Posted on 06/30/2012 11:52:15 AM PDT by Starman417
Pyrrhus was king of the Hellenistic kingdom of Epirus whose costly military successes against Macedonia and Rome gave rise to the phrase' Pyrrhic victory'.In 281 BC Tarentum, a Greek colony in southern Italy, asked his assisstance against Rome. Pyrrhus crossed to Italy with 25,000 men and 20 elephants. He won a complete, but costly, victory over a Roman army at Heraclea. In 279 Pyrrhus, again suffering heavy casualties, defeated the Romans at Asculum.
His remark 'Another such victory and I shall be ruined' gave name to the term 'Pyrrhic victory' for a victory obtained at to great a cost. Later he tried to create a kdm of Sicily, but his harsh methods provoked a revolt of the Greek Sicilians and he returned to Italy. In 275 the Romans defeated him at Beneventum.
The dust blasted into the air from the impact of the Obamacare decision hitting Washington has yet to settle but it's recriminations all around. SCOTUS Chief Justice John Roberts is getting toasted by the right. Mark Levin calls the decision "lawless" and the NY Times and Michael Savage questions Roberts' mental health status. But hold on- I think Roberts did us a favor.
Roberts struck down the mandate as it pertained to the Commerce Clause and ruled that Obamacare is a tax. A lot of taxes, actually- on families and small businesses.
And that recalls Barack Obama's words to Americans. Candidate Obama and President Obama, that is. They each promised us different things.
Candidate Obama was against the personal mandate.
[VIDEO AT SITE] or HERE
For more fun, watch this
[VIDEO AT SITE or HERE
Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D-WV) said that Obamacare represented a “big middle class tax increase.”
President Obama swore that Obamacare was not a tax.
STEPHANOPOULOS: You were against the individual mandate…OBAMA: Yes.
STEPHANOPOULOS: …during the campaign. Under this mandate, the government is forcing people to spend money, fining you if you don’t. How is that not a tax?
OBAMA: Well, hold on a second, George. Here — here’s what’s happening. You and I are both paying $900, on average — our families — in higher premiums because of uncompensated care. Now what I’ve said is that if you can’t afford health insurance, you certainly shouldn’t be punished for that. That’s just piling on. If, on the other hand, we’re giving tax credits, we’ve set up an exchange, you are now part of a big pool, we’ve driven down the costs, we’ve done everything we can and you actually can afford health insurance, but you’ve just decided, you know what, I want to take my chances. And then you get hit by a bus and you and I have to pay for the emergency room care, that’s…
STEPHANOPOULOS: That may be, but it’s still a tax increase.
OBAMA: No. That’s not true, George. The — for us to say that you’ve got to take a responsibility to get health insurance is absolutely not a tax increase. What it’s saying is, is that we’re not going to have other people carrying your burdens for you anymore than the fact that right now everybody in America, just about, has to get auto insurance. Nobody considers that a tax increase. People say to themselves, that is a fair way to make sure that if you hit my car, that I’m not covering all the costs.
STEPHANOPOULOS: But it may be fair, it may be good public policy…
OBAMA: No, but — but, George, you — you can’t just make up that language and decide that that’s called a tax increase. Any…
STEPHANOPOULOS: Here’s the…
OBAMA: What — what — if I — if I say that right now your premiums are going to be going up by 5 or 8 or 10 percent next year and you say well, that’s not a tax increase; but, on the other hand, if I say that I don’t want to have to pay for you not carrying coverage even after I give you tax credits that make it affordable, then…
STEPHANOPOULOS: I — I don’t think I’m making it up. Merriam Webster’s Dictionary: Tax — “a charge, usually of money, imposed by authority on persons or property for public purposes.”
OBAMA: George, the fact that you looked up Merriam’s Dictionary, the definition of tax increase, indicates to me that you’re stretching a little bit right now. Otherwise, you wouldn’t have gone to the dictionary to check on the definition. I mean what…
STEPHANOPOULOS: Well, no, but…
OBAMA: …what you’re saying is…
STEPHANOPOULOS: I wanted to check for myself. But your critics say it is a tax increase.
OBAMA: My critics say everything is a tax increase. My critics say that I’m taking over every sector of the economy. You know that. Look, we can have a legitimate debate about whether or not we’re going to have an individual mandate or not, but…
STEPHANOPOULOS: But you reject that it’s a tax increase?
OBAMA: I absolutely reject that notion.
Roberts ruled that it is a tax. The biggest tax increase on the middle class in history.
Candidate Obama said health care should never be purchased with tax increases on middle class families:
(Excerpt) Read more at floppingaces.net...
This is far more cataclysmic than finding out that Susie's mommy is a man or that Joey's daddy is a woman, or that marriage now has a new definition, which by themselves as word changes are detrimental to our culture. Now we have the impossible task of trusting the sworn testimony of our elected representatives starting with "I solemnly swear.." Now that means "I may slip a couple by you if I have to, but I solemnly swear...
Pardon my duplicate post.
Good points.
It’s distressing to see so many, especially here of FR, pretend that it was better to destroy our freedom than rule correctly in this case.
Bizarre really.
The damage Roberts did here, it’s just mind-boggling.
The problem is less about conservative apathy than conservative nullificaition or overwhelm. That doesn’t read clearly.
The problem is not a failure of conservatives to demand representation from their government. The problem is that we are at or beyond the tipping point where there are more takers than givers, and the votes of the leeches outweighs the votes of the productive. Add to this the magnification of the parasite’s voices because the treasonous MSM bellows their voices while muting conservative voices.
We are just outnumbered is all. There won’t be a conservative revolution because there are more takers than workers, and the takers want their freebees.
There will be a temporary setback for the left wing because the horrible economy has long ago doomed Obama’s re-election chances. So we will have the liberal Republican Romney, and at least he will be far less damaging short term than Obama is short term.
After Romney we will get another Marxist president, and the march toward totalitarianism will continue apace.
I think we were on the high side of the tipping point before the flood of immigrants in 1992. Since then, we have been swamped and now we are just overwhelmed. The votes of hard working middle class native-born Americans are just being swamped by the votes of the takers and the new immigrants.
Hard left-wing tyranny is not baked into the cake, and it is just a question of whether or not we conservatives can muster a rear-guard delaying action, or whether totalitarianism comes relatively quickly.
Either way, I grieve for people’s great-grandchildren, who won’t know freedom. At 53 years old, I seriously doubt I will see totalitarian oligarchic rule in the remainder of my lifetime, but it is coming. I won’t be TOTALLY shocked if totalitarian tyranny is ushered in so fast that I am victim of it before my lifetime is over, but I think it is decades away not years. JMHO.
So dreams of this ruling causing a backlash that results in renewed conservative political revolution are sweet dreams, but I really think we are swamped by our foes. Think Custer here. We’re just outnumbered at this point. Yes, we have the moral high ground and superior weapons, but we are just outnumbered and surrounded because our lifelong traitors showed the Persians the way around our defense in the pass at Thermopylae.
Don’t forget to thank Ginsberg, Kagan, Sotomayor and Breyer for being co-conspirators in this great conservative plot to restore the Constitution.
Before change can be initiated, a certain degree of "non-acceptance" must be achieved. We are much closer to the "non-acceptance" stage as conservatives today than we were before this ruling. Would you agree with this?
If you look carefully at what Roberts ruling does in terms of granting to the federal government the unlimited power now to use punative taxation, setting asdie a hundred or more years of restraint, I belive it will take a Constitutional amendment to nullify what that bastard did with the stroke of his stealthy leftist pen.
I have no idea, and it sounds like mental masturbation in any case. This is what counts =>
"The Federal Government may enact a tax on an activity that it cannot authorize, forbid, or otherwise control."
J Roberts
When, and it is now whether but when, the Republican party gets a majority, preferably cloture proof, in the senate, and the new President is inaugurated, it only takes a simple majority to totally repeal PPAC.That is the hope. However, I would caution the future ripple-effect of this precendent that Roberts set: That congress can tax inactivity.
Both dems & repubs have always danced around what they can get away with. Most of the crap they propose never makes it out of committee -- perhaps because they just were not sure they could get away with it.
Roberts has now signaled to current & future politicians that they are truly "weapons free" and can coerce citizens into something they have no interest in, under threat of IRS prosecution. All they have to do is enforce the legislation with a penalty-tax. The only limitation is their imagination.
Personally, I don't want *ANY* politi-slut having that option. I don't even want the truest, bonafide conservative hero you could imagine having that option. Can you imagine what some future moon-bat-crazy liberal majority could do with that option?
No sir, What Roberts did was reprehensible! Who knows what future congressmen will dream up and justify under "the roberts ruling". Obamacare may be the *least* of our worries now.
Now we have to either get a future SCOTUS case to reverse roberts -or- get a future SCOTUS case to constrain taxation -or- get a future congress to legislate the option away -or- amend the constitution to preclude the option.
I hope history doesn't prove we would have been better off if SCOTUS had declined to hear the case at all!
Possibly. Perhaps the ruling itself is so distorted that it can be overruled by a future court. Also, since the funding for the law is now legally a "tax", this particular tax can be abolished by law. Does the ruling suck? Of course. Now, those of us who dislike it must energize to have it corrected. I'm sure you and I are very much on the same team for this goal. If we are ultimately successful, this will have been just another speed-bump along the way.
Exactly. I find it truly astounding that people cant see that fact -- If Injustice Roberts voted with the Conservatives it would be over.
It makes me angry that some Conservatives think Roberts is some 3D chess genius. Roberts has clearly shown that he absolutely worships at the alter of State Power.
Roberts can be described in one word -- EVIL
This is true. "We the People" with OUR power to throw them out of office and replace them with those who WILL correct things are the ultimate restraint to this action. It is up to US to ensure that this is corrected. I say lets do it. I, for one, have reached that stage of "non-acceptance".
How exactly do you see the evil genius of Robert's playing out?
The Freepers who think Roberts is some genius are fooling themselves. They have no understanding of the evils of State Power.
Each month this monstrosity is moving along, sadistic bureaucrats will write rules and regulations to bend the people to their will.
Tell me when in the past large numbers of rules are simple thrown out.
The Statists will push to give to the parasite class wonderful benefits that will further burden the productive citizens.
There is no deep action on his part to bring us towards Liberty.
Roberts is simply this -- he is a very evil man who has willingly and knowingly increased the power of the State.
Over time all those who cherish Liberty will rightfully come to despise Roberts with a white-hot passion.
What say you to naming names and heaping good old-fashioned shame and scorn on their heads? You can start with Roberts.
I will not accept the "same place" we currently find ourselves after this coming election. This ruling is certainly one of the prime reasons. To some extent, I thank Justice Roberts for this. We the People have put off our duty for too long. The snakes are plentiful, they occupy our entire government at almost all levels. We have allowed this to happen to us over a long period of time. Our children and grandchildren are counting on us to make things right again in this country. We have been forced into a show down with our own government with this ruling. Our current government will not help us. It is up to us. I hope you feel this way as well.
Spare me the classical veneer; a better classical scholar sees this more clearly:
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/304411/not-so-good-news-victor-davis-hanson
“I will begin by saying what everybody would like to ignore or forget but which must nevertheless be stated, namely, that we have sustained a total and unmitigated defeat” Winston Churchill, speaking of Munich, 1938.
Rationalizing Roberts’ decision is applying Turtle Wax to feces.
Even THAT doesn't matter. Repealing the law doesn't repeal this evil precedent about what kinds of laws are Constitutional. Only a contrary SCOTUS decision or a Constitutional amendment will do that now.
Even if that’s what happened, and even if it works, is a Romney presidency worth this precedent?????
Duh! By fining them if they don't!
Subtratc a ten dollar penalty from their ‘earned income credits’? ... The aim of Tommy Daschle’s bastard child (he is the one who herded this monstrosity into being ‘suggestions for a healthcare bill’) was to end up with single payer (read federal program) and to get there the pirvate health insurance industry had to be engortged then collpased, which is exactly what the pirate Roberts has now put into motion. Thanks, JOhn, you elitist wannabe scum.
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.