Posted on 07/01/2012 9:50:52 AM PDT by Free ThinkerNY
(CNN) — Jack Lew, the White House chief of staff, said Sunday the Supreme Court decision upholding President Barack Obama’s health care measure should put to rest the national debate over the law’s practicality.
Speaking on CNN’s “State of the Union,” Lew said the Affordable Care Act, which was signed into law in 2010, needs to be fully implemented before Americans assess its merit, and that detractors of the law, including Obama’s opponent in the 2012 presidential election, were using it to divide the country.
“This was a plan that Gov. Romney supported,” Lew said, “and it’s something that I would have thought he would be proud of.”
The national debate over the law, which has been ongoing since the law was implemented, can now end with the court’s ruling, Lew said.
“It’s time now to get over the debate and implement that law,” he told CNN chief political correspondent Candy Crowley. “What the American people don’t want is, they don’t want to be taken back to the old divisive debate. They want to get on with it, and they want us to be focusing on economic growth and creating jobs.”
(Excerpt) Read more at fox8.com ...
Promise.
Hmmm, why wouldn’t they welcome a debate on a law (tax) that they think is soooo wonderful?
Not like we've never heard that before....
Mr Chief of Staff - you mean it is time for us to get over the “tax” and implement the “tax”, right? OK, Mr. Lew let’s discuss how we will implement the “tax” or should I say the list of “taxes”. Yes, let’s discuss the “taxes”...
I won't be surprised if this ends up being one of Rush's audio montages tomorrow. It was the Mainstream Mediot talking point for today.
Obvious to anyone who is paying attention, Obamacare will be extremely destructive to economic growth and creating jobs. It will also be loaded with bribes and kickbacks, as companies who give fat campaign contributions to Democrats will be granted waivers.
LoL OBot. ObamaCare is not written in the Constitution. It is not a Constitutional amendment. You lose control of goobermint next year you lose ObamaCare. Buh bye.
Mere peons are not to question this ruling.
He’s not President Obama. He’s Emperor Obamus I.
There will be no further questioning. The court has spoken, and Emperor Obamus I and his henchmen expect all dissent to cease and desist immediately!!
It will be over when these assholes are out of a job come November.
It’s gonna be a long hot summer though.
Some blonde yakker on Fox this morning commented on his remark and called it “arrogant.” They guy yakker said “I don’t know if I’d call it arrogant.”
Kudos to the interchangeable blonde.
The time isn’t quite yet, or quite ever, in the struggle for liberty. Better, it’s time for Obama thugs to start looking for new work, like race baiting on the streets of Chicago.
Yep, time to show the penalty tax due on April 15 if Americans don’t vote against Democrats.
I’ll get over it once these lame arse idiots admit that they lied and lied on numerous occasions to the American people given in oral arguments before the Supreme Court, the administration’s attorneys argued — as they knew they had to — that the mandate was constitutional as a tax. =.=
“Lew said the Affordable Care Act, which was signed into law in 2010, needs to be fully implemented before Americans assess its merit”
“But we have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it” -Nancy Pelosi
Just going to disreagrd what the “emperor” and what his so-called henchmen say, period.
These LIB asshat administration fools need to be shunned and, if not shunned, laughed at. November can’t get here soon enough. Out...all LIBs (and RINOs) out.
SCOTUS says “constitutional” = law is “practical”
Sure.
When the democrats “won” the Dred Scott decision, decent Americans did not give up and accept the loss of freedom. When the democrats “won” the Roe v. Wade decision, decent Americans did not give up and accept the death of innocents. Now that the democrats “won” the first ObamaCare, decent Americans will not give up and accept the loss of freedom and harm to the innocent. We overturned the first, at a terrible cost to America but a cost much more acceptable than the decision Democrats attempted to force on us. We’re still fighting the second battle, with more than 40 million innocents dead so far. We will never give up on the third battle.
“Jack Lew, the White House chief of staff, said Sunday the Supreme Court decision upholding President Barack Obama’s health care measure should put to rest the national debate over the law’s practicality.”
I’d rather look at it this way rather than taking that advice:
....”we shall fight on the beaches,
we shall fight on the landing grounds,
we shall fight in the fields and in the streets,
we shall fight in the hills;
we shall never surrender,....” Attribution to Winston Churchill.
I can see November from my porch.
In other words: “nothing to see here,folks...move along”.
Hey, let's wait 30 years and see if turned the USA into Greece.
".... needs to be fully implemented before Americans assess its merit...." while Sebelius turns the original 2K-3K pages to tens of thousands of pages and is nowhere near finished? I personally think Obamacare is too vaguely written to be Constitutional, but many justices before Roberts have let vague laws like this slide, and the plaintiffs did not use the vagueness argument anyway.
Lew (WH chief of staff), who said LINK "Social Security benefits are entirely self-financing. They are paid for with payroll taxes collected from workers and their employers throughout their careers. These taxes are placed in a trust fund dedicated to paying benefits owed to current and future beneficiaries." He does not care how much the govt. grows nor how much it costs.
One problem with the SCOTUS decision is that, even if repealed, the Dems will keep trying to bring it back. The only way to truly kill this now is with a Constitutional Amendment. That might be extremely difficult to accomplish but it is worth shooting for.
Wording it to prevent ObamaCare while allowing current programs like Medicare, Medicaid, etc. will be tricky but could probably be done and then the current House should vote on it just to force Democrats into voting against it before the election.
I hate it when I agree with these jerks. But I think this debate over socialized medicine probably is over.
Other debates like Constitutional conventions, repeal of the 16th amendment, autonomy, secession. Well, those debates have just begun.
Lew is a completely unpleasant person, someone you despise the minute he opens his lying mouth . . . fortunately, “fair and balanced” Fox quickly followed up with a Republican who is in every respect his equal: Mitch McConnell.
This guy got clobbered on FNS by Wallace today. Wouldn’t admit it was a tax, chekc the tape to see how pathetic he sounded.
McConnell was explicit and unequivocal about saying the pubs if he is the Maj leader would repeal Obamacare.
What this tell us is that when the polling was done the dems and pub reached the same conclusion this hurts Obama and is the last thing they want to talk about.
McConnell did a good job linking this ruling and tax to the CBO estimate of a million lost jobs. Counteracting the claim be Lew (SP? )that it was time to foucs on jobs and not healthcare. Trust me if this were polling well they would jump on the Romney claim that he wants to repeal it. That is all they would want to talk about.
The fact they want to talk about the horrible employment situation tells yo how much they fear this subject of Obamataxcare.
Yeah, this is our Dred Scott decision.
It's not that, it's that they're desperately trying to frame the upcoming House repeal vote in eight days (July 9).
OMG — LOL
I can’t wait for the Democrat convention, to see if Obama has a Greek column backdrop again.
I think people need to talk about it more. The word needs to get out to all the lazy looters, societal leeches, and deadbeats that they now will have to pay their “fair share” (gagging). Since “everyone” but illegals, unions, and Muslims will be forced to join this particular cult.
Oh, that’s right, approximately the same number who now choose to not participate still won’t have to pay a dime. Or, lose their current good doctors.
You all need to wake the F up. With Romney as our dear leader, this issue is completely off the table.
I completely and totally disagree. We need to fight this until they are exhausted. We need to fight this until we drive liberals from the House, the Senate, and the state legislatures. We need to fight this forever, and never give in.
I’m thinking the answer is MORE debate, on this and every other issue we can throw at them. The Left got to where it is by being ruthless and absolutely relentless over decades. Let’s give them a good old-fashined electoral curb stomping in November and then not let up until they are nothing more than an unpleasant historical footnote.
Or until they actually engage in an open and honest debate on the subject. This monstrosity is 3,000 pages long, the media refuses to discuss it, and it was rammed down our throats on Christmas Eve using parliamentary trickery via reconciliation.
I am with you 100% and know that those who want to move on from the debate realize it is a losing issue for the DEMS.
Um, we were told that the bill had to be passed to find out what's in it. Now we are told to report to the death panels to find out what's in it.
We were assured that it would not be used to fund abortion. Obama lied, small children died.
I hate it when I agree with these jerks. But I think this debate over socialized medicine probably is over.
No way—We will fight them in the House; we will fight them in the Senate; we will fight them in the State Houses; we will fight them with our own bare hands—we will never give up our freedom!!
Sorry, I made my post befoe I read yours—I wasn’t copying you LOL
Translation: Time to stop thinking.
Sooooo, what do you suggest: Vote for Obama?
“......and they want us to be focusing on economic growth and creating jobs.”
________________________________________________________
Really??? You, Hussien, and the other jackass democrats haven’t been focusing on jobs or the economy for the last 3-1/2 years!
Obama himself says things such as this often: the time for “debate is over.” It is incredibly arrogant and bordering on tyrannical.
What debate? You can't show me no stinking debate.
Obama ordered a weak Congress to pass it without a debate, so they didn't read it and passed it anyway. Looks like the only ones to read it other than Heritage Foundation was SCOTUS (I suppose). But there was no real debate there either. The four socialists will vote for socialism and Roberts thinks he can't overturn legislation that's unconstitutional.
So far, no debate of any real substance. That's because the Socialists lose every time in a substantive debate in the forum of ideas. Whatever they pass, it will be done without the Left having any serious or substantive argument in any kind of actual debate.
“Sooooo, what do you suggest: Vote for Obama?”
I’m praying for a miracle. I’ll know it when I see it.
Debate? What debate? I never saw no stinking debate.
Obama ordered a weak Congress to pass it without a debate, so they didn't read it and passed it anyway. Looks like the only ones to read it other than Heritage Foundation was SCOTUS (I suppose). But there was no real debate there either. The four socialists will vote for socialism and Roberts thinks he can't overturn legislation that's unconstitutional.
So far, no debate of any real substance. Whatever they pass, it will be done without the Left having any serious or substantive argument in any kind of actual debate. There never will be no stinking debate with the Socialist Left because they have no substantive argument and lose every time in the forum of ideas.
Romneycare - at least as far as its intention and purposes go - is not the same thing as Obamatax!
Unlike Barack Obama, Mitt Romney did not campaign on universal health care coverage when he was running for the office of Governor of Massachusetts.
It was only after he became Governor that Mitt Romney was more or less compelled to sign "Romneycare" into law when the Federal Government threatened to cut $385 million of Medicaid funding if the state did not reduce the number of uninsured recipients of health care services.
Romney sought to bring near-universal health insurance coverage to the state. This came after Staples founder Stemberg told him at the start of his term that doing so would be the best way he could help people, and after the federal government, owing to the rules of Medicaid funding, threatened to cut $385 million in those payments to Massachusetts if the state did not reduce the number of uninsured recipients of health care services.
Although he had not campaigned on the idea of universal health insurance, Romney decided that because people without insurance still received expensive health care, the money spent by the state for such care could be better used to subsidize insurance for the poor. After positing that any measure adopted not raise taxes and not resemble the previous decade's failed "Hillarycare" proposal, Romney formed a team of consultants from diverse political backgrounds. Beginning in late 2004, they came up with a set of proposals more ambitious than an incremental one from the Massachusetts Senate and more acceptable to him than one from the Massachusetts House of Representatives that incorporated a new payroll tax. In particular, Romney pushed for incorporating an individual mandate at the state level. Past rival Ted Kennedy, who had made universal health coverage his life's work and who, over time, had developed a warm relationship with Romney, gave the plan a positive reception, which encouraged Democratic legislators to cooperate. The effort eventually gained the support of all major stakeholders within the state, and Romney helped break a logjam between rival Democratic leaders in the legislature.
On April 12, 2006, the governor signed the resulting Massachusetts health reform law, commonly called "Romneycare", which requires nearly all Massachusetts residents to buy health insurance coverage or face escalating tax penalties, such as the loss of their personal income tax exemption. The bill also establishes means-tested state subsidies for people who do not have adequate employer insurance and whose income is below a threshold, with funds that were previously used to compensate for the health costs of the uninsured. He vetoed eight sections of the health care legislation, including a controversial $295-per-employee assessment on businesses that do not offer health insurance and provisions guaranteeing dental benefits to Medicaid recipients.
The legislature overrode all eight vetoes, but the governor's office said the differences were not essential. The law was the first of its kind in the nation and became the signature achievement of Romney's term in office...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M... _____________________________________________
The essential differences between Romneycare and the Obamatax are; namely, that Romneycare merely sought to get citizens here in Massachusetts insured so that our hospitals wouldn't go bankrupt providing expensive healthcare to uninsured recipients - especially if a threatened Medicaid cut were implemented by the Federal Government. Moreover, Mitt Romney never hesitated to admit that the penalty for non-compliance was a tax.
Romneycare never envisioned a government takeover and control of 1/6 of our state's economy as Obamatax envisions a government takeover and control of 1/6 of our nation's economy. Romneycare never envisioned gaining control over the lives of the citizens of Massachusetts.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.