Posted on 06/28/2012 8:51:50 AM PDT by Oldeconomybuyer
Edited on 06/28/2012 9:05:37 AM PDT by Admin Moderator. [history]
WASHINGTON -- The Supreme Court led by Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. upheld the heart of President Obama's healthcare law Thursday, ruling that the government may impose tax penalties on those who do not have health insurance. The decision came on a 5-4 vote, with the court's four liberal justices joining with the chief justice.
(Excerpt) Read more at latimes.com ...
roberts is very disappointing. he no doubt thought this would enhance his legacy and wanted to steal the swing vote away from kennedy. instead it will tarnish him as a phony who was more concerned about preserving congressional tax powers (were they ever in dange) than the concept of individual liberty where the law is essentially requiring a citizen to purchase a product - something that has never been done in history. the ends do not always justify the means.
We're screwed......
“The federal government does not have the power to order people to buy health insurance,” he wrote in the majority opinion. “The federal government does have the power to impose a tax on those without health insurance,” he added.”
In other words, the government does have the power to order people to buy health insurance according to Roberts.
Roberts, you are a traitor and a disgrace as a justice.
The IRS won’t take shi’ite from me.
The GOP might give you liberals; the Democrats WILL give you liberals.
It's not a "mandate" the way a mafia protection racket is not a shakedown.
Bush appointed Roberts hurts us the worst since the World Trade center fell. This contortion of logic to fulfill Roberts political dream is a travesty and had unintended consequences far reaching. In summary it is the end of our country as a free country.Unfortunately we have a Republican leader who is the father of government mandated insurance— he was the pioneer of socialized medicine. He has no credibility at all on the subject but by God the elites will cram him down our throats!! Except I ain’t swallowing.
Some history questions: has there ever before been a capricious tax like that? This end run around limitations of the commerce clause could as easily tax those who won’t buy Kellogg’s Corn Flakes.
You think those are my only options? LOL
I do not ever want to see another Bush in the WH....Jeb is as liberal as any of them.
Time now to dump fund to the Tea Party if we haven’t done so and for all those,who are against this abortion, to get the Marxist, non natural born american out of the WH and under some jail.
Look for a 20% (minimum) loss (2,500 or more points) over the next 30 days!
Today's ruling proves this is a distinction without a difference.
TS
It is up to the country whether it will muster the will and effort to be free. Roberts just sprang a leak in the Constitution. Who will stand up to mend it?
In fact, the pre-communistic state of America right now is Bush's fault. None of this would have happened if he hadn't sat on his political behind during the 2006 mid-term election campaign.
But of course, not Bush’s fault in the sense that Obama has been blaming Bush for things.
He sure did an awful feeble job of selling even a quasi-conservative GOP brand.
It’s up to other parts of the body politic to stand up. This is a hole in the constitution which needs to be patched by amendment.
The U.S. Constitution's commerce clause is very useful to a cabal intent on a global economy as part of their new world order.
A third option, as it would appear, is to go thoroughly Galt with no imputed income to tax.
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.