Posted on 06/29/2012 7:31:50 AM PDT by madprof98
I’ve read all the arguments, some ingenious, for why the Roberts majority opinion is actually “good” in the long run. I don’t buy that at all, and worry that rationalizing defeats is no way to learn from them. From now on, the precedent has been established that U.S. citizens can be forced to buy a product that government deems necessary — period. Who cares what a particular president on occasion deems to call it — tax, mandate, whatever — at any given expedient time, or what a justice does to finesse that definition to protect implementation of the law?
The same is true with the Arizona decision. I don’t see how that decision is such great news either: We now live in a country where a state that tries to follow and enforce federal law is seen as a usurping power, while those government entities, such as the sanctuary cities, which deliberately seek to undermine federal immigration law are, for all practical purposes, exempt. Add that Arizona is now supposedly acting unconstitutionally in trying to close its borders, and the president is apparently acting constitutionally as he sidesteps Congress and implements de facto amnesty by fiat, doing far more damage to the notion of federal law than any conceivable action by Arizona. That is surreal.
As for the culture of the Court, we must accept that when four liberal judges vote in typically liberal fashion they are open-minded, and when conservative judges do the same they are partisan and small-minded, putting enormous pressure, apparently, on the latter to now and then vote in liberal fashion, and none at all on the former to do anything but remain orthodox. There is no conservative majority, but rather a 4/3/2 court, with absolutely predictably liberal justices and those inclined often to join them becoming a reliable majority.
As for the Holder contempt charge, nothing much will come of it. Holder will not release the required documents any time soon; the matter will be manufactured into an illiberal assault on an African-American attorney general who has already shamelessly used the race card in his defense; and there will be, as planned, stalling and stasis until after the election and little knowledge about or justice given to a slain American officer.
Meanwhile, after a “disastrous” May and June, Obama is edging up again in the polls. For all the reports of his fundraising problems or his existential election crises, he seems to have many millions in key swing states to run class-warfare hits against Romney. The serial “Swiss bank accounts” and “shipping jobs overseas” don’t seem to be countered, and so are having some effect. If Obama is where he is after a disastrous 60 days, where will he be after a so-so next two months? Conservatives should not listen to themselves and their ingenious rationalization about how things are “really” swinging their way, and instead accept that the presidency, the courts, and much of Congress are doing all they can, as quickly as they can, with enormous powers at their disposal, to change the fundamental nature of the United States — and so far are mostly winning. All of the above should mobilize conservatives in 2012 as never before and open their eyes to the resources and zealotry pledged against them: November is really a sort of last-ditch effort in a way prior elections were not.
—This argument is specious. —
It is not an argument. It is an observation.
Either celebrate Independence Day or pay the Tax.............
“As for the tax thing, the congress has ALWAYS had this power.”
Wrong. They have never been able to tax INACTIVITY. They have had the power to tax the states (fair aportionment or whatever), implement excise taxes (tax activity) and tax income of any sort (16th ammendment.)
By instituting a new ability to tax INACTIVITY, we have just removed any remaining limits on the Federal Government. In addition, we have no legal remedy to fix this Constitutinal Crisis!
America died yesterday...she was already severely wounded, but we now have no legal recourse to “re-limit” the federal government’s reach.
Maybe for you, but it is part of traitor Roberts’ (fallacious) argumentation.
All of these legal niceties ignore the precarious economic straits we are in. Teetering on the edge of the precipice, our only hope was for business to gain some short term hope had Obamacare been thrown out. The fact that now it will be at least seven months before any action to cripple or repeal will be undertaken may be the difference.
Unfortunately, big economic changes take at least six months to affect things - just enough to get Obama past election day. (then comes the crash)
—The people do need to take responsibility for the trash they elect to office. At the same time, I suspect that Judge Roberts has either by nefarious intention or by his wish to drop the ball back in our laps, has handed us the tools to reshape our government and nation, but only if we are willing to do the work ourselves. If we choose to pout, cry and whine about how unfair it is to have bad government rather than take back our government; so be it. We can be subjects.—
Yep. I think Roberts is trying to give teeth to the phrase “you get the government you deserve” and is telling us that if this ridiculous monstrosity survives, we have nobody to blame but ourselves, and we have a golden opportunity in just a few months to do something.
Let us see if we are up to the task.
I have already made several decisions about ObamaCare. First, I won’t cave and let them force me to buy something I don’t want or need at the present. Second, I won’t cave to the IRS and pay their “fine” (tax) for something I haven’t purchased. Finally, I will let them send me to prison for not caving to them.
If we all refuse to “buy” the insurance and pay the “fine”. there aren’t enough jail cells to hold the majority of America in prison.
Bobby Kennedy, years ago when he was the US Attorney General, said that civil disobedience is a necessary way to overcome bad and unfair laws.
Let’s find out.
No. That's why it wasn't passed as a tax increase, it was passed as a penalty. Roberts did not rule on the law, he re-wrote it, using arguments advanced by neither party. It is a breathtaking judicial over-reach.
“Roberts took the opportunity to slap down the voting public, rightfully telling US that it is our responsibility to elect people that represent our views. He is 100% correct on this count.”
And his statements to that effect within the decision itself was the truly sweet part of this.”
As a Representative Republic with 3 equal branches of government that were designed to provide CHECKS AND BALANCES on each other, our Chief Justice failed to perform his duty. The Court’s only job is to protect the individual from an over reaching federal government that is LIMITED BY THE USSC!
If Chief Justice Roberts is correct that it is not the job of the court to protect individuals from the voting public, then we might as well disband the court completely.
He failed to perform his explicit duty and should be held accountable.
I think I can help you with that. Let's back up to your initial premise:
It’s a continuation of established & accepted tax law:
You pay $X unless you can demonstrate a qualifying deduction.
That isn't what the law said, nor is it what the government argued in defending it. As the dissent acknowledged, Congress undeniably has the power to tax, but they chose not to exercise that right in drafting this law. Roberts did not even rule on the law - he simply rewrote it.
And to think we all expected a conservative justice, if nothing else, would refrain from legislating from the bench.
VDH is right: there are no silver linings.
It’s idiotic.
I agree with you that there's nothing good about the ruling. However, I don't join the "gloom and doom" -ers here, either.
The ruling left plenty of doors opened to overturning and defunding Obamacare. Nothing is shut, yet. This is not a done deal.
I also think that it will galvanize the conservative base and (IMHO) will lead to a 2012 Conservative Landslide - but to ascribe this as a motive for Roberts' ruling is complete idiocy.
So, the ruling is awful. Will the world end tomorrow, though? Probably not.
So true. Roberts was a stealth candidate and Bush got played. Now he has taken off the mask. There is very little good in this Obamacare ruling. Just pray Ruth Buzzi Ginsberg lives 15 minutes past Mitt’s swearing in so he can hopefully replace her with a strict constructionist like Scalia.
Perhaps your history is lacking. We DO NOT live in a country founded as a democracy. We live in a country founded as a CONSTITUTIONAL REPUBLIC. Democracy is as you suggest mob rule. We live in a nation of shared powers and that was thrown away yesterday. Roberts in a cowardlt and traitorous act said if you don’t like it vote different. He assumed the power to write tax code. Between that decision and his position on the Arizona law he has effectively DESTROYED the ability of this country to remain free. Treason has specific consequences
The more outrageous and over the top the administration and their minions behave, the better chance that ignition point is reached.
In all honesty, despite the horrors inherent in any form of armed conflict, the patriotic, freedom-loving peoples of this nation WILL reach a "breaking point" at which their collective desire to avoid the horror shall be eclipsed by their seething hatred for the Marxist perversion of our country. I have prayed that it would never come to this, but I fear that prayer will not stave off the coming storm...
The problem is most people cannot see the relationship between the trash we elect to office and the state our country is in. I am from California and you would not believe the percentage of people who don't even know that the state is in bad trouble economically, much less see a relationship between that and the leaders we elect. And getting getting these people out to vote is NOT the solution, I believe that would only make it worse.
I can't see how that's the case when it took a Constitutional amendment to tax our income. I would think something like this (taxing us for NOT buying something simply b/c we draw breath) would at least take another Constitutional amendment.
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.