Posted on 06/28/2012 1:43:28 PM PDT by Whenifhow
Before you look to do harm to Chief Justice Roberts or his family, it’s important that you think carefully about the meaning – the true nature — of his ruling on Obama-care. The Left will shout that they won, that Obama-care was upheld and all the rest. Let them.
It will be a short-lived celebration.
Here’s what really occurred — payback. Yes, payback for Obama’s numerous, ill-advised and childish insults directed toward SCOTUS.
Chief Justice Roberts actually ruled the mandate, relative to the commerce clause, was unconstitutional. That’s how the Democrats got Obama-care going in the first place. This is critical. His ruling means Congress can’t compel American citizens to purchase anything. Ever. The notion is now officially and forever, unconstitutional. As it should be.
Next, he stated that, because Congress doesn’t have the ability to mandate, it must, to fund Obama-care, rely on its power to tax. Therefore, the mechanism that funds Obama-care is a tax. This is also critical. Recall back during the initial Obama-care battles, the Democrats called it a penalty, Republicans called it a tax. Democrats consistently soft sold it as a penalty. It went to vote as a penalty. Obama declared endlessly, that it was not a tax, it was a penalty. But when the Democrats argued in front of the Supreme Court, they said ‘hey, a penalty or a tax, either way’. So, Roberts gave them a tax. It is now the official law of the land — beyond word-play and silly shenanigans. Obama-care is funded by tax dollars. Democrats now must defend a tax increase to justify the Obama-care law.
Finally, he struck down as unconstitutional, the Obama-care idea that the federal government can bully states into complying by yanking their existing medicaid funding. Liberals, through Obama-care, basically said to the states — ‘comply with Obama-care or we will stop existing funding.’ Roberts ruled that is a no-no. If a state takes the money, fine, the Feds can tell the state how to run a program, but if the state refuses money, the federal government can’t penalize the state by yanking other funding. Therefore, a state can decline to participate in Obama-care without penalty. This is obviously a serious problem. Are we going to have 10, 12, 25 states not participating in “national” health-care? Suddenly, it’s not national, is it?
Ultimately, Roberts supported states rights by limiting the federal government’s coercive abilities. He ruled that the government can not force the people to purchase products or services under the commerce clause and he forced liberals to have to come clean and admit that Obama-care is funded by tax increases.
Although he didn’t guarantee Romney a win, he certainly did more than his part and should be applauded.
And he did this without creating a civil war or having bricks thrown threw his windshield. Oh, and he’ll be home in time for dinner.
Brilliant.
They just might attach the new “penalty taxes” to something essential such as your electric, gas, water utility bills or maybe your internet service.
Actually if Roberts were a genius he would have secured a future for his children and grandchildren. Instead he has knowingly consigned them to hell on earth and by extension all of our children. This nightmare is unworkable. It’s the way civilizations die and his will not be exempt from those horrors.
I’m with you.
Would it now be possible for them to enact a penalty tax for not having an abortion?
Except Obama or his solicitor general did not argue it was a tax or is it written as a tax but that the intent of ObamaCare was a 'mandate.' Roberts ignored the intent and the meaning of the law by becoming an activist judge and changed the law "to a tax" to support his erroneous opinion.
“but I think when people cool off a little they will see that there is some good that could come from this.”
Put down the crack pipe.
So instead of just killing the bill he not only breathes life into it by calling it a tax, he opens the door for us to be taxed over EVERYTHING (like breathing) and that’s a good thing?
This was BAD, BAD, BAD.
Interestingly enough they seemed to me to be classifying all funds transferred to the state to be a tax no matter what it is called. I think there will be hell to pay for that.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think the Court did - or could - decide that the tax itself is constitutional. That battle will likely be fought later.
As am I. We all naturally wanted it to be over today, but there is a bit more work left to do.
I don't think Roberts acted honorably. I think instead of concentrating only on the constitutionality, he considered the historical political consequences of tossing the whole law, and went french in the face of battle.
But, he did toss conservatives a consolation prize. His majority opinion restricting congress' ability to hide behind the commerce clause while continuing to grow was signed by every liberal hump on the court. I think they were so thrilled to have him on board, they all agreed to whatever phrasing he came up with. Giddy idiots.
Plus, it's a political loss for Team Obama, who now have to face the fact that the economy is in the shitter, and instead of fixing it, they championed the largest middle-class tax hike in American history.
Maybe they can kill bin Laden again.
Ummm...the bill would have been dead TODAY if Robert’s hadn’t save it.
Good Lord. What are you smoking?
Roberts had to come with some excuse to make Obamacare constitutional despite the fact that Obama and Congress denied the individual mandate was a tax. Now we are stuck with a legal precedent that will be very difficult to undo even if Obamacare is repealed.
For all those too stupid to understand......ROBERTS SHREDDED WHAT WAS LEFT OF THE CONSTITUTION TODAY.
He stabbed us all in the back.
Talk about denial.
Therefore, a state can decline to participate in Obama-care without penalty. This is obviously a serious problem. Are we going to have 10, 12, 25 states not participating in “national” health-care? Suddenly, it’s not national, is it?
One hopes.
Grasping at straws like the Chief Justice himself if he tried to ratioalize this to others this way.
Politics is Power. We did not have it — they did — in 08, 09, 10, with a little less in 11 and 12, but they still have it. If we don’t have our citizenry that votes with us, we have no power save ineffectual rebellion which will work to their advantage.
Hmmm. I don’t believe it would brazenly be called such for the revulsion it would rightly generate. I can see it beeping called something like Community Sustainability Ratio. CSR for short. You know how they love the acronyms. Besides who could ever be against community sustainability?
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.