Posted on 06/30/2012 10:23:54 AM PDT by EternalVigilance
Spin it all they want, but the monster still lives.
It’s like a French battlefield around here lately, with all the white flags being waved.
ping...
This guy nails it to the wall.
I posted this on another thread. It’s applicable to the TAX conversation.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2901324/posts?page=21#21
It is not conservatives doing this spin. It is people with vested interests in electing Republicans.
The rallying cry of the party types is “Elections Have Consequences”
Well in Roberts we have yet another failed Republican SCourt appointee in a long line of failed appointees. If you don’t see a pattern here you are blind.
That is why the republican elite are spinning so desperately to make you think this is not a defeat, it’s actually a victory. I’m not falling for it.
Except now there can be up to 300 million victims with standing to force Obama to prove he is eligible.
Monckton tells Lords: Obama presidency at risk
From the report:
Attorneys for anyone accused of a criminal offence signed into statute by President Obama under Art. I, s. 7, have the right to request access by their forensic investigators to the Hawaii Health Department’s original birth record for Mr. Obama to satisfy them that the President is the President, the statute the statute and the alleged offence an offence. he suppression by the prosecution of evidence favorable to an accused upon request violates due process [14th Amdt.] where the evidence is material either to guilt or to punishment”. Therefore, the courts will be obliged to grant any such defence request. By the supremacy clause (Art. 6), Hawaii must comply.
By the precedent set in Brady v. Maryland (373 US 83, 1963), “T Does the issue matter? Advice from an eminent constitutional lawyer is that it does: “The Constitution is the supreme law of the US. We amend it, or we abide by it.” He expects a credible court challenge to the authenticity of Mr. Obama’s birth certificate soon. If it occurs, and if the certificate is a forgery, the constitutional consequences will be grave.
Standing, by virtue of direct, personal harm involved in a criminal indictment/conviction? What types of cases would this involve?
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2900297/posts
Sorry. I don't play pretend.
-- Patrick Henry, Give me liberty or give me death speech"Mr. President, it is natural to man to indulge in the illusions of hope. We are apt to shut our eyes against a painful truth, and listen to the song of that siren till she transforms us into beasts. Is this the part of wise men, engaged in a great and arduous struggle for liberty? Are we disposed to be of the number of those who, having eyes, see not, and, having ears, hear not, the things which so nearly concern their temporal salvation? For my part, whatever anguish of spirit it may cost, I am willing to know the whole truth; to know the worst, and to provide for it."
Well, these same conservatives have also been trying desperately to convince themselves that Romney is some sort of paladin of constitutional conservatism, too, even though he’s obviously not.
Never underestimate the power of self-delusion.
I don't believe that Roberts is going to be returning to the bench in October. I predict some kind of health issue or family issue will cause him to resign before the next term.
Agreed. “Some conservatives” have developed a nasty case of battered women’s syndrome. It is truly and utterly pathetic to see otherwise intelligent men reduced to that level.
Oh, the silver lining is actually there. But it is tarnished, debased silver. The problem — and it is not a problem created by the Roberts Court — is that once the Sixteenth Amendment was added to the Constitution, the possibility of Congress taxing income, even laying a confiscatory tax on income, and waiving that tax if the income-earner engages in some action or other has been lurking in the Constitution as amended.
Of course, now that it’s legally and constitutionally considered a regressive income tax (the “penalty” is a percentage of AGI with a minimum — starting at $95 and rising to $695 per person over the course of a few years — and a maximum — the cost of the Federally defined “Bronze” insurance plan) someone needs to challenge the provision waiving it on religious grounds as a violation of the First Amendment (as interpreted by the courts in recent years).
Pissing and moaning about it on the internet won't accomplish anything.
What Roberts actually did was pull a sophoric rhetorical prank, committing a "semantic fallacy," arguing about, not what it means and what it does, but what we call it. Having called something a tax, when it is not a tax, he then further distorted what constitutes a permissible tax.
In my view Roberts grade shool diplomma should be revoked. His antics are of a kind that only a statist could pull, left wing or right wing does not really matter.
This is becoming more and more doable.
That’s a lot of IFS but I’m keeping my fingers crossed.
In other words, there isn't a snow balls chance.
You really think that anyone in DC will ever reduce its power without violence?
Sometimes you guys are just so cute.
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.