Posted on 06/29/2012 9:04:57 PM PDT by Ernest_at_the_Beach
Many conservatives are feeling betrayed by the chief justice's vote to uphold Obamacare. But there's a counterintuitive case to be made that John Roberts's decision is largely a victory for conservatives.
Every time I visit Washington, D.C., I am struck by a single, terrible thought: It is not just that conservatives are losing the various battles over big government, but they have been losing the war for generations. The most conservatives are ever able to do is tinker at the margins – and celebrating small victories like lowering marginal tax rates is a sign of just how low our sights are set.
Why has this happened? After all, this was a country founded in direct opposition to unlimited governmental power. How have we arrived at a point when the feds can do just about anything they want?
It is because, at critical moments in the nation’s history, the advocates of limited government were on the losing side of the political equation, and the opposition was very effective at consolidating its victory. Not only did big government advocates implement policy changes, they also brought about huge structural innovations to the way the government functions.
The progressives of the early 1900s managed this with the 16th Amendment, legalizing the income tax and opening up whole avenues of power that had been previously off limits. The political genius of that move must be admired: The left got its hands on the government for a relatively short period of time, but it sure made hay while the sun was out. We’re still paying the price today -- quite literally. Similarly, the New Deal took advantage of a national emergency to ram through ......
(Excerpt) Read more at weeklystandard.com ...
When you copy and paste from one thread to the next, it’s trolling not posting.
Judges can’t be impeached as far as I know.
BTW, did you read the whole article?
It talks about how Roberts is really for smaller government.
*IF* Roberts was trying to be clever and achieve for constitutionalists everywhere a pyrrhic victory, then after he had a discussion with one or more of {Alito, Thomas, Scalia... even Kennedy}, his superior intellect and conniving for the rule of law would have brought a conservative(s) over to his side of {breyer, old-hag, wise-latina, commiecare-cheerleader}. By going by himself, with no other conservative, to join the leftists that would vote YES no matter what, he shows his true statist tendencies.
I hate to burst any bubbles but no matter what happens in November, CommieCare is here to stay. It is a done deal because the “Chief Justice” played politics from the SCOTUS bench.
This is great. We now have 3 Card Monte as established Supreme Court precedent. Congress will never pass another tax increase again. Anything remotely close to being a tax will be declared a regulation and passed pursuant to the Commerce Clause. The courts will then reinterpret such ‘regulations’ as they see fit and declare them taxes to the extent they don’t pass muster under the Commerce Clause.
Roberts made a career defining decision. No doubt he cast himself permanently in the category of useful idiot. A decision so dopey it is beyond comprehension. Also don’t fool yourselves with polls that suggest the American people disagree with the decision. Roberts has given this monstrosity which will further bankrupt the country and ruin American medicine legitimacy. There is simply no silver lining to this disaster. But the American people voted for Obama and the Democratic clown parade. Elections do matter. Conservatives must win at the ballot box and not depend on judges to correct bad policies however destructive. It would be enough if judges restrained from making policy such as abortion and gay marriage.
Not one that would make sense.
I hold my original post as my position ... strong and fast, until proven wrong. Only time will tell whether I’m right or wrong.
The question, which those like Mark Levin who do know the Constitution asks, is where in the Constitution is there the ability to tax nothing?
The Constitution recognizes four types of taxes: 1) “Duties, Imposts and Excises,” generally called indirect taxes, which must be uniform throughout the United States (Art. I, sec. 8, cl. 1); 2) capitation, or other direct taxes, which may only be imposed “in Proportion to the Census” among the states (Art 1, sec. 2, cl. 3; Art. 1, sec. 9, cl. 4); export taxes, which are prohibited (Art. 1, sec. 9, cl. 4); and the income tax, permitted by the 16th Amendment, which can be imposed without apportionment among the states. Where in any of these categories is there the permission to exact a tax on an individual for not doing something? Is this tax a drug induced hallucination?
Jay Cost joins the merry band of delusional idiots.
Good Post.
That picure shows what the whole leftist establishment in the USA is doing. We have been PLAYED again by another liar who claimed to be a consevative.
I am sick of these. Idiots kneepadding roberts. He is a traitor , a thug, a liar, and a snake. He opened a genies bottle allowing the govt to tax viirtuslly any inactivity.
for anyone to spin this to being anything but a disaster is a lie and a fraud.
They certainly may. In fact, any federal official can be impeached.
Rep. Alcee Hastings (D-FL), for example, was a federal judge before he was impeached for bribery. Subsequently, he ran for and was elected to Congress.
We definitely have a fork in the road.....but then we have been on the path for quite awile as Jay points out.
Roberts is a narcissist who is only concerned about the "Roberts Court" and didn't want to take the heat from the Democrats. Now it is all about him. His principles are obviously flexible enough to allow himself to be influenced by these marxists. Chief Justice Constitutionalist? Ha!
Look at Ginsburg, she couldn't even resist spiking the football with that petty little snipe at Romney.
It is unbelievable that Roberts alligned himself with that pack of rabid marxists. So now we get these CYA articles.
You don't know much, do you?
BTW, did you read the whole article? It talks about how Roberts is really for smaller government.
He expanded the Government more than any other person in History. He basically said there is no limit to the power of Government to tax your behavior.
Give it up Salvation. There is no silver lining to this decision. Roberts is pig. Don't try to put lipstick on him. It won't help.
Once romney is elected there should be a hugh push to demand Roberts resignation.
"...gives the Federal Government considerable influence even in areas where it cannot directly regulate. The Federal Government may enact a tax on an activity that it cannot authorize, forbid, or otherwise control."
J. Roberts
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.