Affordable Care Act Not A Tax, Romney Aide:

So the affordable care act is deemed to be constitutional by the highest court in the land,with the republican appointed chief justice siding with the majority, win for the American people right?

Well not if you are a repub­li­can, like medicare, Medicaid, social secu­ri­ty and every oth­er fed­er­al plan which aids the poor and dis­pos­sessed, repub­li­cans have tak­en to the air­waves with fear-mon­ger­ing and lies, “it’s a tax , it’s a tax, the pres­i­dent has vis­it­ed a mon­u­men­tal tax on the American peo­ple”. The only thing is that it is a total lie.

The US Supreme Court has ruled that the Affordable Care Act (Obama care) is uncon­sti­tu­tion­al under the com­merce clause. Chief Justice Roberts sided with Associate Justices, Scalia, Thomas, Kennedy, and Alito.

Hence the ini­tial euphor­ic shrieks and cries of joy com­ing from the right when net­works like FOX and CNN announced the deci­sion with­out dig­ging deep­er into the ruling.

The rul­ing went fur­ther how­ev­er, the court ruled that under the tax­ing author­i­ty the law is indeed con­sti­tu­tion­al. 

The old repub­li­can nay-say­ers were imme­di­ate­ly on the doom and gloom mes­sage, “Obama has just imposed a mas­sive tax on the American peo­ple”. Leading the charge was Senate Minority leader Mitch McConnell the old cur­mud­geon from Kentucky, remem­ber him? yes the same Mitch Mc Connell whose sole respon­si­bil­i­ty is to make pres­i­dent Obama a one term pres­i­dent, not look after the peo­ple’s busi­ness, remem­ber him?

Other Senate obstruc­tion­ists like Oklahoma Senator Tom Coburn a med­ical Doctor and oth­ers were out trum­pet­ing the tax narrative.

One thing the lame stream media does not both­er to ask is, “do you gen­tle­men and gen­tle ladies at the top of the fed­er­al food-chain have good med­ical insur­ance”? “Do you have to vis­it emer­gency rooms to get med­ical care”? Do you get dumped from Insurance plans because you have pre-exist­ing con­di­tions”? “Do your kids have to for­go insur­ance because they are not working”?

The truth is, what pass­es for media are just cor­po­rate enti­ties in the pock­ets and owned by the very peo­ple repub­li­cans rep­re­sent, so don’t hold your breath wait­ing for those ques­tions. Conversely what you may well hear is the same media trum­pet­ing the cam­paign talk­ing points of the Romney cam­paign. David Gregory in an inter­view on the NBC Sunday morn­ing talk show “Meet the Press” all but told ‚rather than ask House minor­i­ty leader Nancy Pelosi it was a tax. http://​www​.msnbc​.msn​.com/​i​d​/​3​0​3​2​6​08/.

The real issue is, why do repub­li­cans who are paid by tax dol­lars, paid very well, have top-tier med­ical Insurance , bet­ter than the aver­age American with health Insurance, but does not want the mid­dle-class and the poor to have health insurance?

And of course those of you who are famil­iar with these blogs know that my next ques­tion then becomes as always, “how does repub­li­cans man­age to con­vince peo­ple to mil­i­tate and vote against their own self-interest”?

Mitt Romney President Barack Obama

Like oth­er sig­nif­i­cant leg­is­la­tion which has moved this coun­try for­ward, end­ing slav­ery, end­ing Jim Crowe, school inte­gra­tion, and oth­er social pro­grams I artic­u­lat­ed above , repub­li­cans have fought tooth and nail to pre­vent progress.

True to their (modus operan­di), a group of repub­li­can Governors Wisconsin’s Scott Walker, Louisiana’s Bobby Jindal, South Carolina’s Nicky Haley, Florida’s Rick Scott, and New Jersey’s blow-hard Cris Christie has pon­tif­i­cat­ed that they will not abide by the law, in essence they will not move to set up exchanges as dic­tat­ed by this afford­able care act.

This means that American cit­i­zens liv­ing in these states with­out health insur­ance, will be pre­clud­ed from get­ting the care they need, because their repub­li­can gov­er­nors have decid­ed to put pol­i­tics and far right lunatic ide­ol­o­gy over com­mon sense, their health and ulti­mate­ly their very lives.

What these gov­er­nors will not acknowl­edge is that whether they decid­ed to obey fed­er­al Law or not, it will be enact­ed, the fed­er­al gov­ern­ment will step in to set up the exchanges whether these ide­o­logues agree or not, so as they pon­tif­i­cate about not need­ing the fed­er­al gov­ern­ment inter­ven­ing in their states, by default, they are actu­al­ly invit­ing fed­er­al author­i­ty into the afore­men­tioned states.

One won­ders if states like Louisiana with its pover­ty and low per­cent­age of health insured, New Jersey a blue state, real­ly want this kind of pos­tur­ing from their elect­ed leaders?

Jindal Walker Haley

Scott Christie

Let’s look at the facts, experts have said even if we argue that it is a tax as it is deemed con­sti­tu­tion­al, only about 1 – 2 % of peo­ple who have no insur­ance, will pay a of what amounts to about $95.

The truth is, there is evi­dence that this whole health care idea came out of the ultra-con­ser­v­a­tive think-tank Heritage Foundation, and is the cor­ner­stone of Romney-care the sig­na­ture accom­plish­ment of Mitt Romney repub­li­can can­di­date for pres­i­dent in the state of Massachusetts

This presents a conun­drum for Romney, as for­mer con­tender Rick Santorum allud­ed dur­ing the pri­maries Mitt Romney was the worst can­di­date repub­li­cans could field to go up against the pres­i­dent, exact­ly because of Romney-care.

It was no sur­prise then that despite the all out assault by repub­li­can elect­ed lead­ers and their plants in the lame-stream media, by Monday morn­ing July 2nd senior Romney cam­paign advis­er Eric (etch-a-sketch) Fehrnstrom was on MSNBC telling NBC’s Chuck Todd that Romney agrees with the pres­i­dent and democ­rats that the penal­ty in the law which would penal­ize so-called free rid­ers is not a tax but indeed a penal­ty. I won­der how Mitch McConnell, Coburn and oth­ers will remove the egg from their faces?

Romney knows ful­ly well that he will be total­ly inca­pable of artic­u­lat­ing a path for­ward being the cre­ator of Romney-care, in sup­port of which he stat­ed emphat­i­cal­ly and cat­e­gor­i­cal­ly that the penal­ty was not a tax.

Obviously the obstruc­tion­ists in the House Senate and lame-street media did not get the memo.>

I real­ly get that a coun­try which is still major­i­ty white could resist the eman­ci­pa­tion of slaves, the removal of Jim Crowe laws, school inte­gra­tion, and the civ­il rights act.

I get that, but how is get­ting insur­ance when you had none a bad thing?

Most democ­rats cor­rect­ly believe that the gov­ern­ment have a right and indeed a duty to help the most vul­ner­a­ble, not with hand-outs but with hands-up.

Most repub­li­cans con­verse­ly believe that gov­ern­ment should have no role in help­ing the poor,dispossessed or help­less, they fun­da­men­tal­ly believe that those roles should be left up to char­i­ties , church­es, and oth­er NGO’s and for those who can­not access help from the aforementioned/​Well tough, they are out of luck.

Republicans fun­da­men­tal­ly espouse the nar­ra­tive that those who are not rich or well-off are sloven sloths who failed to take advan­tage of the great­est sys­tem in the world as they see it, Capitalism.

On that basis, those peo­ple are prob­a­bly bet­ter off not get­ting any help , in oth­er words they have no use for the poor.