By an enormous stretch on the tax issue, Roberts handed the Democrats a totally unnecessary victory.
You’ll never convince the hardcore ideologues but that doesn’t deny the truth of it.
LLS
There is no need to understand Roberts . what he did is all that matters. He effectively re-wrote this law. Judicial activism, anyone.
I give a rats rear about his personal decisions.
Judicial rewriting laws is not conservative.
This is mind rot.
Liberals cry constitution about laws they like and ignore the ones they dislike. We should consider starting to fight dirty .....laws that only apply to our side are inherently wrong!!!
No, it's not just like buying gas or earning income. Those are voluntary acts of commerce. Nobody gets taxed for NOT buying gasoline. Nobody pays income tax for income the DIDN'T earn.
Roberts got it wrong. He couldn't be more wrong if he showed up a funeral for a young child, put on a pink tutu with no underwear and started singing at the top of his lungs "Another one bites the dust..." That is how wrong his thinking is.
The ObamaTax is like charging every citizen a federal property tax if they fail to go out and buy property.
More than a silver lining. I’ll take the temporary affirmation of ObamaCare in exchange for the long-term reduction in Congressional regulatory power under the commerce clause any day of the week.
If we don't get very busy and elect majorities in congress and then stay busy and pressure them to act responsibly to correct our course, we are headed for a socialistic disaster.
I fear we may already have passed the point of no return.
A silver lining, the Tea Party rises up....Romney/Palin 2012 !!!
BS. It is EXACTLY to job of the SCOTUS to protect us from out of control politicians who pass unconstitutional laws. If not them, then who? What else is the Supreme court for it not to strike down unconstitutional laws? What he is saying in that sentence is that politicians can pass any law they want and SCOTUS doesn't have to rule them unconstitutional, even though they are,simply because it is the voters fault for voting them into office. What convoluted reasoning for screwing the American people. There is NOTHING good about his decision and, in fact, it doesn't make since. He contradicts himself and says we can be made to do anything as long as a tax is tied to it. He disregarded the fact the bill didn't call the fine a tax, and he disregarded the fact that the "tax" originated in the Senate, a move that should have gotten the law tossed on its own merit.
Your whistling pass the grave yard, wake the f*** up.
I think the analysis makes sense -
Roberts is fighting strategically. If he gave obozo a straight defeat, he would have handed obozo a scapegoat and all the obots will cry foul against Roberts and come out to vote for obozo;
it appears that Roberts’s ruling on the Commerse clause and the taxing power of congress is in accordance with the Constitution. He might not like congress’s extended taxing power to influence behavior, but he is not the one to protect people from the bad policies of politicians they vote into power. It is up to voters to avoid bad policies by removing the bad politicians.
So his ruling in effect paves the way for us to reppeal this obozocare monstrocity -
1. energize voters to vote out obozo and Dems by exposing obozo/dem’s lies (it is really a tax to influence behavior!)
2. since it is a tax it will be easier to repeal it - it has to originate from the House and it only takes 51 senate votes!
3. once and for all put the ‘commerce clause’ in its place!
In summary - the ruling gives us enough shock to -
vote out obozo; keep the House; gain seats in the senate; vote to repeal obozocare!
This way Roberts himself does not have to face the wrath of the obots (he knows it is much easier to face our wrath than the obots’!)
The Democrats wanted healthcare powered by unicorns and were given healthcare powered by swine.
Or, some great analysis of the sophistry that is Roberts’ contribution, as the case may be.
Roberts comes across as just another educated idiot in all this. The mental chicanery he has employed to reach his ‘studied conclusions’ is (sadly) laughable.
The Founders were men of simple language but great thought. Roberts has firmly positioned himself outside their sphere as a man of simple thought but good grammar.
Sorry...I’m not buying into the silver lining BS.
1. His ruling killed the commerce clause - yeah, the one with -0- oversight and 100% discretion of the executive and/or cabinet chiefs
2. His opinion forced the recognition that all future legislation is based solely on the power to tax.
For those who wanted a supreme leader (gee, the desire runs in both Rs & Ds) to crush the O-Tax by fiat, it's a bitter disappointment.
But for those who understand that taxes are literally a quagmire where political careers go to die, it's a godsend. There's a reason the Bush tax cuts are called the "Bush Tax Cuts" - tax policy is a key electoral factor.
Also, some are beginning to realize that taxes must be evenly applied ie are subject to equal protection. If there are exceptions/exemptions, like the EIC, it must be based on some underlying basis, as in income under the XVI.
Nowhere in the O-Tax are the taxes actually spelled out. Are they a poll tax, property tax, income tax or whatever tax? Can anyone other than Alberta's Child see what's gonna happen in this arena? Litigation dear reader.
In fact, what if anyone with standing sues on the basis that the tax is a poll tax and the court agrees (in the absence of any countervailing evidence). If Congress doesn't go back to reform/revise the definition, the actual tax construction (not power) of O-Tax is unconstitutional on its face. Congress simply has to do nothing, and the thing dies.
Bull, bull, and bull! He could have killed it and wrote all of that into the decision along with the conservatives in the court. Instead, he Ed kill
America as we know it!
Ah. So if 49% of the public wants to follow the dictates of the Constitution, but 51% don't, it's not the job of the Court to rein in the over-reaching 51%? That's great. When the para-military IRS 2.0 is standing on our necks, we can all give thanks the the Commerce Clause is well in check.
Actually, it is all bad.
My first question is how does handing congress a new means of passing stealth taxes add up to a silver lining?
My second question is, since Roberts could have denied the commerce clause without reinterpreting the ability to tax... what motivated him to flip?
Third, why add "It is not our job to protect the people from the consequences of their political choices.”...are we being punished?
The whole idea of collecting money from those who don't buy or earn health insurance is a sick joke - they aren't paying taxes now! Does anyone think the fed's will withhold the unearned income credit from "poor folks" who can't afford insurance premiums?
If they can create a tax with smoke and mirrors it will only take a single rider to a defense bill to make that tax apply to the middle class at large - those of us already paying the costs of a welfare state.
Finally, how could he add "...the payment is collected solely by the IRS through the normal means of taxation—except that the Service is not allowed to use those means most suggestive of a punitive sanction, such as criminal prosecution.” where did he find a free pass in the legislation?
(End of rant)