Let's all take a step back...

Maybe there's water in the glass but I don't see it as half full. The ruling against the commerce clause power was nullified with the secondary lack of ruling saying that a tax is a valid way of forcing a citizen's hand. Even the decision to not allow the "take it or leave it" medicaid increases allows the fed to punish states in any way other than the total elimination of medicaid support.

The only good news is that the conservative base should be energized.
 
agree on an energized base. I can't remember any other day I had this many phone calls and emails detailing an eagerness to get to a voting booth, pronto.

I've never attended a political rally, just gone thru the process of voting every 2 years. That will change immediately. Any time my Congressman is holding a town hall type setting, I'm there.
 
It will energized conservatives no doubt. But we're all doomed if Romney isn't elected POTUS and the Congress doesn't overturn or somehow gut this thing.
 
you Chicken Littles crack me up

biggrin.gif
 
Relax......did 2010 teach us nothing? This whole issue just got put back on the burner for 2012. I actually think Obama and his people would have been just as happy, if not happier, to see ACA go down in flames.

There's a reason they never talk about it. Now, they have no choice.
 
Serious question? How much will illegals have to pay and how much is it going to cost me. Income is around 175k yearly.
 
Illegals will pay zip and still get necessary treatment. You not only pay for your own, but for deadbeats everywhere. And unless there are companies who prefer to pay the penalty rather than offer healthcare, you won't get to keep your current coverage. So the lies were : 1 - this is NOT a tax 2 - you WILL get to keep your current coverage and 3 - the government will not get between you and your doctor.

And maybe Roberts opened up a path to another appeal. Any spending bill has to originate in the House of Reps, and this one started in the Senate, so technically it is already unconstitutional now that we know it is a tax.
pukey.gif
 
My biggest fear when it was obvious that Obamacare would overturned was that that would energize the liberal base and pacify ours. While it is outrageous that this monstrosity was upheld, especially considering the logical contortions Roberts went through to do so, I think it improved Romney's odds of winning substantially. Everyone that dislikes this law, and that's more than half the country, now has a strong incentive to vote the ******** out. Further, those that would have voted for Romney and Republican senators and representatives will now encourage others to vote and make contributions.

Bad decision, but the best thing that could have happened long term.
 
'/m not going to deny I'd rather be sitting here crowing about the defeat of the ACA. However, the SC decision is the gift that will keep on giving to the Romney campaign and in tight Senate races as the general election heats up. There's a reason the Obama campaign has been silent about his crowning legislative victory.
 
That's something that hasn't been discussed much on here or in other spots.

The bill was set up to funnel healthcare into the government network one way or the other. Of course they wouldn't come out and say this. Just like the mandate wasn't supposed to be a tax. In essence the government has stated that everyone can keep their own insurance; however, they've set it up so that, over time, more and more companies decide to pay the "penalty" rather than cover their own employees. Hell, it's already happening.

It absolutely blows my mind that anyone, in a working career, would be in support of this. One way or another, this is going to screw just about everyone in this country that isn't already sitting on their asses waiting for a handout. You're going to see substandard service, waiting lines, rationing, higher taxes, bureaucracy, higher deficits, etc...

Who is John Galt?
 
Can we tap the break on the sky is falling, chicken little talk. Sheesh. I hate having the government tell me what I have to, can and can't do, but it all falls into the context of the social contract. The government has been shaping behavior since its inception and both parties are equally guilty of "killing" freedom.
 
In the past few months, I remember reading WaPo and NYT articles aimed directly at Roberts and thinking, "Surely there is no way this silly ploy will work on someone as seasoned and intelligent as a Supreme Court Justice. If anything, this nonsense should make him dig in his heels! "

frown.gif
 
Roberts says that it is "not the Court's responsibility to protect the people from the consequences of their political choices." And I'm sympathetic to that view, believing as I do that most people are too quick to ascribe all our political problems to the dysfunction in Washington, rather than to the basic disunion and inconsistency within the electorate itself.

But the problem in this case is that the ACA wasn't sold to the American people as a tax. It didn't originate in the House of Representatives, where all tax legislation is bound to originate, according to the Constitution. Nor does the language of the Act itself suggest that the Individual Mandate is a tax. It is clearly viewed as a penalty.

Roberts may be correct that the policies intended by the ACA are Constitutionally permissible as a tax, but if so, then it needs to be sold to the American people that way.

To say that it is not a tax for purposes of passing it as legislation, and then to say that it is a tax for purposes of keeping it Constitutional, is a perversion of the political and institutional machinery whose legitimacy the Constitution is intended to protect.

Roberts might have preserved the Court's impartiality, if that was his intention. If so, he did it at the expense of the substantive legitimacy of the Constitution itself.
 
Great post Coelacanth! Could not agree more.
Obamacare is one of the largest frauds pushed upon the American citizen.
 
I haven't, either, but I. Entioned this about 20 posts ago. The way Roberts ruled made the whole thing technically unconstitutional, but that's just a minor detail that will be overlooked since we're not paying al that much attention to the Constitution.

What really peeves me is that if Roberts had interpreted the bill before it was voted on, it would never have passed in the first place. Sen. Ben Nelson stated at the time that he absolutely would not vote for it if it raised taxes, and they had to have his. I can just see all the Dems repeating three times "this will not raise taxes" and then clicking their heels together. What a bunch of fools.

And one more thing. If Roberts had voted with the minority, the libs would have SCREAMED partisanship, and yet called it a BFD and cheered from the rafters even though the most far-reaching piece of legislation in decades passed with rule games on a purely partisan vote. It is hard to express how much I despise BO and his thugs.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Recent Threads

Back
Top