Intellectual honesty? A mandate is a mandate. The penalty for not complying with the mandate is supposedly the tax.
Yes, but the House did not call it a tax, they called it a penalty. Only they have the power to create a tax. Roberts and the Court do not have that authority. They should have struck down the bill as unconstitutional and sent it back to the House to pass it again as a tax. The Court cannot rewrite the bill or impose a tax under the Constitution. For doing that they should be impeached.
Romney knows he's toast on this issue. He should have known that right from the start and not tried to "buy" his way into the White House.
I've been saying for months and months this won't work with Obama and the GOP should NOT have given us such a clown like milquetoast Romney.
WE DO still have a choice and the convention will settle it. People were either not paying attention or had their head up their butt. Lies have a way of coming back to bite you and Willard will take it hard and expose him for the kind of person he really is. The GOP will pay for this if WE demand it. Washington has to be cleaned up and the "old order" has to be thrown out. Government is evil on BOTH sides of the aisle.
People who have "blindly" followed Fox News and lapped up everything they were telling them are guilty of listening to the "establishment."
Rupert Murdoch was exactly right when he said that Romney likely would NOT win. The GOP and FOX News are leading the people down the primrose path of falling off the cliff. A lot of people, myself included, have been working behind the scenes to try and get this corrected. That's all I'm going to say.
The RNC/GOP has violated some rules during this election and some people are calling them out on it.
"Use whatever end of the argument you need at the time. It’s exactly what Democrats are doing."
Krauthammer wants Romney to act just like a Democrat, which means adopting the Alinsky doctrine of the "ends justify the means". That is exactly the wrong thing to do. Either he is leading Romney into a trap or he has learned to believe "six impossible things before breakfast." What right would we have to criticize Democrats if we do the same contradictory things they do?
If you agree with Roberts that the mandate is a tax, then you are also agreeing with Roberts that Obamacare is constitutional. Why do that? Four conservative justices disagree with Roberts, so why can't Romney disagree with his ruling? Should Romney also agree that an unwritten right to privacy allows for abortion on demand because 5 justices said so in Roe V. Wade?
It's a TAX cause Roberts said it was and for no other reason because anyone who followed the constitution (4 Supremes) would have thrown it out. DoorMitt doesn't want to say TAX cause then Barry would hit him as being a BIG TAXER. DoorMitt is a Bilderberg RINO like Bush but that's all we got...
Roberts can't say it's a tax without violating the Constitution where it says that taxes must originate in the House. The Supreme Court does not have the power to tax. To this day the Democrats in the House who passed the bill claim it is not a tax; therefore it is not a tax under the Constitution. Roberts cannot rewrite the bill to change the original intent of legislators. That violates his oath to uphold the Constitution, and for that he should be impeached. Neither we nor Romney should legitimize this unconstitutional decision by agreeing with Roberts and calling it a tax.
Forgive me if I'm late to the party, but what I heard the SC say (correct me if I'm wrong) was that as a Commerce Dept mandate it was dead in the water.. the only way it could be upheld was as a tax... Even though Obama's lawyers said it was a tax, everyone is now denying it is a tax.. so if it's a mandate, it's DEAD. Make up your mind!!!
Obama, Pelosi, and Reid said it was not a tax to get it to pass. They knew they couldn't get enough votes if they called it a tax increase. But after it passed, Obama's lawyers claimed it was a tax in arguments before the court. Roberts ruled that it is not a tax in one instance but is a tax in another. He used twisted logic to achieve a political end. In doing so, he is saying that it's okay for politicians to deceive the public and congress to get a bill passed. He is also saying that the original intent and meaning of a bill doesn't matter. That is the most dangerous part of this ruling in the long term. It means they don't have to make up their mind. They can believe two contradictory things at once and the Court has just ruled that it's okay to do that. We are no longer a nation of "fixed laws". The President and the courts can now redefine a law after the fact to mean anything they want it to.
A tax is a penalty on economic activity. Not all penalties are taxes (when you actually do something wrong)., mind you But all taxes are penalties.
Politicians and their legal teams have decided on different names for taxes so they can claim it's not a tax . Their sole purpose is to get taxes passed without an uproar from the masses.
Taxes are a penalty, they are not gifts to you. They aren't praise , they arent' to better your life
The diffence with this mandate is , it taxes you despite no economic activity and claims you will in the future so the will tax you now
It should never made it into law, but it did because Levin and others are stuck in their made up notions of taxation
Kruthammer, you just need to tell Romney to go set in a cornner,and be quiet, so we can carry his sorry butt.
Play politics now. Forget the Constitution. The democrats do it, so should republicans. Who cares how much power congress has to tax? Be grateful of the 4 month advantage on your political opponents.
The century long experiment with Marxian ideology must end. CK wants us to just live with it and play by their rules.
Don't Tread On Me
I'm with Krauthammer.. It was passed based on it being a TAX! If it isn't a tax then Robert's decision should be VOID!
Why agree with him? 5 judges found Obamcare mandate on commerce clause unconstit. It was primarily legislated as a mandate under the commerce clause. They did not primarily legislate it as a tax. Roberts is not a legislator.
The bill still is unconstitutional even though the tax part is partially true.
"Don’t worry about getting into a twist over this and forget about consistency. Use whatever end of the argument you need at the time. It’s exactly what Democrats are doing." - Charles Krauthammer
That is exactly the wrong advice.
Life rarely requires you to answer a question if you don't want to. You can even do better and answer in a way that continues to advance your position.
But, not caring about the truth and veracity of your own statement - is exactly the wrong thing to do. Any time. Any where.
It strikes me as ironically humorous that when the courts decide against one side or the other, the "losing" side always cries "judicial activism", stomps their feet, rends their clothes, gnashes their teeth and then starts screaming for the judge's head on a platter. Had the decision or opinion gone their way the judge is held aloft as a paragon of jurisprudence.
I don't believe that this opinion/decision was the greatest stroke of legal genius, however it has opened up several avenues of attack that make it much easier to bring the real monster to heel. People only need to look past the trees and see the forest.
On another note: Firefighters should really never put themselves into the position of burning down the house in order to prove that a better smoke alarm was needed.
I mean, all that smoke alarm stuff is good and all. Please, do not get me wrong. But, when push comes to shove: "You kinda' hope that the firemen are there only to put the fire out. All that other stuff isn't really the issue at the moment."
Too bad, John Roberts never got Fire Fighter training...
The tax monster is the biggest problem of all. It is the primary reason we broke away from England.
The Commerce Clause wasn't even limited. The justices seemed to stop short of reversing the wheat farmer case...as such...nothing has changed on that end.
Additionally, since nobody joined Roberts' opinion on the Commerce clause (though the dissent mentioned it and Justice Thomas went to the extreme of actually adding an additional dissent.) his writings regarding it haven't set a precedent.
What Roberts did, once you sift through all the chaff, is throw this monstrosity squarely back in the laps of those who are constitutionally able to do something about it, Congress. He included a gift, it only takes a simple majority of 51 votes in the Senate now to kill each and every one of the taxes imposed by it.
Mitt Romney sucks.
I was going to vote 3rd Party or for Obama (well I have thought about...but I probably just wouldn't vote if it came down to pulling the lever for Obama) because I could not fathom giving positive feedback to the GOP establishment for getting behind such a weak candidate...despite the enthusiasm of the Tea Party movement.
Unfortunately, the Supreme Court made a terrible decision, and I will have to support Romney because these are desperate times.
I will fight like hell to defeat Romney in 2016...but that is a fight for another day. Today, we must stop the Progressives/Leftists by any means necessary!
You and the people that liked your comment is why we have Obama in office
Dont think you are getting away without the blame
It is the nature of evil to force you between 2 horrible choices that in reality aren't that much different. All the while fooling you into believing you are choosing hope for a better future.
I don't vote for leftists and I don't vote for non-Christians. Mitt Romney fails on both accounts and I don't vote out of desparation or weakness.
Don't Tread On Me
I think Romney is a Christian. I was raised Catholic and they used to believe the Pope was infallible, which made it a cult. They still pray to the saints, which according to the bible is idol worship. No religon is perfect. Look at Mitt's record, he has succeeded at everything he's done, not like the outside agitator- oops, community activist who couldn't even get asbestos out of a school.
Romney IS NOT a Christian. Mormonism is a "cult of abuse."
Everyone is entitled to their opinion and I appreciate your gentlemenly disagreement. But, Mormons do not believe in the divinity of Jesus. A disqualifier. Obama believes in collective salvation, I believe though admittedly I don't know much about Jeremiah Wright's church and I don't want to. Collective salvation as I understand it is also a disqualifier as it is not what Christ taught. Catholics, as far as I know are the most egregious and religious of all Christian. They are steeped in Man's corruption, which hinders their appeal. But, I believe they are Christians nonetheless.
Here's what Mitch McConnell thinks...
I saw this live and it seemed as if he was saying two different things. C J Roberts did say both things so maybe that what he was doing as well...?
That was Roberts that squared a circle. I already knew that Mitt would put himself in this problem to begin with and that's why I can't support him. However, at least he knows this ruling is wrong! I can agree with him there.
The only way we are screwed is if we do not fight. Our choice is to vote for Romney. It's not a perfect, but we must play from the hand we are dealt. If we take it personally or quit because "our" candidate isn't running, we will end up with BO and America is lost. That is too big a price to pay for standing on principle. IMHO.
Amen! I feel more feisty than ever before over this. Whatever the Chief Justice was trying to accomplish, or not, I don't even care. Elections have consequences, as Rush always says, and it's time that the majority of Americans gets off their duffs and smack this gov't down where it's supposed to be. I sense amendments coming our way too. Balanced budget, limits on congressional power, maybe even a term limit on congressmen. Who knows...