Skip to comments.ObamaCare: Supreme Court may postpone ruling till 2016
Posted on 02/21/2012 11:55:07 PM PST by STARWISE
click here to read article
Here is the problem as I see it. The number of informed voters who understand and defend the intent of the Constitution are in the process of being dwarfed by the number who don't understand it and are anxious to give the government absolute power in exchange for stuff, ease and perceived safety.
So yes, it is all well and good to say that we should know that it is up to us to consent or not consent to the government's power, but that isn't happening anymore. When it did happen, we got good government, or at least better government. When the government feared the people, we got better government.
It is great that you are making the effort to really understand the purpose and details of the US Constitution. Meanwhile, more than half the nation doesn't give a damn. They could care less what this old piece of paper says as long as they get their constant and ever increasing flow of benefits from the government. So those of us who know the Constitution are fighting a losing battle.
As Tyler noted, the average age of Democratic nations is about 200 years after which they self-destruct because the majorty of voters who are controlling elections realize that they can vote themselves more goodies and will vote in the lying bastard who promises them the most entitlements. We are beyond that point now.
I hate to say it is over, but it is over. We failed to keep the Republic, as Benjamin Franklin implied would happen. We failed to give future generations of Americans the remnant of the diminishing gift of freedom we received. This grieves me to no end. I wish we could make all the bums, slackers, takers, and ignorant fools read, learn and know the Constitution, but we can't. The Government schools have been putting out 30 years of brainwashed sheep who mostly have no knowledge or appreciation of their Constitutional rights against the government's power.
But then you have to again ask, "Why?" At some point, you start to come to some of the things Friedman talks about.
Post-Regean Lawlessness. Top-Down
1. Bureaucratic and government bondage, Fairfax and Connecticut-New York City.
2. “Financial” crisis of bureaucratic pensions, and retirements.
3. Plan: Arbeitsziehungslager: Permanent leverage system to secure so called “banks”, insurance company government contractors, Fairfax government, (movable goal-post)
Purpose: to bondage every individual. Arbeitsziehungslager
3. Bribes (lawlessness)+ selective discrimination (lawlessness), to pass Arbeitsziehungslager
5. Current: CONSOLIDATION of Arbeitsziehungslager
6. Population x MOVABLE mandates/tax/fee bondage.
7. Free-ride Fairfax, Connecticut, New York.
“And where lawlessness increase, the love of many shall grow cold.”
Thou Shall Not Steal
Thou Shall Not Covet
The Word does not go out in vain.
No time to read the comments so sorry if this has been drummed in many times ...
The article states it is great for ZeroCare and Zero’s administration that the ruling may not come until 2016.
If SCOTUS fails to declare ZeroCare unConstitutional this year, the 57% or so of Americans who oppose it will be much more likely vote to turn out anyone who supported it.
That would be Zero’s and the Dems worst case situation.
Make sure you learn about this and pass it on to others in your class.
Does anyone sign their name “Without Prejudice UCC 1-308”? [Ron Paul’s website]
THE UCC CONNECTION- by Howard Freeman
Hope this guy is grossly over-stating the situation to get attention and donations to his website...or something like that.
>Talk about a headline guaranteed to make a stomach drop! 2016 far too late to save America.
Is it? I don’t think so, God can and does perform miracles.
The big question, IMO, is if we will believe what God said in the New Testament:
“if my people, who are called by my name, will humble themselves and pray and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways, then will I hear from heaven and will forgive their sin and will heal their land.” — 2 Chronicles 7:14
>Theyre really begging the body politic to fix the problem. Once they dug in on letting Kagan participate, they found themselves in a credibility hole.
Many people clam that the Constitution is what the USSC says it is, if that is so then there are not three co-equal branches but the Executive and Legislature (being bound by the Constitution) are subordinate.
Many people claim that there is no way to be rid of a corrupt Supreme Court, but the Legislature CAN impeach them; but even if there was no such recourse (as seems the practical the case, given the Congress’s behavior) there is still the fundamental right of the people to “vote from the rooftops” — the Declaration of Independence said it thusly: “That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends [Life, Liberty, & the Pursuit of Happiness], it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. [...] But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.”
>Thats exactly what I would expect from a stacked court. Doesnt it seem strange that the decision will be made AFTER Obamas reign?
It does, it does; and it also seems to indicate that they believe Obama’s going to get a second term*.
(* Romney, in this case, would likely be another Obama term.)
If the court rules the surcharge is a tax on omission of commerce... and is legal...
we’ve entered a fully Fascist system.
>I really hope the government starts doing what The People want and the Constitution requires. The other option is not pleasant, but is coming much closer.
It seems to me there is much wisdom in finding and joining (or forming) a militia. (Also in stockpiling ammo, food, and field gear.)
1. A mandate that individuals must purchase health insurance (or have it as part of employment).
2. A penalty if health insurance is not purchased.
It would seem the argument of what is or is not a tax could only be made for the second, penalty stage.
The Administration is [NOW] arguing before SCOTUS that the mandate is a "tax" - which is something that the Administration said IT WAS NOT when the bill was being debated in Congress.
Talk about talking out both sides of your ass ...
If the Administration is successful at SCOTUS [arguing the mandate is a "tax"], then the fine for NOT purchasing insurance IS legal.
If SCOTUS rules that the mandate IS NOT a "tax" [or that Congress exceeded its taxing authority] or that it violates the Commerce Clause [which it obviously does], the penalty would also be null and void ...
By 2016 it is certain that some of the present members of SCOTUS will be gone.
Even if the SCOTUS were to overturn 0bamacare tomorrow, the 0bama regime would simply ignore their ruling just like they’ve ignored upholding the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) which is Federal Law.