Posted on 06/28/2012 6:27:18 PM PDT by semantic
The fallacy in this is that, by making ObamaCare constitutional as a tax, Roberts also opened congress to it being lawful to tax families and individuals for NOT doing something.
So, it's not OK to yank medicaid funding, but it's OK to tax people if they don't buy insurance? It's not OK to withhold a support, but it's OK to add a burden? Sorry, but the logic on this escapes me...
I believe Obama is going to be hurt more this way than if it was struck down.
His own supporters have to face the nation for the largest taxation in history.
Its a tax, nobody likes taxes. At least normal hard working people don’t like taxes.
By making Obamacare a tax it only turned a water tanker heading to a forest fire now a tanker full of kerosene.
obama and his supporters will blame the increases on the insurance and drug companies along with President Bush. And enough of the shep to serve their purpose will believe them. They do not give a damn what those that do not support them believe or think. The Country Club Republicans, including the Speaker of the House, when he is not crying, can be numbered with the obama supporters
Any Constitutionalist who listened to Mark Levin last night could not make such a statement. Levin is a Constitutional attorney who worked on this case. Calling the "penalty" a tax renders it prima facie unconstitutional. The Constitution prescribes what sort of taxes the Congress can levy. The mandate "tax" does not fit at all. Roberts' reasoning is shallower than might be expected from a pre-law student.
I agree with this....now it’s up to us to elect a GOP senate and house and Pres
bttt
I have heard ‘crazy like a fox’ in regards to this, but it STILL pisses (sorry Jim, cursing seems appropriate here) me off that employers will STILL POSTPONE HIRING BECAUSE OF THIS MONSTROSITY.
Yeah, in the long run... whatever. For those who are set (like ROBERTS) this is fine. For those living by the skin of our teeth, it just postpones NORMAL LIVING.
Guess what guys, it’s been so bad for so long in some places that even conservatives are soon to be homeless. This just prolongs it.
I have heard ‘crazy like a fox’ in regards to this, but it STILL pisses (sorry Jim, cursing seems appropriate here) me off that employers will STILL POSTPONE HIRING BECAUSE OF THIS MONSTROSITY.
Yeah, in the long run... whatever. For those who are set (like ROBERTS) this is fine. For those living by the skin of our teeth, it just postpones NORMAL LIVING.
Guess what guys, it’s been so bad for so long in some places that even conservatives are soon to be homeless. This just prolongs it.
I don’t think so. The democrat lawyers argued before the supreme court that it could be either a tax or a penalty. whichever was more constitutional.
*********************************************
And Roberts said “Aye aye Captain!”
Since the law had no severability clause striking the whole would be pretty much automatic.
Actually, no. Many legal scholars saw a real possibility of SCOTUS striking the mandate and leaving the rest for Congress to sort out. Far from automatic, regardless of the absence of severability.
The article with a different title was also posted yesterday
Chief Justice Roberts Is A Genius
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2900590/posts
from post 20
Art 1, Sec 7 Constitution: 2 raise revenue (taxes) MUST originate in House OCare originated in Senate! Sup Court miss that?
Challenges to Ocare coming! Tax Repeal coming...
Post 59
Update: Senate GOP Will Use Reconciliation in Attempt to Repeal #Obamacare! http://herit.ag/o2S
Also see - the individual definition
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2900590/posts?page=111#111
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.