Posted on 06/28/2012 11:22:03 AM PDT by Kaslin
Here’s your sign........)
only congress can tax so if the ACA mandate is a tax and not a fine Does that give the executive power to raise taxes with out congress?
Tax shmax, the agenda is to force single payer upon America, by destroying the insurance industry. Sadly, the greed of insurance brokers is such that they will take the short-term sign ups, and run to their chalets when the pre-existing conditions out run the no longer used actuarial tables. Roberts is an enemy of We The People for he serves an agenda not out int he open but still identifiable. Collapse the systems that held the scoeity together and you takeover America and rule by oligarchy, global governance oligarchy.
It might be more accurate to call Roberts Paulson’s man, since Hank led Boosh around by the nose for the last years he was in office. Paulson works for the same masters as Roberts, the globalist.
Well, well, the Constitution is dead and it took the legal superstar John Roberts to kill it. I shouldn’t be surprised.
Danny,
I don’t like Romney any more than you do. However, let’s look at a couple of facts:
1) Romney will be the Republican nominee;
2) The next President will either have a “D” or an “R” after his name - its been that way since the 1850’s, and if even a former President (Theodore Roosevelt) couldn’t win running under the banner of a third party, then no one can;
3) A re-elected Obama will have no accountability whatsoever, whereas a freshly-elected Romney will have to face re-election in 2016;
4) A re-elected Obama will already have his people in place and will already have laid the groundwork for truly monumental changes to the way this country operates, whereas Romney will take a while to get going (even pre-supposing that he’s as bad, which I don’t buy into);
5) Obama will utterly destroy free enterprise and the economy, and pose incredible risks regarding our foreign and defense policies (areas not to be ignored, despite the importance of the economy and our civil liberties), whereas Romney will likely grow the economy by getting government substantially out of the way and won’t be a pushover on foreign and defense policies.
In short, while Romney has his MANY negatives, there are numerous ways that a 2nd Obama term would be far worse than a first Romney term. Sometimes you have to swallow your pride and vote for the guy/gal you don’t like to stop someone worse. I learned my lesson about that in 1992, when I voted for Clinton (thinking him to be a sure one-termer) because I was ticked off at Bush 41 - that worked out well, didn’t it?
Please rethink your position - Romney will likely not be as bad as you think, and will CERTAINLY not be as bad as Obama’s 2nd term. FYI, I don’t really buy the “make it really hurt and then people will wake up” argument, because it has yet to happen in our history. Evil must be stopped ASAP, even if it is by someone far less than perfect.
If the R's don't start offering a real alternative, then we need a third party. I'm doing what I can do to make that happen. Can't do it alone, won't be easy, but I can help start it.
A re-elected Obama will have accountability. Ask Eric Holder. The checks and balances are being tested. The republicans are slowly growing a spine. They need to put some teeth behind this contempt charge.
If Romney's elected we will have a choice of two liberals again in 2016. If that happens, you'll be to blame, not me.
Romney's been a governor. He will be fairly effective. Romney used executive orders as governor to do more for sodomizers than Obama has done for them as President. Don't underestimate the threat that Romney poses.
Congress has had 4 years to get a fill of Obama, and has started pushing back. Won't be the case with Romney. He will have the republicans on his side because of the R behind his name. And he'll have the democrats on his side because of his policies, unless they are so petty they can't recognize what a trojan gift horse he is to their causes.
You voted for Clinton over Bush? Wow! And now you are about to vote for Romney who is more liberal than Clinton. Way to go!!! Hope you like what you get this time. And You want me to take advice on voting from you? I don't think so.
I'd rather have stalemate and endless investigations under Obama, than move "FORWARD" towards socialism under Romney.
Well said, Danny. Art of War 101.
Well, then Bring It!
I'd rather we take the gloves off now, and finally stand in true rebellion against this tyrannical government, than spend the next four to eight years on an I.V. drip of Republican flavored Socialism.
THANK YOU!
How could any future Court (with a straight face) look to legislative history and intent for interpretive guidance again? Those are now off the table.
That is such an awesome point, Forest Keeper.
Essentially, Roberts rewrote their legislation for them to make it fit. In my view, he failed at that.
It is an awesome power of congress he created that Congress can arbitrarily tax someone for what they are not doing.
I don't like catfish and don't eat it. They just hit me with a failure to eat catfish tax.
The "Anti-Pursuit of Happiness" decision.
And on Monday he issued the "You Can't Mess With Presidential Whim" decision.
Some are saying, "Oh, Roberts is an originalist."
If that means "original ways of twisting the law", then originalist we have.
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.