Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: tsowellfan

2 posted on 07/03/2012 5:07:56 AM PDT by tsowellfan (http://www.cafenetamerica.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: tsowellfan

Romney sides with the minority opinion, the mandate is unconstitutional. He can still hold that either it’s a tax or it is unconstitutional.


48 posted on 07/03/2012 6:55:05 AM PDT by 12chachacha
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]

To: tsowellfan

This is Washington Post b-effing-s.

It seems to me what the Romney “camp” was trying to claim (clumsily, what’s new?) is that Roberts’ corkscrewing the mandate into his opinion as a tax was preposterous.

Roberts couldn’t possibly uphold the mandate as a penalty, so he pulled an executive branch taxing authority out of his cowardly arse and validated the mandate thusly...

The Romney camp is just too “nuanced” (read: gutless) to make their point with a sharpened f’ing edge to it.


54 posted on 07/03/2012 7:13:34 AM PDT by Fightin Whitey
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]

To: tsowellfan

As much as I hate to agree with Mitt I don’t think its a tax either. Its a penalty. The whole thing is unconstitutional and Roberts has further undermined our national stability by coming up with his tortured opinion calling the individual mandate a tax. If you purchase something you pay a tax if you refuse to purchase it you pay a penalty. It makes you wonder about the guy’s reasoning abilities.


58 posted on 07/03/2012 7:33:43 AM PDT by Georgia Girl 2 (The only purpose of a pistol is to fight your way back to the rifle you should never have dropped.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson