Supreme Court upholds ObamaCare.

#352
#352
Cartervol said:
What's disturbing is they fell for it in the first place. Now they have to say it's a tax. Well they haven't really been playing by the rules lately and i don't think they'll start now. The SCOTUS pretty much just gave them the go ahead on taxing us into oblivion.
Click to expand...

My understanding of the Court's reasoning was: if you're going to elect Congressmen that will tax you into oblivion, it's not our job to save you from yourselves.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#354
#354
bamawriter said:
I don't disagree with you there.

I've said from early in the primary battle that Romney's best move would be to say "Obamacare is no different than Romneycare. We tried it in MA, and it was a mistake. Implementing it at the national level would be a disaster." Instead, he's tried to draw a distinction between the two that doesn't exist.

Had he done what I laid out above, paired with yesterday's SC decision, Romney would not only be guaranteed to win, he'd win quite comfortably. He and his campaign have made this more difficult than it should have been.

But like I said, he's still running against an unpopular law. It really makes no difference whether anyone believes him or not, because there isn't a second option. This is one of those situations where a legitimate third party could make hay, but said party doesn't exist.
Click to expand...

You really think Romney's best move would have been to admit that his crowning achievement as a one term governor was a mistake?
 
#357
#357
Also, the SCOTUS is obligated to not give two damns about labeling. It doesn't matter that tax labeling wasn't used during the legislation of the ACA, if it looks like a tax and acts like a tax then the SCOTUS is to treat it as such. That has also been their purview since the founding.

You may have taken the John Roberts poster out of your gym locker, but his opinion just did more political damage to Obama than Romney or the GOP ever could have done.
 
#358
#358
milohimself said:
Also, the SCOTUS is obligated to not give two damns about labeling. It doesn't matter that tax labeling wasn't used during the legislation of the ACA, if it looks like a tax and acts like a tax then the SCOTUS is to treat it as such. That has also been their purview since the founding.

You may have taken the John Roberts poster out of your gym locker, but his opinion just did more political damage to Obama than Romney or the GOP ever could have done.
Click to expand...

The GOP anger over Roberts's "betrayal" is hilarious for this very reason.
 
#359
#359
dreVol said:
The GOP anger over Roberts's "betrayal" is hilarious for this very reason.
Click to expand...

Somehow the reality that I am looking at a $200,000 annual fine in the future seems to out weight what Roberts handed Romney.
 
#360
#360
NEOCON said:
Somehow the reality that I am looking at a $200,000 annual fine in the future seems to out weight what Roberts handed Romney.
Click to expand...

The ACA was the biggest reason for the GOP rally in the 2010 house elections. If Romney wins in November, it will be 1a and 1b with the economy, now thanks primarily to the opinion of CJ Roberts, and if I'm not mistaken, now that the mandate is considered a tax, the GOP can pass a repeal in the senate with a simple majority (assuming they pick up a majority).

In short, Roberts simultaneously declared the ACA constitutional and paved the way for its repeal.
 
#361
#361
milohimself said:
In short, Roberts simultaneously declared the ACA constitutional and paved the way for its repeal.
Click to expand...

Bingo..... And as he did it, he cornered the Democrats into being tax and spenders in an elevation year.
 
#362
#362
milohimself said:
The ACA was the biggest reason for the GOP rally in the 2010 house elections. If Romney wins in November, it will be 1a and 1b with the economy, now thanks primarily to the opinion of CJ Roberts, and if I'm not mistaken, now that the mandate is considered a tax, the GOP can pass a repeal in the senate with a simple majority (assuming they pick up a majority).

In short, Roberts simultaneously declared the ACA constitutional and paved the way for its repeal.
Click to expand...

I have very little faith in the voters anymore so I'm not feeling that perky about all this.

The supreme court was the last place I had a little faith. I felt they would stop all the crap being shoved down our throats by the feds but they've done the opposite.

I see your point but it just appears the "average" american anymore is on welfare in some form and is all for a nanny state.
 
#365
#365
Gramps said:
IMO, The hatred for Obama and the Tea Party rising to power is the reason for the
GOP rally in 2010.
Click to expand...

100 % correct.

The hatred for Obama is still there in some quarters, always will be. Tea party overreached and power has dwindled considerably, though it still there.

Election comes down to sluggish economy president versus non-charismatic rich guy.
 
#366
#366
lawgator1 said:
100 % correct.

The hatred for Obama is still there in some quarters, always will be. Tea party overreached and power has dwindled considerably, though it still there.

Election comes down to sluggish economy president versus non-charismatic rich guy.
Click to expand...
Pretty much.
 
#367
#367
BigPapaVol said:
dirt poor or movie stars? The universities in the country are full of the idiotic moon bats who provide almost nothing to our country.

Your level of concern with guys like the Koch brothers, who actually pay taxes, instead of idiotic professors posing under the guise of expertise / authority is silly.
Click to expand...

Funny part is one-half of the Koch brothers gives ridiculous amounts of money to the old alma mater to build academic buildings ... do they can be filled with more liberal moon bats. :)
 
#368
#368
lawgator1 said:
100 % correct.

The hatred for Obama is still there in some quarters, always will be. Tea party overreached and power has dwindled considerably, though it still there.

Election comes down to sluggish economy president versus non-charismatic rich guy.
Click to expand...
You just can't fathom that the Tea Party was more a creation of economics than race.
 
#369
#369
GAVol said:
Bingo..... And as he did it, he cornered the Democrats into being tax and spenders in an elevation year.
Click to expand...

So that is what we've been reduced to? Clever legal tactics as opposed to substantive change and leadership?
 
#375
#375
Gramps said:
Bush v Gore was strictly politics.
Click to expand...

How can you prove that in a case like that though? Some would say it was politics. Some would say it was a cut and dried case that should have been 9-0 or never gotten there in the first place.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top