Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Chief Justice Roberts Is A Genius ^ | 6.28.12 | I.M. Citizen

Posted on 06/28/2012 1:43:28 PM PDT by Whenifhow

click here to read article

Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100 ... 121-122 next last
To: refermech
No longer will the dems be able to say it isn’t a tax.

That's pretty small consolation, as long as the law is in effect.

What this says is that the government can force any actions they want through the power of taxation. And there's no way to say that this isn't a win for tyranny.

61 posted on 06/28/2012 2:23:40 PM PDT by slowhandluke (It's hard to be cynical enough in this age.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Whenifhow
You can't be serious --- Is this The Onion???
62 posted on 06/28/2012 2:25:30 PM PDT by Uncle Chip
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Whenifhow

The left will say Roberts is there hero, UNTIL, obama wants to do something that Roberts has just limited. Wait until they wake up and realize that Roberts skunked them. Roberts agreed with every argument the conservatives brought up and put it those agreements for conservatives in his findings.

Consider this.

Ezra Klein: The Political Genius of John Roberts

By voting with the liberals to uphold the Affordable Care Act, Roberts has put himself above partisan reproach. No one can accuse Roberts of ruling as a movement conservative. He’s made himself bulletproof against insinuations that he’s animated by party allegiances.
But by voting with the conservatives on every major legal question before the court, he nevertheless furthered the major conservative projects before the court — namely, imposing limits on federal power. And by securing his own reputation for impartiality, he made his own advocacy in those areas much more effective. If, in the future, Roberts leads the court in cases that more radically constrain the federal government’s power to regulate interstate commerce, today’s decision will help insulate him from criticism. And he did it while rendering a decision that Democrats are applauding.

63 posted on 06/28/2012 2:26:43 PM PDT by Linda Frances (Woe to those who call evil good and good evil, who put darkness for light and light for darkness)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Smokeyblue
Wow. Denial runs deep.

I am a lawyer. In thirty years of practice I have learned not to emote about things, but to think through them and look a few steps ahead.

64 posted on 06/28/2012 2:28:22 PM PDT by KevinB (We'll stop treating Obama like a dog when he stops treating us like a fire hydrant - Fred Grandy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: All
A lot of this politico theatre does not impress me anymore.

But every time I go out I buy more ammo. Am I conflicted?
65 posted on 06/28/2012 2:33:26 PM PDT by jy8z (From the next to last exit before the end of the internet.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: Whenifhow

Under Roberts’ reasoning there is no longer a need for a Supreme Court.

66 posted on 06/28/2012 2:34:02 PM PDT by gorush (History repeats itself because human nature is static)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RS_Rider

They all ready have a tax on all your phones incl cell phones

there is a sales tax on electricity in case you have not looked lately

There is a tax on your internet allready

the citys charge you for water with there tax

Gas has 54 cents a gallon tax on it

diesel has 54 cent tax on it

LNG has a 8% sales tax on it

Roberts pulled off a great shot. If a state refuses to join they dont have to get it???? so the same 27 states that appealed to the SC opt out of the plan that makes it useless....Roberts is a genius by the way since its a tax only the House can fund it so they defund it like what was done to Regan on Nicaragua or like Vietnam was underfunded.....

67 posted on 06/28/2012 2:35:07 PM PDT by straps (Ex-Pan Amer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Whenifhow

Occam’s razor:”other things being equal, a simpler explanation is better than a more complex one.”

The Roberts decision is so complex as to defy reason. One principle of law is what would a reasonable man expect? There is no such standard in this decision. Rather, there is a twisted, convoluted Machiavellian path from A to B that no reasonable person would accept. If something is repeatedly deemed not a tax, by what stretch of the imagination is it suddenly a tax?

Only in a coward’s mind will you find such a connection. John Roberts, see the traitor’s face in the mirror and sleep lightly, if you sleep at all.

68 posted on 06/28/2012 2:40:43 PM PDT by NTHockey (Rules of engagement #1: Take no prisoners)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Whenifhow

God Bless FreeRepublic........

I was very upset this morning, but since then, reviewing articles like this by smart folks....I feel great and ready to vote this scumbag out and hairy harry ried to the back bench....

AND don’t forget what else Roberts knew: Romney will probably win, the senate will go GOP and the taxes that support bambi care were passed with 51 votes and can be killed the same money no bambi care

69 posted on 06/28/2012 2:43:27 PM PDT by The Wizard (Madam President is my President now and in the future)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Whenifhow

The commerce clause ruling was 5-4. When Zero is relected, he will get 1-2 more justices. 3-6 after that.

Roberts rewrote the penalty provisions to be taxes. Judges can’t rewrite laws. He murdered the Constitution today.

70 posted on 06/28/2012 2:47:19 PM PDT by LowTaxesEqualsProsperity
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: straps

They already tax behavior. Consider the exorbitant taxes on a pack of smokes.

The financial viability of Obamacare is reliant on the young and healthy purchasing health insurance. If the tax for not purchasing health insurance is not at least as high as the cost of purchasing health insurance, the program cannot be funded.

I can’t wait to see the reaction of all the young numbskull Obama supporters who are going to have the IRS sicced on them because they don’t have health insurance.

Any liberal whose employer drops their health coverage and tells them “you’re on your own now - enjoy Obamacare” has not right to complain. I hope they enjoy paying $1,000+ a month for family health coverage.

71 posted on 06/28/2012 2:47:40 PM PDT by randita
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: straps

I hope you’re right but considering congress no longer feels the need to be constrained by a budget and I don’t see them defunding anything. And yes, I understand that we already have taxes attached to our bills but here were talking about taxes that may soon be larger than the service charge.

72 posted on 06/28/2012 2:48:37 PM PDT by RS_Rider (I hate Illinois Nazis)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: Gabz
is exactly how they argued it before SCOTUS.

So when did Obama change from citing the Interstate Commerce clause to say it is a tax? Answer, Obama didn't change his argument. Roberts like an activist judge did in his opinion. Here's an excerpt from last year's Federal court judgment on ObamaCare where it was found to be in violation of Constitution because it was an overreach by Obama stating that the Commerce Clause gave him the authority.

Obama health care overhaul struck down by Pensacola, Florida federal judge

"The central issue remains the constitutionality of the law's core requirement that Americans carry health insurance except in cases of financial hardship. Starting in 2014, those who cannot show they are covered by an employer, government program or their own policy will face fines from the IRS.

Opponents say a federal requirement that individuals obtain a specific service — a costly one in the case of health insurance — is unprecedented and oversteps the authority the Constitution gives Congress to regulate interstate commerce.

Vinson agreed that lawmakers lack the power to penalize citizens for not doing something. He compared the provision to requiring people to eat healthful food.

"Congress could require that people buy and consume broccoli at regular intervals," he wrote, "Not only because the required purchases will positively impact interstate commerce, but also because people who eat healthier tend to be healthier and are thus more productive and put less of a strain on the health care system." ...."

-end snip-

73 posted on 06/28/2012 2:49:21 PM PDT by Red Steel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: Whenifhow

Only if Patriots figure-out ways to undo this will Roberts look spite of himself. Until then, Roberts screwed the pooch.

74 posted on 06/28/2012 2:50:25 PM PDT by hal ogen (First Amendment or Reeducation Camp?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Whenifhow


75 posted on 06/28/2012 2:52:50 PM PDT by timestax (Why not drug tests for the President AND all White Hut staff ? ? ?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Whenifhow

76 posted on 06/28/2012 2:54:12 PM PDT by Joe 6-pack (Que me amat, amet et canem meum)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: timestax

77 posted on 06/28/2012 2:56:22 PM PDT by timestax (Why not drug tests for the President AND all White Hut staff ? ? ?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies]

To: kabar

Which means I can be forced to purchase drugs my body rejects and be forced to take them, as it is to treat a disease I have. My PCP would love that. I can’t take any cholesterol drugs, they damage muscles..and I have Fibromyalgia and Peripheral Neuropathy both muscle destroying diseases + a tad of cholesterol he considers to high, and I ignore as genetic and eat reasonable.

Well this CELT US CITIZEN does not function to the tune of the feds..I send many RX’s back as rejected for side effects now. And I know how to flush the toilet on what I don’t want to take.

78 posted on 06/28/2012 2:58:04 PM PDT by GailA (IF U don't/won't keep your promises to the Military, U won't keep them to the public)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: 5thGenTexan
The govt argues it is a tax and Justice Roberts and other Justices lead him there.
79 posted on 06/28/2012 2:59:23 PM PDT by TornadoAlley3 (Obama is everything Oklahoma is not.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: 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.

Conservatives on the court don't agree with you
80 posted on 06/28/2012 3:12:09 PM PDT by uncbob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100 ... 121-122 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

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