Quotes of the Day

posted at 8:30 pm on June 30, 2012 by Jazz Shaw

“(T)he government’s tax power theory is far more radical than the Commerce and Necessary and Proper Clause theory precisely because the Supreme Court has generally deferred to any invocation of the tax power to raise revenue to spend for the general welfare. This normal deference is why the mandate’s defenders shifted the argument from the Commerce Clause to the tax power. Yet if its theory is accepted, Congress would be able to penalize or mandate any activity by anyone in the country, provided it limited the sanction to a fine enforced by the Internal Revenue Service.

This is a congressional power unknown and unheard of before 2010. It would effectively grant Congress a general police power. And we know what existing doctrine says about such a power: ‘The Constitution . . . withhold[s] from Congress a plenary police power that would authorize enactment of every type of legislation.’ Such has been the Supreme Court’s position from the Founding until today.”

***

“My guess is that my constituents would appreciate another vote,” Rep. Jo Ann Emerson (R-Mo.) said.

The House GOP already voted to repeal President Obama’s healthcare overhaul as one of its first acts in 2011. But in the wake of the Supreme Court’s decision to uphold the law, party leaders plan to do so again on July 11.

“Obviously we all understand that it’s a statement of principle and it doesn’t have any chance in the Senate, but I think it’s appropriate,” Rep. Charlie Bass (R-N.H.) said Friday.

***

I’m in the swamp. A line in a bill that says “PPACA is repealed” would have budgetary effects and a CBO score. Over the last two years I’ve talked to plenty of Republicans who have experience with reconciliation, and they do not think this is an impossible mission. CBO, as Lizza notes, has in the past found Obamacare to be a money-saver for the government, but it may not so find it in 2013. Even if it does, a reconciliation bill could just find a small amount of offsetting savings to make a repeal bill deficit-reducing and thus, under the current rules, eligible for reconciliation.

I don’t think Lizza is right about the individual mandate, either, assuming that individual items in Obamacare had to be repealed one by one. The Supreme Court just said the bill has a tax on being uninsured rather than a mandate. Taxes can be changed through reconciliation.

***

Republicans are so upset because one of the basic pillars of the “Obama illegitimacy” canard is that he is operating outside the parameters of the constitution, that he is the point of the shiv aimed at the heart of America.

As the conservative radio host Neal Boortz put it in a Twitter message following the ruling: “I am so sick to death of calling the play-by-play of the destruction of this great country by power-hungry Democrats and the moocher class.”

This ruling has supposedly energized the Republican base. Maybe, but it’s been supporting the repeal of the health care act since it was passed. What’s new? Republicans say that the court called the mandate a tax although Obama had insisted that it wasn’t. True, but I’m not sure that has legs outside the Grover Norquist-no-tax echo chamber.

***
ObamaCare will preclude people from having the health care that they like. We have seen this law increase costs, and we are committed to changing that. We are committed to making sure that we can return to patient-based health care in this country, where we can keep costs low, and we can increase access. And that’s why when we return the week of July 9th, I have scheduled a vote for total repeal of the ObamaCare bill to occur on Wednesday, July 11th.



Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4 5

Oh, I just got a job and a place to live, too. It pays 10.35% above minimum wage, too! How ya like that, I’ll get to keep my social security. Yeah, screw all you “entitlement whiners!” I was forced to pay into it and I’m taking it.
.
The market value of the lodging provided makes the payments in kind and in money amount to about $28, 400 annually. I bet a lot of kids just out of college would like to make this money. Too bad, kids! I got this job!

ExpressoBold on June 30, 2012 at 11:11 PM

We can thank our so called media for most of that. They try to turn everything into a popularity contest or the political version of American Idol [...]

Flora Duh on June 30, 2012 at 11:06 PM

That’s exactly right, imo.

Axe on June 30, 2012 at 11:12 PM

They must really be desperate.

JPeterman on June 30, 2012 at 9:11 PM

…gosh JP not desperate…but pathetic!…what’s next?…donations to win a spot or two… to watch JugEar’s… as he preforms successful bowel movements? What haven’t they prostituted?

KOOLAID2 on June 30, 2012 at 11:12 PM

Barred on June 30, 2012 at 11:07 PM

Thanks for considering him.

INC on June 30, 2012 at 11:13 PM

andy85719 on June 30, 2012 at 11:01 PM

Please. The XVI amendment was put through just for sh!ts and giggles, in your mind, I guess.

Congress does not have the power to tax for inaction. And I guess your version of English dispenses with the words “fine” or “penalty”, since you think they’re just “taxes”.

Get a brain. And try to read the Constitution some day.

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on June 30, 2012 at 11:16 PM

Night official raving loony monster. :)

Axe on June 30, 2012 at 11:02 PM

The Raving Loony Monster Party? I saw this earlier, and if we ever decide to go third party, I could probably hop on board. ;}

Time to go. Enjoy, y’all.

Cody1991 on June 30, 2012 at 11:16 PM

According to Madison the taxing power was limited to raising taxes to pay for Congress’ enumerated powers. For example, raising taxes to pay for national defense.

Congress doesn’t have the ability to collect taxes for non-enumerated purposes. If they could, why have enumerated powers?

Charlemagne on June 30, 2012 at 11:08 PM

According to Madison, yes. According to Art. I sec. 8-9 of the Constitution, not so much, especially when we the people — the *only* real check on how much Congress uses/abuses its taxing power — sit on our thumbs thinking the republic is going to “keep itself” without any work on our part. Or have you forgotten the 16th Amendment of 1913 enacting the Income Tax –one of the few taxes *actually forbidden* in the text of the Constitution (Art. I sec. 9).

Dark Star on June 30, 2012 at 11:16 PM

INC on June 30, 2012 at 10:59 PM

Barred on June 30, 2012 at 11:07 PM

Right now I’m still weighing the pros and cons between Weldon and Marielena Stuart.

I hope it doesn’t, but if it comes down to it I’ll vote for Connie Mack over Bill Nelson any day.

Flora Duh on June 30, 2012 at 11:18 PM

What Roberts left us is a clear as day clue that he and the entire ruling elites of the Western World, but I think particularly countries that were former colonies of the British Empire, are in the service of the Luciferian Globalist Elite.

’nuff said.

sartana on June 30, 2012 at 10:34 PM | Delete | Delete and Ban

Sure. That sounds really reasonable.

a capella on June 30, 2012 at 11:21 PM

28th Amendment:

Congress shall pass no law raising revenue, the primary purpose of which is to punish non-criminal action or inaction, nor shall Congress pass any law compelling, under penalty of law, any person to engage in commerce.

andy85719 on June 30, 2012 at 11:21 PM

I saw this from a commenter on another site and it pretty much summed up Roberts’ actions for me. Palin’s name could substituted for any real conservative.

Once again, we see that fear of the right, fear of “Nazis” (scare quotes because there are no real Nazis), fear of arousing “reaction,” takes precedence over all. Better to destroy one seventh of the economy and consign millions to premature suffering and death than give people like Sarah Palin a victory.

TxAnn56 on June 30, 2012 at 11:22 PM

Charlemagne on June 30, 2012 at 11:08 PM

But that isn’t what the text says. The text says Congress can lay or collect taxes to “to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States.” The definition of “general Welfare” is a political question. Roberts erred by creating a Schrodinger tax that wasn’t a tax for Anti-Injunction Act, but was a tax for the Constitution. If he found the penalty equivalent to a tax, then how could he summarily dispense with the Anti-Injunction Act? This is the perfidious portion of his argument. He wanted to label it a tax, perhaps to damage Obama or whatever, but to do this and still uphold the bill, he had to flimflam the public and make a mockery of the court.

andy85719 on June 30, 2012 at 11:27 PM

Flora Duh on June 30, 2012 at 11:18 PM

True.

INC on June 30, 2012 at 11:28 PM

Poll shows negative reaction to Obamacare decision

The first poll conducted after the Supreme Court upheld President Barack Obama’s health care reform law shows bad news for Obama and his fellow Democrats.

Fifty percent of 650 Florida adults polled by SurveyUSA opposed the court’s decision to uphold the law. Only 39 percent supported the decision.

The poll also showed that 51 percent of respondents expect health care costs to rise faster, and 47 percent believe quality will decline because of the decision and the law.

Flora Duh on June 30, 2012 at 11:29 PM

…Hope Romney will “nominate”…

This Idea keeps being expressed, and I need to keep myself from laughing when I see it, given it rests on the (probably faulty, and surely pie-in-the-sky – ‘wishcasting’ if you will) notion that Mittens won’t come to power, and simply take a moderate postion on everything, that is, go all DC Establishment once ensconced in the White House.

I see no pattern, which would assure me Mitt Romney is going to be elected and turn into Mr. Uber-Conservative, righting all wrongs of the Liberal Establishment (Left & Right) or set into motion any events which will undo Robert’s novel taxation.

Has desperation born delusion among us?

Sharr on June 30, 2012 at 11:31 PM

28th Amendment:

Congress shall pass no law raising revenue, the primary purpose of which is to punish non-criminal action or inaction, nor shall Congress pass any law compelling, under penalty of law, any person to engage in commerce.

andy85719 on June 30, 2012 at 11:21 PM

I second the proposed amendment, and recommend same for consideration by the new Congress in 2013 on the grounds, quite simply, that this shit must stop!!!

TXUS on June 30, 2012 at 11:32 PM

Cindy Munford on June 30, 2012 at 8:52 PM

All in all, getting these critters on record as to their support or opposition to a massive middle class tax is a necessary and quite a smart move.

TXUS on June 30, 2012 at 9:14 PM

TXUS whole post is correct…I always get ticked off that the House seems to go through the “dog and pony show”…when knowing their efforts will go nowhere in the Senate…but it is for ammunition in the local races back home.
I get tired of people referring to “Congress”…the problem is in the Senate…not the House!

KOOLAID2 on June 30, 2012 at 11:34 PM

Congress does not have the power to tax for inaction. And I guess your version of English dispenses with the words “fine” or “penalty”, since you think they’re just “taxes”.

Get a brain. And try to read the Constitution some day.

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on June 30, 2012 at 11:16 PM

Demonstrably false. There’s this ingenious thing that *everyone* loves called the Tax Credit & Congress has enacted tax credits for buying solar panels & energy star appliances. Sure, it allows people who buy these products to keep more of their own money via the “tax credit.” But in effect, those people are paying less than the rate they would otherwise be legally required to while those who don’t engage in that activity (buying those products) pay at their required rate. IOW, some pay more & some pay less based solely on whether they buy (or don’t buy) a product Congress deems as “good.” Heck, I’m explaining it to you & you will not believe this amounts to a tax on inactivity because we’ve been so conditioned to view “tax credits” as incentives, rather than “taxes” on those who don’t (or can’t) engage in the recommended activity, but that is the effect.

Nonetheless, the fact that you have bought the government line that “penalties” are not “taxes” doesn’t make it true. The only time a “penalty” is a true penalty (and not a tax) is if the amount of the penalty is higher than the original cost of compliance. IOW, that “penalty” levied if you don’t pay your income tax by April 15th? That’s a tax — it is a small % of the amount of your unpaid tax. A true *penalty* would be twice the amount of your unpaid tax.

Try reading the Tax Code before you tell others to “get a brain.”

Dark Star on June 30, 2012 at 11:34 PM

I think Roberts made this decision to put the ball back in the hands of Congress. After all, this law was created by them, not the Court.

Ruling the law unconstitutional as he should have would have put the ball back in the hands of Congress, and Obamacare would be gone to boot. Instead, Obamacare is now officially the law of the land, and is most likely here to stay forever.

I was disappointed myself and like most people I thought the Court would strike the law down, but by limiting the Commerce Clause and calling this mandate a tax Roberts has given conservatives a way to fight it…but I would still rather have seen it struck down.

Terrye

He didn’t limit the Commerce Clause. The Commerce Clause is as subject to abuse and government overreach today as it was at 10:14 am on Thursday. And by calling it a tax, Roberts has set a new court precedent that will be abused by future congresses, and has forced conservatives to unnecessarily continue a fight that should have ended on Thursday morning. If he does his job, we don’t need to be given a way to fight, because this fight would have been over.

Sadly, for all intents and purposes, the fight IS over, and we lost. Yeah, yeah, there’s still the slightest of chances we can still pull this out….just beat Obama, pick up 6-7 seats in the senate, and then hope they actually get rid of it. Piece of cake. Not.

xblade on June 30, 2012 at 11:35 PM

Coercive taxation isn’t novel. The constitution has always permitted it. What is novel is Roberts ignoring the Anti-Injunction Act in order to rule on the case. He picked and chose what laws he wanted to follow a la Obama and that is unforgivable.

andy85719 on June 30, 2012 at 11:36 PM

The poll also showed that 51 percent of respondents expect health care costs to rise faster, and 47 percent believe quality will decline because of the decision and the law.

Echos exactly what she who shall not be named said on Hannity last night.

http://video.foxnews.com/v/1713050946001/

Flora Duh on June 30, 2012 at 11:39 PM

Sharr on June 30, 2012 at 11:31 PM

No, I don’t think so.

See Flora’ links on polls.

The thing is on the ObamaControlCare Tax & IRS Expansion Act, the polling will continue to be negative. I don’t think Romney is going to ignore that.

However, governors, representatives and senators are much more directly answerable to us. They have to know how we feel on this and other matters, because we’re going to need them to keep dragging Romney to the right.

INC on June 30, 2012 at 11:40 PM

The poll also showed that 51 percent of respondents expect health care costs to rise faster, and 47 percent believe quality will decline because of the decision and the law.

Flora Duh on June 30, 2012 at 11:29 PM

AP or Ed posted that poll yesterday (?) and those Florida numbers are good news for Romney.

Here is something you might want to bookmark for future reference.


Top 10 Obama power grabs

JPeterman on June 30, 2012 at 11:40 PM

What Roberts left us is a clear as day clue that he and the entire ruling elites of the Western World, but I think particularly countries that were former colonies of the British Empire, are in the service of the Luciferian Globalist Elite.

’nuff said.

sartana on June 30, 2012 at 10:34 PM | Delete | Delete and Ban

Sure. That sounds really reasonable.

a capella on June 30, 2012 at 11:21 PM

I’m inclined to agree with sartana. The them, Lucifer represents light in the sense of I guess what you would call enlightenment, a belief that they’re the elites who have been clued in on secret knowledge handed down through the ages. These are the very same types who run Communist countries, and ran Fascist Italy and Nazi Germany. They reject the idea of Democracy or Republics run ultimately by the masses as who the masses elect may or may not be worth a damn…this thought is illogical to them. Also illogical would be the rule of theocracy as they don’t believe in traditional religion…also monarchies are out, because the ruler may be competent or may not be.

Therefore, cut to the chase and let those who already have power run the show…to them it’s obvious that if they are already powerful and wealthy, then they are the fittest to rule-they know better…in their minds their superiority is affirmed.

We can thank our so called media for most of that. They try to turn everything into a popularity contest or the political version of American Idol [...]

Flora Duh on June 30, 2012 at 11:06 PM

Boy, we could spend days and days and days bringing up the Leftist ideology perpetrated on the American people through ALL forms of media. I’ve been better able to pick up on this over the years, but I’m sure I’m still missing some of their subliminal messaging. Not sure which is worse-the fantasy world of Hollywood, or the more (supposedly) factual realm of news and nonfiction writing.

Dr. ZhivBlago on June 30, 2012 at 11:41 PM

Resist We Much on June 30, 2012 at 9:16 PM

…(:->)…so how do you feel…now that you have Miller Lite on my computer desk and on my legs… as I tried to push back quicky as I was spewing trying not to get my keyboard wet?

KOOLAID2 on June 30, 2012 at 11:41 PM

Here is something you might want to bookmark for future reference.

Top 10 Obama power grabs

JPeterman on June 30, 2012 at 11:40 PM

Thank you! That’s great.

INC on June 30, 2012 at 11:43 PM

OTax is dead….
There is now way to fund it..

Obama has no way to tweak it as it is a tax….

Party up Libs….

Your days are numbered…

Electrongod on June 30, 2012 at 11:45 PM

Dr. ZhivBlago on June 30, 2012 at 11:41 PM

It’s far too early to give in.

Liberty must at all hazards be supported. We have a right to it, derived from our Maker. But if we had not, our fathers have earned and bought it for us, at the expense of their ease, their estates, their pleasure, and their blood.

John Adams wrote that in 1765, before the American Revolution. Now just think for a minute of those who have since paid for it with the expense of their ease, their estates, their pleasure, and their blood.

INC on June 30, 2012 at 11:46 PM

The GOP will betray you!..:)

The GOPe will betray you!!..for the true cons..:)

Dire Straits on June 30, 2012 at 11:46 PM

OTax is dead….
There is now way to fund it..

Obama has no way to tweak it as it is a tax….

Party up Libs….

Your days are numbered…

Electrongod on June 30, 2012 at 11:45 PM

Now = no…

Dang it……

Electrongod on June 30, 2012 at 11:47 PM

Since canopfor appears to be taking a well-earned rest this evening, I’ll post this for him.

BreakingNews A 4.9 magnitude quake has hit 30 miles south of the California-Mexico border in Baja California – USGS http://t.co/YRGIyodz

Here is something you might want to bookmark for future reference.

Top 10 Obama power grabs

JPeterman on June 30, 2012 at 11:40 PM

Thanks!

Flora Duh on June 30, 2012 at 11:48 PM

Electrongod on June 30, 2012 at 11:47 PM

Dang it for just screwing up the quote tags.

Electrongod on June 30, 2012 at 11:48 PM

Coercive taxation isn’t novel. The constitution has always permitted it. What is novel is Roberts ignoring the Anti-Injunction Act in order to rule on the case. He picked and chose what laws he wanted to follow a la Obama and that is unforgivable.

andy85719 on June 30, 2012 at 11:36 PM

Technically, if you read the opinion, he didn’t rule the tax itself is constitutional specifically because of the Anti-Injunction Act. He ruled the law with the mandate read as a tax is constitutional — and only on that grounds. That’s not the same thing. Once the tax actually starts being collected (in 2014, or really, April 2015) the tax itself can be challenged –if it gets that far.

And since this all is getting into why I’ve avoided the internet since the ruling, I bid everyone good night.

Dark Star on June 30, 2012 at 11:48 PM

The only time a “penalty” is a true penalty (and not a tax) is if the amount of the penalty is higher than the original cost of compliance.

Dark Star on June 30, 2012 at 11:34 PM

Paying money to a private company cannot be compared to paying a penalty to the government. Your idiotic idea that paying the government for the “non-compliance” of refusing to buy a product from a private firm is patently ridiculous.

“Compliance” … LOL.

Get a brain is too advanced for you. Get a couple of brain cells, first.

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on June 30, 2012 at 11:49 PM

Coercive taxation isn’t novel. The constitution has always permitted it.

andy85719 on June 30, 2012 at 11:36 PM

Coercive taxation, such as sin taxes, involve taxing the product or service to stop people from using it. Forcing people to buy something (from ostensibly private companies) by penalizing them for not buying it is totally novel and insane.

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on June 30, 2012 at 11:51 PM

Thank you! That’s great.

INC on June 30, 2012 at 11:43 PM

That will be a handy list to show all of our so called Conservatives who are staying home because they won’t vote for Romney.

JPeterman on June 30, 2012 at 11:53 PM

Got to sign off HA…

Friends that is…

Tomorrow…..

Let’s talk…

:)

Electrongod on June 30, 2012 at 11:55 PM

I’ve got Chadmans Constitutional lawbooks circa 1906. quite interesting to read. I found them for. $.50/per at a salvation army used book store. It’s amazing to think that it was ten years prior to federal taxes and the difference in interpretation of Constitutional law is profound. When I bounce it off of Wickard, Roe or Raich in a new lawbook, I wanna vomit.

wolly4321 on June 30, 2012 at 11:57 PM

The Supreme Court will betray you.

The Supreme Courte will betray you. For the true cons.

SparkPlug on June 30, 2012 at 9:58 PM

rofl..Good one!..:)

Dire Straits on July 1, 2012 at 12:00 AM

Boy, we could spend days and days and days bringing up the Leftist ideology perpetrated on the American people through ALL forms of media. I’ve been better able to pick up on this over the years, but I’m sure I’m still missing some of their subliminal messaging. Not sure which is worse-the fantasy world of Hollywood, or the more (supposedly) factual realm of news and nonfiction writing.

Dr. ZhivBlago on June 30, 2012 at 11:41 PM

Even some of their own are starting to break ranks.

Former network producer: ‘I’m done’ denying liberal bias in the media

Flora Duh on July 1, 2012 at 12:01 AM

I see no pattern, which would assure me Mitt Romney is going to be elected and turn into Mr. Uber-Conservative, righting all wrongs of the Liberal Establishment (Left & Right) or set into motion any events which will undo Robert’s novel taxation.

Has desperation born delusion among us?

Sharr on June 30, 2012 at 11:31 PM

OK! I give up. I’m just going to lay down and die!

Vince on July 1, 2012 at 12:02 AM

“I am so sick to death of calling the play-by-play of the destruction of this great country by power-hungry Democrats and the moocher class.”

Right On!

Laura in Maryland on July 1, 2012 at 12:04 AM

Can someone explain what the exchanges are for? I understand that now if someone wants health insurance he can go purchase it from a provider like I do. Under Obamacare, if you don’t want the insurance you pay the fine/tax whatever but you are still uninsured so what are the exchanges for – to sell insurance? If that is the case then why not just buy from an existing provider?

Stray Cat on July 1, 2012 at 12:04 AM

28th Amendment:

Congress shall pass no law raising revenue, the primary purpose of which is to punish non-criminal action or inaction, nor shall Congress pass any law compelling, under penalty of law, any person to engage in commerce.

andy85719 on June 30, 2012 at 11:21 PM

Amen, brudda. I’d support that.

JustTruth101 on July 1, 2012 at 12:05 AM

What was funnier, Green Acres or Get Smart?

SparkPlug on July 1, 2012 at 12:11 AM

. If his tax opinion is correct, then the certiorari was improvidently granted and it would be inappropriate to rule on the case until a tax has been assessed.

Day 1 of arguments, everyone agreed it was NOT a tax, else they’d have to wait until someone was taxed to be able to bring it before the court.

LtGenRob on July 1, 2012 at 12:16 AM

Stray Cat on July 1, 2012 at 12:04 AM

One of the main reasons for the exchanges is so that folks that don’t presently have insurance can join an exchange (pool) and get cheaper rates!..:)

Dire Straits on July 1, 2012 at 12:18 AM

SparkPlug on July 1, 2012 at 12:11 AM

Green Acres!!..:)

Dire Straits on July 1, 2012 at 12:19 AM

where in MD Laura? I grew up in Havre de Grace.

What’s MD like now? Been gone for a few years. Is it as hellishly blue as I think?

I totally miss the bay, and steamed crabs. But damned,, look who got elected…

I personally saw O’malley drunk silly crawling on the ground cussing people out on the sidewalk , Fells Point. He must have started early. We had just got there. Two Balt.city cops watching him crawl around.

wolly4321 on July 1, 2012 at 12:24 AM

I see no pattern, which would assure me Mitt Romney is going to be elected and turn into Mr. Uber-Conservative, righting all wrongs of the Liberal Establishment (Left & Right) or set into motion any events which will undo Robert’s novel taxation.

Has desperation born delusion among us?

Sharr on June 30, 2012 at 11:31 PM

No, Romney will not, and I, for one, am not deluded. But he does not hate this country, its capitalist heritage, nor most of the people who inhabit it. Obama does, from his roots and deep within his soul. As do his sycophants in his government and in the media.

Romney in no way was my choice in the primaries, but stopping the Obama transformation of this great country into a socialist Europe or, worse, a caliphate, is now my quest, my American Jihad. You can bitch all you want about our choices, but if you cannot fathom what four more years of Obama will mean to you and yours, you are to be pitied.

TXUS on July 1, 2012 at 12:28 AM

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on June 30, 2012 at 11:51 PM

Nope. A tax credit is a reverse penalty on not engaging in an activity the government likes. Instead of punishing the non-actors, they reward the actors. Similarly, here they punish the non-actors and do nothing to the actors. Very similar in everything but the language used. It is wrong. It is disgusting. But is completely permitted. A tax is: a usually pecuniary charge imposed by legislative or other public authority upon persons or property for public purposes. We need an amendment to Constitution to restrict this. As I said, the evil in Roberts ruling isn’t that he determined it was a tax, it was that he first said it was not a tax for the anti-injunction act. He had to ignore a law in order to do what he did and that is worse than just interpreting the law wrongly, it is deliberate judicial malfeasance.

andy85719 on July 1, 2012 at 12:30 AM

Obama, for the Win!

…and Charles Blow for the hurlbucket!

Schadenfreude on July 1, 2012 at 12:31 AM

LtGenRob on July 1, 2012 at 12:16 AM

Correct, so if they agreed it was not a tax, then how did he determine it was a tax? He is a cheat.

andy85719 on July 1, 2012 at 12:31 AM

One of the main reasons for the exchanges is so that folks that don’t presently have insurance can join an exchange (pool) and get cheaper rates!..:)

Dire Straits on July 1, 2012 at 12:18 AM

Hiya Dire! Thanks for the info…so why don’t they just get a policy like I do? I’m work by contract and am not on a payroll. I thought the initial idea behind Obamacare was to force everyone to buy a plan through an existing insurance provider or pay a fine. Are these exchanges working with current providers and are they subsidized? I don’t get it.

Stray Cat on July 1, 2012 at 12:34 AM

…do you all realize how enjoyable these threads are when the trolls are absent?
I liked reading Hot Air before the open regs… it saved me time from going through several papers to get the major news…with all of your “link’s”…and yes you had your share of trolls here and there…but they were decent with arguments…and didn’t try to divert every thread. The majority of the thread was not in response to their insanities. You folks would throw out your views on a topic…and I would have one, (that I wasn’t certain of sometimes…just a gut feeling) and incorporate bits and pieces of opinions that were logical and made sense…and next thing I know I’m satisfied about how I feel on a topic…and I can take on a prog in my daily contacts…and have them standing at a urinal…pooping their pants when we get done debating) I thank you folks for that!…
There have been several threads where moby/trolls have been absent today (I’ve been absent and going end to end on the comments)…and guess what?…I’m being educated again!
No wonder I’ve disliked these moby/troll people since I’ve gotten in! These MF’ers have been wasting my time! I’m enjoying this again!

KOOLAID2 on July 1, 2012 at 12:35 AM

OK, whatever you say, Chucky Blow.

Resist We Much on June 30, 2012 at 9:00 PM

Thanks for the smiles.

Schadenfreude on July 1, 2012 at 12:39 AM

I see no pattern, which would assure me Mitt Romney is going to be elected and turn into Mr. Uber-Conservative, righting all wrongs of the Liberal Establishment (Left & Right) or set into motion any events which will undo Robert’s novel taxation.

Has desperation born delusion among us?

Sharr on June 30, 2012 at 11:31 PM

No, Romney will not, and I, for one, am not deluded. But he does not hate this country, its capitalist heritage, nor most of the people who inhabit it. Obama does, from his roots and deep within his soul. As do his sycophants in his government and in the media.

Romney in no way was my choice in the primaries, but stopping the Obama transformation of this great country into a socialist Europe or, worse, a caliphate, is now my quest, my American Jihad. You can whine all you want about our choices, but if you cannot fathom what four more years of Obama will mean to you and yours, you are to be pitied.

TXUS on July 1, 2012 at 12:40 AM

Stray Cat on July 1, 2012 at 12:34 AM

Hello..It is complicated for sure!..You understand the need for insurance..A whole bunch of these new folks do not/or will not understand!..It is going to be a train wreck of major proportions!..I hope we can elect Romney and get rid of the whole mess!..:)

Dire Straits on July 1, 2012 at 12:40 AM

was funnier, Green Acres or Get Smart?

SparkPlug on July 1, 2012 at 12:11 AM

…Get Smart!…I’m reminded of Maxwell Smart in a dress…every time they play Nancy Pelosi saying something, in a clip!

KOOLAID2 on July 1, 2012 at 12:40 AM

So you don’t forget the big discussion from this morning/noon/afternoon.

Sibelius’ power is unlimited.

Schadenfreude on July 1, 2012 at 12:41 AM

TXUS on July 1, 2012 at 12:40 AM

+ 100..Excellent post!..:)

Dire Straits on July 1, 2012 at 12:41 AM

TXUS on July 1, 2012 at 12:40 AM

Agreed. Plus I would like to get some sleep the next eight years…LOL.

d1carter on July 1, 2012 at 12:45 AM

Judicial malfeasance. Yep. That’s what it was.

I may be wrong, but wasn’t it Roberts that brought up the Constitutional argument of a limiting principal during oral agruments? Limiting principals on what? .

wolly4321 on July 1, 2012 at 12:49 AM

Stray Cat on July 1, 2012 at 12:34 AM

I told you hello earlier..Forgot to wish you and yours a very good weekend!..:)

Dire Straits on July 1, 2012 at 12:50 AM

SparkPlug on July 1, 2012 at 12:11 AM

Green Acres!!..:)

Dire Straits on July 1, 2012 at 12:19 AM

Yep that show was hilarious. That Jeb guy was funny. How about Mr. Haney and Ziffle?

Now what was funnier, The Adams Family or the Munsters?

SparkPlug on July 1, 2012 at 12:52 AM

Make no mistake, Thursday’s ruling is an unmitigated win for the Obama administration and for America. The “too much government” crowd is just grasping at straws.

Charles Blow has the most perfect last name of all the writing hacks in the world.

He, however, does not know America.

If most Americans are still NOT European-like, Blow will cry like a baby on Nov. 6. Buy stocks in diapers, Depends and Kleenex.

If he is right, there will be no America as you’ve known her, in which case you buy survival kits and most definitely starve Blow and his looters and the stupid moochers.

Schadenfreude on July 1, 2012 at 12:52 AM

I personally saw O’malley drunk silly crawling on the ground cussing people out on the sidewalk , Fells Point. He must have started early. We had just got there. Two Balt.city cops watching him crawl around.

wolly4321 on July 1, 2012 at 12:24 AM

He is Taxing and Spending through the roof.

Raising Bay Bridge toll to pay for streets in Baltimore. He is really screwing over the Eastern Shore and other places in Maryland that are conservative.

Steveangell on July 1, 2012 at 12:52 AM

+ 100..Excellent post!..:)

Dire Straits on July 1, 2012 at 12:41 AM

Excellent comment :)

Schadenfreude on July 1, 2012 at 12:53 AM

KOOLAID2 on July 1, 2012 at 12:40 AM

Maxwell smart was funny with his shoe phone.

How about the Cone of Silence?

SparkPlug on July 1, 2012 at 12:54 AM

The Munsters were way funnier than the Adams family.

Herman was the bomb.

SparkPlug on July 1, 2012 at 12:55 AM

+ 100..Excellent post!..:)

Dire Straits on July 1, 2012 at 12:41 AM

Excellent comment :)

Schadenfreude on July 1, 2012 at 12:53 AM

Super good comment Schad

SparkPlug on July 1, 2012 at 12:57 AM

Former PM Yitzhak Shamir passes away at age 96 in Tel Aviv

JPeterman on June 30, 2012 at 11:56 PM

Mourners Kaddish.

annoyinglittletwerp on July 1, 2012 at 12:58 AM

How about the Cone of Silence?

SparkPlug on July 1, 2012 at 12:54 AM

Eric Holder wound up with that.

novaculus on July 1, 2012 at 12:58 AM

SparkPlug on July 1, 2012 at 12:57 AM

The pebble smiled. Hang in there.

Schadenfreude on July 1, 2012 at 1:01 AM

+ 100..Excellent post!..:)
Dire Straits on July 1, 2012 at 12:41 AM

Excellent comment :)

Schadenfreude on July 1, 2012 at 12:53 AM

Super good comment Schad

SparkPlug on July 1, 2012 at 12:57 AM

So just thought I have a quick look before tuning in to see what y’all were commenting on. Nice job on the comments.

Bmore on July 1, 2012 at 1:02 AM

novaculus on July 1, 2012 at 12:58 AM

Haha,. Lolz.

Somebody tell Twerp that she could use a parasol to keep the sun off her while walking. It would be kind of classy.

Or she could wear a cowgirl hat.

SparkPlug on July 1, 2012 at 1:02 AM

SparkPlug on July 1, 2012 at 12:52 AM

Boy that is a tough one there..You can’t go wrong with either but I will say the Adams Family..:)

PS..Plus the Adams Family movies was very funny!..:)

Dire Straits on July 1, 2012 at 1:02 AM

Schadenfreude on July 1, 2012 at 12:53 AM

lolz..:)

Dire Straits on July 1, 2012 at 1:03 AM

Stray Cat on July 1, 2012 at 12:34 AM

Here’s an analysis. This is from last December. I can’t find anything Pipes has written since then on exchanges.

Sorry for the long quote. I tried to highlight the points I thought were important.

Rejecting health-care exchanges
BY SALLY C. PIPES and DR. HAL SCHERZ

Obamacare instructs states to set up health insurance exchanges where consumers and small businesses can look for coverage starting in 2014. The exchanges would effectively put health insurance — and the delivery of care — under the control of the feds, who would dictate what policies would look like and how doctors would treat patients with exchange-provided coverage.

The feds have further stipulated that people can only access billions of dollars in tax credits and subsidies earmarked for the purchase of policies by shopping in the state-run marketplaces.

If a state refuses to set up its own exchange, Obamacare allows the federal government to come into the state and set one up.

But here’s the rub. The text of the law stipulates that only state-based exchanges — not federally run ones — may distribute credits and subsidies.

Without the federal cash, consumers won’t patronize the government-run exchanges — particularly with all the cost-inflating mandates they impose on insurers who wish to participate….

Obamacare’s defenders claim that the exchanges will expand consumer choice. With insurers exiting state markets across the country, the opposite appears to be true.

In fact, the exchanges may represent the first stages in the death of private insurance.

If Obamacare’s exchanges and other rules prevent private firms from making money writing health-care policies, they’ll get out of the business. At that point, the government may feel justified in setting up its own plan to fill the void — and the march toward government-run, single-payer health care will be under way.

The Obama administration and congressional Democrats may be kicking themselves over the errors they’re discovering in their signature law.

But for state officials — and American patients — anything that arrests the implementation of Obamacare is a blessing in disguise.

INC on July 1, 2012 at 1:04 AM

What was funnier, Green Acres or Get Smart?

SparkPlug on July 1, 2012 at 12:11 AM

Get Smart!

What do you get when you cross Purple Haze with the Green Acres theme? Green Haze (don’t blame me if you don’t like the band’s name!)

Bizarro No. 1 on July 1, 2012 at 1:04 AM

Bmore on July 1, 2012 at 1:02 AM

Your comment is better than Schad’s.

And Schad’s is better than Dire’s.

And Dire’s is better than my mine.

SparkPlug on July 1, 2012 at 1:04 AM

andy85719 on July 1, 2012 at 12:30 AM

andy, if one is inclined to remove all semantics from language there is nothing to stop them. You can call anything a “tax” if you so desire. You can call the Empire State Building a “chair” because someone can sit on the top. You can even call the radio tower a “backrest” as they can lean against it. It satisfies a semantic-free definition of “chair”. Almost anything will. If you allow the language to be so distorted then you are left with nothing. This is what law schools teach their students and this is the cr@p that those students then try to convince everyone else of.

There is a semantics to our language. We cannot have a stable society without meaning to the words which describe the limits of that governance. Otherwise, one is left with nothing but dictators who tell us, on a daily basis, what the current meaning of any word is.

Yes, I can argue that all sorts of things are “taxes” in the meaningless sense. But that is not what stable societies are based on. We have a number of inherent assumptions in the use of our governing language which many people think themselves brilliant for abusing. There’s no brilliance in that, though. It’s easy work that any idiot can come up with. That is, after all, the nature of human language – most especially English.

We do not tax for inaction. We do not call penalties and fees “taxes”. Anyone could, if they so desire, but that doesn’t make those semantics correct or make them fit in any historical context on the use of the words. At some point, you have to come to the idea that there is some concrete floor beneath which you will not allow words to be lowered in their use for governance and legality.

The point that Benedict Roberts used “tax” in two different contexts and allowed the word to have its meaning radically changed within the same argument to serve only the local purpose (restricted to whichever paragraph in which it was being used) is an indication of the difference between human language and formal language. Governance is described by formal language, not human language, though we have only human language with which to approximate the governing formal language. At some point you must draw a line or you will find that there can be no such lines, ever, and no written law will ever be of any value.

“Tax credits” are, themselves, an abomination of the governing language. That doesn’t mean that we are bound to follow that folly into the gates of chaotic hell, which is where a meaningless governing language leads. Even so, this new idea of the taxing of inaction is entirely novel and ahistorical in our feral government. We all know what the writers of the original laws would have thought of such a ridiculous and insane notion, which would have rendered the whole of our federal Constitution totally and completely meaningless.

But, that is the nature of these sorts of things. That is entropy and the reason why all living things, including nations, must eventually die. At some point, they allow all meaning to be sucked out of their governing languages and render themselves nothing but syntactic, meaningless, random utterances that can accomplish their intended purposes for no longer than the desire of one to make outrageous new definitions and “brilliant” perversions of “known” concepts. It’s all too easy to do. THe fact that this accepted “legal decision” allows the instantaneous morphing of a law between a tax and a penalty in the same argument is all the evidence you need. Once a single inconsistency is allowed in a logical system, ALL theorems become provable. That is what we are staring at, and that is accepted by “the experts”. They think themselves brilliant in these retarded games. I consider them nothing but disingenuous and retarded.

I know what taxes are, with respect to our feral government. Not every payment forced by the feral government can be called a “tax”. This idea that some support about the size of the penalty versus the size of the payment (for private purchases) to determine if it qualifies as a “tax” or a “penalty” is as intellectually offensive as it gets. Being a smoker, I am well aware that the “taxes” I pay for my cigarettes FAR OUTSTRIP the cost of the cigarettes, themselves. But, for those instances we have one definition. For this argument we have another definition. For the Anti-Injunction Act, still some other …

I could make logical arguments for any of these, if I so cared, but I could make logical arguments for other definitions that would make your head spin. And I would be logically correct. As I said, once you release the language from the semantics, there is nothing to hold anyone down. You can make the Empire State Building a “chair”. But … it ISN’T. Not because it fails to satisfy the definition (it doesn’t; we have lots of chairs bolted to the ground) but because it violates the essential semantics of a “chair”. But, if someone really wants to seem clever, they could argue it. And I guarantee you, if there was something special about chairs and some outrageous power the government could gain by calling things “chairs”, you would find that tomorrow the Empire State Building would, indeed, have become a chair. I would be making this same argument against that.

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on July 1, 2012 at 1:04 AM

How about the Cone of Silence?

SparkPlug on July 1, 2012 at 12:54 AM

…I thing JugEars and his people are working on a patent on that…and we have to give it to the media!

KOOLAID2 on July 1, 2012 at 1:07 AM

Largest tax in history.

Bmore on July 1, 2012 at 1:08 AM

I still don’t understand why the Supreme Court couldn’t just say that since the HC bill mandate couldn’t stand unless it was changed to a tax, the legislators would have to vote on the bill again to get it passed. And since the dems don’t have a sweeping majority anymore like they did when they shoved it through the first time, they wouldn’t be able to do it this time, and would be forced to either, A. Scrap the whole thing, or B. Have to work with republicans to develop a better bill that would be acceptable all around. That could have settled this whole thing. Or am I wrong?

Sterling Holobyte on July 1, 2012 at 1:08 AM

F-Troop was pretty dang hilarious.

SparkPlug on July 1, 2012 at 1:10 AM

Largest tax in history.

Bmore on July 1, 2012 at 1:08 AM

Yes, in international history.

Change it to “Largest tax in the world history” and propagate it like you did today, every day, always.

Schadenfreude on July 1, 2012 at 1:10 AM

SparkPlug on July 1, 2012 at 1:10 AM

Just curious??..Are you going to vote for Gary Johnson??..:):)

Dire Straits on July 1, 2012 at 1:12 AM

Stray Cat on July 1, 2012 at 12:34 AM

Sally Pipes is a name to remember. I first heard of her through Philip Klein when he would eviscerate Massachusetts’ health care plan (RomneyCare) with a series of posts at The American Spectator blog. I think each headline began with the question, How’s That Mass Health Care Working Out For You? He started with Part I, and worked his way up at least into the twenties.

Here’s an NRO interview she did in March:

http://www.nationalreview.com/critical-condition/294752/post-court-report-sally-pipes-future-health-care-reform-america-kathryn-je

In addition to Pipes, Jindal (LA) is very knowledgeable on health care with massive experience at the state and national government level. Scott (FL) was a health care CEO.

If anyone has other names who they think know what they’re talking about, please let me know.

INC on July 1, 2012 at 1:13 AM

@JammieWF Wow. Never saw anything like this http://t.co/FX6p2atF via @TwitPic

Flora Duh on July 1, 2012 at 1:15 AM

T

Bmore on July 1, 2012 at 1:15 AM

Sterling Holobyte on July 1, 2012 at 1:08 AM

You’re not wrong, but Roberts is, and it is done now.

To Nov. and to the barricades!

Schadenfreude on July 1, 2012 at 1:15 AM

State Action Toward Creating Health Insurance Exchanges, as of June 18, 2012

http://www.statehealthfacts.org/comparetable.jsp?ind=962&cat=17&sub=205&yr=1&typ=5

INC on July 1, 2012 at 1:16 AM

A

Bmore on July 1, 2012 at 1:17 AM

I dedicate this mostly to wolly4321: (You Gotta) Fight For Your Right (To Party)

Bizarro No. 1 on July 1, 2012 at 1:18 AM

Dire Straits on July 1, 2012 at 1:12 AM

Sure thing. BTW who is he? Charles Johnsons LGF brother? Or is he related to Levi?

SparkPlug on July 1, 2012 at 1:19 AM

X

Bmore on July 1, 2012 at 1:20 AM

Bmore on July 1, 2012 at 1:15 AM

Are you going to vote for Gary Johnson??..:):)

Dire Straits on July 1, 2012 at 1:20 AM

A

Bmore on July 1, 2012 at 1:17 AM

I didn’t think it was possible to make a typo in a post that only has one letter but you did it.

SparkPlug on July 1, 2012 at 1:22 AM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4 5