Posted on 06/29/2012 7:01:33 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
The United States Supreme Court reaffirmed the power of words and rhetoric. Take a bow, Progressives. Clap. Clap. Clap. Clap.
But beware the Pyrrhic victory, dear friends on the left -- the victory that cost too much. The Court has called you to account. This decision wraps and ribbons a gift to Republicans, the gift of a core issue that remains very unpopular with much of the voting public.
Lemons to lemonade, they say. This decision presents the opposition with a rallying cry. If intuition serves, the Supremes have re-irritated an already addled giant. Make hay when it shines, they say. Republicans can now, more than before, in unison, call for the repeal of the Mandate Tax on the grounds that it was sold as not a tax.
It was sold as a bill of goods.
It was bait-and-switch, and the power-holders knew it all along. They knew all along that they had authority to mandate as a tax, but they also knew they couldn't call it a tax for getting re-elected reasons.
Which goes to account for the stunned progressive reaction to the challenge in the first place. How dare anyone question their authority?! But the Court today makes them look cowardly, for having the lust for their convictions but not the courage of them.
This interpretation shows the Court remonstrating Democrats, saying, "You passed a tax, by God -- now you call it a tax."
The number-one national issue in the 2012 presidential election is economic, but as a cultural question, the scope, limits, and trustworthiness of government looms large and ominous to those who perpetrated the fraud of duplicity: disguising a wolfish tax in the sheep's clothing of moral imperative, just long enough to pass it.
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
____________________________
Stephanopoulos: 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. … What 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 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: 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.
“Yeah, we lied, but it’s the law now, and ‘it’s constitutional, bitches’”.
And the adminstration’s HHS secretary can waive any company or group from The TAX.
Kathleen Sebelius, Health and Human secretary can waive companies or groups from obamacare.
Mitt should say that he is going to appoint an HHS secretary that will waive ALL AMERICANS.
Since Obamacare is now a TAX (not “healthcare”), are the waivers invalidated? Isn’t there some sort of legal precedent that taxes have to be applied equally?
The liberals won a Monkeys Paw decision here. They will regret it. Roberts was pretty successful at giving us the tools to throw out a lot of them. Sadly, I don’t trust the electorate to be that smart. We’ll see, though.
As one columnist said yesterday: "the Dems made their bed and now the Supreme Court is making them lie in it."
You think the Rats really give a crap? The bottom line is it passed, and Roberts and the rest of the SCOTUS gave it the official "Okey-Dokey."
***They knew all along that they had authority to mandate as a tax, but they also knew they couldn’t call it a tax for getting re-elected reasons. ***
I knew it would be a tax. I knew it would be argued as a tax if it went to the SCOTUS. How did I know?
After Obamcare was signed into law the Obama admin hired tens of thousands of new IRS agents to administer it.
The ‘Rats’ probably don’t give a crap right now .... but the ‘non-Rats’ do. The ‘Rats’ will care only if/when it starts affecting their re-election chances. I, for one, believe it will.
I think it won’t change that many votes, people that were outraged by ObamaCare in the first place weren’t going to vote for Obama anyway. The vast majority of the electorate saw yesterday’s events, as the Supreme Court Upholding ObamaCare, and went back to watching American Idol, or whatever show is on now.
And which entity collects that “penalty”?
Exactly.
The Dems can call it a tap dancing canary, it’s a tax and now they have to wear it.
Dems will be slaughtered this Nov.
Bull! He could have smacked it down, and wrote all all the same stuff into the ruling. No way did he have to rule with the leftists turds, and the expect us to believe its really good for us. America has been betrayed again!
How many of them vote?
Damn few.
All this has done is made a high GOP turn out a certainty. Probably woke up a few Indys too.
Tax laws change all the time.
Mitt could appoint someone to HHS that would waive inclusion to what each person or state decided to opt-out.
He could also delay implementation for a few hundred years.
The results of the 2008 election would invalidate that point.
**This interpretation shows the Court remonstrating Democrats, saying, “You passed a tax, by God — now you call it a tax.”**
So true!
I have relatives in the 20-30 range & I am on FB only to keep up with them. What I saw yesterday was an outburst of anger from these folks .... definitely not sitting at home watching American Idol. Really angry about Obamacare and realizing it was going to be expensive & forced on them. They are struggling to stay afloat in this horrible economy ... starting families, buying houses, paying off student loans, not making a lot of money yet. I was encouraged by their anger & disillusionment with Obummer ... so I’m going to take the approach that the glass is half full & save my disappointment for November when I will know for sure if I’m right or wrong to be optimistic. I find it personally impossible to surrender to the country/freedom killing agenda of Obummer, Pelosi, Reid, & the ‘Rats’ right now.
Where were they in 2010? That is a much more accurate assessment of that block. Once the drugs had worn off, they went back to doing whatever they normally do.
Also, you may be underestimating just how many regularly voting GOP and Indys went to that side in 08.
The problem with Roberts’ interpretation is this -— THE ORIGINAL INTENT OF THE DRAFTERS OF THIS OBAMACARE WERE CLEAR.
Everyone, from Obama to his defenders, DID NOT CALL IT A TAX. It was written as a PENALTY.
Obama himself explicitly said to Stephanopolous when interviewed that he REJECTED the notion that it was a tax.
Which is — If you don’t get healthcare, you will be assessed a PENALTY.
So, how can Roberts call it a tax when a tax was clearly not the intent?
He should have said this — the bill as written is UNCONSTITUTIONAL. If you want it to be constitutional, redraft the bill and call it a TAX explicitly, BUT NOT IN THIS PRESENT FORM.
But Roberts did not do that, he essentially RE-IMAGINED the bill (which explicitly said it was a penalty) and then called it a tax and then pronounced that it would be OK.
If that isn’t legislating from the bench, I don’t know what is.
Roberts turned out to be a huge disappointment IMHO.
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.