Whirly Might Be Right

The Obamacare tax is easily reversed, if November goes our way. And yesterday's decision (and majority opinion) is a big win for conservatives if we can kill Obama 's $1 trillion tax!!!!! Originally Posted by Whirlaway

Whirly didn't you admit on my thread that is was bad news for the GOP no matter how you twist it??? here's the link: http://www.eccie.net/showthread.php?t=484452&page=2
I will tell you something your article didn't mention- if this ignites the Republican party and/or the far right TEA party and Romney embraces them- I still laugh every time Romney says he wants to repeal Obamacare- when Romney says he wants to repeal Obamacare it's as absurd as a Bi-sexual man saying he is against homosexuality. However if the TEA party rallies behind Romney - Romney will run the risk of losing the Independent vote which he will no doubt need- Romney is way behind in the Latino vote and particularly every minority vote- he trails Obama with women voters(they are the ones who really vote) and if he embraces the TEA party bullshit he's going to lose the Independent voters- no matter how you flip it this was a win for Obama- big time!!!!

Ok, this is a "Hail Mary".

Liberty was on life support. The SCOTUS pulled the plug on Liberty this morning. We need to get a defibrillator on to Liberty before it dies completely. We don't have much time.

We don't have time for the Libertarian Party to become a national party.

We don't have time to wait for the establishment Republicans to pull their heads out of their ass.

That leaves the Tea Party. If we can get new, untainted Tea Party candidates, and bring these issues to a vote early, before they become Washingtonized, we may have a chance.

Problems:

1. We must get Romney elected. (God, I hate to have to depend on him. But this is an emergency, and he's the only game in town.)

2. The Republicans must keep the House.

3. The Republicans need 60 Senators, and the increase must come from the untarnished Tea Party candidates. This is necessary to give Romney a veto proof Congress, and more importantly, will prevent the Democrats from filibustering judicial appointments.

4. Justice Ginsburg, and Justice Breyer must resign, and be replaced by lawyers who understand the Constitution.

This is ambitious, and must occur without any variation, but it is our country's only hope. I hate to have to rely on Republicans, but that's all we have. It's important to overturn Obamacare, but more important to overturn the SCOTUS decision so the convoluted and twisted reasoning by CJ Roberts doesn't become preceding. That means we must work fast. The longer the ruling goes unchallenged, the stronger it becomes.

So Whirly, I'll stop overly promoting the LP at the expense of the Tea Party. We need the Tea Party to reach back to its roots, and vote accordingly.

Again, it will be the Republic against the Empire. The Republic must win. Failure is not an option. Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

It sounds like the perfect storm, necessary for success.The planets have to come into alignment. Actually, it sounds a lot like the way the country was born, when an army of ill equiped, ill fed, ill trained farmers defeated the most powerful military in the world.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sw16FXp5ZJk

You say that as if you do know something about the law. I presume you are speaking of the same legal issues that you were 0 for 2 in predicting earlier this week? Some friggin' expert you are! ROTFLMAO

SOF knowing something about the law qualifies as the joke of the day, week, month, year, decade and century!

Once a StupidOldFart, always a StupidOldFart! Originally Posted by bigtex

Spoken like a true Obamaton apologist, who knows nothing about anything.

Spoken like a true Obamaton apologist, who knows nothing about anything.

Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

Your words are easy to say but difficult to prove. Therein lies the story behind StupidOldFart's pitiful, online existence.

Indeed, talk is cheap!

Talk is cheap? You hired a lawyer lately?

Talk is cheap? You hired a lawyer lately? Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

Correction: Your talk is cheap!

That's better!

Bad news for a Constitutional Republic, but campagin positive for Romney.

Minnesota is now in play. Obama cant poll above 50% in this deep blue state.

Whirly didn't you admit on my thread that is was bad news for the GOP no matter how you twist it??? here's the link: http://www.eccie.net/showthread.php?t=484452&page=2
I will tell you something your article didn't mention- if this ignites the Republican party and/or the far right TEA party and Romney embraces them- I still laugh every time Romney says he wants to repeal Obamacare- when Romney says he wants to repeal Obamacare it's as absurd as a Bi-sexual man saying he is against homosexuality. However if the TEA party rallies behind Romney - Romney will run the risk of losing the Independent vote which he will no doubt need- Romney is way behind in the Latino vote and particularly every minority vote- he trails Obama with women voters(they are the ones who really vote) and if he embraces the TEA party bullshit he's going to lose the Independent voters- no matter how you flip it this was a win for Obama- big time!!!! Originally Posted by wellendowed1911

Bad news for a Constitutional Republic, but campagin positive for Romney.

Minnesota is now in play. Obama cant poll above 50% in this deep blue state. Originally Posted by Whirlaway

Norm Coleman held a senatorial seat for us in Minnesota for six years until Al Franken stole it; so maybe Minnesota is more purple. Since Wisconsin seems to be in play, there are probably a few other states we've got a shot at that we didn't last time. I hope Romney picks Rubio for VP. Locking in Florida would be a shot in the arm, plus Rubio should help with the Hispanic vote nationwide.

1. We must get Romney elected. (God, I hate to have to depend on him. But this is an emergency, and he's the only game in town.)

It's important to overturn Obamacare, but more important to overturn the SCOTUS decision so the convoluted and twisted reasoning by CJ Roberts doesn't become preceding. Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

Um, you are aware the Mitt Romney signed the same exact law, are you not? With the same exact tax/mandate, whatever the hell you wanna call it?

My God, it's not as if he appeared on Bill O'Reilly one day supporting it, then decided to campaign against it. He signed the freakin' idea into law - and then decided to campaign against the idea.

You really need to be a hypocrite of epic proportions to weasel your way out of that. If that's not a textbook example of "it's ok when i do it but not when you do it", then i don't know what is. And you really need to be one deranged Obama hater (Olivia) to support Romney while taking issue with the ACA.

Um, you are aware the Mitt Romney signed the same exact law, are you not? With the same exact tax/mandate, whatever the hell you wanna call it?

My God, it's not as if he appeared on Bill O'Reilly one day supporting it, then decided to campaign against it. He signed the freakin' idea into law - and then decided to campaign against the idea.

You really need to be a hypocrite of epic proportions to weasel your way out of that. If that's not a textbook example of "it's ok when i do it but not when you do it", then i don't know what is. And you really need to be one deranged Obama hater (Olivia) to support Romney while taking issue with the ACA. Originally Posted by Doove

as I said in another thread, it was the STATE, not the federal government, big difference

as I said in another thread, it was the STATE, not the federal government, big difference Originally Posted by cptjohnstone

Yes it is a "big difference," with the "difference" being if he had been President as opposed to the Governor of Massachusetts, it would have been the entire country and you guys would have been slobbering all over him for being a visionary!

If one state wanted a state healthcare system, and another one wanted a free market system, what is wrong with that? States are (were) allowed to manage their own business. It's called "federalism". It's what the Founder's intended, rather than the all-consuming federal tyranny we have now.

rather than the all-consuming federal tyranny we have now. Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy;2867879If

You really are a StupidOldFart. You can take your "federal tyranny" bull shit and stuff it where the sun don't shine!

I'm not surprised you are in favor of tyranny, it kind of goes along with corncobs up your ass.