Romney is just unbelievable... really unbelievable. How can anyone change his mind so many times on so many issues. He's supposed to be a religious man, but do his personal beliefs allow lying, deceit and fraud?

For the Reich Wing party or Romnut to call this penalty a tax is ludicrous. The party of personal responsibility. Right! This country has so lost it thanks to these nut jobs.

If this man were ever consistent on anything, I'd certainly like to know. How can anyone trust him when he constantly changes his mind or his so-called beliefs. It's a mandate any way you look at it. Use the damn dictionary, Romney; also look at your record in Mass. I trust you like I trust a poison snake. You have no knowledge of foreign affairs, no knowledge of people in need, whether it's health care or other human needs. BUT WHY did you take Mass. into the health care plan it now has, if you don't believe in it now. And frankly, I believe that although Roberts may have supported the bill under taxation laws, he most certainly should have upheld the law under commerce. It is commerce. NOT A TAX., And anyone who thinks he or she won't need health care at some time. please do let us know where that alien exists.

And in the spirit of Bipartisanship, the President's Official News Agency, the Associated Press, has just announced that Barack Obama has just reversed the position of his own campaign and that of House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi.-----------Obama stated "The Supreme Court is correct. "I agree with candidate Romney on this issue. My health care law is in fact, a TAX."

The main point is that Barack Obama, Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi used false budget projections and kickbacks to key members of Congress to ram through an unpopular "reform" of health care. That is what matters, not Mitt Romney's. Choice of words.

You've got it wrong. The government lawyers actually proposed that it was a tax as an alternative interpretation in their arguments before the Supreme Court. Immediately after the ruling Nancy Pelosi said in a press conference that it didn't matter what it was called as long as it was constitutional. If the 4 dissenting judges had thought it was a tax, the court would have ruled 9-0 in favor of the health care law. Are you saying that the majority were right but the 4 conservative justices -- the ones you worship -- were wrong?

The semantics of it are meaningless. The court has made its ruling, and now it is up to the people to make ours. By electing Mitt Romney, we still have a chance of saving the nation from the consequences of Obamacare. That is how it should be-the court ought not set policy, that is what elections are for. Obama deceived the American people, with his many false promises linked to Obamacare. In November, he will pay the ultimate price for his deception. He will be forced to retire, and can begin writing his third autobiography.

I'm fine labeling the penalty under Obamacare a tax. However, given the apparent importance of "correct" labeling, should I assume the analogous penalty under Romneycare is also a tax?

Interesting response to a major flip-flop in the space of 2 days. Like it didn't happen or it doesn't matter. But anybody but Obama, right?

Willie, it is a god awful law, and I would say so no matter who signed it into law.

Anybody that votes for this clueless fraud is nuts. You think the right wing nuts are fouling up this country now?

Please explain to me and other readers what is wrong with Obamacare,or Romneycare if you want. And please don't start with the IRS being involved because that is pure BS.

Tell us why over 50% of Americans polled now approve of the long needed healthcare reform as its benefits are starting to be realized. Especially senior citizens.

Excellent point(s). The lack of foreign policy experience other than his desire to appease the hawks by bombing Iran is nil. His knowledge of needy people is zero. I only hope that we will see a McGovern election,only this time Massachusetts will be on the winning side.

so what else is new for a posed lip flopper who may be challenging the world record holder for flip flops.....McDonalds....in fact, he should be called the McDonald's candidate...perhaps with a sign at all his offices...."over 1 billion flip-flops".....

This whole debate stems from the overly imperfect payment mechanism chosen to pay for an individual's health care under the ACA and even worse in the status quo. To painfully preserve market principles that do not work for medical treatment a Rube Goldberg system has been fashioned in this country. It has created a confusing array of risk groups isolated one from another: Employer groups, self insured employer groups, self pay, government paid(Medicare, Medicaid, VA, government workers), people who refuse insurance even if they can afford it, the working poor or near poor, the elderly, nursing home patients, philanthropy. Given this mixed bag it opens the door for any side to call it what ideologically appeals to them. I think for Justice Thomas it was just too much so he decided this all needed to be swept into one entity, a tax. He was probably impressed that separate bureaucracies are the present norm being used to deal with these separate buckets. He also noticed that each had its own method of determining price and eligibility causing extra dollars to be wasted by duplicating administration for paying for the exact same services. By using a unifying concept that says the government gets revenue for its programs by taxes, the solution becomes clear. If you want to truly be efficient then a single set of rules and payments for all insurers must be set up. The Constitution states that any proposed tax must be the same for all states. Pricing and uniform negotiation for the same expenses that are paid according to some overall taxation scheme must have gotten his attention. In this country a progressive tax system has been shown to be the fairest everyone contributing according to their ability to pay. Sounds like the right decision to me.

Mitt, it doesn't matter to us what it is called. People like what they get from the ACA. It's pretty sad that the Tea Baggers can't let this go. They haven't had an original thought in their plan to take over the government in 5 years? Who would vote for a party that does no original thinking? Tea Baggers, please pY your taxes like the rest of us. Then go off and shut up. Your values are reprehensible. And your candidate is a fool.

For the love of god, man. Grow a pair and stand up for what you did. Stop mincing words and trying to weasel your way out of admitting that ACA is largely based on the Romenycare model. You want to be president but you're too gutless to stand up for your own deeds? Take a look in the mirror and get it together.

Last sentence is inadvertently pretty funny, since the LDS church was founded by a con man who, indeed, was familiar with the fine arts of lying, deceit and fraud in order to advance his own interests and satisfy his ego. If you haven't read it, a good history of the church is embedded in Krakauer's "Under the Banner of Heaven".

well he should know since it created the Healthcare mandate for MA.

Romney agreed with the Supreme Court decision. The Supreme Court is the authority which states the law of the land! There would have been one big hullabaloo if Gov. Romney would have said anything else. It is Obama who puts his big foot in his mouth, but the media chooses to ignore Obama's verbal blunders.

It seems as if a lot of people will just merely flop around in the sun like a fish when it comes to this whole "tax", "penalty" issue. I don't see how it really matters although I am fascinated by the way in which politicians can twist an argument and then get the media to go along with the twist. The Court clearly state the "penalty" was authorized under the "taxing authority", therefore like the "penalty" for late filings is a "tax". Now to most of us this is pretty clear, it's a "penalty" under "taxing authority", a hair splitter if ever there was one, but Mitt can't seem to stand up and say, "Hey, I called it a "penalty", the Court calls it a tax. Instead he tries to finesse the issue and alienates the very fringe voters that he needs. I don't know who is advising him, but I think they need to start thinking about what Mitt is for and quit explaining why he was for something else before he ran.

Gov. Mitt Romney agreed with the Supreme Court decision. Which no one can argue against. It was the only thing and the right thing to do. Also, there is a difference between federal and state authority and which administration has the authority to levy taxes OR develop policy and programs.