Vox Popoli: Supreme Court: Obamacare is constitutional

This is the first Scotusblog take: "So the mandate is constitutional. Chief Justice Roberts joins the left of the Court.... The bottom line: the entire ACA is upheld, with the exception that the federal government's power to terminate states' Medicaid funds is narrowly read."

People are still reading the opinion, but it would appear that the Court did its usual trick of admitting that the law is unconstitutional on its face, but finding a way of allowing it to come into force anyhow. And the support of the Bush-appointed Roberts for Obamacare demonstrates the complete absurdity of appealing to the Supreme Court to justify voting for Republican presidents. After nearly 40 years of this, you'd think Charlie Brown would realize that Lucy is never going to hold the football no matter what she says.

UPDATE: Bingo. "The Court holds that the mandate violates the Commerce Clause, but that doesn't matter b/c there are five votes for the mandate to be constitutional under the taxing power."

UPDATE 2: In Plain English: The Affordable Care Act, including its individual mandate that virtually all Americans buy health insurance, is constitutional. There were not five votes to uphold it on the ground that Congress could use its power to regulate commerce between the states to require everyone to buy health insurance. However, five Justices agreed that the penalty that someone must pay if he refuses to buy insurance is a kind of tax that Congress can impose using its taxing power. That is all that matters. Because the mandate survives, the Court did not need to decide what other parts of the statute were constitutional, except for a provision that required states to comply with new eligibility requirements for Medicaid or risk losing their funding. On that question, the Court held that the provision is constitutional as long as states would only lose new funds if they didn't comply with the new requirements, rather than all of their funding.... to answer a common question, the whole ACA is constitutional, so the provision requiring insurers to cover young adults until they are 26 survives as well.

Labels: law

323 Comments:

The Deuce June 28, 2012 10:21 AM: Wait, *Roberts* and not Kennedy was the backstabber this time?!
Redjack June 28, 2012 10:22 AM: Rumours are that Roberts is a poofter, and was going to be outed if he ruled the wrong way.
The other skeptic June 28, 2012 10:25 AM: So, the non-productive elites win again ... expect more gun purchases ...
Josh June 28, 2012 10:25 AM: so...the arguments that we should vote for willard because he would appoint better justices than obama have yet again been invalidated...
Titus Quinctius Cincinnatus June 28, 2012 10:29 AM: And yet, all over the (traditional) Right side of the blogosphere, the nearly unanimous sentiment is that now, more than ever, we have to work to get Romney elected.

Even though Romney's MassCare was a major factor in getting this whole ball rolling to begin with.

Ridiulous.
JartStar June 28, 2012 10:29 AM: Hispanics are rallying to Obama thanks to his new immigration policy as well. Looks like he won't be dropping out of the race, but winning it instead.
Josh June 28, 2012 10:30 AM: THIS IS STILL THE MOST IMPORTANTEST ELECTION EVER!
rienzi June 28, 2012 10:32 AM: Well, at least that: "We have to vote Republican for president, even if the nominee is a deranged idiot like McCain, so we can put conservatives on the Supreme Court.", argument ought to be down the toilet once and for all, but then, of course, MPAI, so it will probably be trotted out again.

If not, I suppose we'll hear a lot of:"You have to vote Republican so they can repeal Obamacare." The chances of which, of course, are about the same as Bill Gates leaving me a billion or two in his will.
Roundtine June 28, 2012 10:37 AM: We now know Taxmaggedon is definitely coming in 2013, it cannot be stopped.
Astrosmith June 28, 2012 10:38 AM: The U.S. Constitution isn't "living and breathing".

It's completely dead.
TLM June 28, 2012 10:39 AM: I haven't listened to talk radio in a long time. However, I may have to today. It should be comical hearing Hewitt, Hannity, and the other RNC acolytes spin this one.
Daniel June 28, 2012 10:39 AM: This court would find abortion constitutional as a tax.
Giraffe June 28, 2012 10:42 AM: I am surprised. I shouldn't be, but I am.

Damn that Lucy and her football.
cherub's revenge June 28, 2012 10:44 AM: Good, and let Obama win this November and openly fling open the gates on the border, and appoint nothing but Jews, Blacks, mestizos and queers to every department head (pretty much the same as now, I know).

I want the right hardened. I want conservative Whites to know they have no say in their government. That it has turned completely against them, before they are completely powerless and too overrun to coalesce and fight back. Probably too late anyway, but I'd like to see 'em go down swinging.

I want to see some Fire Eaters on that Senate floor again just once before we cash it in.
Logos June 28, 2012 10:46 AM: This decision could be a tremendous help to the cause of liberty. By that I mean more of the people who hope to rescue America will finally realize that it cannot be done through the courts, who are part and parcel of the government apparatus that always seeks to expand its power and strangle civil society. There is now a palpable and undeniable distinction between the Constitution as it is and what the courts have re-imagined it to be. Since the Constitution is superior to the federal government and its courts, Americans must disobey the latter if they wish to embrace the former. It's a time for choosing -- the rule of law, or the rule of government.
Daniel June 28, 2012 10:52 AM: Ha. Those who thought it could be done through the courts - NRO, for example - are finally realizing that George W. Bush made bad justice picks, and so we've got to get Romney in so he can make the perfect picks.

Drama-loving republicans are just women with a bigger, faster rationalization wheel.
Scintan June 28, 2012 10:52 AM: When I was a kid, I thought I'd die before the U.S. did. As I grew older, I saw the rate of the country's decline speeding up due to bad judicial selection after bad judicial selection.

Today, we've seen the end of the United States. With this ruling, nothing is Unconstitutional. The court has all but told us that all "important" laws will be massaged as needed. The United States of America was killed, and it was by the unelected branch of the government.
Crispy June 28, 2012 10:53 AM: Reading the dissent by Scalia, Kennedy, Thomas, and Alito (p. 127) now. They ripped 'em a new one. Too bad they were outnumbered.
http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/11pdf/11-393c3a2.pdf
Roundtine June 28, 2012 10:54 AM: This decision could be a tremendous help to the cause of liberty. By that I mean more of the people who hope to rescue America will finally realize that it cannot be done through the courts, who are part and parcel of the government apparatus that always seeks to expand its power and strangle civil society.

Tell your friends and relatives that and then watch them respond that they must vote for Romney.
FP June 28, 2012 10:54 AM: The spin is Roberts voted this way to be able to write the majority...

I'm already reading from folks on HotAir that we should donate to Romney. At least it gives him something to light the fire of his campaign. Beck was almost yelling that Romney better repeal and come out against this or the GOP is dead.
Astrosmith June 28, 2012 10:55 AM: The U.S. Constitution is no longer "living and breathing". It's dead.
RINO June 28, 2012 10:57 AM: It was a horrifying decision to be sure. But let's do a quick count here.

Republican appointees: 4/5 voted to strike down
Democratic appointees: 0/4 voted to strike down

There is a clear and obvious correlation regardless of your usual talking point.
Josh June 28, 2012 10:58 AM: why are you people surprised? of course they were going to uphold the law. once they started referring to the mandate as a tax, it was obvious...
The other skeptic June 28, 2012 10:59 AM: Government by the political classes for the special interests.

Why am I reminded of the closing years of the Byzantine Empire?
Vox June 28, 2012 11:00 AM: There is a clear and obvious correlation regardless of your usual talking point.

The fact that they take turns siding with the Democratic appointees doesn't change the fact that one of them is usually sure to do so.
Josh June 28, 2012 11:02 AM: It was a horrifying decision to be sure. But let's do a quick count here.Republican appointees: 4/5 voted to strike downDemocratic appointees: 0/4 voted to strike downThere is a clear and obvious correlation regardless of your usual talking point.

and...Roberts was a Bush appointee...your point?
Josh June 28, 2012 11:03 AM: The fact that they take turns siding with the Democratic appointees doesn't change the fact that one of them is usually sure to do so.

you just don't understand how important this election is!
TLM June 28, 2012 11:03 AM: Does ACA disassociate health insurance benefits between employers and W-2 employees? Will W-2's now have to be responsible for finding and purchasing their own insurance? Additionally, does ACA eliminate the ridiculous market restrictions such as only being able to purchase insurance from a provider in your own state?

As a self-employed SBO I've been saddled for years with limited choices and s*itty policies for health insurance, and to a certain degree felt that was BS compared to the market advantages of the W-2 class. If ACA does away with some of those restrictions and forces W-2's to take control of their own damn health care than that's potentially a good thing. Although I'd never agree with the idea that Govt can force you to buy anything, I've had enough of being dicked around because I choose to work for myself and not some corporation.
Ceinwyn June 28, 2012 11:04 AM: Could we pluck Scalia from the Supremes and run him as president?
FP June 28, 2012 11:05 AM: So if its a tax, what about all the waivers?
Oh, Snap! June 28, 2012 11:07 AM: TV news is reporting that although there is a penalty for non-compliance, there is no penalty for non-compliance with the non-compliance penalty.
Anonymous June 28, 2012 11:09 AM: U.S.A. may it R.I.P.
Rantor June 28, 2012 11:10 AM: They vote in order, junior to senior, as the vote was lost, I suggest Roberts went with the majority so that he could write the decision and try to narrow it somewhat. It is strategery.

The desion remains wrong.
Josh June 28, 2012 11:11 AM: So if its a tax, what about all the waivers?

tax credits!
Stilicho June 28, 2012 11:12 AM: What part of the Constitution gives Congress the authority to tax a failure to engage in economic activity?
Scintan June 28, 2012 11:13 AM: It was a horrifying decision to be sure. But let's do a quick count here.

Republican appointees: 4/5 voted to strike down
Democratic appointees: 0/4 voted to strike down

There is a clear and obvious correlation regardless of your usual talking point.

The problem is that both sides violate the constitution for their pet causes. The problem has never been strictly Republican/Democrat, or whether a judge is activist or originalist in theor. It's always been about the willingness of the judge to put his pet causes behind the document. Even Scalia, the great champion of the court right, has failed in this, because he's allowed himself to be bound by the stupidity of "precedent!".

This case shows why precedent is such a terrible thing for courts to look to. Had Scalia & company had the balls/brains to kill the bad line of cases that led up to today's decision, this would never have happened. Instead, they've allowed one unconstitutional encroachment to be added on to another for so long that we're now effectively a country with two legislatures at the Federal level.
cherub's revenge June 28, 2012 11:13 AM: Republican appointees: 4/5 voted to strike down
Democratic appointees: 0/4 voted to strike down

3/4 of White men on the court voted to strike it down.

3/3 of the White men on the court who have fathered children voted to strike it down.

Probably about the same result as if you had plucked them off the street by those metrics and placed them on the court.
Giraffe June 28, 2012 11:14 AM: The fact that they take turns siding with the Democratic appointees doesn't change the fact that one of them is usually sure to do so.

That is why we need more than five republican nominees. Republican nominees are only 80% reliable.

/s
Russell June 28, 2012 11:16 AM: Huh, I never thought I'd live to see the State unmoor itself from the nation like this.
The other skeptic June 28, 2012 11:17 AM: This case shows why precedent is such a terrible thing for courts to look to.

The American Revolution is also a precedent ... Tyranny is Tyranny regardless of whether it is by a monarchical government or a so-called popularly elected one ... (I leave open the question of whether the government of the day was especially tyrannical, compared to today.)
Josh June 28, 2012 11:17 AM: What part of the Constitution gives Congress the authority to tax a failure to engage in economic activity?

interstate commerce, of course!

the precedent of the great depression wheat case is that the failure to engage in economic activity IS an economic activity
john June 28, 2012 11:18 AM: I love cherub's revenges comment:
I want the right hardened. I want conservative Whites to know they have no say in their government. That it has turned completely against them, before they are completely powerless and too overrun to coalesce and fight back. Probably too late anyway, but I'd like to see 'em go down swinging.

I want to see some Fire Eaters on that Senate floor again just once before we cash it in.

But with Rand Paul throwing support to Romney, it is beyond clear that there is no hope in the current government structure. I'm going to vote. I'm going to write in Ron Paul and let the chips fall where they may. I want the Republican establishment to realize that when they took away Paul as a choice, they gave the white house back to Obama.

Not that I supported all the policies of HW Bush, but I watched in horror as Perot threw his hat back into the ring at the last minute to split the vote and cede the white house to the known philanderer Clinton. Our country hasn't been the same since.

I shudder to think what is going to happen, but I'm not "voting for the lesser of two evils." I'm going to vote my conscience and that is Ron Paul as a write-in.

Time to invoke the 10th amendment and start thinking seriously about secession.
TLM June 28, 2012 11:20 AM: On the lighter side, it is amusing that the laws of over 300 million people are struck down or upheld by 2 Jew broads, 2 wops,a beaner, some gay white guys, and a freaking Kennedy (When will this country ever get rid of this name in politics?). We are screwed.
Suomynona June 28, 2012 11:21 AM: Republicans are falling all over each other pledging that they will not stop fighting for the repeal of Obamacare. It's disgusting. Jackals and weasels are running our lives.
Anonymous June 28, 2012 11:23 AM: The constitution is no longer living and breathing, it's dead.

- Astrosmith
Roundtine June 28, 2012 11:25 AM: TV news is reporting that although there is a penalty for non-compliance, there is no penalty for non-compliance with the non-compliance penalty.

I hear the voice of Simon from Die Hard 3.
Jeff June 28, 2012 11:27 AM: The country is completely screwed now that the Feds have unfettered power to demand you act in a certain way. There are not enough productive whites remaining from the pastoralist background variety to impose liberty going forward (Check the blog Dusk in Autumn for great write-ups on how groups differ: http://akinokure.blogspot.com/2011/11/why-some-cultures-have-more-touching.html). We are overrun with peoples who do not care for individuality at their core; to feel freedom at your core is very different from understanding the rationale for human liberty. To everyone on this blog, your only hope is to make as much money as you can to insulate yourself from the massive decline to which we are headed.

To everyone who votes for Republicans because they are anti-abortion, this is your comeuppance. The way it works is that the Palin-idiotic brigade says abortion is the biggest deal in the world, this means that only anti-abortion Republicans can be nominated for President. These men, when they become President, then nominate only Catholics because they think that Catholics will vote anti-abortion. Every other issue subordinate to abortion. There is no critical thinking along the way; no notice that Catholics are often super liberal and not exactly Lockean in their outlook. Only abortion matters; until days like today.
The One June 28, 2012 11:27 AM: In economic terms what does this actually mean. US goes more in debt and healthcare goes up for everyone? I buy private health care, will my rates go up?

Can't wait to leave this country, don't even want to call myself American anymore
Other Josh June 28, 2012 11:30 AM: Does this really surpise anyone?

Over the last 18 months, I've seen many of my Republican friends come to realize they can no longer trust in their Republican politicians. There's resentment, frustration, and a sense of hopelessness. Hopefully it translates into rightful anger and resolve.
Scintan June 28, 2012 11:30 AM: Republicans are falling all over each other pledging that they will not stop fighting for the repeal of Obamacare. It's disgusting. Jackals and weasels are running our lives.

This is why the change has to be bottom-to-top instead of top-to-bottom.
RINO June 28, 2012 11:30 AM: and...Roberts was a Bush appointee...your point?

The correlation isn't 1.0 so it must be worthless or something.
Stilicho June 28, 2012 11:31 AM: What part of the Constitution gives Congress the authority to tax a failure to engage in economic activity?

interstate commerce, of course!

the precedent of the great depression wheat case is that the failure to engage in economic activity IS an economic activity

Yet they specifically rejected that expansion of the commerce clause and Wickard. Instead Roberts' opinion claims it is a tax just like the tax on gasoline (excise tax) or the income tax. Now Congress' power to levy excise taxes is in the Constitution and the income tax was authorized by the 16th amendment, however, nowhere does the Constitution authorize Congress to tax the absence of economic activity or, put another way, to tax the failure to consummate a sale. You would think that a Court which ruled that the commerce clause does not empower Congress to regulate a failure to engage in commerce would also understand that Congress has no power to tax a failure to engage in a transaction.
691 June 28, 2012 11:32 AM: Why would Roberts vote to uphold if he didn't have to? If Kennedy was a lost cause, I could see him defecting to write a 6-3 majority opinion. But Kennedy didn't vote to uphold so it wasn't necessary to defect. Unless something strange occurred, where Kennedy would have supported a commerce clause justification but didn't agree that a fine is a tax, Roberts did this of his own volition.
Hayden June 28, 2012 11:37 AM: For all of those who are acting as if this the final nail in the coffin of liberty, get real.

We lost the right to self determination during the war of northern aggression.

We lost soveriegnty over our monetary policy with the creation of the Federal Reserve in 1913.

We gave up liberty for security with the New Deal.

And finally, had our freedom of association taken with the civil rights act.

Oh I almost forgot, we have already spent the next 4 generations lifetime earnings to pay for vibrancy and shooting arabs.

Liberty is dead and only the blood of patriots will bring her back.
DT June 28, 2012 11:38 AM: Do we need any more evidence that America's Constitution...and therefore America...is dead?

To hell with this government. The sooner it collapses and the U.S. splits into separate nation states, the better.
The Deuce June 28, 2012 11:38 AM: The lesson is, there is nobody we can rely on at the federal level, and nobody in the Supreme Court, that will make a difference. Seeking change in federal politics is futile. The hooks of the elites are well and truly in.

The only hope now is to seek revolt against the federal government at the state and local level, where the politicians answer more to the people. If the feds can just pretend that federal law doesn't exist, so can the states and localities.

And if even that fails, there will only be two options: water the tree of liberty, or quietly accept the dying of the light.
jay c June 28, 2012 11:38 AM: They're just hastening the decline.
DT June 28, 2012 11:38 AM: Liberty is dead and only the blood of patriots will bring her back.

Amen!
cheddarman June 28, 2012 11:38 AM: This pretty much killed any residual faith i had in our "republic." Bring back the monarchs.

No king in his right mind would systematically reward his parasitic classes at the expense of the producers.
George June 28, 2012 11:40 AM: TLM Said:

"On the lighter side, it is amusing that the laws of over 300 million people are struck down or upheld by 2 Jew broads, 2 wops,a beaner, some gay white guys"

You can't ever fail to be impressed by the quality of VodDay readers.
Nate June 28, 2012 11:40 AM: I've been saying that the US will be totally unrecognizable in around 2015 to 2016.

With this decision... the economic implosion... the tribal in-group out-group political mentality... We will see open civil war in this country.

And no one will benefit but the morticians.
Nate June 28, 2012 11:41 AM: i confess I am disappointed in the way its worked out though... since Go Time is so obviously approaching... but because of this decision... like the families of so many other medical professionals... we probably won't be here when it arrives.
Jardinera654 June 28, 2012 11:42 AM: Can we find a Dr. Frankenstein to dig up, reanimate George III , and put old George back in charge?

The taxes were a lot lower.

I wouldn't have had a vote, but then, my "representatives" don't represent me any better than if I didn't have any vote to begin with.

The decisions of Geo.III's judges, don't appear to be made as if they were high on a combination of LSD and "bath salts", as they do now.

It really, really, pains me to say this, but maybe, just maybe, Wheeler has been right all along. sigh. :-(
Scintan June 28, 2012 11:44 AM: We will see open civil war in this country.

That part of the game has already been rigged. Police departments across the country he been getting all sorts of military-grade equipment.
George June 28, 2012 11:45 AM: "With this decision... the economic implosion... the tribal in-group out-group political mentality... We will see open civil war in this country."

Who looks a the American culture and body politic and actually concludes something like this. The absurdity of this conclusion can't really be measured as such a long yardstick does not exist. There is and will not be any such thing. "Open Civil War"? In the most prosperous country in the world?

Good God....Get your head on straight.
Conrad The Crazed June 28, 2012 11:47 AM: Pure, naked, in your face TYRANNY. I didn't expect anything less from a wholly corrupted SCOTUS, particularly since the Kelo 'decision'.

And how helpful of them to essentially say: 'well, you can't get away with it via the penalty method, but you CAN get away with via the tax method, and we are hereby granting permission for you to do just that.'

We are rapidly approaching a redo of 1775 Lexington-Concord, as we are well beyond fixing this via conventional means. Time to water Jefferson's tree again.
11B June 28, 2012 11:48 AM: I would just like to say that I now retract my objections to free trade and immigration. I am now a proponent of free trade and open borders.
Scott June 28, 2012 11:48 AM: This is what I don't get. Apparently the government can pass anything as long as it's a tax. Why don't we just tax abortion at a few thousand per? If we're going to have terrible laws, we might as well use them to our advantage.
Salt June 28, 2012 11:48 AM: The US flag is now the white of surrender with a green head of broccoli in the middle.
Outlaw X June 28, 2012 11:52 AM: And no one will benefit but the morticians.

From the civil war or the health care law?
Gen. Kong June 28, 2012 11:53 AM: rienzi (reporting on a common Repuke scam): I suppose we'll hear a lot of: "You have to vote Republican so they can repeal Obamacare."

You betcha. The R-jerseys trotted this one out in 2010 with great success. From the day weepin' Johnny and the Brokeback Boyz took over from Pelosi, they and their media whores have told their supporters that it wasn't necessary to block funding for Obamacare's implementation or otherwise act to derail it because the "there's no way it would pass the Supreme Court".

As for Roberts, it appears he's yet another Repuke appointee who has "grown" in office. Good ol' Imam al-Duhbya is just the gift that never stops giving. I wonder what Mittens will do? Maybe he should just be honest for a change and endorse D'Won, since his whole purpose is to ensure a second term for the Mocha Messiah anyway. The Repuke flim-flam is like Colt 45 Malt Liquor - works every time. Even yesterday the Repukes were all trumpeting Obamacare's doom. Thanks to a Repuke-appointed "conservative", it's now engraved in stone. I think I'll go visit RimJob's site FreeRepublick to gloat.
Vox June 28, 2012 11:53 AM: Who looks the American culture and body politic and actually concludes something like this. The absurdity of this conclusion can't really be measured as such a long yardstick does not exist. There is and will not be any such thing. "Open Civil War"? In the most prosperous country in the world?

Yes, there most certainly will. And George... weren't you one of those fine intellectuals who claimed that the Islamists wouldn't come to power in the Arab Spring?
George June 28, 2012 11:54 AM: "This is what I don't get. Apparently the government can pass anything as long as it's a tax. Why don't we just tax abortion at a few thousand per? If we're going to have terrible laws, we might as well use them to our advantage."

The reason we won't do such a thing is that too few people would support such a thing. Thankfully.
unger June 28, 2012 11:55 AM: Initiating force isn't wrong and taxing people, directly or indirectly, isn't wrong. Neither is going against some words on an old piece of paper - which, of course, those who decide what those words mean say it doesn't go against them, all appearances aside. Those with the society-granted authority to decide the national interest have decided that it is in the national interest for everyone in our society to have health insurance, and you people make me sick with your libertinistic, atomistic notions that deny this national interest.
The other skeptic June 28, 2012 11:56 AM: It seems from Fast and Furious that the governing classes are scared of an armed populace ...

They might also be scared of some people's ability to hijack their drones

Now that the legislation has been ruled constitutional, perhaps there are some interesting bit in it to turn the tables on the governing classes. After all, they didn't draft it very carefully. It probably looks very much like a camel's ass.
George June 28, 2012 11:57 AM: Vox Said:

"Yes, there most certainly will [be civil war]. And George... weren't you one of those fine intellectuals who claimed that the Islamists wouldn't come to power in the Arab Spring?"

LOL...Americans will take up arms over a Supreme Court decision. LOL.... Where exactly to do you see any evidence that anything more than a few nuts might do such a thing? Is there a movement to do such a thing? Are there leaders of this movement? Weren't you the one that predicted that Hillary would be nominated and that Biden would be dropped from the ticket? LOL
The One June 28, 2012 11:58 AM: Unger are you for real or is that dead pan comedy? hard to laugh today
George June 28, 2012 11:59 AM: The One:

It's EASY to laugh today....Right here you have folks claiming this ruling will lead to another American Civil War. You have to admit, that's pretty funny.
Outlaw X June 28, 2012 12:00 PM: five Justices agreed that the penalty that someone must pay if he refuses to buy insurance is a kind of tax that Congress can impose using its taxing power. That is all that matters.

Someone please explain this to me. How you can be "taxed" on not doing? I thought the definition of a tax required that some kind of transaction is required? What am I missing, this is not a rhetorical question.
Scott June 28, 2012 12:01 PM: @George
If you put a vote out there I'd say more than 50% would support such a thing and the only reason abortion isn't illegal already is because it's unconstitutional. I'd prefer freedom and liberty but obviously that's not happening. Liberals advance some cause and the conservatives back off, then it happens again, and the conservatives back off. Rinse repeat. Might as well have mutually assured destruction. Just attack every liberal cause when in power. I'm just ranting, none of it matters. The democrats are evil and the republicans are evil, incompetent, and/or cowards. Maybe it's time to buy that ar-15 I've been looking at.
unger June 28, 2012 12:01 PM: Hah, if you can't laugh at this, how are you going to get through what's coming? Someone on VFR commented that 'the Gods of the Copybook Headings are on their way', and I can't say it any better than that.
Scintan June 28, 2012 12:02 PM: Someone please explain this to me. How you can be "taxed" on not doing? I thought the definition of a tax required that some kind of transaction is required? What am I missing, this is not a rhetorical question.

You can start with Wickard v. Filburn and go from there.
George June 28, 2012 12:04 PM: @scott

Knock yourself out with that purchase.

Further, if you think conservatives "back off" I'd suggest you buy some new glasses along with that ar-15.
cherub's revenge June 28, 2012 12:04 PM: On the lighter side, it is amusing that the laws of over 300 million people are struck down or upheld by 2 Jew broads, 2 wops,a beaner, some gay white guys, and a freaking Kennedy (When will this country ever get rid of this name in politics?).

Ain't it something? It's like the English were never here - kind of like London. Most certainly their document framing government didn't survive.
rienzi June 28, 2012 12:04 PM: We will see open civil war in this country.

@ Scintan That part of the game has already been rigged. Police departments across the country he been getting all sorts of military-grade equipment.

Fortunately, if the police fight, with the results being anything close to their historical average, most of that military-grade equipment is going to end up in the hands of their opponents.
George June 28, 2012 12:06 PM: Hey rienzi.....Can you point to anyone in America seriously organizing for civil war?
Josh June 28, 2012 12:06 PM: how is the mandate any different than any other tax? you pay a tax, unless you buy insurance, then you don't have to pay the tax...like other tax credits (children, mortgage interest, charity, etc)
The One June 28, 2012 12:06 PM: George, there will be a civil war, but this won't be the straw that breaks the camels back. What this will do is move more biz to cash only under the table.

Unger whats VFR? Yea guess my sense is humor is off.
George June 28, 2012 12:08 PM: The One:

Can you point me to anyone organizing for Civil War..?
The One June 28, 2012 12:08 PM: Hey George, after reading this blog you don't think what the ILK are doing is called organizing. Think before you answer.
RINO June 28, 2012 12:08 PM: Hey rienzi.....Can you point to anyone in America seriously organizing for civil war?

There's no time to prepare for civil war when TGLSWD(p)EC is coming. Build your underground bunker before it is too late.
Scintan June 28, 2012 12:09 PM: Fortunately, if the police fight, with the results being anything close to their historical average, most of that military-grade equipment is going to end up in the hands of their opponents.

The police are only part of the equation. They're just there to help the military. Remember, the AI is advancing, and it won't be long before the people are not needed for fighting.

Keep the masses calm. Slowly take away their rights and expectations. Then, when the masses are no longer a threat because you've become impervious to attack, the coup is defacto and bloodless.
The Gray Man June 28, 2012 12:10 PM: George,

Only nutjobs believe there will be an immediate backlash or civil war. Vox has decided it is better to take the long road approach. The US has changed dramatically in only the past 15 years. In another 15, it will look even more different. The seeds of civil war are sown, but it will take a long, long time to make a complacent population do anything.

American generations in the past would not stand for this sort of thing, but we've reached a point where most people can feel sick for a few minutes and then get on with their lives. That cannot last indefinitely, though, even if it takes another 20 to 30 years.
RCR_Chris June 28, 2012 12:10 PM: Gm. Can't seem to get a shocked look on my face....

The US Supreme Court is the major league level weasel group. The job title isn't "Supreme Court Justice", but "Supreme Court Justification Technician".

I doubt anyone will see that Roberts isn't conservative, but interested only in upholding the supremacy of the federal government.
Stilicho June 28, 2012 12:11 PM: This is what I don't get. Apparently the government can pass anything as long as it's a tax. Why don't we just tax abortion at a few thousand per? If we're going to have terrible laws, we might as well use them to our advantage.

It's actually worse than this: they can now tax your failure to get an abortion.
Conrad The Crazed June 28, 2012 12:13 PM: Ummmm.....even if he/she DID know of anyone organizing for civil war, why on Earth would he be dumb enough to tell you all about it on a public message board?

And why are YOU so interested in that particular tidbit of information?
Gen. Kong June 28, 2012 12:15 PM: RINO: It was a horrifying decision to be sure. But let's do a quick count here.

Republican appointees: 4/5 voted to strike down
Democratic appointees: 0/4 voted to strike down

There is a clear and obvious correlation regardless of your usual talking point.

If the vampire-squids wanted the vote to be 9-0, that's what it would have been. Your notion that any of the blackrobed buffoons sitting in that kangaroo court have ever had an independent thought in their entire lives is highly amusing. There are aspects of off-the-shelf liberalism which have been voted against by the D-jersey appointees (the destruction of the fourth amendment being a good example). Like every single member of Congress, they do as they are told when anything of import is "decided". The fact that some are allowed to write dissenting opinions from time to time is all part of the shell game. The water temp goes up very gradually, the vast majority of frogs don't know or care.

Let me issue and control a nation’s money and I care not who writes the laws. - Mayer Amschel Rothschild
George June 28, 2012 12:18 PM: The One:

What's an "ILK"?
realmatt June 28, 2012 12:21 PM: how is the mandate any different than any other tax? you pay a tax, unless you buy insurance, then you don't have to pay the tax...like other tax credits (children, mortgage interest, charity, etc)

That isn't a tax credit..

if they started lowering peoples existing taxes when as a reward for buying insurance then it would be. But they're UPPING people's taxes as punishment for not.

That is not a tax credit.
The Anti-Gnostic June 28, 2012 12:21 PM: Affordable Care Act:

Affordable Care Bubble Enabling Act

Affordable Cartelization Act
W.LindsayWheeler June 28, 2012 12:22 PM: George, the "Ilk" are the continous commentators here at Vox Populi. I'm a proud member of the Ilk.
RC June 28, 2012 12:22 PM: "i confess I am disappointed in the way its worked out though... since Go Time is so obviously approaching... but because of this decision... like the families of so many other medical professionals... we probably won't be here when it arrives."

When you leave, post directions to your lake.
The Gray Man June 28, 2012 12:22 PM: You should stop using that quote, G-Kong. I have begun to notice that people outside of the libertarian circle jerk seem to know of that quote and are instantly dismissive of anyone who uses it.

Even though I believe the quote is an important one, I have noticed an overall lack of intelligence in those who use it despite them being freedom-loving.
The One June 28, 2012 12:23 PM: Nevermind George. Just ask yourself what is the reason for 30% increase in yr over yr guns sales since 2008.
If you think no one is organizing, then you act on that belief and the rest of us will act on different beliefs.
swiftfoxmark2 June 28, 2012 12:23 PM: Typical. The whole system is designed to defer responsibility to some other branch. I knew from day one that the courts would uphold the law and I knew that Congress would next to nothing to overturn it.

Don't bother counting on them to do it next year either, regardless of how many Republicans get elected. Republicans have always wanted this law, as evidenced by the current Speaker of the House, John Boehner, stating that he wouldn't repeal it once it was passed. Just the portions that benefit only the Democrat special interest groups.
691 June 28, 2012 12:24 PM: Vox, do you have a legal philosophy? Is it something you've thought much about? I would assume the same deformation professionelle informs you views as with your analogy between God and a video game designer, that laws are human constructions

In particular, are some here proponents of natural law and what do you mean by that term?

I've just started reading a little about various philosophies of law and know very little
Vox June 28, 2012 12:25 PM: LOL...Americans will take up arms over a Supreme Court decision.

No one claimed that, George. That is a major failure of reading comprehension on your part.
Suomynona June 28, 2012 12:25 PM: I read that Romney is making grand gestures, "I will act to repeal ObamaCare - and I'm immediately thinking, yeah, it certainly will be an act.

The pattern is clear. Democrats screw the country, providing job security for the Republicans, who fail to unscrew the country, providing job security for the Democrats, who then screw the country.
The One June 28, 2012 12:28 PM: Romney will repeal Obamacare and implement Romneycare. It's a vanity thing.
JD Curtis June 28, 2012 12:28 PM: "If your household income is $66,000 a year, slightly above the national average, Obama’s healthcare bill will require you to spend 12 percent of your income — about $8,000 a year or almost $700 a month — to buy health insurance before you get any federal subsidy...

Even those making just $33,000 will have to ante up 4.5 percent of their income (about $1500) for health insurance" Link

I wonder what percentage of the mind-numbed robots that I debated in public forums for the last year and a half are even aware of this information.

Usually, such online conversations devolved into accusing me of being a big meanie who 'wanted people to get sick and die' or 'didn't want peoplee to have *free* health care'.

The sheer level of idiocy in this country (US) is astounding.
Mr. Nightstick June 28, 2012 12:31 PM: There is no curse in Elvish, Entish, or the tongues of men for this treachery.
Nate June 28, 2012 12:32 PM: "The US has changed dramatically in only the past 15 years. In another 15, it will look even more different. "

It should be noted that people were saying this exact same thing in 1857

Of course.. that wasn't a civil war...
Nate June 28, 2012 12:34 PM: "That part of the game has already been rigged. Police departments across the country he been getting all sorts of military-grade equipment."

I'm quite certain they do... but it won't be nearly enough... as... just like the cops in mexico.. they mistakenly believe that they will be safe when they take their uniforms off.
FP June 28, 2012 12:35 PM: "Can you point to anyone in America seriously organizing for civil war?"

Well, according to the FBI/DHS it is anyone having anything to do with "militia" in the name. Libertarians, Paulites, constitutionalists etc.. Oh, and if you're a "prepper" who buys stuff in bulk.

Civil war is inevitable, but it won't happen until things get worse in most places.
Nate June 28, 2012 12:35 PM: George...

You bely your ignorance when you call this "the most prosperous country in the world". There is no objective measure that puts america in such rare air.

You borrow a billion dollars... and call yourself rich.
11B June 28, 2012 12:36 PM: Even those making just $33,000 will have to ante up 4.5 percent of their income (about $1500) for health insurance"

That sounds great. I hope a lot of the population feels some pain.
Difster June 28, 2012 12:36 PM: Let's talk about the waivers. Since it's a tax, the government can't simply grant tax waivers like that because taxes have to be apportioned. All of those waivers might be null and void.

I will wait for further analysis before commenting on that aspect further.
IM2L844 June 28, 2012 12:37 PM: This is far from over. I expect many state's libertarian leaning ligislators will try to pass constitutional amendments to their state's constitutions that will prevent them from setting up state run health care exchanges. And I expect to see a big fight in congress over funding for the billions of dollars it will cost to set up federally run health care exchanges in each of those states.

In any event, it will be a good all around distinguishing highlighter of differing principles and perspectives that will hopefully serve to further polarize public opinion with more clarity.
Russell June 28, 2012 12:41 PM: "You borrow a billion dollars..."

from one of the most ruthless political entities around

"and call yourself rich."

We're screwed.
Josh June 28, 2012 12:41 PM: You bely your ignorance when you call this "the most prosperous country in the world". There is no objective measure that puts america in such rare air.

if you measure wealth in iphones per capita, maybe...
Josh June 28, 2012 12:43 PM: bets on the first state to secede or nullify?
Difster June 28, 2012 12:45 PM: Montana, followed by Idaho and Texas.
Clay June 28, 2012 12:47 PM: Don't worry George. Now, you can get that sex-change operation, and really pee like a girl.
Gen. Kong June 28, 2012 12:49 PM: Gray Man: You should stop using that quote, G-Kong. I have begun to notice that people outside of the libertarian circle jerk seem to know of that quote and are instantly dismissive of anyone who uses it.

I'm not in the habit of using that quote often, GM. It was there to underline the point made above - which is that there is no actual opposition to utopian socialism in the USSA, only controlled opposition to keep the dialectical dragon's wings flapping along. It is a rigged game from top to bottom. Since MPAI, there are really very few outside of the vampire-squids and their upper-level servants who even comprehend this. In contrast to VD, I am now fairly certain that the overlords have already decided they want D'Won as their teleprompter-reader for another four years. Romney is playing the same role that Kerry did in 2004. Even if I am wrong about this and Willard Hussein Obamney ascends the cherry-blossom throne next January, the end game (totalitarian slavery) remains unchanged.

There is nothing untrue about the quote itself. As long as a cartel has the legal authority to counterfeit, those in the cartel along with its friends and loyal toadies can literally buy whatever and whomever they need to control things to their advantage. It's even worse than that though since as long as any such counterfeit money is accepted as payment - those issuing it will continue to have control. Jefferson understood this. That's why he wrote the great warning about central banking.
RC June 28, 2012 12:54 PM: You should stop using that quote, G-Kong. I have begun to notice that people outside of the libertarian circle jerk seem to know of that quote and are instantly dismissive of anyone who uses it.

Even though I believe the quote is an important one, I have noticed an overall lack of intelligence in those who use it despite them being freedom-loving."

So we shouldn't reveal the truth because we might be dismissed by the MPAI crowd? Strange advice.
patrick kelly June 28, 2012 12:54 PM: "Even those making just $33,000 will have to ante up 4.5 percent of their income (about $1500) for health insurance" Link"

IIRC the "tax" for not buying health insurance is only $750 for individuals, $1500 for families, and some have suggested that the ACA does not have a penalty for not paying the tax. That sounds wrong to me, but I really don't know, like most of the congress who voted for it, I haven't actual read the thing.

Currently, my share of paying for insurance through my employer is already about $1500, so it is a wash for me, but if my employer decides to no longer subsidize my health insurance, and pay the employer penalty which is much less than the cost of their employer share of the health insurance bill, I can either buy all the insurance myself at about $9600/yr, or pay the $1500/yr penalty and receive coverage under the gov't pool.

I know math is hard, but that's not very difficult to figure out. Of course this assumes the $1500/year tax pays for something comparable to the $9600/yr purchase, which may not be the case.

Constitutional or not, the ACA sure seems to have many unforeseen or unintended consequences. Or maybe it was designed that way. On the surface it looks like it would put private insurance out of business if enough people decide to pay the tax rather than the higher cost of purchasing insurance.

This of course will require higher taxes to fund the gov't pool as its costs go up, and mandate single payer, otherwise too many doctors and hospitals might opt out of accepting the gov't insurance money as payment due to fee caps. AFAIK there is no provision in the ACA to mandate Doctors accept the patients. There are many in my area who no longer accept any form of insurance or gov't money, like medicare or medicaid, and find enough patients willing and able to pay.

A round and round we go....
FP June 28, 2012 12:56 PM: Hah, via twitchy and drudge, the DNC is celebrating on twitter with:

"Its constitutional bitches" and a now deleted "take that mother******s"

No civil war eh George?
HH June 28, 2012 12:56 PM: I guess I don't understand.

As Christians shouldn't we care that XX million people (what ever the number is) don't have health care (Y/N)?

The capitalist health care system we currently have provides far less coverage for far more cost than other countries health care system (Y/N)?

Obama tried for a single payer system but was forced into this monstrosity ACA to try an compromise with the Republicans (Y/N) ?

So we know the ACA is wrong, yet we know what we have doesn't work either -- what should have been the right system ?
cherub's revenge June 28, 2012 12:57 PM: how is the mandate any different than any other tax? you pay a tax, unless you buy insurance, then you don't have to pay the tax...like other tax credits (children, mortgage interest, charity, etc)

I would say the numero uno reason is that the actual statute says "penalty" not tax.

Roberts opinion:

And Congress’s choice of language— stating that individuals “shall” obtain insurance or pay a “penalty”— does not require reading §5000A as punishing unlawful conduct.

See, just say that a word doesn't mean what it means, and bammo, all good.
rienzi June 28, 2012 12:57 PM: George,

Perhaps I should have put that "organizing for civil war" in quotation marks, as those were not my words, my point. The point was that police forces, regardless of how they are equipped, have historically tended to be near useless, when used in situations that call for a military force.

"Open Civil War" doesn't require "organization", just a few Anders Breiviks with decent escape plans. Have you already forgotten how two guys with an old van and one rifle had the whole DC area living in fear?

If only one tenth of one percent decide to go all Rambo on the government, that's over 310,000 folks pot-shotting away, and melting back into the populace. Something on that scale simply could not be stopped without imposing law enforcement so draconian, that it would create even more Rambos.

In the end, governmental force is based on illusion, and the people really do deserve, and are responsible for the government they get.
RINO June 28, 2012 12:58 PM: George: The US won't be the most prosperous once free trade has run its course ..................

Side note ... Hmmm:

"Scalia’s dissent, at least on first quick perusal, reads like it was originally written as a majority opinion (in particular, he consistently refers to Justice Ginsburg’s opinion as “The Dissent”). Back in May, there were rumors floating around relevant legal circles that a key vote was taking place, and that Roberts was feeling tremendous pressure from unidentified circles to vote to uphold the mandate."
JDC June 28, 2012 12:58 PM: Quote; The sheer level of idiocy in this country (US) is astounding.

I have for a long time believe we should adopt Valentine's Hierarchy of Foreignness, and apply the label varelse to a growing number of Americans, recognizing them for what they are...members of another species who are not able to communicate with us.
Suomynona June 28, 2012 1:02 PM: When it becomes obvious, of which today's ruling is just another blatant example in the mountain of blatant examples, that the system itself is broken, corrupt, and no longer serves the people but rather those who control it, then there isn't any alternative to civil war if the people desire to restore their power.

I sincerely hope, with trepidation and horror, that enough people with enough balls will have had enough of this BS to trigger a full-scale, full-on, bloody and vicious civil war. It's better than sitting in the pot being slowly boiled to death.
Scintan June 28, 2012 1:03 PM: I guess I don't understand.

As Christians shouldn't we care that XX million people (what ever the number is) don't have health care (Y/N)?

No, and that pretty much eliminates the need to answer the rest of your questions.
cherub's revenge June 28, 2012 1:06 PM: I wonder how many fines and prison terms the Supreme Court will be vacating in the future for violations of other statutes where the word "shall" and "penalty" are used. I'm going to guess zero.

Dishonest MFers.
W.LindsayWheeler June 28, 2012 1:08 PM: @691, I'm the only one here of the Ilk to be a proponent of natural law. Thomas Jefferson used that term "nature's laws" in the Declaration but he, even as an agaranist and a classical reader, didn't even know the meaning of the term. I'm the only person in the world to know what is the True Real Original meaning of the term "natural law". The Natural Law and "Laws of Nature" are the laws that built the cosmos. They are the Constitution of the Cosmos. Here is the list of the real, original natural laws: Natural Law.

Thomas Jefferson didn't know anything about the real original natural law. Proof. He was a socianist. Yes, a "sociaNist"; a disbeliever in the concept of the Trinity. The Trinity is perfectly compatible with the Natural Law; The Trinity ensconces the whole of the Natural Law.

The failure of America is that it attacked, undermined, disabused the real, original natural law. America has nothing to do with the Natural Law. Absolutely nothing.

One of the laws is "Bad company drives out good". The First Amendment of Free Speech cancels out this Natural Law. You don't obey the Natural Law---you die. The constant infiltration of communists and socialists in this country has undermined the WASP culture of America and replaced it with its socialism. The WASPs infused with the tolerance and diversity rhetoric of Masonry, allowed everything, and so now the WASPs have no control of the culture. The Socialists in the colleges and universities vet candidates and only Socialists are moved to higher positions, like BHO.

If you don't control your parameters---you lose them. You are all wrapped in the Enlightenment cry of "Freedom" and "Liberty". Society is an organism. You don't operate on the intrinsic program of an organism, you dissipate.

Nature Rules. You don't follow Nature's rules---you die.

Sorry, Charlie.
jerry June 28, 2012 1:10 PM: There ain't gonna be no civil war. America has been sufficiently and irreversibly pussified.
THe One June 28, 2012 1:11 PM: Freestateproject.org still working here in NH.

http://blog.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2012/06/democratic-governor-of-n-h-signs-bill-blocking-state-creation-of-obamacare-exchanges/

Democratic governor of N.H. signs bill blocking state creation of ObamaCare exchanges
Bookmark and Share
Posted by Mike Maharrey

EmailShare
Share on Tumblr
inShare

CONCORD, N.H. (June 20, 2012) – New Hampshire took a small stand against implementation of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act this week.

On Monday, Gov. John Lynch signed legislation into law that blocks the creation of a state run insurance exchange in New Hampshire. The exchanges serve as a foundational mechanism in the infrastructure of ObamaCare.

Our governor is a democrat too.
patrick kelly June 28, 2012 1:12 PM: RE: HH

"I guess I don't understand."

You're likely correct.

"As Christians shouldn't we care that XX million people (what ever the number is) don't have health care (Y/N)?"

I might care if it were true. Did you mean "health insurance" where you wrote "health care"?

Health insurance != health care.

There are people who pay for their own health care everyday without using insurance.

There are people everyday who have no insurance who are admitted and treated in emergency rooms all across the country without respect to their ability to pay.

There are charitable hospitals and organizations all across the USA funded voluntarily by Christians who care.

Maybe you should narrow the scope of your question down a bit.

"The capitalist health care system we currently have provides far less coverage for far more cost than other countries health care system (Y/N)?"

Nobody has a capitalist system of health care. The government administers a varied and diverse system combining both private and tax funding. It is a very mixed system. IMAO, mixed up.

"Obama tried for a single payer system but was forced into this monstrosity ACA to try an compromise with the Republicans (Y/N) ?"

I'm not familiar enough with the details to comment.

"So we know the ACA is wrong, yet we know what we have doesn't work either -- what should have been the right system ?"

Who knows the ACA is wrong? Apparently not the SC. Are you really suggesting that nobody ever receives any health care that works in the USA, ever? That it doesn't work for anyone? Nobody?

What should be the "right" system? IMAO, there should not be a government health care system any more than a food system, or breathing system, or shelter system, or shoe system, or clothing system, or entertainment system or........
WarKicker June 28, 2012 1:13 PM: " but because of this decision... like the families of so many other medical professionals... we probably won't be here when it arrives."

Or just work 100 hours a week to meet overhead. I'm already at 70, and looks like after today, it's guaranteed to get worse.
Difster June 28, 2012 1:13 PM: I nominate Wheeler as the first patient of Obama's death panels.
Daniel June 28, 2012 1:15 PM: HH
I guess I don't understand.

Yes. This is correct.

As Christians shouldn't we care that XX million people (what ever the number is) don't have health care (Y/N)?

N.

The capitalist health care system we currently have provides far less coverage for far more cost than other countries health care system (Y/N)?

False premise. The system currently in place is quite obviously and swiftly provably not a capitalist one. Invalid question.

Obama tried for a single payer system but was forced into this monstrosity ACA to try an compromise with the Republicans (Y/N)?

Y. In effect, this traded a centralized state system for a centralized state tax to fund a centralized system. You present a false choice.

So we know the ACA is wrong, yet we know what we have doesn't work either -- what should have been the right system ?

One that simply abolished the unnecessary destruction of price signals, supply and demand, price sensitivity and other fundamental economic policies in place in our other health care system known as private veterinary care.

If you want a restoration of patient-doctor confidentiality, a removal of the state's mismanagement of care, and no need to appeal to the fallible robes, simply cut out the cancer. Vet care has been cancer free health care for a hundred years. There's no reason not to adopt that former model that operated rather successfully until its gradual replacement started in earnest about forty years ago.

Basically, the rule of thumb is this: if a baby boomer saw merit in a particular approach, do the opposite, and you'll probably be better off.
Gen. Kong June 28, 2012 1:19 PM: Redjack: Rumours are that Roberts is a poofter, and was going to be outed if he ruled the wrong way.

This should not be surprising in the least. Why do you think so many of the ilk refer to Republicans as the "Gay Old Party" or "Gay Old Pedophiles". The Repuke establishment is filled with folks like Jerry Sandusky. If Roberts is indeed a poofter, that would also explain why Imam al-Duhbya, an ever-loyal servant to squiddom, put him in the position of chief justice. He has a chain that can be yanked when needed.
Josh June 28, 2012 1:24 PM: does obama care cover massages at asian rub n tug parlors?
Vox June 28, 2012 1:25 PM: As Christians shouldn't we care that XX million people (what ever the number is) don't have health care (Y/N)?

No. Do you think we should care that they don't have Mercedes? Or gum drops? Or any other good or service?
Aviator4 June 28, 2012 1:25 PM: This is how liberty dies....with thunderous applause.

As Vox has so eloquently stated myriad times over the years, America as we know it is dying a slow, metastatic cancer like death, with no panacea remotely possible. If its any consolation, previous free republics throughout history have collapsed within 200 years of formation, so in essence we're on borrowed time anyway and can take solace of the fact that we made it this long.
Stilicho June 28, 2012 1:26 PM: and that Roberts was feeling tremendous pressure from unidentified circles to vote to uphold the mandate.

Qui bono? Captain Underoos.
Stilicho June 28, 2012 1:27 PM: does obama care cover massages at asian rub n tug parlors?

You are not vibrant enough for THAT ride...
Lysander Spooner June 28, 2012 1:29 PM: Will "Obummer" be covering war wounds when the shooting starts ?
George June 28, 2012 1:30 PM: "LOL...Americans will take up arms over a Supreme Court decision."

Vox Said:

"No one claimed that, George. That is a major failure of reading comprehension on your part."

LOL...Ok, then what? Civil war of words. You said, "There most certainly will be" referring to a Civil War. Maybe you'd conceived a new definition? Back peddle, sir. Back peddle.

Will it certainly be a "civil war" in the way Hillary would certainly win the nomination or the way Hillary will certainly be put on the ticket this year?

You need to back away from ANY political predicting. It's just not your thing.
George June 28, 2012 1:32 PM: Josh Said:

"bets on the first state to secede or nullify?"

I'll take "NONE" and put down $1000
George June 28, 2012 1:34 PM: FP Wrote:

"Hah, via twitchy and drudge, the DNC is celebrating on twitter with:

"Its constitutional bitches" and a now deleted "take that mother******s"

No civil war eh George?"

Those are called uncivil words. I can point you to a dictionary and an encyclopedia if you need.
Gen. Kong June 28, 2012 1:34 PM: Auster was one of the very few who smelled a rat with Bush's appointment of Roberts at the time. Limbaugh, who is busy foaming and crying in his cigar now, was one of Roberts' most ardent supporters at the time of his nomination. Conseravtism, Inc. was all gung-ho for the obscure lawyer who did pro-bono work for the sodomites in Roemer v. Evans. The fix was in long ago. It now turns out that Roberts is very much in the mold of David Souter, the Mother of all Stealth Nominees.

Just remember kids that you gotta get out there and vote next November because Mittens Willard Hussein will only appoint conservatives who will uphold the constitution.
Sheila June 28, 2012 1:34 PM: What Hayden said. And Cherub's Revenge, too.

Patrick Kelly - you pay only $1500 a year for your share of health insurance? Is that just individual, or for your family? My husband's employer pays half of his premium and nothing for the family. Two years ago (when the CFO's son joined the company and needed insurance for his family) the company finally had an insurance plan that didn't cost us more than the crappy policies we had purchased privately. That said, it costs us $600 a month for the family, and that's with a very high deductible. Since one "child" is soon to be 21 and the other an adolescent, I think it might well be preferable to pay the $1500 penalty and wing it.

Vox, what is Italy's immigration policy? My husband claims there's nowhere to escape to, but he's half Italian. This SCOTUS decision is not the final nail in the coffin, but it does confirm that July 4, if it's to mark anything, would be best suitable for a funeral for the Constitution. I'm certainly not planning to celebrate anything. Patriotism for a dead nation is pure jingoism.
George June 28, 2012 1:36 PM: Rienzi said:

"If only one tenth of one percent decide to go all Rambo on the government, that's over 310,000 folks pot-shotting away, and melting back into the populace. Something on that scale simply could not be stopped without imposing law enforcement so draconian, that it would create even more Rambos."

Zero possibility of this happening.
Salt June 28, 2012 1:42 PM: Here's the decision!
LES June 28, 2012 1:44 PM: The lobby for the private health insurance companies wrote the Obamacare bill.
With an aging population (boomers) and medical care costs going up, the private
medical insurance companies saw their business model will not work in the future.

The individual mandate gives the big insurance companies one last, big payday before
they turn all medical care insurance over to the government as the single-payer provider.
patrick kelly June 28, 2012 1:46 PM: Sheila: " you pay only $1500 a year for your share of health insurance?"

Yes, for the family, but it's not one of those "luxury" policies, very high deductible and not very generous co-pay amounts. I'm happy to have it, the total cost is closer to $10k/yr. My employer is apparently relatively generous, however back from 1992 - 2000 I worked for employers who paid it all, including vision and dental. Ah, the tech bubble years....
JartStar June 28, 2012 1:47 PM: Eventually there will be civil war in the US just like one day the dollar will be gone, but these predictions are worse than worthless without definitive time tables.

For instance:

Assume you were convinced in September of 2001 that the euro would fail, but you weren’t sure when but soon. So you pulled all of your money ($10,000) out of European equities. Good idea right? The euro is tanking, Europe is slipping into a depression, and war could break out. Good thing you didn’t lose money in European equities!

Assume your neighbor invested $10,000 (202.83 shares) on 9/01/01 in VEUSX, never invested another cent, but reinvested all dividends. As of today his market value is $15,668 and he owns 305.36 shares and has a 5.26% 10 year total return. (Assuming a tax free account.)

You might still be proven right about the euro, and your neighbor might lose 90% of his investment this year! Month! Hour! Minute! Everyone run!!! But when?

My point isn’t to invest in Europe, but to point out those broad, sweeping predictions without specific time tables aren’t just worthless, but can actually be harmful.

If you are predicting civil war, massive economic collapse, etc., you are attempting to market time the entire worldwide economy! Tens of thousands of people are trying to do this right now on Wall Street and fail day after day so why do you think you are going to be successful?
Vox June 28, 2012 1:48 PM: LOL...Ok, then what? Civil war of words. You said, "There most certainly will be" referring to a Civil War. Maybe you'd conceived a new definition? Back peddle, sir. Back peddle.

First, the word is "pedal", not "peddle". Second, there was no back-pedaling. Third, the fact that there will be a civil war does not mean the civil war is imminent or that it will be triggered by a Supreme Court decision, much less this one. The significance of the ACA decision is that it removes for many people what they had erroneously believed was a means of restoring lost liberties, namely, by winning elections and appointing Supreme Court justices.
The One June 28, 2012 1:50 PM: OBAMACARE: RFID CHIP IMPLANT IN 36 MONTHS:
MANDATORY VERICHIP MEDICAL IMPLANT UNDER OBAMA HEALTHCARE

BOTH HOUSE AND SENATE HEALTH BILLS REQUIRE THE MICRO CHIPPING OF AMERICANS

Required RFID implanted chip

Sec. 2521, Pg. 1000 – The government will establish a National Medical Device Registry. What does a National Medical Device Registry mean?

National Medical Device Registry from H.R. 3200 [Healthcare Bill], pages 1001-1008:
(g)(1) The Secretary shall establish a national medical device registry (in this subsection referred to as the ‘registry’) to facilitate analysis of postmarket safety and outcomes data on each device that— ‘‘(A) is or has been used in or on a patient; ‘‘(B)and is— ‘‘(i) a class III device; or ‘‘(ii) a class II device that is implantable, life-supporting, or life-sustaining.”

ANy Christians see this, it honestly sounds like the mark of the beast. Getting real now, sounds like martyr time is coming soon.
The One June 28, 2012 1:51 PM: Mark of the Beast

Then on page 1004 it describes what the term “data” means in paragraph 1,
section B:

‘‘(2) In this paragraph, the term ‘data’ refers to information respecting a device described in paragraph (1), including claims data, patient survey data, standardized analytic files that allow for the pooling and analysis of data from disparate data environments, electronic health records, and any other data deemed appropriate by the Secretary”

What exactly is a class II device that is implantable? Approved by the FDA, a class II implantable device is an “implantable radio frequency transponder system for patient identification and health information.” The purpose of a class II device is to collect data in medical patients such as “claims data, patient survey data, standardized analytic files that allow for the pooling and analysis of data from disparate data environments, electronic health records, and any other data deemed appropriate by the Secretary.”
patrick kelly June 28, 2012 1:54 PM: " that's over 310,000 folks pot-shotting away"

It wouldn't even take that much. It only took 11 hi-jackers with box cutters to hasten our current decent into the dark police state.

There may not be that many "organizing for civil war", but I would suggest that increased sales of guns and ammo and other "preper" fare indicates millions *preparing* to organize for something.
JartStar June 28, 2012 1:54 PM: Let me clarify: If you are predicting "civil war, massive economic collapse, etc.," and then taking immediate, life changing actions on these predictions, you are attempting what the market timers attempt.
paradox June 28, 2012 1:57 PM: Well I think today we found the reason behind Homeland Security's purchase of all that 40 cal. ammunition.
Ron Paul June 28, 2012 2:07 PM: The issue is not whether Congress can compel commerce by forcing you to buy insurance, or simply compel you to pay a tax if you don’t. The issue is that this compulsion implies the use of government force against those who refuse. The fundamental hallmark of a free society should be the rejection of force. In a free society, therefore, individuals could opt out of “Obamacare” without paying a government tribute.
Lysander Spooner June 28, 2012 2:18 PM: "It only took 11 hi-jackers with box cutters to hasten our current decent into the dark police state."

Don't ya' mean ONE rogue criminal mass murdering Vice-President named Cheney?
Other Josh June 28, 2012 2:22 PM: I fear civil war in America. Unfortunately, I do think it's coming. Some of the more conservative states are growing weary of the federal government's thumb. Eventually there will be secession. Eventually race war will break out. Eventually, due to severe economic hardship (still to come) there will be extreme levels of robbery, murder, and violent crime of every shade.

Something to think about: in civil war, having a stash of food means nothing. Having a stash of weapons means nothing. You will be living in a war zone. Just think about that. What's it like to live in a war zone?

The best solution is to simply leave.
Stephen Martino MD June 28, 2012 2:24 PM: .Just like the old adage of seeing something half empty instead of half full, many are viewing the Supreme Court's decision on Obamacare as a purely negative outcome. Sure, I would have liked the court to rule constitutionally and in a responsible fashion. Sure, I would have preferred the court use the law to base their decision instead of failed socialist ideologies. It would have also been nice to see the court use their power for the good of the nation instead of heading it towards a path of bankruptcy and despair.
However, in the Supreme Court's infinite wisdom they voted to uphold the Marxists principles which Obama holds so dearly. Though many despair because of this mindless decision, I see a positive side that far outweighs the negative which seem to hang so heavily over America's future.
Why? The answer is simple and can be summed up in one word: Complacency. It might seem over simplistic but it actually makes sense when you think about. First, you have to ask yourselves what got General Secretary Obama elected? It was the opposite of complacency: Motivation.
What the Democrats did in the last presidential election was motivate their base to go out and vote in droves. They got them to the polls. Through rhetoric such as hope and change they made everyone out in American feel as if they alone could make a difference just by voting for Obama. They made it feel that a vote for Obama would change the country for the better; a vote for Obama would make your life better; a vote for Obama would turn America into a true utopia. Though Obama and his failed policies could do none of this, people felt as if he do all of this and more. They were thus motivated to go out and vote.
However, times have changed. Obama is in power and his greatest assault against American freedom and Capitalism, Obamacare, was upheld. Now I ask: where's the motivation to Obama's supports? They already have what they want. If, however, Obamacare was repealed, there would have been a battle cry sent out by Obama and his Himmler-esk cronies. They would have berated the Republicans, chastised the courts and made it a point that if Obama were voted out of power this November, things would go back to the way things were during former President Bush's times. Obama would have sent the fear of God into people and made them think if Romney got into office, a Republican-driven Supreme Court would repeal civil rights, women's suffrage and all welfare-type programs. They would have painted a picture of the future filled with despair, filled with greedy capitalistic clones of Romney economically squashing the other 99% of society.
Instead of chanting, "Remember the Maine, down with Spain", they would be shouting, "Remember Obamacares, throw Romney down the stairs!" (Maybe not exactly, but I just wanted it to rhyme). It would have again provoked the masses to go and cast a vote towards economic insolvency- I mean for Obama.
Now you have to ask: who is motivated now? I can tell you. All the Republicans, members of the Tea party, the working class, people who actually pay taxes and everyone who owns any size business across the country. Now, we have the motivation. We have the battle cry. We have more a reason now to vote Obama out of office than before!
In fact, I'd like to thank the Supreme Court for their ruling. For at this moment the tide has turned against Obama and the path to his exit from the White House has become visible. Thank you for your nearsightedness. Thank you for your demagoguery. Thank you for total disregard to the Constitution. For it is through this act of total ignorance that we Americans will take back the White House and elect a real American into office!
JP (real one) June 28, 2012 2:25 PM: Another way of looking at this: Republicans have had decades to clean up the current screwed-up health care system. Since the time of FDR, it's been mostly an employer-based, regulation-intensive, third-party-driven piece of junk. Now Obamacare will make it worse, no doubt. But instead of de-regulating the system, taking on the AMA and crony medical capitalists, etc., Republicans have given us such wonders as Medicare Part D.

The ONLY thing you can say re: "vote Republican to get a better SCOTUS" is that it may help us drive off the proverbial cliff at 80 MPH instead of 90 MPH.

Everyone should've known that health care deform was coming unless drastic changes were made so it could be truly free market. We even had a preview of the current mess 20 years ago.

Ron Paul's full remarks here, BTW:

http://paul.house.gov/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1987&Itemid=28
RINO June 28, 2012 2:26 PM: Don't ya' mean ONE rogue criminal mass murdering Vice-President named Cheney?

*ONE criminal mass murdering president named George W. Bush who blew up the twin towers with a remote control

Fixed it for you
cherub's revenge June 28, 2012 2:32 PM: For it is through this act of total ignorance that we Americans will take back the White House and elect a real American into office!

Well don't just leave us hanging? Who?
Porter June 28, 2012 2:33 PM: The switch in John that saved D'Won.
W.LindsayWheeler June 28, 2012 2:35 PM: First, you must consider, and I'm wondering why no one brought this up or is on anybody's radar, is that Roberts is Catholic. Catholics, aka Ted Kennedy, are a dime a dozen. This obamacare is much in line with "Catholic social teaching" and Catholic social justice which is a big influence at Notre Dame, Georgetown, etc. The over big influence of the Gospel turns Catholics into socialists! It is normal that Roberts voted this way. It is Catholic social teaching and it fits. My parents were Catholic liberals so I ought to know. They voted for Obama and go to church every Sunday. For every one Pat Buchanan, there are 20 liberal catholics. Roberts is just like the Jesuits, a bunch of panzy liberal welfare agendaists. The Gospel drives this socialist kant within Catholicism.

Second, I'm a military man, there will be no civil war.

The odds and the parameters are not there. The people that are complaining are 50 and older, maybe some 40ish people. We are too old to conduct war. Times are different. There is absolutely no military character in young people. War takes hardship. The youfs of America are not going to conduct war no way, no how. After the example of the drones in Pakistan, that Obama used 68 times this year alone in Pakistan, means that you're goose is cooked. With everybody having a camera phone and their eavesdropping technology, they have the edge. There is no where to run and no where to hide.

And lastly, logistics. During the Revolutionary War, 80% of Americans were agrarian. There were farmhouses every where. To conduct war requires logistics, logistics, logistics. That is nowhere here in America now.

Ain't going to happen. Yes, you're, I'm, mad as hell. Ain't nothing going to change. Franco won his war--Spain is a leftist hellhole. What experience in history, proves your conservative revolution will succeed? Nope. There is none.

50 million Mexicans, and the Black population and the Marxist White liberals are not going to support WASPs. Besides all your women are laying with black men anyway. You've lost the demographics, you've lost the government, you've lost the courts, and you've lost the colleges---ain't no puttin' Humpty-Dumpty back together again.
ICG June 28, 2012 2:36 PM: Another way of looking at this: Republicans have had decades to clean up the current screwed-up health care system. Since the time of FDR, it's been mostly an employer-based, regulation-intensive, third-party-driven piece of junk. Now Obamacare will make it worse, no doubt. But instead of de-regulating the system, taking on the AMA and crony medical capitalists, etc., Republicans have given us such wonders as Medicare Part D.

The ONLY thing you can say re: "vote Republican to get a better SCOTUS" is that it may help us drive off the proverbial cliff at 80 MPH instead of 90 MPH.

Everyone should've known that health care deform was coming unless drastic changes were made so it could be truly free market. We even had a preview of the current mess 20 years ago.
907 June 28, 2012 2:37 PM: G. K. Chesterton: “The business of Progressives is to go on making mistakes. The business of Conservatives is to prevent mistakes from being corrected.”
Anonymous June 28, 2012 2:38 PM: Good news everyone: They can now tax you if you don't vote Tyrant A(Dems), or Tyrant B(GOP). I'd expect to see a law of this nature during the next Administration.
darrenl June 28, 2012 2:38 PM: It's always nice to know that the people here are keeping an eye on the sky for us...we'll get a good warning just before it starts to fall.

/popcorn
ICG June 28, 2012 2:40 PM: Good thoughts from the Bionic Mosquito.

http://bionicmosquito.blogspot.com/2012/06/katy-bar-door.html

I will limit my comments on the Supreme Court decision regarding Obamacare to this one statement by Chief Justice Roberts, in writing the majority opinion:

In this case, however, it is reasonable to construe what Congress has done as increasing taxes on those who have a certain amount of income, but choose to go without health insurance. Such legislation is within Congress's power to tax.

In place of the words “go without health insurance,” insert any of the following:

Go without public education
Go without joining the military, Peace Corp, or other approved community service
Avoid paying state income tax
Own a firearm
Buy a car delivering less than 40 miles-per-gallon / buy a car with an internal combustion engine
Hold assets overseas
Hold non-US Dollar denominated assets
Buy precious metals
Have more than two children
Live in more than 1500 square feet
Own more than one home
Eat red meat
Avoid taking statins
Avoid annual physical exams

I am sure there are hundreds more. I have limited my universe to items that fall into areas that could easily be targeted as having a so-called “societal benefit,” in other words, where the dialogue already makes it easy for the government to assert a so-called "national benefit." Even here, I am sure there are dozens more.
Porter June 28, 2012 2:44 PM: all your women are laying with black men

Laying what with black men...Tile? Carpet?
JartStar June 28, 2012 2:46 PM: Vox,

Now that the court has ruled, couldn't your "Might as well build the stadium now to save money later" argument work for a government single-payer system? It seems inevitable that we are headed towards the single-payer system so why not build the healthcare "stadium" now rather than a using a more inefficient private/public hybrid on the way?
yukonyon June 28, 2012 2:50 PM: Well, Romney has gone on record as saying that in his first day in office, he will work to repeal Obamacare, so it is obvious that he knows that most US citizens don't want this thing. Whether or not he will be true to his word is something else entirely. Or, maybe he will simply replace it with something less incindiery, but accomplishes the same thing. But he is definitely not hiding the fact that he knows we don't want this thing in our country.
Anonymous June 28, 2012 2:53 PM: lol, Romney repeal it? He'll expand it.
Stilicho June 28, 2012 2:54 PM: Now you have to ask: who is motivated now? I can tell you. All the Republicans, members of the Tea party, the working class, people who actually pay taxes and everyone who owns any size business across the country. Now, we have the motivation. We have the battle cry. We have more a reason now to vote Obama out of office than before!

Qui bono? Captain Underoos.

Mr. Martino, question:

How is electing Mitt Romney going to make anything better with respect to 1) the debt crisis; 2)the ongoing wars; or 3) the ongoing destruction of liberty in America?
unger June 28, 2012 2:56 PM: This is music to my ears. All you meddling protectionists whining about what is, after all, just one more state intervention in 'the national interest' - in other words, people doing to you what you hoped to do to others. You're reaping what you sowed; you deserve this as thoroughly as anyone could deserve anything. Sam Adams hoped your chains would set lightly upon you; I hope they break your backs. And they will. Mine too, but I shall at least have the sick (but very real) pleasure of saying 'I was right'.

Then all the elders of Israel gathered themselves together, and came to Samuel unto Ramah, and said unto him, Behold, thou art old, and thy sons walk not in thy ways: now make us a king to judge us like all the nations. But the thing displeased Samuel, when they said, Give us a king to judge us. And Samuel prayed unto the LORD.

And the LORD said unto Samuel, Hearken unto the voice of the people in all that they say unto thee: for they have not rejected thee, but they have rejected me, that I should not reign over them. According to all the works which they have done since the day that I brought them up out of Egypt even unto this day, wherewith they have forsaken me, and served other gods, so do they also unto thee. Now therefore hearken unto their voice: howbeit yet protest solemnly unto them, and show them the manner of the king that shall reign over them.

And Samuel told all the words of the LORD unto the people that asked of him a king.

And he said, This will be the manner of the king that shall reign over you: He will take your sons, and appoint them for himself, for his chariots, and to be his horsemen; and some shall run before his chariots. And he will appoint him captains over thousands, and captains over fifties; and will set them to ear his ground, and to reap his harvest, and to make his instruments of war, and instruments of his chariots. And he will take your daughters to be confectionaries, and to be cooks, and to be bakers. And he will take your fields, and your vineyards, and your oliveyards, even the best of them, and give them to his servants. And he will take the tenth of your seed, and of your vineyards, and give to his officers, and to his servants. And he will take your menservants, and your maidservants, and your goodliest young men, and your asses, and put them to his work. He will take the tenth of your sheep: and ye shall be his servants. And ye shall cry out in that day because of your king which ye shall have chosen you; and the LORD will not hear you in that day.

Nevertheless the people refused to obey the voice of Samuel; and they said, Nay; but we will have a king over us; that we also may be like all the nations; and that our king may judge us, and go out before us, and fight our battles. And Samuel heard all the words of the people, and he rehearsed them in the ears of the LORD.

And the LORD said to Samuel, Hearken unto their voice, and make them a king.
Stilicho June 28, 2012 2:59 PM: lol, Romney repeal it? He'll expand it.

Well, that IS the definition of "reform" in D.C. :)
Roundtine June 28, 2012 3:09 PM: This law is brilliant and epic fail at the same time. The fine for going without medical insurance is 1% of income. Since most people are paying several percent, and their employer is kicking tot total around 10-15%, there's a great incentive to quit paying private insurance and go on Medicaid. Great if you want universal care since it will put tens of millions onto Medicare. Of course, there's no money to pay for it......
George June 28, 2012 3:10 PM: Vox Said:

"the fact that there will be a civil war does not mean the civil war is imminent or that it will be triggered by a Supreme Court decision, much less this one. The significance of the ACA decision is that it removes for many people what they had erroneously believed was a means of restoring lost liberties, namely, by winning elections and appointing Supreme Court justices."

First, there is no "fact" that there will be a civil war. This is fantasy. But knock yourself out.

Second, where have you been? No casual observer of presidential appointments to the Supreme Court over the past 50 years ever believed that a president's appointments to the Court guaranteed anything like ritual adherence to the ideology of the president. Ike, Nixon, Bush and others discovered that.

The "many" you speak of who may have believed this....were they readers of Vox Day?

You're funny.
swiftfoxmark2 June 28, 2012 3:13 PM: bets on the first state to secede or nullify?

None. State governments are addicted to Federal handouts as much as half the people of this once great nation are.
George June 28, 2012 3:14 PM: Other Josh Said:

"I fear civil war in America. Unfortunately, I do think it's coming. Some of the more conservative states are growing weary of the federal government's thumb. Eventually there will be secession. Eventually race war will break out. Eventually, due to severe economic hardship (still to come) there will be extreme levels of robbery, murder, and violent crime of every shade."

Josh, step away from the morphine.

Secession? Really? Where? Who? When? How?

Crazy talk.
11B June 28, 2012 3:15 PM: This is music to my ears. All you meddling protectionists whining about what is, after all, just one more state intervention in 'the national interest'

And don't forget about those invisible lines on a map. They should be not be an impediment to millions of mestizos seeking to fulfill the needs of millions of American employers.
realmatt June 28, 2012 3:26 PM: Only naive and people completely ignorant of history believe secession and civil war aren't coming.

I believe a race riot will tip it off.
DonReynolds June 28, 2012 3:27 PM: I was Medical Economist for Bill Clinton during his first two-year term of office. Seventeen years later, I was recalled to be Medical Economist for Mike Huckabee for another two years. I am somewhat familiar with the arguments surrounding Obamacare. (Thank you, Martin Feldstein...scholar and inspiration.)

I see very little that is new in Obamacare. The last time this nonsense was paraded on the national stage, we called it HillaryCare and little has changed since 1993. Very likely, the same Leftist advisors wrote both. More sugar and honey for the women and still no dental care. Tons of money for reproductive health, substance abuse, and mental health. Even more money to pay for the health care of illegal aliens, even though they are NOT under the mandate to buy health insurance. (How can we? They get free care already, why do they need it?)

I am now prepared to vote with my feet. I never thought in terms of leaving the USA before, but I see no way either party is going to directly address the most serious problems of this country. The Republicans will continue to run their mouth and fold at the first opportunity...like whipped curs with tails between their legs. The Democrats will continue to pander to every ethnic and social minority, utterly despising the historic stock that built this country. (Even the Baptists have become flaming Liberals.)

Well, boys and girls, if that is what they want...let them have it....but I do not have to be a party to what happens next or in the long run.
unger June 28, 2012 3:27 PM: 11b: If there were any such thing as the American culture you people talk about, in the sense you speak of it, the employers who said 'no' would be impediment enough. But you thought the government could handle it; you thought it would absolve you of the responsibility to do the hard work of preserving culture. Being, at bottom, just a football, it couldn't and didn't, and you should have known better, and were warned, repeatedly, and now you deserve to reap the whirlwind you've sowed.
redsash June 28, 2012 3:28 PM: redsash: If it took a Constitutional amendment to implement the income tax, why does it not take an amendment to implement this health care tax? Likewise, if it took an amendment to outlaw alcholic beverages, why not an amendment to outlaw weed? I suspect our ancestors knew more about Constitutional law 100 years ago than the entire legal profession does today.
Suomynona June 28, 2012 3:31 PM: I see the meme-patrol is very busy today, trolling for cash.
Beefy Levinson June 28, 2012 3:33 PM: Look on the bright side: when a Republican is elected president, he can start taxing leftists for all of the things they aren't doing. "Didn't buy any guns this year? That's a taxin'. Not going to NASCAR? That's a taxin'. Not listening to Rush? Oh you better believe that's a taxin'."
Stilicho June 28, 2012 3:35 PM: 11b: If there were any such thing as the American culture you people talk about, in the sense you speak of it, the employers who said 'no' would be impediment enough. But you thought the government could handle it; you thought it would absolve you of the responsibility to do the hard work of preserving culture. Being, at bottom, just a football, it couldn't and didn't, and you should have known better, and were warned, repeatedly, and now you deserve to reap the whirlwind you've sowed.

AS if 11 Bravo's opposition to free trade is the cause of this. What utter nonsense. Un-knot your knickers. Besides, you need to focus on welcoming a whole new horde of vibrant immigrants who share your disdain for invisible lines on maps.
yukonyon June 28, 2012 3:40 PM: lol, Romney repeal it? He'll expand it.

That may be, but the last time a politician took a "read-my-lips" position, it didn't work out so well for him during re-election. I would hope that Romney, being the GOP nominee, would understand that it would be the nails in his coffin for a one-term-only presidency, and somehow, I don't think he's interested in doing only one term. That's the only reason I'm indulging in a ray of hope. Because it's either this, or relocate.
Beefy Levinson June 28, 2012 3:42 PM: That's the only reason I'm indulging in a ray of hope. Because it's either this, or relocate.

Where is there left to relocate to besides a monastery or a cave?