Posted on 06/29/2012 6:28:18 PM PDT by yoe
"...fine a 'tax,' the White House still claims it's only a 'penalty.'
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
If Eric Holder holds himself above the law and the White House Community Organizer places himself above the law, well so will I so place myself....if anarchy is what the Obama administration wants, then we should all join in on the lawlessness.
Obamacare is perfectly clear. The FOOL John Roberts cannot distinguish between a penalty and a tax.
When a get a Speeding ticket I am going to ask the policeman what is the tax for speeding
If it’s not a tax, why is the King going to use the IRS to collect?
The Obama regime could not care less what Justice Roberts chooses to call it, as long as the court upholds the law.
Roberts was foolish to try to curry favor with the liberals, they will just spit in his face because they despise him.
In the bill itself the had always planned on the Irs collecting it even though they called it a penalty. This whole ruling stinks to high heaven.
As I said before it’s OBAMATAX “NOT” OBAMACARE!
My High School Teacher some 50 years ago (Roosevelt High, Fresno) told me that “ALL” Tax Bills originate in the House “NOT” the SENATE. Maybe times have changed, but what do I know?
Are you saying the IRS couldn’t collect a penalty?
In their dissent, Alito, Kennedy, and Scalia say it’s a penalty, not a tax.
But, but, but ObamaCare is good for everyone. Why would liberals need a penalty/tax/force to compel people to do what is in their own interest? Not to mention, how will liberals fund this gigantic power grab if they can’t compel the young to pay far more than the average cost of insuring people their age?
The IRS collects fines and penalties, too. Perhaps you’ve never sampled their services?
So if I refuse to pay my taxes and I am assessed a penalty and then I pay the penalty, have I paid my taxes?
I wonder what will happen when people refuse to pay this fine tax (pun intended)?
Exactly.
Injustice Roberts walks in to rob a bank and yells, “GIVE ME YOUR MONEY! THIS IS NOT A STICKUP, THIS IS A TAX!”
Why can't it be both?
A tax is as a tax does. The method of extracting the penalty money is to increase the tax on certain individuals.
Stop blaming Roberts. Change the income tax amendment. So many people are angered by this. There may not be a better opportunity.
Problem for Roberts is, we despise him, too. But he's probably one of them, anyway, given his flippant statements after the fact.
If this thing is founded upon a tax or taxes to be accurate, is it Constitutionally allowed that little barry bastard commie can unilaterally exempt groups from this legally passed tax?
Has the Oval Office stinker just given himself unenumerated powers? And what the hell can the Congress do about it, and why aren't we discussing that here to get a better handle for what to demand of our feckless elected representation?
It has to be a Tax, if is Not, it is illegal and unconstitional! So the only way the democraps can claim it has to be a tax!!!
What good would that do in this instance? If it's a tax, it's not an income tax. It could be argued it's a direct tax, which are unconstitutional, unless apportioned by the population of the states. But most likely it would be ruled an excise tax, which are allowed under even the unamended Constitution, and only need be uniform among the several states.
Truth be told, if it were a tax, rather than a penalty, it would be an excise tax, like the tax on NFA weapons.. or interstate telephone calls. The former of course violate the second amendment, despite the power of Congress to lay and collect taxes. They can't tax newspapers for instance nor can the states. Nor they can they exercise their other enumerated powes so as to violate the provisions of the Bill of Rights, or of later amendments for that matter.
Roberts bit the Big One on this, and quite deliberately too.
It would not be a uniform tax then, which is specifically prohibited, by Art. 1 Section. 8:
The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;
. Change the income tax amendment.
What good would that do in this instance? If it's a tax, it's not an income tax. It could be argued it's a direct tax, which are unconstitutional, unless apportioned by the population of the states. But most likely it would be ruled an excise tax, which are allowed under even the unamended Constitution, and only need be uniform among the several states.
Truth be told, if it were a tax, rather than a penalty, it would be an excise tax, like the tax on NFA weapons.. or interstate telephone calls. The former of course violate the second amendment, despite the power of Congress to lay and collect taxes. They can't tax newspapers for instance nor can the states. Nor they can they exercise their other enumerated powes so as to violate the provisions of the Bill of Rights, or of later amendments for that matter.
Roberts bit the Big One on this, and quite deliberately too.
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.