterfall very soon as we move toward November.

      In closing, a word of friendly advise to you for the next time you post. Knock it off with the caps. It makes you look unhinged and a bit hysterical. We hear what you’re saying loud and clear.

      Glad you are on our side here.

      Regards, CM

  • gladiola

    The more the so-called Conservatives forcus on Romney and whether his spokesman said exactly the right thing or not… not even about Romney himself but the spokesman caused all this uproar by so-called conservatives…

    The more that is what the topic is… the stronger Obama gets.

    Romney is an outsider. He isn’t the best politician… I don’t want a politician. I want a businessman. I want real world experience not fancy words to appease the simple minded people who call themselves conservatives while getting Obama re-elected.

    Either get on board or just join the Obama campaign.

    There is no middle ground here.

    We either get behind Romney and stop nit picking his words, or his spokesman’s words to death… or we have Obama turning us into Socialist zombies.

    If there were a better candidate, they would be the nominee. Since not one of the others could get the votes to beat Romney, he is the best and most conservative voice we could get!!! The rest sucked! All of them sucked!!!!

    So buck up!!!! We got the best we could get, now get off the Obama train and back the guy who will finally fix this mess!!!!

  • CarolT

    I was at work very late last night but briefly read criticism of Romney from the Transom, The WSJ, William Kristol and others. All said the same things, basically Romney only talks about the economy, he’s got to have a campaign full of ideas. Kristol wrote that he might end up just like other recent MA presidential candidates, Dukakis, Kerry and lose what should be a slam dunk for him.
    He’s a flawed candidate because of Obamacare, I know the differences, because I live in MA but it’s still an issue. I know them but does the average voter know?

  • Pingback: mehr...

  • Pingback: Angelena Sumner

  • Pingback: Laura Brunk