There is also a pony buried under every great big mountain of horse manure.....
Posted on 07/02/2012 1:32:42 PM PDT by Lima_Two_Zero_Alpha
Posted on June 28, 2012 by I.M. Citizen
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 through his windshield. Oh, and he’ll be home in time for dinner.
Brilliant
Do you expect me to read beyond this little tidbit?
I consider that an insult, and insulting your readers on the first sentence is not a good plan.
Instead, he gave Congress the power to tax literally everything AND ignored the fact that this “tax” did not originate in the House where all such measures MUST originate. So now, the Senate has taxing powers...
You can’t polish a turd.
Same as #2.
There is also a pony buried under every great big mountain of horse manure.....
This issue can be challenged once the law goes into effect, if it has not been repealed already.
I’m just going to paraphrase Rush from this morning-
Our people are so used to losing that they view losing as winning.
Just knock it off, man. You are never going to win if you cannot even recognize when you’ve lost.
The ‘”mandate” didn’t fund anything. There are umpteen OTHER taxes in the bill that fund it. The mandate was to COMPELL people to buy insurance. All that idiot Roberts did was allow the Feds to use taxes to compell ANY activity they want. They don’t even have to call them taxes, the courts will just declare them taxes allowing the behavior Nazis to lie and lie.
No Roberts is no genius. Just another lawyer weasel destroying our Republic, one ruling at a time.
So he was unable to convince Scalia, Alito, Thomas and Kennedy to go along with this brilliant scheme, or is that one of the nuances of his genius?
Those were not my words. I simply put it up for Freepers consideration.
The US Supreme Court just said that Congress’s power to tax has NO limits.
They can now force us to buy ANYTHING. Wait till the environmentalists figure out that they can use the US Tax Code to make us all buy electric cars and solar panels.
There is NO win here for anyone other than the Ruling Class.
...so there's that.
Someone around here is going to have to explain to me how it’s better for the government to have the ability to tax the public into compliance on issue, for any reason, than it is to have the government accomplish the same thing through its regulation of interstate commerce. At least in the past, the taxing power was restricted to the purpose of generating revenue. Roberts decision narrowed the commerce clause and blew the doors off congressional taxing authority. I’m not buying that as a fair trade.
This is just incorrect as a matter of law.
As Ginsburg pointed out in her dissent, because Roberts did not go ahead and actually strike down ObamaCare with the four conservatives, his discussion of what he feels or doesn't feel about the Commerce Clause is beside the point.
Since he upheld the law as a tax, his speculation about other theories that might have struck down the law had it not been constitutional as a tax, is just so much dicta.
A good way to identify dicta is to take a pair of scissors and cut out the passage in question. Does the omission change an underpinning of the holding? No? Then it was non-binding dicta.
Roberts could just as well have included a discussion of gardening or the recent NBA draft in place of his section on the commerce clause and it would be just as binding.
Excuse me? We are not OWS around here...
What is it with people who want to defend Robert’s action. He broadened the Govt. power to tax us into destitution and they will not give up that new power easily.
Secondly, there is higher probability of Mr. Roberts slitting his own wrists that anyone from this board taking him out before supper.
"White House 2012" is rather vague...
You can’t polish a turd.
Roberts or his decision? I think perhaps both.
“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.”
Do you really think Obama and his thugs really give a damn about the law? If you think so I have a bridge in NYC to sell you. One way or another they’ll force the States to implement it.
“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.”
And if you don’t pay the tax you will pay a penalty!
“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.”
Obama doesn’t care about that. He’ll find another way to “persuade” the States into compliance. The Feds do it now so why should The Lawless One think he has to do otherwise?
“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.”
The author obviously lives in a dream world, isn’t familiar with how collectivists work, or his head is clouded with the smoke from a thousand doobies.
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.
