CNN Asks GOP Senator If He's 'Sore Loser' for Continuing to Fight ObamaCare
It didn't take long after ObamaCare was upheld by the Supreme Court for CNN to browbeat Republicans about accepting defeat and getting behind the law. Anchor Brooke Baldwin asked Sen. Roy Blunt (R-Mo.) on Thursday afternoon why he was still fighting a law opposed by a majority of Americans.
"You lost in 2010 when this law was passed, you lost again today. Yet you are still pushing for the repeal of this law. Doesn't that make you look kind of like a sore loser?" Baldwin obnoxiously asked. [Video below the break. Audio here.]
Perhaps Baldwin forgot that according to her network's own poll, a majority of Americans oppose the law. And in the 2010 elections Republicans gained over 60 seats in the House months after a Democratic Congress passed ObamaCare by the narrowest of margins. Yet she still thought GOP opposition to the law would hurt the party in the long-run.
Baldwin also hit Republicans for attacking the financial cost of the new law, but Blunt smacked down her efforts. "Well we know for sure that they're – they intended to cut $500 billion from Medicare to fund this new program, so you could have the whole 'could we afford it' debate on that one issue alone," he retorted.
A partial transcript of the segment, which aired on June 28 on CNN Newsroom at 2:36 p.m. EDT, is as follows:
BROOKE BALDWIN: ObamaCare lives. Republicans did everything they could to chip away at the law in the two years since it was passed, and many were confident the Court would strike down the individual mandate. So for them, today's ruling kind of has to sting. Senator Roy Blunt is one of those Republicans who is rooting for ObamaCare to fall. Senator, welcome. You lost in 2010 when this law was passed, you lost again today. Yet you are still pushing for the repeal of this law. Doesn't that make you look kind of like a sore loser?
(...)
BALDWIN: I want to begin with Chief Justice John Roberts, a man appointed by George W. Bush. Sided with the liberal-leaning justices on this. Does that make you take a step back when you realize that a conservative justice, Chief Justice, was the swing vote here?
(...)
BALDWIN: But sir, I just asked about the chief justice specifically. Forgive me for interrupting, but the Chief Justice specifically – does that make you step back and worry about this supposed conservative Chief Justice?
(...)
BALDWIN: On the affordability, on the dollars and cents that Americans will be facing come 2014, the CBO director does say that because of the size and the scope of this law, certain cost projections like looking ahead – it's impossible to really tell right now. So isn't it misleading for your Republican colleagues to cry financial doom over this today?
Sen. ROY BLUNT (R-Mo.): Well we know for sure that they're – they intended to cut $500 billion from Medicare to fund this new program, so you could have the whole "could we afford it" debate on that one issue alone. Why would you take a program that's about to have significant financial challenges anyway and use it as a big pay-for for a new government takeover of more of the health care plan. This debate now really gets started. The constitutional thing, while narrowly decided, set aside, and now we get to do you think this is a good idea? Aren't there better things to do to make the health care system work better? And my side of this debate is let's repeal this and let's start over again and try to produce this system where people get more competition to provide services to them and they are their doctors make decisions, not some regulating board at some far-away place.
BALDWIN: I know Romney said day one if he is elected, he used the same word, he will repeal ObamaCare. You are Romney's congressional liaison. His campaign says it raised a million dollars since the ruling. I want to just listen to some of Romney's comments on this.
(Video Clip)
MITT ROMNEY, Republican presidential candidate: As you might imagine, I disagree with the Supreme Court's decision. And I agree with the dissent. What the Court did not do on its last day of session, I will do on my first day if elected President of the United States. And that is I will act to repeal ObamaCare.
(End Video Clip)
BALDWIN: You yourself said the law is the law, now that the nation's highest court has ruled this is constitutional. Doesn't it hurt Romney's rhetoric in the long-run?
(...)
BALDWIN: I want to read something you said on Monday. Quote, "I could get in lots of trouble in the current environment saying I think we should have more compromise. But what I've said about this is what I believe – compromise is the price for living in a democracy." Compromise, senator. Will more of your Republican colleagues have to learn the meaning of compromise after today?
- Matt Hadro's blog
- Login to post comments
Comments
November 6th, 2012.
Submitted by johnsonl on Thu, 06/28/2012 - 4:02pm.
It's the Constitution,
Bitch.
"You're a cheerleader for a
Submitted by NC Cop on Thu, 06/28/2012 - 4:05pm.
"You're a cheerleader for a bill that is opposed by most Americans, will raise health care costs for everyone, reduce the quality of health care for everyone and will tax an already overburdened economy to the point of collapse. Doesn't that make you look kind of like an idiot?"
End of interview.
As a famous coach once said, ...
Submitted by Newsbubba on Thu, 06/28/2012 - 4:04pm.
... "Show me a sore loser, and I'll show you a loser."
Congress, you are losers. Sad thing is, we elected your sorry asses, along with the RBFSOB.
... and now, as the DNC Tweeted this morning, we are officially Obama's bitches!
Am I the only one that pisses off to the point of ....?
And if it had gone the other way
Submitted by Marcus Porcius on Thu, 06/28/2012 - 4:05pm.
She'd be asking a liberal what they planned to do to get around the Supreme Court.
Two-faced media hypocrite c-word.
"Tolerance is the virtue of the man without convictions." G.K. Chesterton
www.theconservativereview.com
We used to pronounce it "soont," ...
Submitted by Newsbubba on Thu, 06/28/2012 - 6:01pm.
... to keep from upsetting people.
Pelosi is definitely a "soont," whatever the spelling or pronunciation.
Didn't it come down to a 5-4 vote?
Submitted by Kubrickfilmfan73 on Thu, 06/28/2012 - 4:09pm.
In other words, ObamaCare has been upheld as the law of the land because of ONE Supreme Court justice: yes or no?
Am I the only one who sees it this way?
Obamacare is the law of the land because . . .
Submitted by Galvanic on Thu, 06/28/2012 - 4:46pm.
. . . five justices voted Yes. Plain and simple.
We lost, and the longer we dwell on it, the more the Left is going to shove it in our faces and distract the public from the economic issues.
Romney can point out that Obamacare raises taxes on those making under $250,000, but keeping it in the headlines is just pissing in the wind at this point.
And if the Republicans don't keep the House, and win the WH and the Senate, Americans will grow accustomed to Obamacare to that by 2016, it will be impossible to repeal no matter how much it costs or how inefficient it is.
Newsflash..
Submitted by ckc1227 on Thu, 06/28/2012 - 5:48pm.
"We lost, and the longer we dwell on it, the more the Left is going to shove it in our faces and distract the public from the economic issues."
Obamacare IS an economic issue.....possibly the biggest. Let them continue to shove it in our faces, hopefully alienating even more voters in the process.
Sore loser . . and those . .
Submitted by Gary Hall on Thu, 06/28/2012 - 4:21pm.
Sore loser .
And those . .
. . still pushing to repeal the Bush tax cuts?
(;~/ gary
How about a "desperate" loser?
Submitted by motherbelt on Thu, 06/28/2012 - 4:22pm.
Steny Hoyer goes off the rails.
Just one more example of why, if we can't have term limits, we at least need mandatory retirement at 65!
The Liberals Are Correct - Kinda
Submitted by Jimbo on Fri, 06/29/2012 - 3:55pm.
In a sense, they would be correct. In this case, the revenue stream can be cut off because it is considered a tax, effectively killing the snake by cutting off the head. HOWEVER - they are correct in that the concept cannot be repealed - that is the government now has the ability to "tax" its subjects into submission with their wishes.
I expect the next argument from liberals to be
Submitted by motherbelt on Thu, 06/28/2012 - 4:29pm.
I expect the next argument from liberals to be that once a law is declared constitutional, it can't be repealed.
Who is this woman?
Submitted by averageschmoe on Thu, 06/28/2012 - 4:30pm.
And shouldn't she be co-hosting Entertainment Tonight or TMZ?
Justice Roberts might just be a true Patriot here folks.
Submitted by gregfahey on Thu, 06/28/2012 - 4:43pm.
My first thoughts were "traitor!" about Roberts but, in reading what he said, I think he intended his decision to light a fire under a lot of Americans.
Bottom line? Roberts said "You don't want this? Then work at it harder and via elections, place people in the govt to do just that!"
Am I the only one feeling this way?
We need to dig down deep people of America. We need to get our hands dirty and do the hard work it takes to rid this country of leftists who are intent on implementing their socialist utopian scheme on mostly unsuspecting Americans who do little in the way of actually paying attention to legislation...they let Brian Williams and Matt Lauer feed them what they want to hear.
I was never a big fan of Romney's but, you know what? We had best get him in the WH or this next term of Obama's will do the part of stripping the 2nd Amendment. He'll have a majority in the SCOTUS and that should keep most of us up at night.
Wake up America. This might be our last chance.
gregfahey
Submitted by ant on Thu, 06/28/2012 - 4:50pm.
Check out my link below.
I don't think he had that in mind at all
Submitted by Galvanic on Thu, 06/28/2012 - 4:53pm.
As he stated, he took a very narrow interpretation of the Congress's authority to tax (Which is what a strict constructionist to do), and ruled that the mandate is a tax, and therefore Constitutional. But that was a roundabout way of validating the WH's Commerce Clause argument because the tax is on people who opt not to buy a specific product -- unprecedented according to the CBO.
Roberts was doing anything but send a message to Americans.
Greg you make a good point
Submitted by I hate marxists on Thu, 06/28/2012 - 5:16pm.
However he took a big chance if that was his strategy.I hope that wasn't his plan. If and only if Obama gets back in the USA will not be as you and I know it.
My two cents...
Submitted by Djinn1975 on Thu, 06/28/2012 - 10:38pm.
after being pissed. It may have been a stroke of genius by Chief Justice Roberts to expound that the mandate is not the means by which this abomination stands, it is through taxation. Time will tell, but I believe this lefty orgasm at an apparent victory will turn sour when we no longer care about the term mandate, all that said abomination will stand on is taxes and the IRS. Nobody, left or right, likes the IRS. So epileptic medication drunk Chief Justice Roberts may have just out smarted the whole damn country.
Glad someone else pointed it out
Submitted by jon_torlin on Fri, 06/29/2012 - 9:50am.
His job was to declare something Constitutional or not. Not rewrite the damn thing just on that basis alone, and that's exactly what he did. If someone had been working for me and made some sort of interpretation for something like that, he'd have been fired on the spot.
-Jon
Sore loser? Is she talkin'
Submitted by ant on Thu, 06/28/2012 - 4:48pm.
Sore loser? Is she talkin' about The Unions in Wisconsin, the plummeting relevance of the Occutards, Kerry supporters, the Coffee Party...?
This might make some people feel better;
http://borepatch.blogspot.com/2012/06/what-disaster-for-democratic-party...
Thanks to another conservative citizen for the article. I notice many people from the right trying to wrap their heads around this whole thing, in terms of Constitutionality, what it means for the future, the elections, jobs, etc. which has led are 'enlightened proggresives' to comment that Conservatives are so stupid they just don't get it. But, I say to my libtarded bretheren, it is just the opposite...you see, while you happily accept propaganda and talking points as absolute truth and follow your ideological crowd like a bunch of radical brain-dead sheep...you never can see the big picture or even ponder for a moment the ramifications of anything, nor empathize with another...therefore it is up to conservatives to do the thinking for you, to weigh the significance of every policy, regulation, and act. Be thankful, for what seems to be confusion from the right to you, is 'thinking' and primarily the only reason the Country, including you idiots, hasn't slid into chaos and poverty already. Not that I owe you an explanation....just thought you'd like to know.
o'bama-care
Submitted by theyjustcantstop on Thu, 06/28/2012 - 5:10pm.
i'm getting so angered, when any one uses the phrase,it's better for all americans,if it were a truthful debate on lowering the health-care cost of americans that could be accomplished,the truth of the matter is, can we afford to give away american health-care to 10's of millions of illegals.
someone add it up,how much free health-care was provided,and passed on to the american tax-payer last year,that will be dollars their trying to make up.
any o'bama-care conversations has to deal with free health-care to 10's of millions of illegals,so put the price of it up front.
Stalin was right
Submitted by I hate marxists on Thu, 06/28/2012 - 5:12pm.
America is a healthy body and it has great resistence to communism they have patriotism,morality, and is spiritual. If we can undermine those areas we will have them collapse from within.
So true. However come November you have one more chance to rid this country of Marxism and you must vote to get them out otherwise our Great USA will be lost for decades
Liberals idea of compromise
Submitted by LionKing on Thu, 06/28/2012 - 5:20pm.
Like the 100 Democrats that walked out on the contempt vote?
The only compromise they understand it there way or no way.
Good point.
Submitted by ant on Thu, 06/28/2012 - 5:31pm.
And just like in Wisconsin, there they go shirking their responsibilities again...hey, maybe they left to go work on a budget....maybe?...no?. While we got 'em leaving let's bolt the doors and change the locks...who do they represent anyway, their constituents or Holder?
Roberts is the new GOP hero.
Submitted by DoggyDaddy on Thu, 06/28/2012 - 5:42pm.
Roberts is the new hero to the GOP. Just watch what happens to the Democrats this November. It will be like the 2010 election again and likely result as a super majority for the GOP. ObamaCare is still doomed along with other terrible Democrat bills and their agenda.
If a law was passed, that.........
Submitted by GregE on Thu, 06/28/2012 - 6:13pm.
.............called for lining up all in disagreement with Obama, and shooting them, would someone be a sore loser for continuing to fight against that law?
Amazing statement by Justice Roberts
Submitted by GregE on Thu, 06/28/2012 - 6:17pm.
If this isn't fishing around for the definition of "is"......
"If an individual does not maintain health insurance, the only consequence is that he must make an additional payment to the IRS when he pays his taxes," Roberts writes. He adds that this means "the mandate is not a legal command to buy insurance. Rather, it makes going without insurance just another thing the Government taxes, like buying gasoline or earning an income."
"the mandate is not a legal
Submitted by Kubrickfilmfan73 on Fri, 06/29/2012 - 10:24am.
"the mandate is not a legal command to buy insurance. Rather, it makes going without insurance just another thing the Government taxes, like buying gasoline or earning an income."
If the definition of "is" is "without," then yes, I agree with you. When was the last time you paid taxes for not buying gasoline, and how exactly can you expect to pay income taxes when you don't have an income? Sounds like something straight out of Catch-22, doesn't it?
Wonder why nobody watches CNN
Submitted by mmilesll on Thu, 06/28/2012 - 6:32pm.
This dumb bitch wouldn't know which side was up unless it was written on a telepromter, just like the clown.
Another Demented Leftist
Submitted by HardRightTurn on Thu, 06/28/2012 - 7:12pm.
Thinks it's "game over". We're just going to another level.
To more fully comprehend the Left, one must read “Leftism As Psychopathy” by John Ray, M.A., Ph.D. Caution, it might scare you a little bit.
http://jonjayray.tripod.com/psycho.html
Dred
Submitted by Jamson64 on Thu, 06/28/2012 - 7:28pm.
Those darn opponents of Dred Scott. Sore losers.
/sarc
unchecked power is scary.
Submitted by dmacleo on Thu, 06/28/2012 - 7:46pm.
if they can tax you for living what (if left unchecked) can they do to you for not paying that tax?
https://twitter.com/conserv_voice/status/218456989523652608
THE TEA PARTY
Submitted by A TEXAS GRIZ on Thu, 06/28/2012 - 9:04pm.
will double in size by Independence Day; we are just getting started. People, we must get out of our comfort zone and convince people to support freedom, spread the word, one person at a time!
The last time a president swore "no more taxes", he lost! Obama LIED, it is the largest tax increase in American history! BOOOOOOM
I have decided that this
Submitted by Suilbup on Fri, 06/29/2012 - 11:57am.
I have decided that this decision is completely unimportant. WHEN Romney wins in November all he has to do is issue an executive fiat ... er... Executive Order saying he doesn't believe in this law and so he will not be enforcing or defending it. Sorta like the current administration has done with our immigration laws and the Defense of Marriage Act. The press will love him for his daring, bold leadership and the rest if us can live our lives in liberty.
How's THAT for a plan.
And, if Congress dares to oppose him in any way he can just declare them in recess (like Obama did with his NLRB appointments) and ignore them.
This ruling like a lefty has its advantages (although one has to really be an obnoxious pus-bag to actually do it).
Sore loser?
Submitted by Morganfrost on Fri, 06/29/2012 - 1:54pm.
I don't think we're losers at all unless we stop fighting before this thing is dead.
A sore loser?
Submitted by stratosaurus on Fri, 06/29/2012 - 2:59pm.
Let me get this straight. This libturd apologist for Odildo the Mad thinks that a continuing effort to repeal a law which 70% of the population do not want is an indication of being a sore loser? How then does she explain the continuing (and CONTINUOUS) efforts by the demoncraps to thwart any attempt by the sovereign states to enforce federal immigration law? Why does the DoJ attempt to thwart every attempt by the sovereign states to purge the voting rolls of invalid names? I would fix those answers in the same "sore loser" category.
Brooke Baldwin seems to be as mentally-deficient as Alec. Has anyone done the research to find out if they are related? If that's the case, I would be hard-pressed to believe that any union of which Alec or Brooke were the product was not incestuous. They're both not in full command of their faculties.