Posted on 07/03/2012 8:15:21 PM PDT by Innovative
Chief Justice John Roberts recently struck another blow against limited government by creating a new, unrestrained power to use taxes to compel activity (even if the proponents of the tax insist vehemently that it is not a tax!).
There's something tragic about a decision that says federal powers are practically unlimited, checked only by public opinion and the political process. There should be a large and healthy sphere of American life that is insulated and protected from political negotiation. But we cannot dwell on that tragedy. We have no recourse left but to engage and win in the political process.
Barack Obama, a man long intent on breaking free from the Constitution's essential constraints, has succeeded in doing so. With those constraints broken Obama is certain to pursue the "redistribution of wealth and more basic issues of political and economic justice." That means massive tax hikes, intrusive regulations, and pervasive government control of our lives.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
There could easily be four vacancies in the next four years.
Breyer, Ginsburg, Kennedy, and Scalia are all at least 75 years old.
If there’s good news there, it’s that 3 of the 4 likely retirees are liberal. The bad news is that Obama will appoint new young liberals if he gets the chance to do so.
But, the big ? is, will Romney appoint strong conservatives to the Supreme Court? Or will he give us Souter/Stevens types, who we think are conservative, then go liberal on us?
I hate to say, would he appoint a John Roberts, who appeared to be a safe conservative, only to see such an appointee go liberal on us in a crucial case???
Alito, Thomas, and Scalia appear to have been faithful to conservative constitutional principles during their time on the court. These are the justices who should be the benchmark if Romney gets to be president and appoint justices.
Tell ya what...
Let’s hold off paying taxes until “they” decide if it’s a “tax” or a “penalty”, okay?
It is also important to realize that a Supreme Court in an age brainwashed by three generations of leftists won’t save us from Progressive ruin. We must mobilize and capture not only a conservative congress but local school boards and a media of our own.
We are helpless if only a court decision can save us.
The elephant in the room is no longer Obama and it's not Roberts. It's the ones we elected to control the House. They are witnessing all that we are witnessing.
This is a game of political 3 card monte. And we’re the suckers if we continue to play it.
With any luck Obama will get his walking papers in November and Romney, as much as I distrust him, will, I think, at least treat the Constitution with some respect.
What Good Can a Handgun Do Against an Army.....?
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-backroom/2312894/posts
Sort of like how we worried about Bush having so much power after 911. We weren't as worried about Bush having it but worried about the person (such as Hillary)who replaced him inheriting it.
“Let’s hold off paying taxes until “they” decide if it’s a “tax” or a “penalty”, okay?”
Now there’s a direction worth considering.....if I was making any money to pay taxes on
That is my greatest fear. What is left of liberty would die and we would never recover... not ever.
—”If you don’t like this SCOTUS, just consider Obama appointing more Judges to the Supreme Court in the next four years...”
Right on...
The Justice Roberts fiasco is yet another reason for Freepers — who won’t let themselves vote for Romney — to realize that allowing Obutthole to win is sheer foolishness given that several Supreme Court appointments likely to occur in the next 4 years.
The prospects of another Obama term and his potential to screw up the SC is downright scary.
(Well, we know a RINO BUSH appointed Roberts, but GWB wouldn’t have chosen Roberts if he knew this is the way Roberts would have voted on Obamacare).
We have to seriously ask ourselves which appointees would you prefer: Romney SC appointees or Obeyme appointees?
If you REALLY think Romney appointees would be essentially the same as Obeyme’s appointees, then go ahead and vote for President Narcissus Obeyme if it makes you feel good.
After all, not voting for the non-Obama candidate is throwing away one more potential anti-Obama vote, so one might as well vote FOR Obama if one insists on being that stubborn.
I, myself, can NEVER bring myself to vote for Obama (or not use my vote to vote AGAINST the MF’er).
This is not rocket science, folks...
Chief Justice John Roberts recently struck another blow against limited government by creating a new, unrestrained power to use taxes to compel activity (even if the proponents of the tax insist vehemently that it is not a tax!).
There *is* something we can do about that. A *constitutional amendment* may be necessary to abolish this SCOTUS newly endorsed “penalty tax”. It should also prohibit the Congress from using any “penalty tax” to coerce any activity or non-activity. It may even be necessary to more clearly define the original constitutional limits on the taxing powers of Congress.
Conservatives definitely think that this “penalty tax” is an assault on freedom. And I think liberals will be scared of it too when they no longer control the Senate and White House in 2013 (I hope!). I wouldn’t worry too much about inaction by weak-kneed Boehner and Mitchell. With a new Republican president and a bunch of new Tea Party senators and representatives, they *will* work on passing this amendment. Or, if necessary, a majority of states can call for a constitutional convention to pass this amendment. That’s another reason to cast your vote for conservatives this November and every other election all the way up and down the ticket from your local dog catcher to president.
It might also be a good time to fix some other supposed vagueness in the US Constitution, like:
the right of the *people* to keep and bear arms, as well as a well regulated Militia;
abolishing the idea of “anchor babies”. Only children born of legal US citizens can automatically be granted US citizenship;
to qualify for the office of president, the person must have both parents be US citizens.
Here is an idea, why don't you spend some of that effort getting Romney to withdraw and let a real conservative run?
I predicted when we had nine candidates, that none of the nine debating would ever be President, and I stand by that.
“This is an inflection point in American history. Forward to unchecked federal control or back to meaningful constitutional protections for individual freedom. Are you doing everything you can to help America make the right choice?”
I’m afraid the author has still not grasp the scope of the Roberts disastrous treachery. Yes this is a turning point in American history, but with regard to the nature of Robert’s treachery there is no way to go back to meaningful Constitutional protections. Roberts has cut that off with the only remaining enforcer being our States thou nullification & interposition.
From the Federal Government’s point of view John Robert’s has most effectively killed the Federal Constitution. That is why winning the 2012 Federal election doesn’t really matter as far as the Federal constitution goes. Indeed just holding on to what little is left of our reserved rights is premised(in Robert’s world) upon the utterly impossible task of winning every last federal election from now onto forever.
Even amending the Federal Constitution cannot be said to have any effect owing to the Robert’s court creative powers to find ways to justify the power grabs of their appointing Government.
Our only real options all remain in the domain of what the same federal court would regard as a revolutionary if were lucky. Freedom is basically dead at this point.
Under the Original Constitution, Direct taxes are defines as taxes by the Federal government DIRECTLY upon the citizen and they are prohibited without apportionment among the states.
The 16th amendment relieves the Federal government of that apportionment requirement but ONLY for income taxes.
AS Obamacare’s individual mandate is not taxing income but rather inaction, and it is directly imposed by Washington upon the people. Then the Constitutional text would at least require it to be apportions among the States.
John like his liberal buddies doesn’t care about the Text of any Federal Constitution or law of any kind, they just rewrite it to fit his needs. No amendment to that Constitution is going be anything but Text. As long as its up to Federal employees to enforce and “interpret” that text it will only have the force and meaning they want it to have. This is of course to effectively unbound them, The guards are hand picked by the Prisoners who thus now run the prison, and it is we the people who are left subject to their boundless whims.
If we are to preserve and restore our rights we will require nothing short of a revolutionary change disarming and replacing the “Federal” government.
Now Roberts has given him infinite range.
Gee. A revolution in a court room.
Just how did Roberts become a socialist overnight? Or was he acting all these years?
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.