Their rational for voting it down completely or just passing an empty shell back to congress is more important than what how they vote.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~`
Surprised by your answer, HM. Need educated on this. Is not the vote the whole ball of wax? If the empty shell is passed back to Congress, is it not then out of SCOTUS hands, no matter what majority and minority decisions are?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
It’s an Alinsky mind game of using the system to destroy the system and I do wish someone could point that out to them so they can stop the mind games in their tracks.
The same was my greatest source of frustration in listening to these oral arguments. Justices asking what are the "limits" if Fed can impose ObamaCare? Then what next? Where are the limits?
What next? ALL they need is ObamaCare to take down America.
Other dogs not barking:
1) There are not 40 mil citizens w/o Healthcare. Not true. That was mentioned again and again. Then said, well, the percentages don't matter, but that number DID matter to them, and it is false.
2) Another "fact" that was repeated over and over again was related to the subject of cost-shifting. Someone not having insurance is costing me more. And the amount that was bandied about, over and over again, was $1000. It is costing me $1000 per year to subsidize those w/o health insurance.
NOT TRUE: The real cost is more like $80-$200:
Referenced article:
ObamaCare and the Truth About 'Cost Shifting' {March 11, 2011]
3) "Soft" euthanasia -- The number of people under ObamaCare who will be exempted from both "contribution" and penalty costs can no more support Obamacare by the contributions of the low-actuarial-risk young citizens than can requiring the 1 %ers to hand over all of their cash improve the economy.
ObamaCare doesn't even require an increasing number of denied medical procedures and life-saving meds, though that is guaranteed to happen. It only requires an army of SEIU home healthcare workers knocking at the doors of the elderly, the disabled, and the mentally infirm, telling them that their selfish desire to live longer is denying quality care to others---to their children and grandchildren---a monologue that I imagine will be scripted much like debt-collectors' monologue, and with similar increasing psychological pressure.
We have the means to improve the healthcare system that exists---if only that had been the original objective.
The reason that I think the opinions will be more important than the vote is whether the high court calls them on their game playing. 2,700 pages of legal manipulations, attempts to rewrite commerce laws, challenging the constitution, not to mention all the non-case issues that the SCOTUS are aware of just by living in DC.
The congress and legal eagles for BO administration appeared inept. Will the opinion point that out? (Did you read about the commercial using their attorney....think it higher up on thread)
Putting all the legal decision and issues aside, just dealing with the crap this bill represents, with the writing skills on this court, should make for some interesting reading.
AS Thomas once said it's time for them to evade the bull-crap they call Obamacare. There is a second meaning of the word, although dissect might be more appropriate. Regardless hope Nancy, and BO are left with nothing but piles (PI)