Chief Justice Roberts Is A Genius

Bookmark and Share  Before you look to do harm to Chief Justice Roberts or his family, it’s important that you think carefully about the meaning – the true nature — of his ruling on Obama-care. The Left will shout that they won, that Obama-care was upheld and all the rest. Let them.

It will be a short-lived celebration.

Here’s what really occurred — payback. Yes, payback for Obama’s numerous, ill-advised and childish insults directed toward SCOTUS.

Chief Justice Roberts actually ruled the mandate, relative to the commerce clause, was unconstitutional. That’s how the Democrats got Obama-care going in the first place. This is critical. His ruling means Congress can’t compel American citizens to purchase anything. Ever. The notion is now officially and forever, unconstitutional. As it should be.

Next, he stated that, because Congress doesn’t have the ability to mandate, it must, to fund Obama-care, rely on its power to tax. Therefore, the mechanism that funds Obama-care is a tax. This is also critical. Recall back during the initial Obama-care battles, the Democrats called it a penalty, Republicans called it a tax. Democrats consistently soft sold it as a penalty. It went to vote as a penalty. Obama declared endlessly, that it was not a tax, it was a penalty. But when the Democrats argued in front of the Supreme Court, they said ‘hey, a penalty or a tax, either way’. So, Roberts gave them a tax. It is now the official law of the land — beyond word-play and silly shenanigans. Obama-care is funded by tax dollars. Democrats now must defend a tax increase to justify the Obama-care law.

Finally, he struck down as unconstitutional, the Obama-care idea that the federal government can bully states into complying by yanking their existing medicaid funding. Liberals, through Obama-care, basically said to the states — ‘comply with Obama-care or we will stop existing funding.’ Roberts ruled that is a no-no. If a state takes the money, fine, the Feds can tell the state how to run a program, but if the state refuses money, the federal government can’t penalize the state by yanking other funding. Therefore, a state can decline to participate in Obama-care without penalty. This is obviously a serious problem. Are we going to have 10, 12, 25 states not participating in “national” health-care? Suddenly, it’s not national, is it?

Ultimately, Roberts supported states rights by limiting the federal government’s coercive abilities. He ruled that the government can not force the people to purchase products or services under the commerce clause and he forced liberals to have to come clean and admit that Obama-care is funded by tax increases.

Although he didn’t guarantee Romney a win, he certainly did more than his part and should be applauded.

And he did this without creating a civil war or having bricks thrown through his windshield. Oh, and he’ll be home in time for dinner.


Follow I.M. Citizen at

Bookmark and Share

571 Responses

  1. Good insight !!
    Hope it turns out this way !!

    • Just have health insurance and you won’t be taxed…it’s called individual responsibility!

      • Except if you are unemployed or your own boss, individual health care is dang expensive. I’m not supporting Obamacare but I am saying if I choose not to have health care then so be it. Or else the insurance companies need to get over it and make the premiums affordable. Besides that the whole insurance thing is a scam and a fraud anyway. You’re screwed if you have it and screwed if you don’t. Either way the government has no right to tell me how to live my life.

        • independence and individual freedom is guaranteed in the Constitution…and those freedoms were taken away and the Gov’t HAS NO RIGHT TO TELL YOU TO DO ANYTHING if it doesn’t harm or destroy someone else’s property, business, or reputation. YOU”RE obviously a fool to think otherwise. THE GOV”T ITSELF IS A FRAUD and STEALS from it’s citizens and gives needlessly to idiots who deserve nothing (social security, medicare, medicaid all illegal…unconstitutional along with OBAMACARE…. ACORN, Black Panthers, 503’s like any progressive organization that DOES ANYTHING but be a legitimate unbiased TAX FREE organization and should be taxed like every other business…they are in business of undermining the constitution, the American family, American exceptional-ism, and the American way of life along with the free market.,…fools who do nothing and allow this to happen, except take fm what the Gov’t gives them …enslave themselves to a lifeless existence while their heart still beats. They don’t help their country, community and hurts the country and everyone around them. Get a clue open your eyes and help your fellow man by earning your keep by any means necessary…under the table..or whatever…laws don’t mean much to the supposed gov’t leadership…or to the left via the OCUPPY WALL STREETers…who defy any licensing or legitimate way to protest has never been done in accordance with the law…rape, murders, and over 1,000 arrest compared to the calm self responsible, legitimate organized protest of the TEA PARTY.. Only the corrupt media and idiots who believe them could think otherwise.

          • AMEN, Sir and someone of your stature would know this. Sir thank you for your service.

          • You have the freedom to move to another country if you don’t like this one.

          • Right On and Amen!

          • Matt,who do you think you are? You lived off of the government for 24 years,did what you were paid to do,now you draw a military pension,along with health benefits,along with your social security,then you have the nerve to put me in the same class of the black panthers,and,acorn,because I draw s/s,and get some medicare,I paid for it,and,continue to do so,at 69 years old.You did well in life,but,not well enough to look down or judge me.You know where you can stick your elitist attitude!

          • Well said m’man!

          • Well spoken, Matt

        • Not going to tell you how to live your life? really? State and Federal governments tell you how to drive a car, deal with your garbage, what drugs you can take, where you ca build a home, how many people you can marry. Please attempt not to be so ignorant. Wake up. Government tells you how to live your life the majority of your life. If ou don’t like it move somewhere else like North Korea. Send me a post card when you get there.

          • @Erik…North Korea? Seriously? You can’t even own a cell phone in North Korea! What a dumb thing to say..

          • “Gov’t HAS NO RIGHT TO TELL YOU TO DO ANYTHING if it doesn’t harm or destroy someone else’s property, business, or reputation. ” All that you mentioned has the potentual to hurt someone else. If i choose not to have health insurance that is my choice. I will be the one not allowed care or have to put a lot of money out of pocket.

          • Don’t worry. People are,and have been, leaving in droves. according to US & World Report over 3 million Americans a year are leaving to live in foreign countries.


          • You don’t have to drive a car, trash is actually regulated by the HOA.. what drugs to take is regulation of patent protection as often as it is morality. You don’t have to build a home and I agree about polygamy. Government has gotten too big, I agree, but those things you pointed out are actually its jobs.

          • FYI, Erik, driving a car isn’t a right guaranteed in the constitution, it is a privilege. Garbage collection isn’t controlled by the federal govenment, neither is where you can build your home or how many people you can marry. States rights is the point of the article, which of course equates to inidvidual rights. You make no point whatsoever that has a basis in reality. As far as the drug thing goes; it’s quite simply broken down into state laws anyway, so again your point is ludicrous.

            Lastly, you said “Government tells you how to live your life the majority of your life. If ou don’t like it move somewhere else like North Korea”. Are you really dumb enough to believe the communist government in North Korea is going to be less controlling than the US government? You need to get out and travel a bit to see how the rest of the world actually is. Geez.

        • I think it all falls back to the crooked bunch in congress.They get payed off . we need to elect T-Party people.

          • Bitch, you assholes ELECTED Tea Party members and they spent the last two years terrorizing America and tormenting America with their racist and woman hating bullshit.

            The Tea Party “experiment” failed and you fuckers are going to be the ones voted out and go down as the racist fucks you are who and as a disgrace to the REAL PATRIOTS who were involved in the Boston Tea Party.

          • The proper word is TEA Party. The T must stand for something, and it does! Taxed Enough Already Party is proper because it explains what we (yes, I am a member) are all about. Taxation with representation is just as bad as without, if is burdensome and not equal!

            The purpose of the TEA Party is to remove the members of Congress who have spent their entire adult life there, The present Congress doesn’t represent the people of the United States, or even the people who elected them. They are a closed clique who represent only themselves and the people who provide them all the graft. We need to rid ourselves of every Member who has been there more than two terms. The Constitution implies that by saying that the members of the House should be elected for a term of two years. The Federalist Papers say that that term was set so that, after serving their two years they were to return home to manage their affairs.

            We really need to pray that God will protect our nation because those we elect will not!

          • Tea Party people are just as crooked and are controlled by AIPAC, among others. That why we’re actually considering WW3… because Israel needs us to prove we love her by attacking a country who hasn’t attacked anyone in like 300 years and has signed the NNPT (which Israel refuses to do)… all based on propaganda you would have laughed at if it came out of the Soviet Union-era Pravda.

        • and how exactly does such a person get health care when they are injured and not insure? The rest of us pay it, thats how…. Not sure on either side, but knowing that hospitals and doctors are forced to help the injured, and are compensated in some manner by tax dollars (medicaid/medicare), should also be a point when making the above statements; although I whole heartedly agree that insurance is a scam. I also don’t see how the government telling us we need insurance for health is really all that much different from them (or rather the states) telling us that we have to have car insurance. Either way, its a CYA (cover your arse) check…. There are many such examples where the government already forces our hand, take a look around….

          My own opinion of the

          • You should look into your state car insurance requirement…the requirement is not that you have to have insurance for your OWN car it is the LIABILITY insurance incase you damage or injure someone ELSE’S property or person. BIG DIFFERENCE! If you really do not understand that difference then you should not be trying to debate anything.

          • “the rest of us pay it” Not always true, my husband and I did not have health insurance for several years but we had a small savings and worked with the hospital to pay what the insurance companies “ACTUALLY” pay. It was called self-pay. We had 2 kids (each cost $6K for a 24 hour stay… yes that was exhausting for me but we had to keep expenses down), one surgery/cat scan/etc. (costing $1K after deductions).
            But, I was surprised to find out that the hospital charges the insurance company x amount, and they actually only pay about .25x of that amount and still charge the insured .05x-.20x of that amount that they paid.
            We have insurance now and will be paying a max of 2500 for our 3rd baby, but I know that the insurance will only be paying about 2K to the hospital for expenses. That means, that as a self insured I paid more than a big business.

            There are a lot of people who don’t have the same mindset though, they see “Taking free $” as taking from the govt., when they should really see it as taking from their neighbors.

          • You have some good points, except for one statement. Not all of the “uninsured” Americans depend on anyone besides themselves to pay for their medical expenses… Don’t forget the small business community who can’t afford expensive insurance plans, and remain responsible for their own medical costs.

          • The major thing to consider is that you have endless other options, buses, trains, walking, biking. Just by simply breathing you are required to have health insurance. Don’t play the “it is just like car insurance deal”.

          • Except people aren’t forced to BUY cars………..

          • Except mandated car insurance covers the damage done to someone else. There is no mandated insurance to cover my own vehicle, unless it is new and that isn’t government mandated.

          • I am sick of hearing the “you must buy car insurance” theme. The government only requires you to have car insurance IF YOU OWN or DRIVE a car. I don’t do either. Also, car insurance does not cover you, it covers the other guy, the one without insurance and for any damage you do to them. So it is not the same thing. Personally, I think the government should take over EVERYTHING! The biggest cause of death in the home is taking a fall in your shower. REQUIRE everybody to purchase a helmet before they can shower. Even if they only take a bath. That is more like Obama non care.

        • ther is a trick to what you are saying ,they have started offering lower rates to people like myself ,self employed and diabetic ,but here is the catch your premium goes down but they hit you with a $20,000.00 deductable

        • Michelle, you do have the freedom to move to another country if you don’t like this one.

        • Yes, it does. it’s called the social contract. The state makes people buy auto insurance, get vaccinations to protect the nation at large. Then there is the gay marriage and abortion laws, it’s all a question who’s “big government” is telling you what to do. . .

          • Social contract is a farce. A contract is a legal document spelling out the rights and privileges of the parties to the contract. Show me such a document exists. You can’t manufacturer it out of thin air. This is just more politically correct liberal speak for “I can make you do whatever I want”. Only the ignorant would accept the premise that such a contract exists. It never has and never will, because it would only benefit one side and therefore lack the basis for a contractual agreement. I’m sick of you Marxists trying to cram your phony political agenda down America’s throat. It failed in the old Soviet Union and it will ultimately fail in the United States.

        • Excellent health care is available to all without health insurance. Health insurance is a business that relies on risk management that benefits the buyer of a contract, in the form of a small payment that guarantees compensation according to the details of the insurance policy contract. “Making the premiums affordable” is an emotional lie spread by politicians to help them nationalize the insurance business. That is socialism which is the first step to communism – a known failure that causes the greatest of hardships on everyone except the leaders. Don’t fall for the one size fits all or the everybody deserves it lies.

        • I agree. However, don’t expect health care that YOU can’t pay for. And, the doctors etc. need to have a backbone and not treat you at the expense of others.

      • I have insurance. Right now. With the next premium increase I may not. Health insurance is UNAFFORDABLE. It isn’t just people who are not responsible who don’t have insurance.

        Do you pay for your own plan (100%)?

      • Sure pay for Healthcare Insurance and you won’t be forced to pay a tax…brilliant, why didn’t we all think of that…wait, we did in Boston Harbor when Britain said pay taxes on this tea or pay us tribute. Guess what happened next? Or better yet think of it as car insurance for the body, except you can total a car or chose not to drive a car…exactly how do you have freedom if you buy every strong arm tactic to take your freedom away through fear an terroristic threats?

        • Wow did you read the bill? You can chose not to pay the ‘tax’. Please educate yourself before you write.

          • Says the man who thinks you can live however you want in North Korea…LOL

          • Only if you have health insurance, otherwise you must pay the penalty “tax”. If you don’t the IRS will take it out of your refund, levy bank accounts, etc….

          • Yes, you can choose not to pay the “tax”. But only by buying health insurance from one of their exchanges which even they don’t have figured out yet. If you are unemployed, as so many are, you can’t afford to buy the insurance so how are you going to afford to pay the “tax”.

        • No one is forced to buy auto insurance either, in order to be able to get a driver’s license. It is only if you are involved in an accident, that you must be able to show some form of financial responsibility.

          • You are forced to buy Auto Insurance in the state of Texas if you want to drive your vehicle on PUBLIC roads. You have to have Insurance to get your vehicle inspected or get vehicle tags. Other wise you will be ticketed. (If you get caught).

          • Not sure what state you live in, but in Texas you can’t register your car without insurance. If you get a traffic ticket you have to show proof of insurance. If you don’t have it, you pay purchase it or you pay a fine. Having insurance protects all of us. Health insurance protects you and ultimately, protects the rest of us. We still live in the best country on this earth. Deal with it.

          • I don’t know where you live but where I live you must show proof of insurance to get a drivers license and to register your car

          • um actually you are . and if your are pulled over while just simply driving, the 1st thing police will ask you for is your id, your registration and your insurance, Without all 3 you end up with a ticket and go to court and face a fine. The fine of driving without insurance is $400 dollar in the state of AZ and in IA.. The problem? most people who cant afford to pay $100 a month for car insurance sure as hell cant afford a $400 fine on top of that.
            Double jeopardy.

          • Or to get a car safety inspected or to pay the car registration or if pulled over by law for any reason the driver must show proof of insurance.

          • This is not true. If you don’t have car insurance in Maryland they report that to the MVA and you get charged a fine for being uninsured. So there is NO option not to have auto insurance and obviously with them forcing you to get it it’s not just about getting into an accident anymore.

          • No, but you are required to have it to register or drive a motor vehicle in all 50 states.

          • You’re misinformed. Some – repeat, some – states allow uninsured driving but only after you set aside a bond equivalent to hundreds of thousands if not millions of dollars. You can get a license without it, sure, but you cannot get license plates. And if caught driving without, you risk the “forfeiture” (read that as “theft”) of your property, the denial of your liberty, etc, etc. Doubt that? Look it up. Yet the Supreme Court has ruled that the right to travel, in the common conveyance of the day, is a common right a common right which each of us has under our right to enjoy life and liberty ( Thompson v. Smith, 154 S.E. 579, 1929). Look that up, too. Then ask your congress critter if he or she is aware of it and why they are not demanding the Constitution be complied with.

          • Not in Texas, at least. Insurance proof required to annually register or inspect a vehicle. Of course, some buy it for those reasons, then cancel shortly thereafter thus raising MY insurance premiums for ‘uninsured motorists’. Where really is the lack of fair play?

          • But you don’t have to drive a car. One can choose to live near where they work and take public transportation, walk, or bike. I wrote an article wondering if ObamaCare could lead to a flat tax for all.


        • martial law is next!! the closer we get to november, watch for martial law!!! never in my life did this ever enter my mind when I served
          my country in ,nam.
          all for complete IDIOTS to be free and do nothing for their country.
          the democrats has to go for this country to survive.
          I’lll take the MORMON over the MORON!!!
          old sarge,’nam vet,’68’70

      • Uhhhh, you need to do some research. EVERYONE’s taxes are increasing….$400 BILLION tax increases over the next 10 years…insurance or not, sweety. Welcome to Obama’s reality check.

        • 1.7 TRILLION IN THE NEXT 10 YEARS!

        • Can’t wait for Jan 2013! 7 New taxes on Obama care ALONE. And that is on everybody, especially the middle class. I am handicapped and need surgery. OH! Medical devices are taxed. Mine should require about 50,000 bucks for the devices. Where do I get the extra 1250 dollar in taxes for that tax? Oh, and the wheelchair. Plus, all FSA’s are reduced to only 2500 dollars. Period. My medicine alone costs that for 6 months. Do they think I have a money tree? And don’t forget the 13 taxes on small business. Anyone making 250,000 is now RICH even though they may be a small business employing people. They get taxed BEFORE deducting the cost of doing business. OUCH! That should help the economy as more businesses closes and more people are out of work. But better yet, the Bush era tax rates which are reasonable? Obama will not renew them and your base tax rate is going up, up, up! Appx. $4000 more taxes in all for a couple. Of course you still have your state, local, city taxes to pay. Any Captial gains? Like if you sell your house for more than you bought it for? Going up from 10% to $20%. Now add the marriage penalty and the death tax. Still feel so great about Obama now? Of course, those who voted it in illegally, you know, a little bribery here and few bucks passed there are exempt from the stupid bill. And of course even if it violates my religious beliefs, I have to pay for abortion, unless I am Muslin (waivered) or Amish (waivered). Catholics and Baptists need not appy.
          Wow, can’t wait to no celebrate the 4th of July and New Year’s. No Christmas this year. How do you like living in the Socialist States of America?

      • Since when does the government require individual responsibility?
        They certainly don’t impose punitive taxes when someone cranks out more babies than they can afford. They reward them with more welfare.
        They don’t impose punitive taxes when someone is a drug addicted wast of human flesh. They reward them with SSI.
        The way I see it, I should get a monthly check for not having health insurance.

        • I agree with you completely. Health insurance is not necessarily health care. People should be free to decide whether they want health insurance or not, but when they get sick, don’t go to the public hospital expecting me to pay your bill! All these baby cranking, crack and meth dealer baby daddies on welfare get better health care than I do because the government pays for it. Let a few of these non-member of society die in the street like the worthless oxygen sucking leeches they are and see how everyone’s health care costs go down and then most of us will be able to afford good health insurance to assure good health care. If there were true personal responsibility DEMANDED of everyone, we would not be in this pickle.
          Only people that should be at the government teat, which raises costs for all of us, are those who are truly in need, that have real handicaps, widows/widowers or abandoned mothers and fathers with small children (as long as they stop the baby making), poor elderly that are UNABLE to work, mentally handicapped people, truly physically handicapped people who are unable to be rehabilitated for work (too many leeches on disability too!), etc. No more charity to the leeches in any way, and you’ll see not only health care, but the whole economy turn around. Oh, and NO BENEFITS for illegals that pay no taxes.

        • Amen!

        • welfare babies grow up to vote “democrat” everytime. This is how the left shore up their voting base…

        • You get my vote in Nov. I too would like to get a check for being in good health, for holding down a job and paying taxes for 43 years. However “IF” illegals want to work here and take from tax payers, maybe they should pay me,(us) as well as those which never hold a job, never pay “their” fair share and pop out babies for gov. checks. Time to repay that bill….I’ll be standing by the mail box…waiting !

      • Instead of coming up with this huge scheme to hire countless people to manage this monster–why couldn’t they have done something to bring the healthcare costs DOWN? THAT is the problem that will make Obamacare unsustainable. We can’t afford the entitlement programs we already have.

      • Well, that’s kind of the issue, isn’t it? I have excellent insurance through my employer. It’s about 5k a year (each) for many hundreds of us. If my employer can decide, rather, to just pay 10% of that in the form of a tax penalty, then what kind of business sense would it make for him to keep the policies we have? So, now, I can’t really keep the insurance “I like”, can I? Watch what he said in these short clips. I’m pretty sure I have a handle on what he’s after. It’s that he’s disingenuous and intellectually dishonest.

        • Sure you can keep the insurance you like. You just have to PAY for it. Instead of your boss. Maybe “get off your butt”, as some other tea bagger comented, and pay for it.

          See, you prove my point. Many people arguing against this DON’T PAY FOR THEIR OWN INSURANCE!! Get back to me when you pay the full premium, like I do.

          • We don’t pay for it because health insureance is part of our pay in our benefits package….so now do you think employer’s are going to increase our pay to make up for our lost benefits so that we can now pay for our insurance?

          • I can’t afford my premium. I would Love to have health care, but I make $11.50 and hour and work full time. If I buy insurance for my family, I will have to pay (close to) half my paycheck EVERY WEEK!!! I have two school age children. I can’t live on $800 a month!

          • Pace, the term teabagger is a disgusting expletive. Look it up. Other people here don’t use nasty language to describe people they could use nasty language for. Just a clean thought.

          • @Pace, you’re idea that those of us against this ludicrous and unconstitutional bill don’t pay our own insurance is just plain wrong. Part of the WORKING CLASS benefit packages usually do include medical insurance… in lieu of pay. My take home pay would be much higher if I chose to not have the company I work for make those payments. It’s your choice to pay your full premium, not mine or anyone elses. Don’t like it? Get a different job.

        • You make some very good points. I have considered employerp aid health insurance as a set of golden handcuffs that kept me working for the employer. Unfortunately, I have had a total of 20 surgeries over the years and 3 other hospitallizations, the last one had a tag of $85,000 of which my deductible was $500.

      • Wow- what can I say – but God help us – “individual responsibility” really – ithis has nothing to do with our government but with the insurance companies over priced coverage packages and ridiculous premiums. Check out how the bonus money alone for all of the Insurance Company CEOS. Then check out how much national health coverage will cost you – a lot! Simplicity is not the answer – honestly!

        • Government is the problem, since it got involved in the health care system prices have skyrocketed…..Don’t bash the insurance companies you sound like a left wing cook..

      • What if food vendors were to begin gouging their customers as has the medical industry over the last 140+ years. If the only way we could afford to eat was by purchasing “food insurance”, whether or not we perish, should we not still have freedom of choice in the matter? I dare say we would. And if we all refused this insurance, no matter the cost? Then food prices would come back down. When you add insurance as a safety net for customers to be able to afford your services, you are inviting greed, bloat, and yet more un-affordability. The snowball begins to roll and never ends. But when businesses (like the “sickcare” industry) are forced to price their products and services to actually be affordable by their target audience, well then there is no need for insurance.

      • I can’t believe you just said that, Barry! I don’t know if that comment was based on apathy, or that you prefer to live in a socialist society instead of a free society. People do not live in a free society where the government can mandate or punish with a tax such as with this so-called affordable healthcare bill. I, for one, am tired of this Orwellian government we have allowed to pervade our great country and once-free society.

      • Or, use your individual responsibility to self insure–instead of paying high premiums, keep a bank account for emergencies. Oh wait, you don’t have that choice anymore without a penalty. Darn. That would have been a reasonable and freedom friendly option.

        • Mary Wysong: Or, use your individual responsibility to self insure–instead of paying high premiums, keep a bank account for emergencies. Oh wait, you don’t have that choice anymore without a penalty. Darn. That would have been a reasonable and freedom friendly option.

          Yeah, sure Mary, one long hospital stay and *pfft* there goes your bank account. And your house. Who pays for your insurance?

      • No, you must have health insurance that meet Federal guidlines mandated by and acceptable to the department of Health and Human Services. A critical distinction.

      • That’s just incorrect,the government will mandate what kind of insurance you must have which will increase the cost for you and your provider, most insurance companies will raise your premiums or drop you. It will make insurance so costly that most people won’t be able to afford it and you will end up on some government program…and by the way most people are responsible……it’s the government who’s irresponsible……

      • ObamaCare doesn’t include insurance. Insurance is to help you get over -big expenses- caused by -unexpected events-.

        What ObamaCare does is analogous to making it so you can get insurance on a car you wrecked three years ago. Or a house that burned down last summer. This is not insurance.

        You can believe that covering pre-existing conditions is a good idea. Fine. We disagree. But don’t use bull—- arguments to defend it.


        On another note, we can no longer buy the insurance we want. If we wanted low-cost, high-deductible catastrophic insurance, we could not get it. We are forced to buy only plans which cover what the Federal gov’t wants covered. Anything less is literally illegal.

        This means that the plan bought by a 65 year old male will be the same as that bought by a 25 year old female, covering, among other things, birth control, hysterectomy, mental health issues, Viagra, dialysis, etc.

        These two people have radically different reasonably expected healthcare needs but their insurance coverage will have to be the same.

        Does that actually sound reasonable to you?

      • Responsibility comes from individuals, not the government. Try that.

      • You do realize that the Obama plan is designed to phase out private insurance therefor leading to a single payer system within 10-15 years. Listen to him speak to his union donors, he’ll verify my statement. This is why companies will be penalized only $2k to opt out of the govt plan to maintain private insurance per employee in the beginning (to give folks like you the notion that they will retain an option), but within half a decade the opt out fee would be beyond reasonable…. pushing everyone to Obamacare. Don’t believe everything the government tells you. Search for the truth yourself unless you like being lied to.

      • Exactly! If everyone is held responsible for buying insurance, the rest of us don’t end up paying for you in the long run. I’m forced to buy auto insurance so what’s the difference. I’m also forced to pay school taxes, although, I have no children. It is what it is. Everyone needs health insurance because, unless you are killed in a tragic accident, who will eventually get sick. One stay in a hospital could throw you into bankruptcy. Why would anyone take the chance of losing everything they have because they don’t have insurance. Give it a chance instead of deciding it’s a terrible thing. The best part of all of this is that now, people who are willing to pay for it, but have been denied for pre-existing conditions will be able to have the coverage they need and deserve. We accomodate people with wheelchairs and no one ever complains. Think of those with pre-existing conditions with the same compassion you do for people who need a special ramp to enter a building.

      • Oh — is THAT all we have to do, Barry????? I enjoy a reasonably good paying job. Yet even so, as my employer doesn’t offer subsidized health insurance to me, I’m on my own to go find it elsewhere… And my harsh reality is that to make that purchase, I’d have to shoulder the expense equal to (or greater than, as I happen to have children) that of buying a SECOND HOUSE!!! REALLY???? All I have to do to exercise “individual responsibility” is to bear the cost of an additional mortgage payment (or MORE!) for a service we almost never use?? Oh, THAT’S ALL!! I thought it would be difficult! Silly me….

        I’m all for individual responsibility. Don’t even get me started on that count… (Welfare payments to the cunning and lazy, federal refusal to rein in the overwhelming cost-burden of ILL-FREAKING-LEGAL “immigration”, untold billions in foreign aid paid out almost universally to countries who HATE us, subsidies to industries unable to stand on their own feet, federal grants to put Jesus-on-the-cross in a jar of piss, and the list goes on and on and on…) BUT, you so blithely toss out the mandate to ‘have health insurance’ as though it were only stubbornness preventing those who don’t!

        Insurance companies are utterly corrupt and fraudulent, in my opinion. The entire idea of ‘sharing the risk’ — while it sounds nice in theory — is fatally flawed. It in itself is a form of creeping socialism. (I could rush to the hospital every time I get a sniffle, paying very little to do so — while you who exercise common sense and personal responsibility visit the doctor only for actual emergencies. But now, you (and you and you and you) get to shoulder the needless costs — in the form of ever increasing premiums — of my endless trips to the E.R. for events a nice, hot cup of tea and some aspirin would have been a more suitable remedy for…) Add to that mix the unabashed greed of the pharmaceutical companies who have long ago figured out that offering us “cures” is unprofitable; providing us instead with medicines that merely “manage” our illnesses — which keep us enslaved to them for the rest of our lives, lining their deep pockets all the while… Toss in the avarice of “personal injury attorneys” who have made an open disgrace of our “justice system” through famously chasing ambulances, convincing anyone who will listen that they are a “VICTIM” who is owed a king’s ransom and instant retirement at the expense of the faceless “they”, just because said “victim” was stupid enough to spill hot coffee in her lap (insert other, various injury here–real or imagined)…. Mix these and other corruptions up together and you quickly create a health care system that has become so encumbered with fraudulent burdens utterly unrelated to “Health Care” as to become unaffordable to the common man. At least without the artificial aid of some Big Brother insurance company. And now, even that elephant has grown too big to carry!

        Health Care is in desperate need of reform. But ObummerCare IS . . . NOT . . . THE . . . ANSWER!! And until someone on the hill grows some stones big enough to root out the real causes of the problems plaguing health care (medicines whose primary object is cure–not profit, placing health care back into the arena of a vendor-customer relationship so that customers may shop and compare the value of service, and getting rid of the greedy lawyers and the insane costs and “C-Y-A” mentality they’ve single-handedly created), we will never have any real answers to fixing the problems of Health Care in America.

        Mr. Citizen, I do so hope you are right in what you’ve written about Roberts’ scheme — and I desperately hope it works out the way you’ve described. It’s too little too late, IMHO, but any relief would be welcome.

      • Not all of us can afford health insurance. I have it through work but I have to pay a fortune for it and can barely afford it. I know several people who don’t have it at all because at $ 350 – $ 400 per month for individual coverage it is extremely expensive so before you say stupid things like you just said get back on the real earth where people are working every day but struggling while the lazy perople who can work are sitting home collecting our
        tax dollars.

      • Thanks, Barry – – most people just can’t figure out how simple it is to understand how insurance works – – either that or they’re thinking they might contribute towards someone else’s broken bone, heart surgery, or vaccinations, whatever! It feels very mean-spirited.

      • Are you seriously defending Obamacare with “individual responsibility”? That’s the craziest thing I’ve ever heard! An expansion of government, from the right or the left, tramples all over individual responsibility and assumes that we are all too dumb to make wise choices.

      • To Barry: I AM INDIVIDUALLY RESPONSIBLE. I do not have health insurance because I can’t afford it. The money I make from three jobs is barely enough to cover rent, groceries, and gas. If I get sick, I have to pay. And by the way> I am not on food stamps, I am not on any government assistance, I am not on hardship status for reduced utilities. So don’t tell me to just get the insurance so I can be a responsible individual. You obviously have not walked a mile in my shoes, and until you do, you have no right to TELL me what to do (just like this legislation does).

      • I work two part time jobs to pay my bills, if I have to fund insurance then I will need a third to pay for it, how many people don’t have a job in this crap economy and you want me to go and grab a third job to be responsible? How about I quit paying for my house and utilities and buy health insurance, that sounds like a good idea.

      • Individual responsibility does not involve entering into a contract with irresponsible corporations. Health insurance is collective irresponsibility.

      • On the other hand, there are folks, for example Mitt Romney who are weathy enough to be self-insured. That is they have enough wealth to pay cash for any health care they may require. If Mitt were not to purchase health insurance using this strategy, he would then incurr the penalty tax. My point of course being he IS personally responsible AND he is being penalized. Unfair.

      • I hope you remember this the next time the left wants American taxpayers to flip the bill for the next major social engineering experiment.

      • Well if i made good $$ and had health problems your right, but in in my late 20’s in good health and self employed. I make less than $10,000 a year. and health insurance would cost over$1200 a year . Im not looking for a govt handout or free anything, but cant afford for the govt to require me to pay for something i cant afford and don’t need.

        • Jayson, I think what the IRS does is ad 1200 dollars to your total income, then you are taxed additionally based on your income plus 1200 dollars. So in your tax bracket it may only cost you a 150 bucks if you refuse to take Obama Care.

          I’m not a fan of what Roberts did, but I’m trying to learn the reality of it is for all of us. There may be a huge swath of people in the middle class who might be better off with a flat tax that also includes healthcare within the flat tax.

          Think of all the time that would free up for so many people if we switched to a flat tax and it included the healthcare coverage. The flat tax could only go so high before people would truly revolt, yet Obama Care could not be snuck in as an additional tax.

        • So Jayson, you’re 20 and don’t need insurance. If at 24 you discover you have cancer, you’re going to be SOL without insurance.

      • Glad you can afford it. Insurance for me would run around $700 per month because of my age alone not because I have health issues. My paycheck only adds up to $1000 per month. What would I use for food and shelter if I pay $700 of my $1000 on insurance?

        • In your case Jim, you would probably be screwed. If you refuse Obama Care the IRS would add 700 x 12 months, or 8,400 to your income of 12,000. You would then look up your “income” as 20,400 and pay taxes on that if you refuse Obama Care. You can compare income tax levels at 12,000 versus 20,400 to see how much more you are paying for not taking Obama Care.

          You might benefit from a flat tax if it also included Obama Care.

      • OH, but you will be taxed – what about the over 3% tax if you sell your home – what about the tax on medical devices – what about the tax on “Cadillac” insurance plans – ETC!!!

        My current health insurance with Humana does not call on the IRS if I miss a payment.

        We must make sure to vote and support conservative members to Congress this November and get rid of the UNCONSTITUTIONAL law!!!

    • I sure hope this is right and not just a ploy for public forgiveness for Roberts. I’ve been cussing him since I heard about the ruling and Roberts play in the whole scheme. I wish that SCOTUS had ruled to abolish the entire Obamacare plan, but we all knew going into this that wouldn’t happen. I honestly and truly hope and pray that Roberts had this whole agenda in the back of his mind from the beginning and it works. Now everybody get out and vote Obama out of office in November so we won’t see anymore of these under the table bogus manifestations again!

    • What you don’t consider is the fact that MANY Americans, including myself, think that providing insurance to people with pre-existing conditions, trying to provide medical coverage to all Americans and reducing the profits of insurance companies at the expense of the ill are all very good things… Way to go, Obama!!!

      • Insurance for people with pre-existing conditions? Well, we will all just wait until we are sick to get insurance then. None of this will work. It will bankrupt the country. The reason health insurance and health care are so expensive now is due to government interference in the market. You will have a little card that says you have insurance – you just won’t be able to see a doctor for months.

      • Steve, except that there is a big doughnut hole in the plan. MOST Americans will be covered. Not ALL. 11 million people will be left out. Read the bill yourself.. Plus it is going to cost 2.4 trillion dollars, not 900 billion. Gee, for that kind of money the government could just have bought insurance for those that need it and left the rest us alone. And since when do YOU or anybody else get to decide how much someone or someone’s company makes? How would you like it if someone decided what YOU were worth. Gee, how about all those overpaid sports players, singers, actors, etc. I think that we should be able to tell them that they make too much money. And who decides that? The Government who all make more than the rest of us? Ever hear of supply and demand? Economics 101, Capitalism?. You know what Steve, you probably make more that I do, so give it up because I want it, that’s why. See how silly you are?

      • Yup, such a great idea that Obama had to bribe the last two senate votes….Mary Landrieau and Ben Nelson. Then he allowed a few hours to read it, and most members voted on the largest tax increase in history without reading it…just as Nancy Pelosi instructed. Welcome to Obama’s version of open government.

      • Then, you and those many Americans are clueless about how business works.

    • My 1 tweet health care plan! 1/2 Govt $ yr on health care / by the US pop = 15k yr 4 private acct 4 us all. Shop and costs drop!

    • Pure spin. Roberts’ opinion was judicial activism at it’s worst. He stabbed every law abiding American right in the back. Read the dissent. They let him have it.

    • the writer fails to consider one very important thing about Obama The gangster. He will use Coercion & threats of other sorts to get compliance or the states will face retaliation of another sort. The Proof? Arizona.In Retaliation for The Ruling & the upholding of a key provision in the Arizona immigration law The feds will no longer enforce immigration or deport any illegal from Arizona!

    • Miss the point…IRS won’t start taxing until AFTER the election. Those morons who voted for him and might be swayed not to because of this horrendous decision and the tax….the effect won’t be felt until AFTER the election.

    • Yeh,strait up common sense would have sufficed. Outstanding call Justice Roberts!

      The American BAR Association (and its State alter-egos) has, for all intents and purposes, taken over our entire federal, state, and local governments. The legislative branch follows the advice of their BAR member advisors in the constructing of statutes. The executive branch does the same in the enforcement of those statutes. The judicial branch is literally a closed union shop in that regard. You can’t be a judge unless you are BAR member and you can’t practice in their courts unless you are a BAR member.

      The term “BAR” is an acronym for British Accredited Registry [see comments below]. These snakes are in fact working for the Crown of England. And that is why the gold fringed flags are in the courtrooms. It signifies admiralty jurisdiction* [maritime law], which is another way of saying British jurisdiction [England is a maritime nation].

    • I just got my letter from Blue Cross / Blue Shield that they will have to raise my rates or I will have to change doctors and the hospital I prefer. So much for the lies “I can keep my doctor” or, “nothing will change for folks who already have health insurance.” I guess I didn’t hear the part that my deductible and premium will go through the roof in order to prevent a few more lies from the traitor in chief. Oh by the way you need to believe its still not a tax, its actually penalty, to prevent another lie from being true.

      • @Scott
        Then the reason my premiums have been going thru the roof for the past 15 years is because of OBAMA?! Good grief, you’re right it is a conspiracy!

    • I would rely like to feel like I was voting for someone, and not against someone. Its been a long time since we had an election like that. This year will be no different.

    • Maybe… It seems Roberts poison pill is that instead of using the Commerce Clause, Congress can simply use punitive tax powers to get us to do or buy anything.

  2. Bush’s Revenge??? Now that I’ve come down off the ceiling and can read without seeing red I see your point. It was brilliant!

      Ooops sorry for screaming

      • Bush nominated Roberts to SCOTUS and elevated him to Chief Justice when Rehnquist died.

      • Bush appointed Chief Justice Roberts, therefore, if he’s as crafty as presented in this article . . . it was Bush’s Revenge.

  3. Fascinating analysis about Justice Roberts. Very thoughtful. I’m not sure if I agree but you have certainly made your points well. Thanks.

    • Thank you. This is of course only something which I can assert as my inital opinion and analyses. I will not go so far as to say this I know this is the way it will defintely all play out. Things can easily change. The President can easily find a groove that allows him successfully perrsonalize the issue in a what that dupes voters again and Republicans could easily fail to get their act together. The only thing I know for sure is that I know a lot less think I do.

      • Also keep in mind a tax is easier to repeal AND the Dems WON’T be able to filibuster a repeal because of the same reconciliation procedure the Democrats used to pass it!

        • Always be aware and vigilant as vigilance is the cost of liberty. Do not underestimate the ability of Dems to SPIN the issue and be ready to state the obvious to those who fall for their not=so-cleverly disguised agenda.

          • You are incorrect. Reconciliation refers to bills that reduce the deficit, not bills that reduce taxes. The Affordable Care Act reduces the deficit. Repeal of the Affordable Care Act will require 60 votes in the Senate since it will decrease taxes and therefore increase the deficit.

          • To Keith Grimes…No Keith, it is YOU that is incorrect. OC can be repealed with a simple majority.

  4. One of the key points made in Chambers before the ruling was that, if it is a tax, and no one has been taxed yet, then the plaintiffs have no standing until AFTER they have paid the tax. The American People should CONTINUE to oppose this unconstitutional tax at every opportunity.

    • The law originated in the Senate, how does this jive with the Origination Clause that requires all bills for revenue to originate from the House?

      • They used convoluted reasoning. Roberts said that the required payment is not a penalty, but is a tax. Then, later in the decision he says that it’s not covered by the Tax Anti-Injunction Act because Congress never intended for it to be a tax when they passed it.

      • Jamie Dupree, a serious legislative wonk explained it, but he lost me in the telling. He’s usually right though.

  5. Spin it all you want. The Affordable Care Act is here to stay.

    • Yes sir. You are, unfortunately, correct.

      • Fortunate for all Americans who get sick or injured.

        • You sir have been drinking from the Koolaid Fountain!!!! WAKEUP!!!

          • If I am drinking Koolaid, its good to know I have affordable health care.

          • Keith Grimes is a socialist piece of dog$hit.

          • Mr. Grimes, you forgot to add some clauses to your phrase “it’s good to know that I have affordable health care.” 1) If I can get it. 2) If the government panels let me get it. Good luck and welcome to tyranny.

          • Healthcare will no longer be affordable once this legislation is fully enacted. Those who think otherwise are fools.

          • Ron, what do you mean “no longer be affordable”. It hasn’t been affordable for 15 years. There have been 13-18% increases EVERY YEAR.

        • Why? Because if they don’t have health insurance they’ll be taxed? How is that fortunate?

          • Your so called “TAX” dumbass works out to about a 1,000 dollar a day fine for those who can’t afford to or refuse to buy into this bullshit……Makes a whole lot of sense force people to buy something they don’t want or force them to pay outrageous fines until they do want it……..Half the fucking country will be in prison for non payment of fines………That whole gaggle of idiots needs brought up on criminal charges and Odumbo needs to be impeached and charged with treason and shipped off to gitmo along with Holder and that ugly ass wife of his

          • Got a link for that $1000 a day claim?

          • Pace, I love you man. You are one smart dude. Thank you for calling all these people out on their crap. ❤

        • that’s why people buy insurance to start with, you must be one that free loads off working people.

        • they always had health care of sorts. Now the government mandates what KIND of care (or lack of) anyone can get. Look at other nations to see how well it worked.

          • As a native of the UK, I would say it’s working just lovely, thanks

          • I agree. Mr Smith here ought to look at reality about his beloved UK…They are looking to model their Healthcare after what we here in the US HAD because their current plan is too COSTLY. But what do freeloaders know about such things?

        • Unless the new un-elected panel decides the procdures you need are not cost effective

        • Unless, it is a costly treatment like cancer or heart disease and then you will get pain meds and sent to the corner to die a quiet death, after you wait in line for hours on end behind the guy that doesn’t attempt to work for a living. It’s not just like a visit to the ER anymore…. Canadian MP Belinda Stronach came to America for life saving breast cancer treatment when her own Healthcare system could no longer help her. Who are you going to see when our system can no longer help you?

        • Until there’s not enough to go around and panels start deciding what you do and don’t get. Don’t get too old or you’ll be given a sleeping pull and sent home.

        • …and all Americans who don’t get sick or injured will pay for it.

          • And ALL the Americans that get sick will too… get it? It’s a mandate – we ALL pay for it, duh

          • Mr. Fergo…how will those who have low paying jobs or no jobs at all pay for it? Since those are the one that use the emergency rooms the most?

        • Again, Steve? NOT ALL AMERICANS ARE COVERED! APPX 11 MILLION ARE LEFT OUT> READ THE BILL YOURSELF.It is not about healthcare it is about power and control. And when you are a handicapped person and read the part about special needs people, you would walk in front of a bus.

    • For about 6 months!

    • We can’t afford Obama. But we can afford to fix what he hasn’t already destroyed. I don’t like where we’re going and I would suggest that many millions of God fearing Americans don’t like it either. We WILL be showing up to the polls on November 6th! It’s the only poll that matters. There will be a game change coming.

    • Not if it’s repealed.

      • It won’t be repealed. Just like Bush wasn’t thrown out after the SCOTUS allowed him to steal an election. That pissed off the left, you didn’t seem to have a problem with it though. Applauded the SC back then, remember?

        • Pace. You’re an absolute ass but a perfect representation of the ignorant, hyocritical, liberal establishment.

        • I am registered Democrat, and believed that Bush stole an election. I no longer believe it, but I do believe that Obama stole the presidential election in 2008 through electronic voting machines fraud, and I will be voting against him AGAIN in November. You can’t blame Bush for voters not understanding their ballots in SE Florida. Whenever I think about this, I thank God that Al Gore lost that election, and I stupidly voted for him!

          • lol, really ?…….you voted for Al Gore ? not anything i would ever admit to, Have you seen what he does recently……..losing that election drove him insane, he goes around lecturing about global warming promoting the carbon tax agenda scam…….like a chicken with his head cut off, ” the sky is falling,the sky is falling “…….lol , Al Gore is a OWO puppet like all the rest , Mad Scientists claim the globe is warming and the communist socialists use it for a way to pump the dummies ( indoctrinated strawmen ) for more tax money for the damages that the elitist criminal corporations caused from their profiteering……..$$$$$$$$$$$$$……..carbon tax what a hilarious joke on you …….it’s solar cycles that have repeated themselves forever , there has always been drout and famine , read the book of genesis in the holy bible …….47-13-27 …….only an idiot would want to pay a tax for something the sun and huge corporations caused ( if they did )mostly disproven at this point……….the ice caps are not melting calm down and don’t ever vote for someone like gore or obama pie in the sky . Also you need to defect from the communist democrat party and become an independent thinker instead of believing all the hoaxes your party pulls on you…….

        • Last time I read the Constitution, we elect people by Electoral College votes, not popular votes. Is there an amendment that I have not heard about?

    • No Keith you are incorrect. The Affordable Care Act was sold to the public as a Bill that would reduce the deficit. Months after it was signed into law and after the CBO finally was able to go through the whole Bill, they came out with the information that the cost would actually be double what was originally stated. It was sent to the Supreme Court as a Bill passed by Congress to reduce the deficit. It came out of the Supreme Court as the same Bill that was passed to supposedly to reduce the deficit. Justice Roberts did not change the Bill or it’s original intent by the Congress. He has no authority to make or write law. He gave an opinion that the fees are a tax and if they are a tax, then Congress has the authority to tax. Therefore it was Constitutional. The Bill is still the Bill. It is back in the hands of Congress and it can be repealed in the same manner that it was passed. It will neither reduce the deficit nor taxes.

    • Keith Grimes I believe you are wrong the ammount of votes to Repeal is 50 +1. Not 60.

    • “Spin it all you want. The Affordable Care Act is here to stay.”

      Until it fails disastrously. Won’t be too long.

  6. Hmm, I don’t know about this. I still smell bullshit. Maybe he’s on our side but it’s just as possible he’s not.

    • He is a justice. He isn’t supposed to be on your side. He’s supposed to interpret the constitution and apply it to each case that comes before him. Anything else is “judicial activism”.

      • But since those opposed to Obama health-control are on the side of the Constitution, Roberts should therefore be on our side. Thank you very much.

      • tell that to kagan, sotomyor, ginsberg and the other leftist hack that rules law from the bench based on political ties that named them to the supreme court FOREVER. they choose to interpret laws as THEY see fit, by who authored the law and which side of the aisle presented it, instead of reading the law and interpreting it based on its merit, language and constitutionality. anyone who has read the obamacare law knows it is an unconstitutional law no matter what the supreme court says. the fore-fathers of this country that wrote the constitution are all rolling over in their graves right now, on how this country has turned out. they are looking down on us and see how these politicians have ruined the greatest country in the world and we have become what we fought against for 200+ years….to be ruled instead of governed!!

    • There isn’t “sides” here . . . there is only interpretation of the Constitutionality of a law.

  7. Political bullshit , he is coward

    • Uhm, how? He’s there for life and can’t be “voted” out. So, what could he be afraid of. Did you read this post?

  8. I think you might have something here.. I was wondering the same thing myself.. Thank you for your amazing insight..

  9. Medved was making roughly the same point. I, however, believe this is a bumbling early defense of a judgement that will forever damage the country. With a “win” under their belt, the Democrats will be embed this law by trickery or slight of hand no matter what the future politcal landscape may be. A full, unequivocal repeal was/is our last, best hope.

    • clearly our work is not done…we must vote him out, etc. But Roberts, to me, set the table for us

      • Good luck… I’ll be voting him back in 🙂

        • And I won’t. We just canceled each other out. 😀

        • Oh, you must be one of those who strongly oppose voter id laws, only because they interfere with your ability to vote numerous times. The only way the current occupant of the White House will get re-elected is if those who are not legally allowed to vote for him actually place votes. That is fitting, since he is the first occupant that had his college tuition paid for by the American public using foreign-student aid.

    • To do that the Republicans will have to win the White House, the House of Representatives, and 60 seats in the Senate. It is doubtful that will happen any time soon.

      • Actually, since it was ruled a tax, they only need a simple majority in the Senate to repeal through reconciliation. The same way it was passed in the Senate.

        So realistically, all the Republicans need to do is win 4 seats in the Senate and the Presidency along with keeping the House. I doubt they lose the House, and Obama’s not really doing all that well and now has to defend this thing as the largest tax increase on the Middle Class in the history of the US (with the possible exception of the implementation of the 16th).

      • 34 Senators are up for reelection.
        22 Democrats
        10 Republicans
        2 Independents.
        With the backlash in the political climate, the Rs have a decent chance of getting close to 60% this time around.

      • Actually, since it was ruled a tax, the Republicans only need a simple majority in the Senate. Then they can use the same budget reconciliation process that the Dems used to give us this thing in the first place.

        4 Senate seats and the presidency? That’s actually quite realistic. Especially since the Dems and President Obama now have to defend the largest tax increase on the middle class in the history of the US. Barring implementation of the 16th.

        • I realize facts are difficult to wrap your minds around, but from Politifact (I would suggest that Google is your friend whenever you hear FOX commentators, Rush Limbaugh, or a republican politician say anything and do some fact checking):
          “Depending on your rounding, that would mean the tax increases resulting from the health care law would be about the size of tax increases proposed and passed in 1980 by President Jimmy Carter, in 1990 by President George H.W. Bush and in 1993 by President Bill Clinton.

          The health care-related tax increases are smaller than the tax increase signed into law by President Ronald Reagan in 1982 and a temporary tax signed into law in 1968 by President Lyndon B. Johnson. And they are significantly smaller than two tax increases passed during World War II and a tax increase passed in 1961.”

          Now, hating to burst anyone’s dreams of a country going to ruin because of this, but we are presently being taxed at the lowest rate in over 70 years. If we could afford the 1 1/2 times greater hike under Reagan when the rates were higher, we can afford this.

          I looked up what exactly the penalty is for not having insurance. $90/person, or 1% of your income, whichever is greater. Since I’m not sure I’ll be in the subsidized category, nor that my backwards state will even choose to expand Medicaid, I’d be paying all of a penny per dollar to help pay for all the folks using health care unable to pay. If a hospital writes off a thousand dollars, that’s tax income we are not collecting now. If paying a penny a dollar covers that, it is a good thing for the nation. The $1000/day BS up thread is, I think, targeted at large corporations- you know, the same corporations making record profits under Obama’s presidency. Tax credits so actual small businesses can offer insurance is already started- I was reading the posts of businessmen-the actual job creators-blessing Obamacare since they could now afford to offer loyal employees insurance, in some cases those people were themselves.

          People are now taking a second look at Obamacare. The court case ensured that the actual benefits came back into public notice. The cries of “Death Panels” are dimmed, overshadowed by the many people who in the past two years have faced real death panels in their insurance companies, have lost jobs while the T-Party elected on “Jobs, Jobs, Jobs” have fussed around with curtailing voting rights, enacting restrictions on abortion and birth control, and fighting over .05% tax increases. They are looking at paying the rent or actually having birth control (of course, married couples can always give up conjugal rights for the duration). If the birth control fails and they have to have a baby they can’t afford, with no insurance because they lost their good job with benefits, well, sucks to be them, right? I don’t think any but the most brainwashed will vote for the people that didn’t focus on the promised jobs, and loudly stonewalled every measure proposed by the president or the democrats.

          Enjoy your fantasies. You could conceivably still win the election. Citizen’s United and voter ID laws will give you a chance. Rig some Diebold machines like in the past and you’ll have it. But you can’t do it honestly. Simply reading the folks touting the falsehood about the size of the tax increase is proof of dishonesty. Your presidential candidate flips and flops like a fish, and isn’t even a good liar. Personally, cheating or lying to win isn’t something I ever felt happy about. Being the “best” by outspending someone isn’t something I would feel pride in either. Used to be an American Value- you know, Truth and Justice, Fair Play, those values that used to be central to our pride as Americans? All gone as far as I can tell on the Right, and a bit lacking on the Left at least in the political class. I’m a traditionalist, and a bit of an idealist. I truly believe n American exceptionalism, which means being truthful, having our entire nation prosper, not just the already prosperous, caring for the sick, the disabled, the Veteran (Paul Ryan’s budget cuts care for vets), the young, Having the best education system in the world (no where else does Creationsim get debated as belonging in science class). We used to be the manufacturer for the world, now it is China for mass cheap stuff and Germany for quality. Our fall has been gradual, but it started under Reagan with union busting and tax cuts. It was creating the EIC instead of raising the minimum wage, so the government now subsidizes the burger you bought at McDonald’s, and your low prices at WalMArt. Clinton helped continue the deregulation of business and added fun trade agreements which hurt our middle class. Bush II cemented the downfall with tax cuts and wars on credit. He also single handedly made us despised as a nation by many. Or laughed at. He made us hypocrites about human rights when he authorized torture. But y’all hate Obama and really hate any program or plan to bring us back to our old status, especially if it might cost you a penny today, even if it will cost you more later. Where is the spending on our bridges and roads right now when we can borrow at effective negative interest? Blocked by your precious T-party. No, we can’t borrow a billion today, even if the cost will triple in a few years when we have no choice but to do it. Even if the cost will at least be partly offset by increased revenue and taking folks off unemployment and food stamps. Can’t do it. It would help the black guy.

          • did anyone read the manifesto above? I quit when I noticed the math errors over the difference in an billion and a trillion. You have to do better than spout the sum total of your knowledge based on what someone reads to you off of the bumper stickers that go by your free government housing.

      • Wrong. Only 50 is needed with the VP tiebreaker. This is a tax, which is revenue, which is voted on under the rules of reconciliation and is not subject to filibuster. Roberts just forced Obama to admit it is a tax and run on the biggest tax increase in history, weakened the Commerce Clause, and strengthened federalism. Now the states that want OCare will attract those who like freebies and those states that don’t will get the talent and best doctors. The goal has always been 50 separate experiments and this will now allow for that to happen. So your jobs are twofold – ensure your state does not accept federal money or setup any exchanges and then ensure you get to 50+ in the Senate, hold the House, and get the Presidency. Then this thing is toast and we still get the benefit of a weakened Commerce Clause and strengthened state powers. This is not wishful thinking on my part. I only believed this after thinking about it logically for a very long time and talking with those in DC who know more about this stuff than I do. Think about this: why would the replace for Reinquist vote with the liberal block? That makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. The man who says he is a strict constructionist. Certainly he should have stuck with that principle, but I think he let his feeling guide him to a place where he made a personal call (which he should not have done) but that in the end will hurt Obama and his healthcare plan all the more. Just my two cents.

        • So, those of us who don’t want to live in “Nanny state, USA” can move to a state where they don’t accept federal healthcare dollars and be exempt? Priceless! And, as you say, all the best doctors will be in THOSE states, so it’s a win/win. LOL. Hope this turns out to be correct.

          In any case, it clearly is a vote that weakens the commerce clause in a liberal’s eyes (once they get the koolaid out of ’em anyhow). Justice Roberts just made it IMPOSSIBLE for them to force us to buy X electric car, Crest Toothpaste, Genetically modified food, or whatever unless they remove ALL the free market and individual ingenuity.

          I’m giggling so much over this prospect! LOL.

          • You’d have to get the GMOs labeled first, though, to know 100% what they were……….

          • The problem is that, when the remainder left in those states begin dying off due to the lack of decent doctors and nurses, they will wage war on the rest of us, either via confiscations or other usuruous and treasonous laws. Bottom line, the thiefs and traitors who maintain offices in the District of Criminals will only stop when they are made to stop. It has always been that way; throughout history, people had to rise up with tar, feathers, pitchforks and guillotines.

        • Well spoken and finally some one gets the #’s it is 50 +1 not the 60 that Keith Grimes keeps plastering on this page! I agree with all you have stated. Well done.

      • Wrong. Only 50 is needed with the VP tiebreaker. This is a tax, which is revenue, which is voted on under the rules of reconciliation and is not subject to filibuster. Roberts just forced Obama to admit it is a tax and run on the biggest tax increase in history, weakened the Commerce Clause, and strengthened federalism. Now the states that want OCare will attract those who like freebies and those states that don’t will get the talent and best doctors. The goal has always been 50 separate experiments and this will now allow for that to happen. So your jobs are twofold – ensure your state does not accept federal money or setup any exchanges and then ensure you get to 50+ in the Senate, hold the House, and get the Presidency. Then this thing is toast and we still get the benefit of a weakened Commerce Clause and strengthened state powers. This is not wishful thinking on my part. I only believed this after thinking about it logically for a very long time and talking with those in DC who know more about this stuff than I do. Think about this: why would the replace for Reinquist vote with the liberal block? That makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. The man who says he is a strict constructionist. Certainly he should have stuck with that principle, but I think he let his feeling guide him to a place where he made a personal call (which he should not have done) but that in the end will hurt Obama and his healthcare plan all the more. Just my two cents.

      • Actually Keith, if it’s a tax, it only needs 51 votes to be done away with. Take your blind sheep act elsewhere.

      • Actually, since it’s a tax, only 51 seats in the Senate are required. Doable….without cheating like they did to pass it…

      • Wrong. This obamanation was passed by reconciliation. Only 51 votes are needed to overturn. Also, this bill originated in the Senate as a penalty. Now that it is deemed a tax, only the House of Representatives has the sole power to originate any new taxes. Can you say unconstitutional? Sure, I knew you could. Roberts knew this. Bye bye Obama.

      • No!!!!! The Republicans will do it the Democrat way. We will go through reconciliation to pass it!!! We don’t 60 seats in the Senate. 51 seats is all that will be needed. With 23 Democrats up in the Senate, 4 seats to get a majority won’t be a problem!!! Even with Barry’s ACORN thugs, the Republicans will keep the House and get the White house back!!!!!!

      • or Romney can use the Presidential Directive to stop Obamacare, jisdt like Obama used it to stop immirgration enforcement

      • No, since it is a tax, you only need 50 + the Veep. (or 51)

      • They only need 51 in the senate for a reconciliation vote. Ironic huh?

      • 49% of the total populace against this, Nobama coming out for gays, continual blunders on the world stage, constantly pushing a civil or race war of epic proportions, allowing military troops to train for crowd control in an American city…as this list continues to grow, it becomes less doubtful every day.

      • They don’t need 60….The mandate is a TAX…..You don’t need 60 votes to repeal appropriations

      • I’m hoping that the 63% of Americans who do not want Obamacare will go to the polls and throw the Socialist-in-Chief out on his butt. I know this Democrat will not be voting for Obama.

      • A tax bill only requires 51 votes in the Senate! Live by reconciliation, die by reconciliation!

      • don’t fool yourself…we would rather put in Romney than have 4 more years of Obama and his mandates !!

      • Kieth, pretty sure you meant to say win 13 seats to get to 60 in the Senate. The reality is they may not need to have that supermajority. My bet is there are a few Democrat Senators that would vote to repeal.

        The Republicans already have the House and will likely keep it.

        The white house could be a fight but a lot of independents and other fence sitters are gonna be pissed when they find out that their going to be hit with more taxes.

      • We already have the House and I believe we can keep it. We do not have to win 60 seats in the Senate we have to take over the majority. We already have put in some new Senators in 2010, remember that? We working Nation wide don’t you worry Keith.

      • 50 +1 is what they will need to Repeal not 60

  10. Obama said it wasn’t a tax, however he appears to have misrepresented it. I would call that “Taxation without representation”. Wouldn’t you?

    • It is a tax offset by a tax credit, so the presidents record of lowering middle and lower class taxes remains intact.

      • Oh dear God in Heaven! You CAN’T be THAT stupid!!

      • Semantics, smoke and mirrors. There are upwards 20 different taxes involved. If you think this plan (and the taxes involved) won’t lighten middle class taxpayers’ pockets, then you are naive.

        • Actually, by removing uninsured people from the emergency room, which are supported by all people who pay taxes, and making them purchase health insurance, tax rates overall will decline.

          • I disagree, for many reasons at many levels. They now estimate this plan will cost $2 trillion. Who will pay?

            How do people who are uninsured, that go to the emergency room, make my taxes go up. If they don’t pay the bill and they aren’t on entitlements, then the hospital writes it off. I will assure you those write offs don;t add up to $2 trillion. Many hospitals are nonprofit 501c3’s and have no write-offs anyway (they pay no taxes to have a write off).

            Sure, those unpaid bills probably result in higher health care costs, but nonetheless my taxes will go up. Unless they simply borrow the $2 trillion from the Chinese or have Bernanke print it up. Those options make the value of USD go down (and prices go up) inflation is also a tax.

            I am one of those many people who are too poor to pay and not poor enough to get the expanded medicaid.

          • Hi KC Ted: You say that “They now estimate this plan will cost $2 trillion.” Who is “they?” Over what period of time? Is it offset by the savings achieved by emergency rooms? (And, this amount will be real.) What is the cost of leaving 40,000,000 or so Americans uninsured? What is the cost to small businesses that cannot afford group health coverage, or worse yet, don’t even qualify. Fact is, every industrialized democracy has some form of universal health care, and they ALL pay less overall for health care than we do (we are 36th on the list). No, I am certain that the Affordable Care Act will save money for everyone AND result in better health care available to far more people. BTW, even if it does cost $2 Trillion (which I doubt), we can pay the cost by deciding to invade fewer countries and waging less war.

          • Bums don’t buy insurance Keith, they buy 40s. They don’t file taxes either, or have addresses, so how are they going to assessed, or for that matter, pay the tax?

          • You seriously msut live in a fanastyland. I live in Massachusetts and the ERs are still full of ilegals and the scum of the earth that still use the ER as their doctor. Nothing has changed in MA except for those of us who pay for our insurance have seen our prices go up and the state to be further in debt financing all the freeloaders. I hope every state that brought a lawsuit aganist this mess op out of Obamacare if that happens Keith your affordable health care plan will be none existed due to no fundings.

          • you guys are idiots. You arent looking at the big picture. Pathetic

          • Since the overwhelming numbers of uninsured users of emergency rooms are illegal aliens who as of yet don’t pay taxes, not sure where all the money you think will be saved is coming from.

            For five years I lived in a country that had national healthcare. Every time I had something serious, I sought out and paid for private healthcare because yes — the national health care was that bad.

            So if you’re happy that everyone will have crappy care (because it will bring the top down, not the bottom up), rationed crappy care, I should say, then something is truly wrong with you.

          • Holy crap Kieth those people uninsured using the emergency room can’t afford to buy health insurance to begin with. And, in case you didn’t understand the ruling by SCOTUS no one can be made to purchase health insurance. no one.

          • Make people who get free food, housing, phones, healthcare etc…pay for health insurance? Yeah right!

          • KC Ted, everyone who goes to the emergency room with no insurance makes your health care go up.

          • “The Affordable Care Act will fix that. And that, my friend, is a “fact.””

            HAHAHAHAHAHAHA! Hey, wanna buy an immortality potion? Maybe I could interest you in some water front property in Atlantis?

          • The problem is, you won’t actually remove anyone from the emergency room. You’ll just be shifting the burden by reclassification, renaming, recategorization, and all the other politically correct smoke and mirrors. Just where the hell do you think all those “poor unisured” people are going to get the money needed to pay their fair share of the premiums – er, taxes – er . . .

        • My husband and I are both self-employed and uninsured. I pay for my health care out of pocket, even the emergency room visits for a broken ankle (three times) on a weekend or holiday when no doctors’ offices were open. You know who I saw in the emergency room besides myself? People on Medicaid who had a flippin’ COLD. So I’m thinking that’s a misuse and abuse of Medicaid, because there’s not a lot to be done for a cold, so why not wait until a weekday to go to a regular doctor, which is infinitely less expensive? If I could afford to buy health insurance, I’d have it. How is making me pay more taxes going to solve anything? All it’s going to do is make it where I cannot afford to self-pay, so NO HEALTH CARE. I guess I’d better wear my ankle brace 24/7 and pray I don’t break it again.There are many of us who are too proud to go on public assistance . . . besides, I’m quite sure we wouldn’t qualify.

          • CB I am self employed and I pay for my own insurance, which is going to stop pretty soon because I can no longer afford it. You know what I see? I go to the radiologist, I pay for xrays, teachers and cops get them free. I go to the pharmacy, I see teachers and cops with $2 co pays. I’m sick of paying for their insurance and mine. I want change. Whatever it is it can’t be worse than what I have now, which will soon be NOTHING.

          • Rut-roh, Pace, struck a nerve there: My dad was a police officer. He willingly put his life on the line, for people he didn’t even know, every day, whether on or off duty. I consider it minor compensation if police officers are provided free health care, although I know his was never free.Not only that, but for the risks involved in the job, they are sadly underpaid, as are firefighters; and teachers, who help shape our children’s minds. Of course, my dad wasn’t union, which makes a huge difference. Unions were good and needed when they began (my grandpa was union); now many of them are full of power-hungry thugs and bullies.They’ve outlived their usefulness, IMO.And remember, many of the unions are exempt from this *wonderful* new health care law, as are members of Congress. Hmmmm, just how wonderful can it be if exemptions have to be made to keep Obama’s buddies in his corner?

          • Ok pace, I am a teacher, and I get NADA for healthcare. I don’t have any!!! I might be inclined to punch you in the face. I actually need a hernia fixed, but can’t afford it. I wouldn’t mind if I, the cops, firefighters and military were given good benefits. They deserve it. Just throw out the non tax paying bums and illegals. Keith Grimes is a complete buffoon. Hoping Texas opts out of Obamacare.

          • Rather than punch me in the face, maybe you should kiss me for telling you to move to Long Island. The teachers where I live make well over 100,000 a year and pay 15% of their cadillac health plans. And don’t even think of telling me I’m lying, look them up: seethroughny. com. Mattituck Cutchogue or Riverhead school districts. You live in the wrong place.

        • You are wasting your time with Keith Grimes! There is zero logic and if something begins to make sense he will immediately transfer to a war, etc. He will not transfer to ‘bailouts’ or any other shenanigans that Obama has implemented because he believes all of those have been immensely successful. I spoke with a real estate agent – over 30 years experience – who told me that almost no money that was intended for the real estate crisis has been seen. Somewhere along the way before it got to those it was supposedly going to help…someone else got it! Imagine that. Of course, Mr Grimes will spin that as well so don’t waste your time trying to change his mind and certainly don’t argue with facts; they don’t work with liberals.

          • The fact is, the vast majority of the “bail outs” occurred under Bush. Obama’s “bail out” consisted primarily of tax cuts. And, that’s a fact.

          • Problem is C. Gordon, most of the anti-Affordable Care Act proponents on this thread are dealing in misplaced emotion based upon I don’t know what…but “facts” is not the basis. Most of the people posting here don’t seem to understand that the USA has the most expensive health care covering the fewest people of any industrialized democracy on the planet. The Affordable Care Act will fix that. And that, my friend, is a “fact.”

          • Wow…so you mean that the politicians and corporations IN this country, have finally figured out how to do what those in foreign countries have been doing for at least the past 100 years — make US govt money that was “intended” for some purpose, “disappear”? And here everyone was blaming all those “corrupt” officials in other countries, for fraud, waste & misuse of our hard-earned government funds…

          • Keith you are an idiot. The act has already caused many small businesses to stop providing insurance because of the massive increase in cost since it’s passage, as it does NOTHING to control costs, which is essential to fixing the problem. I AM a small business, and my rates have gone up at a rate in the last couple of years several times greater than at any time in the last 15 years, to the point that this year will likely be the last year of coverage for my business, we just can’t afford it anymore, it’s becoming one of the single highest cost items for us.

          • Cy Welch, I’m calling you on your BS. I’m a small business also. My rates have been increasing anywhere up to almost 20 percent each year for the last 15 years. Last year was actually one of the SMALLEST increases I have had. Your costs would have gone up regardless. And yanno what? You shouldn’t provide it for your employees, let them pay 100% of the cost like everyone else should. Including every freaking teacher, cop and other public employee.

      • Keith….You truly are an idiot…. (I managed to post this after I managed to stop laughing) Yes folks…They really are that stupid

        • Idiot? Why? Maybe you can stop “laughing” long enough to post some facts that would prove that the Affordable Health Care Act is either unconstitutional or bad public policy. Good luck.

          • The laughing is that you believe it was Bush that did the big bail outs and not Obama. I’m laughing now at that thought. Let’s see YOUR facts. OH and I want to see the deed to General Motors signed by G.W.

          • Here’s a “fact”. The power of government to do what the revised-Hillarycare-Act does was unconstitutional before, and attempts to do what it does have been denied before. The limits placed on government by the Constitution are specific and government’s powers are few. The Constitution says it can only be changed by an Amendment. Anyone seen an Amednment lately?

      • that is bullshit…..there is no zero sum taxes….

      • Middle class will get hard with this Obamatax. There arent enough rich people to pay for it, even if every penny from the rich were confiscated by the regime. Lower class pays NO income tax and are eligible for taxpayer paid entitlements. Obama is creating more and more poor or lower class American with his inability to inspire and create a business friendly environment to allow people to get jobs.

      • Grimes, Evidently simple math is beyond your comprehension, You can not spend more than you take in and decrease deficit, it’s a physical impossibility. A tax offset by a credit? what kind of idiocy is that? it results in null revenue. Grow a brain!!

        What SCOTUS has done, has actually increased the likelihood that, this POS legislation will be repealed and or defunded, and that all but the wacked out communist states will refuse any funding from the feds to implement it. And as an individual I do not have to participate in the scam. Also I have talked to hundreds of business owners that will not play ball with this crap either.
        It is just like medicare/medicaid which started out broke and will end broke.

    • ..nice try. Actually it’s only “taxation by mus-representation”. (Being nice here, no sarcasm intended.)

    • More like taxation with misrepresentation…..

  11. two arguments from commenters at Dick Morris site that I found very compelling:

    Charles S. LangSupreme Ct. Under Art.1 Sec8. Only Congress has the right to impose a Tax and thios must be equal between the individual states. Art.1 Sec 8 clause 19 regulates the Supreme Ct’s. function. Yet Roberts placed the “mandate as a tax” B.S.
    Semper Fi
    Chuck Chris Lang.

    Nancy Menicon Christiansen · Clarkson University
    I believe health care insurance is a CONTRACT between the insurance company and an individual, certain services for a fee. If one has to “buy” health insurance under threat of a fine, that constitutes duress, which would negate a legal contract where both parties have to agree on terms without duress.
    Reply · Like· 54 minutes ago

  12. THANK you for this!

  13. Mitt Romney: “If we want to get rid of Obamacare, we’re going to have to replace President Obama.”

    • Sorry, that won’t do it. You also have to win the House and 60 seats in the Senate. Unless, that is, Romney intends to become dictator-in-chief.

      • I’d prefer Romney dictator in chief to the Obama lawless, tyrant dictator we already have!

        • President Obama can’t repeal anything without Congress. Neither can Romney…despite his constant claim that he can.

          • You keep sayin that the GOP needs to win the house and 60 seats of the Senate. A) they already have the House and are expected to gain seats. B) you don’t need a 60 seat majority to repeal a bill. This isn’t a constitutional amendment. You need 51 votes to write a bill that kills Obamacare. And Romney can issue a waiver that won’t require immediate Congressional action. If the GOP takes the White House and the Senate, Obamacare is dead in February.

          • Not to worry. They won’t.

          • Not quite, Keith. Romney could order an executive order to stop funding elements of the law. So, if you want to get technical – yes, the congress would need to repeal it. But, cutting off funding does the exact same thing.

          • ..I believe Romney said “..WE must repeal ObamaCare..”. He has available to him only the EO process. He has said he will issue an EO waiving ACA for all states the first day in office.

            He reiterated that today.

          • It is called A Presidential Directive, just like Obama used to stop enforcement of immigration laws

          • Keith, President Obama has shown that the President can pick and choose what laws to enforce. Romney as President could just choose to not enforce the law.

          • Romney just said he would begin the process. Need to listen carefully for yourself.

          • Well….We need a congress that will mandate every american buy a gun…the ones who refuse will be “fined” $3000.00 per year through the tax code…..because now we can mandate what we want and just call it a “tax”

      • You sir are incorrect. A simple majority of 51 votes in the Senate is all that is required. And it will happen… as soon as that slimy geek Harry Reid is no longer the majority leader.

        • Good luck on that one. I am happy to predict that the Affordable Health Care Act is here to stay. Maybe I’ll revisit this site in a year or two (though I don’t generally visit these rightwing blogs), to see if the rant has subsided as the law takes hold. I predict that it will.

          • You don’t get it Keith. But then again, I expected nothing less from the “Gimme sumtin 4 free!” crowd. I really look forward to pay a higher premium this year, a higher co-pay, and a higher tax just so you can slide on by in life with minimal effort while the rest of us get screwed.

          • Jeff ^^^ another one on the right who thinks people who can’t afford insurance are just lazy or want something for nothing. Jeff, I’m in sales. I haven’t had a day off in I don’t know how long. I pay 100% of my own insurance. Go ahead and tell me I want sumptin 4 nothin. Go ahead, I dare you.

      • Wrong. 51 votes to repeal a tax.

      • Actually, that’s not true. Since it was passed through reconciliation, it only requires 51 votes to overturn in the Senate. That should be easy now that conservatives are REALLY fired up!

      • Like Obama is???

      • As I heard it, because the original bill was passed via reconciliation, rather than a full vote, it would take only a simple majority in both houses + POTUS to overturn; thus, 50 senators (+VP) will do.

      • I believe the President can grant waivers for each state to op out just like your hero let unions and government workers op out of obamacare.
        If Romeny wins there is no Obamacare.

      • No we don’t. The Senate got it here via reconciliation, and we’ll end it via reconciliation. And I wouldn’t be so quick to say we won’t get the 60 seats in the Senate. 22 Democrats are up this year;

      • Are you kidding me??? Obummer with his 30-40 czars is the dictator-in-chief and is trying to destroy this country.

      • Uh, we already have a dictator-in-chief and apparently you are ok with that. So, if we get a different one….. what’s the difference?

        • If we have to have one, better he stands with the people than the moneyed (corporate) interests in America.

          • 60% of we the people don’t want Obamacare or, as it should be called, Obamatax.

          • LOL! Obama behave like a corporatist, but only with favored businesses. Keith Grimes, please go back to the Democratic Underground site
            and spout your tripe.

      • why not, isn’t that what Obama has done?

      • only 51 – tax bills require a simple majority – and cannot be filibustered.

      • can repeal with 50 votes in senate…remember the nuclear option!

      • I believe that is exactly what Obama intends, Keith.

      • like obama has????

  14. Whistling in the graveyard.

    What Roberts just said is the following event is NOT theft

    A large man walks up and says.. “I am not a thief nor am I stealing your wallet, you can keep it and I will me beat the stuffing out of you as a penalty for not giving it to me instead.”

    Taxation on a non event is on its face ludicrousness, what will be be taxed for not doing next ?

    • Totally agree. How can the Senate initiated bill be a tax issue, when they can’t do that Constitutionally.

    • That really is the crux of it, and if it is not labeled as a tax, but rather as a penalty it is considered to be unconstitutional. Because it is unconstitutional as a “penalty” they have defined it as a “tax” even though it stretches, to great extremes, the boundaries defined.

  15. Not sure I agree with the assessment. I think this leaves us way too open to more tax abuse at the hands of the political class. The semantic differences between a “tax” a “fee” and a “penalty” are moot when the effect is the same.
    About the only thing good that will come from this is the blazing hot response the TEA Party will have in resistance, may put the Senate, the House, and the Presidency in the hands of Conservatives, and Romney (not what I call Conservative, but he HAS promised to repeal Obanation’s Health Care law.

  16. Yes, I understand the logic and insight, but you will see no tax under after November, and then, too late. You better have a better strategy than that!

  17. […]…enius Share this:TwitterFacebookLike this:LikeBe the first to like this. By aimeerosenow 0 […]

  18. “His ruling means Congress can’t compel American citizens to purchase anything. Ever. The notion is now officially and forever, unconstitutional. As it should be.”

    I call BS on this. What is to prevent a future Congress from mandating the purchase of a Chevy Volt and penalizing any citizen who doesn’t comply? Roberts just ruled that such a law is constitutional.

    • Obviously, nothing…the spirit f the comment is that the question (can they or can’t they) has been answered and now, for Congress to try something like that becomes much more difficult…it is up to the people to take it from here, is really the poin

    • That is exactly right. But let bring it to something thing more realistic… Gun control… Now that they have been told they can tax people for not following the leftist ways, what will stop them from passing a anti-gun tax and call it a gun safety tax if you if you have kids in the house?

    • EXACTLY!! I wonder if that’s what he did but then I think surely he knew what the further ramifications are. Even if obamacare is repealed – the damage has been done, a mortal wound has been dealt to us all – as the legal precedent has now been set – any government mandate is now legal, period, end of story, as long as you add a tax to the mandate. [what kind of mandates you think those self serving folks in DC can come up with? plenty I tell you, none of it good]

    • if you think the TAX from not buying a volt would pass congress, you’re crazy…obamacare passed barely because it was “sold” as a fine/penalty….

    • Actually, that was addressed in the text of decision. He distinguished between a tax that would be so high as to to it force you to make a decision — and thus coercive — and one that wasn’t. Essentially he said the government couldn’t use taxation in a coercive matter.

      The politics of it aside, the argument about it being a Constitutional tax was incoherent. They reverted to a narrow definition of what a “direct tax” was, saying that taxing a non-purchase was not a direct tax, but at the same time upheld the income tax as a direct tax.

  19. […] Chief Justice Roberts Is A Genius – WhiteHouse 2012 GA_googleFillSlot("BelowPost_640x120"); window.fbAsyncInit = function() { FB.init({ appId : 248812318541713, status : true, // check login status cookie : true, // enable cookies to allow the server to access the session xfbml : true // parse XFBML }); }; (function() { var e = document.createElement('script'); e.src = document.location.protocol + '//'; e.async = true; document.getElementById('fb-root').appendChild(e); }()); […]

  20. Love your denial and poor spin job.

  21. thrown through, not “thrown threw”

  22. I appreciate the emotion but did you all read the actual ruling??? The Court is tasked with first finding a way to find constitutionality in the law, they did that by stating it was not a penalty but a tax, but they also stated categorically, the government could NOT make citizens enter a market place. They also ruled the federal government could NOT punish the individual states by withholding regular medicare funding if they chose not to comply with Obamacare. States can decide not to establish the health care exchanges and not accept ACA funding. It is time the governed stood up and VOTED this out of existance!

    • Thank you Gail Foster and to I.M. Citizen for this post!! I was on the verge of a nervous breakdown until I read this. I was reluctant at first to read this, but it makes total sense.

      I like that the Government’s attorney argued that it was a TAX and Justice Roberts picked up on that!! Yes, you can put lipstick on a PIG…it’s still a PIG!! Now this Healthcare is a HOG and the DEMS will go down with it!!

      To point this out: Therefore, a state can decline to participate in Obama-care without penalty. This is obviously a serious problem. Are we going to have 10, 12, 25 states not participating in “national” health-care? Suddenly, it’s not national, is it?

      You are right…IT’S NOT NATIONAL!! Indiana, where I live, was one of the states that was in on the suit.

      JUSTICE ROBERTS DID THE RIGHT THING!! IT IS “WE THE PEOPLE” that need to take this matter up!! It is up to US to vote the people out if we don’t like their policies!!!


      • I’m part of the “people”, and I think that heading towards a national system of healthcare is the right direction for this country.

        I am glad the individual mandate was struck down. I don’t agree with it now, and I didn’t agree with it in 1993 with the Republicans proposed it in the House. I am, however, for a raise in taxes. Our infrastructure is falling apart and our deficit is out of control. Hard working Americans should have the opportunity to have affordable healthcare, even if their employers do not offer it, even if they are self-employed, and even if they have a pre-existing condition.

    • Except there are many Americans that feel differently then you do, and want the ACA to stay. What bothers me most about this thread is “us versus them” theme. You should be ashamed of yourselves, we are all Americans, we all want happiness and to raise our children. You people have lost your grip on reality “I’d prefer Romney dictator in chief to the Obama lawless, tyrant dictator we already have!”

      Lawless, tyrant dictator…really, ever live in a dictatorship…, the Constitutional democracy you pound on the table and say we should follow just did what you asked them to do…saved us from irrational tea party activists

      Grow Up, or get a psychiatrist

  23. Complete nonsense!!!! Roberts just gave the federal government the power to tax behavior not approved by the State. Now the feds dont need the commerce clause to run over us!!!!

  24. Do not have to have 60 in the senate for a tax…just 51…only 4 more needed at this time!

  25. I keep seeing that “spin” and can’t help thinking (no offense intended): what *&^*&^&%^&%^ planet is the writer from?

    I just must be too dumb to grab the nuance but I do know this: The power the Majority created with that decision will outlast Obamacare (whether it is tinkered with, the rates changed or it is eventually repealed). They reaffirmed the government’s power to tax you into compliance… just because you breathe air. And that, will carry over as a precedent. No spin is going to undo that.

    • The government had always had the ability to tax. If this had been originated as a tax it NEVER would have made it out of committee.

      • They have control over taxation and specific areas of commerce, but this particular shift gives them the right to tax inactivity.

  26. Don’t agree with the assessment. What this has done to the small minds in the media and the left is to prove that Nancy Pelosi’s “Are you serious” comments correct, give Obama a much needed accomplishment, and validation. The GOP by contrast has spent the last couple of years claiming that a law that was unconstitutional, when the supreme court found the opposite.

    This is absolutely terrible for our chances in November. With an in-the-tank media, you can be sure this will be touted far and wide as Obama was right and the GOP was wrong. And most ignoramuses, especially the 53% who voted for this disaster of a president, will believe it.

    • Republicans chances in November were already dismal. The Republicans could not have selected a poorer candidate than Romney. Most conservatives don’t like him. Liberals, of course would never vote for him. This ruling makes it all worse. Romney’s victory in November would be a bigger surprise than the recent immigration and health care decisions by SCOTUS.

  27. It is possible Roberts put a buckshot into Obamacare. Some suggest he gave Obama the middle finger in this ruling- he took away the legislate from the bench argument Obama used to threatened him, and supposedly he explicitly stated in his arguments that this cannot be a penalty tax, but the whole thing is written as an individual mandate penalty tax??? And I have heard it said, that by Robets telling Obama you win, it is a tax, the Senate will no longer need 60 votes (only 51) and of course there’s the whole little problem of taxes can only originate in the House and this one came from the Senate and that was ok because Obama said it wasn’t a tax… Things like this take days…. I wish it was repealed, absolutely…. but now in addition there is still the HHS Mandate battle, which would have disappeared if this was repealed…. so Obama’s war on the Catholic Church is still very much center stage… Romney would be wise to pick a Practicing Catholic as his VP. I think we will need Rubio in the senate, but Santorum, Newt, McDonnell, are good choices with Teaparty and swing state appeal….. It’s just 2 cents of an opinion though 🙂

  28. I’m curious about something: if the Supreme Court has now officially labeled Obamacare as a tax, and has reiterated that any tax can only be levied by Congress, doesn’t the Affordable Care Act have to follow the same rules as any other tax and be voted for by a 2/3 majority of the Senate? Since Obamacare (again, remember it is now a tax) was passed along party lines and did not enjoy a 2/3 majority vote, does that mean that the act was improperly passed and is therefore automatically repealed?

    Because I’ve been working all day (to earn my fair share so I can pay more than my fair share) I haven’t been listening to the pundits, so this question may have already been addressed without my hearing it. But if not, any thoughts?

    • Adam, I will respond to you since I can’t find the lady who pays 5,000 per year and truly believes that is enough to cover herself!!! Please check the costs of basic procedures, starting with the true cost of a simple doctor visit without insurance. I guess as long as you NEVER get sick or EVER Consider getting old and frail. What in the world makes you think you are paying “more than your share”?

  29. No, no, no. Roberts engaged in judicial activism in the most blantant manner — right in front of your respective faces. Who the hell is he to assume the advocacy role on behalf of the government in light of the Solicitor-General’s incompetence??? It was his duty and judicial responsibility to demand that the government take a stand regarding “penalty or tax” issue and defend their case on that basis. As Chief Justice he should not have allowed that presentation to create an “out”, and then guide them gingerly toward that “out” to the point where he finally had to SHOVE the government through that particular door between penalty or tax. It is not up to him or any other Justice to help the case of either party in one direction or another, but rather to consider what was brought before them and, if it was inadequate to lay out a rationale that was clear and acceptable, throw the case out. I am angry and ashamed of whom I thought was fair and objective. I will never hold SCOTUS in the same light.

  30. Should be able to overturn with only 51 votes in the senate. It was passed via reconciliation requiring only 51 – and it is now a budget issue since it is funded by taxes.

  31. Reblogged this on A POLITICAL PUNDIT and commented:
    Glad the Chief Justice is a brilliant man!!

  32. What he did do though, is state that the federal government can control our behavior with a tax. If they want us to do anything, all they have to do is say if you don’t do it, we will tax you. If you don’t drive an electric car, you will be taxed, if you eat fat, you will be taxed, etc. That is so bad, unconstitutional and unamerican I can’t even believe he did that. If the dems will, we are doomed!!!

  33. I meant if the dems win, we are doomed!!

  34. Mr. Obama, you said repeatedly that you wouldn’t raise ANY tax on the bottom 95% of income earners “NOT ONE SINGLE DIME”. Yet this is THE LARGEST TAX INCREASE IN THE HISTORY OF THE WORLD. But of course, all of your corrupt Union buddies are exempt. YOU ARE A FRAUD AND A LIAR.

  35. At least I’m not paying for people freeloading in the ER. I wish Republicans had a viable candidate. Romney is dangerous for the middle class.

    Obama has this one – slam dunk.

  36. Reblogged this on Freedom Is Just Another Word… and commented:
    Interesting points..

  37. One more thing and then I’m through: I keep seeing that posted…or similar sentiments (in re: the “Roberts was brilliant mentality”). And people repeat it ad nauseam as if saying it over and over makes it true (again, NOT you). I’m not sure if this is just an elixir to make them NOT feel as bad as they should, a means to give some leeway to Mittens for coming up with the blueprint or a way to give W a pass for appointing the “conservative” Justice (that sided with a liberal minority to add an expansive new Federal right to an already vast power power at the expense of the People, the States and freedom)… but it is an asinine spin to say the least and if that is the prism they see it in – they need to invest in a new pair of glasses.

    Anyone that thinks that Roberts’ selling out the conservatives today was a “brilliant” move vs. writing a Decision for a conservative Majority… read some history. See how expanding the reach and scope of Govt power (esp the power to tax) ever worked out to scale back Big Brother. Whether the ACA gets tinkered with or eventually repealed, the power the SC just created will survive it. And it is dangerous to its core. And no amount of “spinning” will change that.

    By that logic, Roberts could have sided with the minority (which would have then been the MAJORITY) that said the Govt didn’t have the power under the commerce clause or taxation powers (which is EXACTLY what they said -actually, they said the entire act was unconstitutional – but why let facts get in the way of a good spin). FWIW

    The dissenters were Justices Samuel Alito, Anthony Kennedy, Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas.

    In a joint statement, they said, “The act before us here exceeds federal power both in mandating the purchase of health insurance and in denying non-consenting states all Medicaid funding.”

    Kennedy, speaking in court, summarized the dissent by saying, “In our view, the act before us is invalid in its entirety.”

    “What is absolutely clear, affirmed by the text of the 1789 Constitution, by the Tenth Amendment ratified in 1791, and by innumerable cases of ours in the 220 years since, is that there are structural limits upon federal power – upon what it can prescribe with respect to private conduct, and upon what it can impose upon the sovereign States. Whatever may be the conceptual limits upon the Commerce Clause and upon the power to tax and spend, they cannot be such as will enable the Federal Government to regulate all private conduct and to compel the States to function as administrators of federal programs.”


    “If people let the government decide what foods they eat and what medicines they take, their bodies will soon be in as a sorry state as the souls who live under tyranny.”
    ― Thomas Jefferson

  38. Reblogged this on ballisticpolitics and commented:
    Extremely persuasive arguments made.

  39. I think the questions needs to be answered is: Who is going to define “affordable”? What a nebulous term and will not apply to everyone evenly. “Affordable”, is subjective. What is affordable for you, may be entirely unaffordable for me? I believe that we have been “sold down the river”!!!

  40. Page 12 of Justice Roberts opinion: Our permissive reading of these powers is explained in part by a general reticence to invalidate the acts of the Nation’s elected leaders. “Proper respect for a co-ordinate branch of the government” requires that we strike down an Act of Congress only if “the lack of constitutional authority to pass [the] act in question is clearly demon-strated.” United States v. Harris, 106 U. S. 629, 635 (1883). Members of this Court are vested with the authority to interpret the law; we possess neither the expertise nor the prerogative to make policy judgments. Those decisions are entrusted to our Nation’s elected leaders, who can be thrown out of office if the people disagree with them. It is not our job to protect the people from the consequences of their political choices.

  41. We can wait for a Congressional repeal, OR, the states can nullify ObamaCare. You want to get rid of it? Nullify! The Ten Amendment to our Constitution gives us a way to get rid of Federal law that over reaches.
    Go to;
    To get on board check this out;
    But if you don’t check those out DO NOT MISS;

    mss kriss

  42. Impeach Chief Justice Roberts!!!

  43. […] Chief Justice Roberts Is A Genius « White House 2012. Share this:FacebookEmailLike this:LikeBe the first to like this. This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink. ← LET’S HOPE THESE FOLKS CAN FINALLY COME HOME […]

  44. […] Read on here! [Comments (0)]  [link]  [TB] […]

  45. […] This one is at […]

  46. hmmmm… I don’t buy it. IF he went with the other justices… Obamacare would have been gone in it’s entirety and even MORE damaging to the Progressives. By leaving the Obamacare… they left the infrastructure of a broken monstrosity that Progressives will be obliged to throw money at it to fix ad nauseum from now until the end of time. Roberts should have killed it when he had a chance… and by not doing so… HE IS NOT A GENIUS. Time will tell who is right.

  47. Hey Keith Hello 2010 The Tea Party Took over the Congress and became the majority and almost succeed with the Senate. Yes we can take over all branches. And Romney will win by a landslide. Since the Supreme Court decision this morning Donations from small donors $10, 25, 30 and so on donated to The Romney campaign 1.5 Million dollars and it is still climbing so you are wrong and I am so glad. Obama may have won the battle but he is going to lose big the war!!!!

    • We shall see. I have my doubts.

    • So? Are we still talking about how money can buy elections? Good Grief!!! And you can “take over all branches” ??? I hope you miss the chance to VOTE.

  48. Roberts could have ruled the law unconstitutional and still accomplished all you say he accomplished. He’s a frappin coward.

  49. Absolutely Awesome analysis and insight. I was trying to say the same thing myself and ended up just FWDing yours instead. Go Roberts.

  50. Unfortunately, I disagree with this. That was not some effort on the part of the Chief Justice to put the ball back in the people’s hands. Instead, it created an opening for all future Congresses to tax anyone who participates in behavior that they do not approve of, or to tax anyone who does not want to participate in behavior that they wish them to. In short, there is now legal president from the Supreme Court that Congress can tax you into compliance. Roberts opened a massive Pandora’s box today and fundamentally altered the relationship between the government and the citizens. The implications will be felt for the remainder of our republic.

  51. Sorry, I’m not buying it. If Roberts wanted to follow the Constitution, he would have ruled with Scalia, Alito, Kennedy, and Thomas. As it stands, Roberts’ ruling does nothing to “gut” the Commerce Clause.

    As so eloquent stated by in the dissenting opinion, “…The principal practical obstacle that prevents Congress from using the tax-and-spend power to assume all the general-welfare responsibilities traditionally exercised by the States is the sheer impossibility of managing a Federal Government large enough to administer such a system. That obstacle can be overcome by
    granting funds to the States, allowing them to administer
    the program. That is fair and constitutional enough when
    the States freely agree to have their powers employed and
    their employees enlisted in the federal scheme. But it is a
    blatant violation of the constitutional structure when the
    States have no choice. The Act before us here exceeds federal power both in mandating the purchase of health insurance and in denying non-consenting States all Medicaid funding. These
    parts of the Act are central to its design and operation, and all the Act’s other provisions would not have been enacted without them. In our view it must follow that the entire statute is inoperative.”

  52. interesting take…imo it will energize, mobilize & insense many; Romney raised a million $ in the hours following the decision’s release. That being said, however, it would not surprise me in the least to learn that heavy handed threats had been made, for that is strip try how this *administration* is known to accomplish their objectives.

  53. I don’t swallow the statements in this article. It would have been much better if Justice Roberts would have decided to kill Obama-care completely instead of putting us through many more months and maybe even years of anxiety, anger and consternation.
    Some are saying on the news that Justice Roberts decided the way he did because he did not want to look like he was playing partisan politics with the Supreme Court. Well, I say – If that is so what an idiotic, stupid, moronic and lunatic time and issue to cast an UNLAWFUL DECISION!

  54. Let us then in that case see how the ruling on the Affordable Care Act stands up when worded thusly.

    See §5000A(b). That, according to the Government, means the mandate can be regarded as establishing a condition—not owning health insurance A Firearm—that triggers a tax—the required payment to the IRS. Under that theory, the mandate is not a legal command to buy insurance a Firearm. Rather, it makes going without insurance a Firearm just another thing the Government taxes, like buying gasoline or earn-ing income.

    • Good luck getting that one passed. Hahahahahaha

    • Great way to make a point!

      • A tax (penalty) on people for not owning a firearm? The proceeds from that tax (penalty) would go to fund police depts as these people put an extra burden on the system adding costs for everyone. And we can even add a criminal penalty if needed since almost EVERY State has militia laws that put almost every LEGAL resident in the “unorganized” militia.

        Let’s see how the Obamacare assholes like the mandate then.

        • I like it! Where do I sign up?

        • Excelent . . . We could maybe extend this same logic to parents who don’t make sure their children get a decent education. This TAX could go to help fund the social welfare, food stamp and unemployment programs.

        • Hahah, just thinking that through makes me smile, and I needed to do that with this topic. When you put another word in the place of health care (could be any number of effective words) it illuminates what this mandate decision really is.

  55. So if they can’t “mandate” that we buy a product, how can they “tax” or “fine” us for NOT buying it?

    It doesn’t make sense!

    • Agreed. Single Payer would have been much better than the Individual Mandate…that way we could have cut the insurance companies out of the deal, and made health care even more affordable and less exclusive. That will be the next step…universal health care for all, regardless of wealth, or lack thereof.

      • God I hope so. Having lived 28 years in the UK, and the generations of my family before me, I have seen no first hand evidence of the purported downsides that many on the right seem to so knowledgeably harp on and on about ad infinitum…

  56. What Roberts did by declaring it to be a tax is make it easier to overturn. Since the constitution gives ‘tax and spending’ decisions to congress the senates rule requiring 60 votes to end a filibuster is void. All that is required is a simple up or down vote to end a tax or to spend taxpayer money. Basically he left this up to the Americam people to get rid of this monstrosity with the next election.

  57. Strongly disagree in fact it’s just the opposite, first understand he reached to get it through in the first place but even more importantly as per the law all taxes must originate from the house of representatives this did not. getting a clue yet? Roberts usurp the law ! he also expanded the governments reach into our lives and killed federalism all in one shot . Fact is even his snide remarks about it not being his job to strike down bad is a ruse as that is Excalibur what his job description is .. this is bad very bad…

  58. Can any of you posting to this forum say you have the same health plan today as pre-PPACA? Doubtful. While Obama said repeatedly “if you want to keep your plan you can”. Baloney! Employers were mandated to include components of PPACA (dependents to age 26, unlimited lifetime maximum, preventive services at zero copay, and more.) all of which are good for the employee certainly. The cost of these new benefits is about 4% of the groups healthcare premium on top of healthcare trend costs that increase about 10% annually. Look at what your doctor charged in 2011 and today- they are passing increased costs on to their patients. Employers can opt out of the mandates to include preventive services until 2014.i see this driving many small businesses to eliminate offering health insurance at all. Master plan? Possibly.

    • Absolutely. A friend of mine recently went looking for a new family practitioner because her existing doc now charges the maximum allowed by insurance- a whopping $1,000 an hour. Of course, they don’t base that fee on actual time spent with the patient- as I recall, she was charged $500 for the visit (she has insurance.)

      I went to my GI specialist, who, with my insurance, charged me a whopping $50 for my visit. Because my deductible for the year had been met, my portion was not even $5. Honestly, I was embarrassed to write a check, but a person has to keep a paper trail of sorts………

      Some doctors are ethical; some aren’t. Some are now out to make as much money as they physically can -while they can.

      Those with insurance now are getting screwed because of what’s considered ‘reasonable and customary.’ And heaven help you if you are rural and fall into an area where your insurance doesn’t cover the ER docs who aren’t part of your insurance plan even if the hospital is, because they can charge you whatever the heck they want with NO regulatory oversight.

      Follow the money and find out who is getting rich – in many cases, it’s not the doctor……………

    MONROE, NC 28110
    TEL: 704.288.3515
    TEL: 704.989.0044

    June 28, 2012

    SCOTUS legalizes “lying” as a “Freedom of Speech”

    Politically speaking, Chief Justice John Roberts just proved he may be a “left-wing” Liberal. In addition for Chief Justice John Roberts joining the four left-wing Liberal Democrats on SCOTUS, he today joined these same four “left-wing” Liberal Democrats and Justice Kennedy to “legalize” lying as a First Amendment, “Freedom of Speech”.

    How low can SCOTUS go? Lying now is a First Amendment “right” under “Freedom of Speech”?

    Who is/are the individual(s) who recommended Chief Justice John Roberts to President George W. Bush for SCOTUS?

    Is Chief Justice John Roberts the “political traitor” who is leading and/or preventing SCOTUS from investigating President Obama’s qualification as a “natural born citizen”?

    While this SCOTUS decision was based on Stolen Valor Act, a federal law that made it illegal to lie about military honors, when SCOTUS legalizes lying on and against our “hero” veterans, Lying will become legal for all issues.

    • Speaking of “big government.” Lying should be a crime. Where are we going to get all the prisons to hold all of the liars in America? And, the police to police them? This would be big government run amok if you ask me.

  60. Nice theory. But you’re the only one who holds it. The states attorneys general likely don’t know it or believe it. Besides, all this (if you’re correct) does is create more legal limbo. It sets up more costly, protracted legal battles that will end back in the Supreme Court. And if there are no “genius” justices left at that time, your theory will be for naught.

    A “genius” Chief Justice would have ended it here and now. All Roberts did is kick the proverbial can down the road — out of his jurisdiction. For the time being.

  61. We will all find out what it means shortly. In the meantime, I read the bill, all 1100+PAGES, Nowhere does it say it is free to anyone….over 900 companies have been exempted from having to participate, wonder why? Because they had their attorneys read the law…that is why. It gives the IRS access to all your financial and medical records, if you don’t pay, they can fine you up to 700.00, or withhold our tax refund, if you are on public assistance and too poor to afford to pay, they will deduct it from your check, unlike medicare who will let you have it free if you don’t get paid enough to buy medicare and live, I don’t know if it is a tax or not, don’t care, I read it and if more people had taken the time, everyone in America except the illegal/non citizens(who won’t be required to purchase it) would be up in arms right now. I am not even going to tell you about the parts discussing the level of care which will be afforded the elderly and very young, especially the ones born with chronic, genetic and degenerative diseases. In addition, many doctors and nurses are leaving the profession when it is implemented, leaving so few to staff the hospitals and clinics, your treatment will be given by assistants and students, why would docators and nurses who make the money they do now choose to work for gov. free clinic wages, think about it for a minute, want to see what your care will be like? Go down to the nearest free clinic or Indian Health care facility, and that is a little better than what you will have once this law goes into effect. This isn’ t political, I’m an Independent, I don’t care one way or another, but if you don’t believe me, read the bill yourself, it is hard to read, and boring as hell, but that is where your answers are.

    • From what I have read so far Linda, those who are on welfare, or from poverty level incomes will not have to pay the tax at all. They are exempt.

    • You’re freaking about a possible penalty UP TO 700.00?
      I’m VERY proud that you read the whole thing, honestly!
      Obviously there is no simple or “fair” way to afford healthcare for basic needs, let alone for those unfortunate to be in an accident; or manage to care for the elderly or young who are not able to pay at all. There has to be a real safety net OR leave folks “on the side of the road”
      You are bright , please contact your representatives (all parties) and see if we can find some COMMON SENSE in all this absurdity.

    • You have a good point! No one is talking about the QUALITY of the care that is mandated! It is already hard enough to get some necessary medical issues covered… try getting them covered with the government in charge of them! (“Dial 1 for accute appendicitis… Dial 2 for testicular cancer…”) Good Luck!

  62. I still say, we would have gotten a better result with a states’ rights argument. States have always had the power to regulate insurance. The Constitution says that the feds cannot take powers unto themselves, if the states have already chosen to do that. There is DEFINITELY enough evidence that the feds cannot manage healthcare, with the seven mismanaged programs we currently have.

  63. Conservatives…………… is now our time to do something about this travesty that took place today. We all need to get out and recruit, get people to sign up and put this matter “to bed” in November! Our country depends on “Us”, not liberals. Liberals are followers of the people who hand them something for “free” which actually is paid for by others!

  64. taxation is force, so yes, in this case, even though it is a tax, it is still forced upon the American people. If you don’t have health insurance you will be assessed a 1% penalty on your income taxes. THIS IS FORCE.

  65. Heck of a risk with a troubled economy, debt, and a weak candidate running against President Obama. Not too smart if you ask me.

  66. […] Institute: Initial Thoughts The Catholic News Agency with a silver lining. You heard it here first: Chief Justice Roberts is a genius.Filed Under: Learning, Living, Prayer, Working Tagged With: Affordable Care Act, HHS Mandate, […]

  67. EXCELLENT! First thing came to mind after hearing about this vote was he probably did it on purpose! I have a gut feeling this will work in OUR favor on the side of JUSTICE FOR AMERICA!!

  68. Nice try, but no. Roberts could have ruled the Commerce clause reading unconstitutional without rewriting the bill for Obama to make it Constitutional (and, really, he didn’t even do that. He went so far as to say that words don’t mean what we heretofore have come to agree they mean — they mean precisely what John Roberts say they mean.)

    If the mandate as written was not constitutional under the Commerce Clause, and the Medicade reimbursement penalty unconstitutional under the 10th Amendment, the bill should have been sent back to Congress to be fixed and re-voted on, not deemed to be legal under an authority Congress and the President never claimed. This Roberts-is-playing-5-dimenssional-chess meme needs to be murdered in the crib, because it’s B.S.

  69. if ObamaCare is a tax, but it didn’t originate in the House… didn’t the Court just invalidate the law?

    • One would think, but I’ve yet to see anyone asking this question outside of Twitter and the blogosphere.

  70. Taxation without representation..tyranical government going against 70% of the people and 26 states suing prove that Of ,For and By the people is dead..or are we going to Obey or pour tea in the harbor again? Beans ,bandages,,all they need is bullets and we are the same as the rest of the world ..powerless to stop totalarianism..old farts R or D gotta…would rather Tar and Feather them though.

    • Have no idea where you got 70% of the people have really been heard. But I do know that our “great state of Texas” has become so partisan that our governor and top cronies will do ANYTHING to gain “power” (over who?) We hate the FEDS but gladly take the $$$

  71. He declared the “tax” to fund Obamacare is Constitutional. That “tax” is already provided for in Obamacare and will be confiscated by the IRS via liens and garnishment. There is NO positive media spin that can change that.

  72. He declared the “tax” to fund Obamacare is Constitutional. That “tax” is already provided for in Obamacare and will be confiscated by the IRS via liens and garnishment on those who do not buy government approved health insurance. There is NO positive media spin that can change that.

  73. well the fires in Colorado are proof that he can yank funding away from other services. If states can rely on themselves, fine, but don’t think this does not mean that Obama or any other president can’t in the future punish states by withholding funds for other items with the excuse that the feds don’t have enough money. Or that what they want to do, like put out fires with chemicals dropped from planes, is not environmentally friendly and therefore will not be funded.

    • Karen, last year when our Governor Rick Perry was in California campaigning for President, we needed his approval to access the nat’l guard or the other feds to help put out fires. He was actually too busy to figure that he could use a cell phone to call for help! He already knew that he had stepped on a few too many toes! The forest and the homeowners paid for his stubborn pride (states rights)

  74. We have a large portion of our country uninsured. This means they don’t get preventative care. When sick, the illness is usually in a later stage, which costs more to remedy, and they have no insurance to pay for it. The hospital doesn’t get paid, which means they pass on the costs to people with insurance. Then insurance rates go up.

    More people buying insurance will expand the pool and over time, lower costs. As people are able to now get free preventative care, illnesses will be caught earlier, and treated before they end up in an ER., where costs are much higher.

    In Texas, A Republican state, 25 % of their populace are are uninsured, compared to Mass. which only 4% go with out insurance. The only other way to fix the problem, would be Medicare for all.

    • Couldn’t agree more! I am sure my insurance would rather help me get a mammogram than wait till I can feel a lump. Fellow texan, who simply cannot believe so many people really don’t care if their neighbor cannot go to the doctor!!!! Friendly State Indeed!

  75. […] to, this afternoon, Chief Justice Roberts is a Genius […]

  76. From the begenning we have been mezmorized, if that is spelled correctly, anyway you get the drift. this health care act is one of the first among many to slowly erode our freedom as we know it and turn us into a government controlled society and the more dependent that we get on someone else to support us while we have a life of leisure`and when you get to the point that you depend on the government , then they control you and your freedom is gone. Some of us don’t realize we are letting thest liberals or What ever they are are so sloly stealing our lives and liberty. You have heard the saying that if you can’t dazzle them with brilliance baffle them with bull shit and you tell me if there has been anything done except big words , smoke without fire and it seems to be working on a big percentage of us.. Remember , no matter who knocks a hole in the ship we all go down together..

    • I am a liberal or whatever who really does not understand? Isn’t LIBERTY and FREEDOM about equal access to healthcare?
      since when in this country did it change to being concerned about someone living a life of leisure on your dime? Honest, god-fearing people get sick too and should not have to have loads of money in order to get help. Your carefully worded treatise was quite the razzle/dazzle you know what. I AGREE no matter who knocks a hole in the ship we all go down together. Starting with whose grandmother or whose premature baby?

  77. yes we can opt out of parts of it – but we will still pay in the end. Why should I pay taxes in Virginia to fund healthcare for the liberals in California or New york? THis was what the liberals were shouting about with the stimulus. Don’t like it – your state can turn it down…but it is funded by federal taxes that we all pay. I see no reason to opt out of benes on principal when I have to pay for them whether I like them or not.

  78. i do think he could have been less subtle and more forward and just said the obvious… it is not Constitutional.

    • Problem is…it is Constitutional.

      • It is pushing the boundaries further from the constitution than other taxation processes, simply by creating a tax for inactivity. Taxes are created for active use of a service, product, or process, but they are not (and in my opinion should not be) used to tax people for NOT doing something. It gives away too much power, and becomes extremely vague when deciphering what is and what is not within Congresses right to tax.

  79. Civil war? Now there is a resolution that may work if emperor Romney wins

  80. Be this as it may… I’ll take Romney at his word that he will start the repeal process as soon as he takes office. We conservatives need to take the Senate and keep the House so that a repeal is possible. What the rest of us need to do is contact our conservative candidates NOW and urge those who have no possibility of winning to drop out of the race and back a candidate that CAN win.

  81. […] Chief Justice Roberts Is A Genius « White House 2012. Like this:LikeBe the first to like this. This entry was posted in In The News. Bookmark the permalink. […]

  82. Bull, they just sidestepped the commerce clause. Nothing changed.

  83. Justice Roberts is no genius.

    4 liberal justices agreed with the commerce clause argument and the mandate penalty.

    4 conservative justices agreed the mandate was flat unconstitutional.

    4-4 tie.

    Roberts agreed the commerce clause was unconstitutional (it would have been a 5-4 win if left at this point), but let’s call it a tax.

    … 4 liberal justices see they can’t win with the penalty, so go along with Roberts on the tax.

    IOW, Roberts was the only one that said the penalty was a tax.

    And if he’s such a genius, why did he call the penalty a penalty for purposes of the Anti-Injunction Act?

    Oh, and the genius ruled against Stolen Valor and AZ.

  84. thats the dumbest garbage ive ever heard. you explained it like a four year old trying to take over the fort during play time.

    plain and simple. roberts didnt want to politicize the courts by seeming to side with the repubs. but at the same time he didnt like allowing the mandate to exist through the commerce clause. he made a mental compromise… he played a political game in attempt to de-politicize the courts.

  85. The bottom line is…it is up to each and everyone of us to vote in every election. There is no excuse for not executing that right…while we still have it.

    • One of the reasons to vote in every election is called redistricting! We have “districts” in Texas that go from austin to the Gulf – all in the effort to out-vote Democrat Lloyd Doggett, who actually does work of his constituents.

  86. He still voted for it. A pig with lipstick is still a pig.

  87. Brilliant? Do you not realize that this ruling allows Congress to bypass the Commerce Clause on anything? Not only can they tax the American people for purchasing a product; they can also tax the American people for NOT purchasing a product. Brilliant? No, idiotic.

  88. As A Christian Nation, Let us pray that all this will go down in history as as a sad and short lived try to destroy our country Amen amen

    • wow, universal health care is so unchristian. What Jesus do you worship?

    • Christ opposed health care for all? Are you sure?

      • Nowhere in scripture does Jesus demand Caesar to levy taxes to take care of people’s healthcare. Jesus commands all of us to care for the sick that’s why churches built hospitals and clinic long before the socialists in government took over that function. The argument that Jesus is a socialist is hogwash. Socialism is antithetical to Christianity because it destroys the very freedoms that can only come from God.

    • Christian Nation?
      While christianity may be the most practiced religion in the USA, this country is a country without a national religion. So we are not a “Christian Nation”.

    • “Christian Nation”?
      No…its a nation with no national religion. Just because christianity is the largest practiced religion in this nation doesn’t make the nation christian.

  89. I’m still not buying it. I see it as the government being able to force us to do something simply buy calling it a tax. If they make the tax high enough, we would have no other choice than to do their bidding. Right now, it would probably be cheaper to pay the penalty than buy the insurance, but what if they raise the tax. They could still be forcing you to buy it. And what prevents them from using this rationale to make us do anything they want. Such as this scenario I thought up today.

    Progressives HATE large families. They feel parents are greedy and selfish for having a lot of children because it’s “bad” for Momma Earth. Joe Biden loves China’s one-child policy. While I don’t think our government is quite to the point of implementing an out-and-out one-child policy, let’s say we get to that point in a, God forbid, second Obama term. They pull a Bloomberg and say, we’re not telling you that you can’t have more than one child, but for the collective good, we’re going to impose a $50,000 tax on each additional child you have. This will offset the cost of that child to society and help save Momma Earth. Well, they aren’t doing anything different than the health-control law. All they’re doing is implementing a tax on certain people to force them to do what the government has mandated. If the tax is prohibitively expensive, they have accomplished their goal. Is this that far fetched with a crew like we have in the administration and Congress right now?

    Even if health-control is repealed, this precedent is set in stone now.

    • Silly post. I have 9 children, 15 grandchildren, and 1 great grand child. And, I am a progressive. Without the Affordable Care Act, many of my children…and many of America’s children…will never have health insurance. Thanks to President Obama and the Democratic Congress they will now all have insurance. Goodby Emergency Room! Hello decent healthcare for all.

      • The question becomes, if you could not provide for so many children and if your children can’t provide for their children, why were you so irrresponsible, and why must I take responsibility for that which you can’t take responsibility for.

      • Wrong. Your children and their families can have health insurance if the get off of their butts and go to work and provide it for themselves.

        • What is it with these lunatics right wingers who think the only reason people can’t afford insurance is they don’t “get off their butts and go to work?” Obviously many have NO IDEA how much health insurance costs because SOMEONE ELSE PAYS FOR THEIRS. Who foots the bill for you, Andrew? The TOTAL bill. I don’t want to hear “I pay it” when you only pay 15% or only for your spouse.

          • What is it with theses fucking dense, asshole liberal lunatics who think the United States government is suppose to run our lives. I don’t want to hear liberals promotin g their socialist agenda and i do not want them intefering in my life. So Pace, kiss my ass!

          • SO Kempite, you’re another one who thinks people who can’t afford insurance should “just get off their asses” and make more money?

      • All Keith can do is call comments silly, but then doesn’t address the issue. Health care is not a right. You do NOT have a RIGHT to anything that another person must supply. You have a right to life, liberty, etc. But you do NOT have a right to things.

  90. With all due respect…HAVE YOU LOST YOUR MIND!! Nothing Roberts did today helped anything. He just made new precedent on the court that says the people can be taxed for no reason at all. The Constitution stipulates certain areas of taxation, Roberts went ahead and said just because it only states these few places does not mean other areas cannot be taxed. His opinion sounds like a second year law student wrote it and to top it all off it made almost no legal sense. Even the left of the court had to be scratching their heads about this.

    His opinion that the mandate is unconstitutional but a tax on nothing is constitutional is NOT good, that is NOW precedent! If the Congress wanted to tomorrow they could say we are going to be taxed for existing and there is nothing that could be done because of this ruling. It was a constitutional sham that even the left-leaning observers of the court will admit was one of the oddest decisions they have ever seen.

    Try to sugarcoat this all you want, but the fact of the matter is that none of this helps. So what the Supreme Court held that Congress cannot make you buy anything. They also held that they don’t even have to make you buy anything to tax you. The briefs asked for by the court did not even ask for the issue of the tax or it would have been argued by the states that they are both inclusive, not separate.

    Do whatever it is to make yourself feel better, but at the end of the day this decision was a sham. Even if Romney wins and we can repeal ObamaCare, what do you do about the hole the court left as it deals with taxation? The only remedy is a Constitutional Amendment, and good luck with that!

    • We posted at the same time and we’re thinking along the same line. The precedent set here will affect our country forever. Health control is kind of irrelevant now.

  91. The article clearly summarized the 3 important findings Chief Justice Rogers soundly overturned – use of the commerce, mandate, and taxation authority. We have to be grateful he thwarted some serious over-reaching of the Executive Branch. I am now reading Ginsberg’s opinion, and I dare say WE ARE LUCKY! Read the decision, America, it is good civics without the media spin.

  92. I wonder how many people posting here struggle with how to pay for health care?

    • As a teacher, in the South, I struggle with everything, but I don’t need to steal from my neighbor.

      • It shouldn’t be THIS expensive. Starting on the premise that that is OK is a wrong-footed way to start. If the burden is more evenly divided than is currently the case, then LESS “stealing” is going on.

    • It’s the middle class who will pay for this…The very poor will be covered but this is how it is already. Nobody is turned away presently..

      • No, but they will hound you and garnish your minimum wage job to get their money, usually at the full rate which is higher than ins.companies negotiate. If they can’t get their pound of flesh that way, they write it off, which comes off their tax bill, so you pay for those folks anyway. Since someone with no money or insurance can’t go in for regular check-ups, they hit the ER in a diabetic coma, or late stage cancer. You’ll pick up the bill there. Just as insurance covering contraceptives is a proven cost saver for the insurance companies, yet many don’t cover birth control outside of sterilization. Most companies finally caught on to cancer screening as a way to save money. But those of us who value eating well and having luxuries like heat in the winter over paying for health care we seldom used and now can’t afford are playing Russian Roulette. I’m hoping I can afford a health plan in 2014, since I think I’m just over the limit on subsidies, or expanded Medicaid, which probably won’t happen here in VA. With the pre-existing conditions dropped, and age/sex increases banned, I’m figuring I might can afford something. If not, the 1% penalty is doable. That is low so folks on the cusp like me are not beggered by it, yet someone making 500 grand a year won’t pass on insurance because it will be cheaper to pay 5 grand for a policy than pay a 5 grand penalty and out of pocket for anything that comes up. My one prayer is that the greedy old men who have desk jobs and a few million in the bank don’t succeed in screwing my Medicare- I have 11 1/2 years to go to qualify, and would prefer to not find the age suddenly pushed to 70.
        Yeah, maybe I’m being selfish, but I did have insurance for almost 30 years, and paid for it. My present employer will pay half if I get a policy, but at 50, even half is more than I can afford, even at 65-75 hours a week. Most any other job I qualify for is less pay and/or more physically demanding, which my body can’t take after 30 years of standing and lifting, and I’m supporting 4, plus helping my ex and his family. I’m willing to chip in via taxes or whatever so my friends, neighbors, and yeah, even wingnut strangers are not bankrupted or die due to our present system Its known as acting as a Christian would. Jesus never spoke to government providing health care, or food for the poor, but in His religion, temple tithes went to those things, employers were to pay their workers and slaves a reasonable living wage, and farmers were to leave gleanings in the fields for the poor. A beggar coming to your door at meal time was mandated by GOD to be invited to eat. I don’t think you folks would feed me if I dropped in somehow.
        Charity failed to keep up with demand before the Depression. Old people lived by the grace of relatives, dragging down their standard of living. Social Security could be considered a mandated tax because of inactivity-people did not save enough to support themselves past the time they could work. Medicare came to be to take care of the medical costs, which with better medicine were higher. Fewer charity hospitals and more for profit ones. Medicaid to ensure poor children saw a doctor and had a fighting chance at equal opportunity. If you need glasses, or are chronically ill, how can you learn in school and later compete in the workforce?

  93. […] Chief Justice Roberts Is A Genius […]

  94. For all of you believing that a Republican Senate could repeal the Affordable Care Act by a simple majority…you are simply wrong. Consider this essay published on a popular rightwing blog:

    You are also misstating Senate Rules. Reconciliation is for bills that reduce the deficit, not bills that reduce taxes.

  95. […] other Roberts friendly musings here, here and here, and especially here. Share this:TwitterDiggLinkedInPinterestTumblrRedditFacebookStumbleUponEmailLike this:LikeBe the […]

  96. MUST READ!!!!

  97. Roberts is screwed up and a traitor,,period. Grow up!

  98. Thank you for providing a voice that is deeper than a sound bite. Roberts is sharp. I have thought that from the time they started vetting him. Hopefully this will turn the tide in the correct direction.

  99. Weel, this was amusing wishful thinking. Here’s the reality: we were just told federalism is dead, and that we have a national government without limit.

  100. nice PR for Roberts but he is an idiot

  101. Chief Judas Roberts is no genius. He’s backstabbing sellout. Bastard ought to be removed from the bench and exiled to Mars.

  102. What makes any one think that because we’re mandated into a national health insurance program that we can’t now be regulated on what to eat, when, how much amongst other things?

  103. There’s nothing “brilliant” about this. Even if the writer’s premise is true, it’s an extremely dangerous gamble on Robert’s part. Besides, the Constitution is not a chessboard on which to play political games.

  104. I.M., you’re exactly correct. Conservatives got a lot out of this for future battles. In addition, the political motivation for the anti-Obamacare conservatives is as strong or stronger than ever. The election of a Republican president is now the whole game. Any risk that overturning Obamacare would motivate the left, and leave the right complacent and unenthused about the election is now gone. The battle will, and should, be fought in the voting booth and this decision , and the way Justice Roberts wrote it, has made sure that the dynamics and energy favor the conservatives.

    It will take a week or so before the conservative talking hot heads will realize this, but they will.

  105. Yay now Odumbo will play the fliip flop card on Obama light er Mittens. Sorry but he didn’t help Mittens out at all. Remember how much he touted this was heavily based on Romneycare and the emails showing Romney wanted the mandate for Massachusets

  106. I don’t see it. We would have had the same benefits and the end to the whole monstrosity had he simply sided with the 4 dissenters and declared the whole thing unconstitutional, other than labeling it a “tax.” This stops the federal government from bullying States? This decision simply recognizes an already established principle. It doesn’t establish a new one so this effect is superfluous. Roberts’ decision is bad, period. Given his decision in the Arizona case too, we have reason to be very distrustful.

  107. Guess we’ll find out in November whose the Genius, Obama or Chief Justice Roberts…

  108. Can’t wait till this law is sent to the shredder. Poor people cannot die soon enough. With this bill we will have all of the darn health poor people every where. What are we going to do? Naturally they will vote democratic because they are the party that saved their lives. We must end the law ASAP. Vote Romney! Down with poor people. Discrimination rules!

  109. This is really reaching (to call Roberts a genius). Yes, there were a few positives coming from the written opinions; however, that can’t detract from the fact that we are still being forced to purchase something. Call it a tax or penalty or a duck, it’s all the same. If Congress wants something forced on us they will just call it a tax.The opinion was poorly written and reasoned and I’m terribly disappointed in Roberts. Add to this ruling the Arizona immigration ruling & we see big government getting its way. By the way, does anyone really think 100% of the people will actually purchase health care? Studies show that between 16%- 20% of drivers do not have insurance (as required by state law). You really think this will be different?

  110. I, too was feeling angry and discouraged at the ruling, it could have been done, over with, we could have been free of this burden. But then I read the ruling and I M Citizens blog and the light went on. As much as we would have liked for Chief Justice Roberts to do our dirty work, we must never forget, it is all about “the consent of the governed” Americans voted into office President Obama and the many democratic Congressmen that ran roughshod over our liberties to to deliver to us for our “good” the horror that is Obamacare. This battle would NOT have been won with a SCOTUS ruling, it can only be won when the “Governed” speak loud and clear with their vote and then it can only be said… The “Governed” have spoken..

  111. will fix Social Security and eliminate ALL taxes based on income without lowering revenue going to the U S Treasury

  112. However, Chief Justice Roberts just re-wrote the bill making this a tax to get around the commerce law. Seems very wrong to me but he may have done the Republican party a favor with more vigor than ever to defeat Obama in Nov. Who knows!!! It’s up to the American people folks…Make sure everyone you know is registered to vote.

    • Hello Americans…you may get your healthcare but your taxes will increase by 40%. Hope it works for you in the end.

      • Citation for the taxes going up by 40%? There is a 40% tax on cadillac insurance plans, but if you are already able to afford a 27000 dollar family plan, you can probably afford 40 grand. If someone has calculated the change in every individual’s tax burden to be 40% I fail to find it on the internet.

        Let’s see, say you are in the 30% bracket, a 40% increase would bring it to 42%. I doubt this is the case, since we are using the cost efficient private insurance sector, rather than the awful costly public option for this. 42% tax rate in other nations gives you high speed rail, free health care (or extremely cheap), more family (paid) leave, better unemployment benefits, and a cookie. Tax on zillionaires, .9% increase-nope. The only conceivable way I see someone’s rate going up that much would be a small business owner/operator who chooses to take his company income as his, rather than taking a salary and keeping things separate, and having 50 employees he doesn’t take advantage of the credits to insure, and they end up on subsidized health insurance. Then maybe I can see this big jump if the business really doesn’t make much money. Of course, we already see insurance companies sending out rebates to customers because the did not spend 80% on actual coverage, so I imagine rates will be coming down. Ought to balance out the taxes in a few years when all the healthy people buy in to the system.

        • Yes, and all those countries who provide high-speed rail, inexpensive or free health care for all, long vacation times, etc., etc., are failing miserably. We’re already on the road to financial destruction – do we really want to emulate those countries we have helped bail out because many of their citizens have an entitlement mentality and riot when they don’t get their way and refuse to willingly lower or eliminate completely their “entitlements,” even when their country can no longer sustain them? You eventually run out of other people’s money.

      • “but your taxes will increase by 40%.”

        And I’m Superman.

        See… just saying it doesn’t make it true.

  113. The ruling, as I see it, creates a new mechanism by which government can coerce individuals to buy something against their will or conscience on penalty of being ‘taxed’ if they don’t. It may limit the expansion of the Commerce Clause, but it substitutes a new mechanism, a federal tax on nothing – a purely coercive measure that creates a new avenue for expansion of state power. The damage done by this ruling will last long after Obamacare is repealed, if it is.

  114. […] conservatives are not happy about the decision and immediately began trying to spin Robert’s reasoning in their favor. It never ceases to amaze me how some people can manage to contort the facts of a […]

  115. Only problem is that he did not have to uphold Obamacare to achieve the same result. Roberts was too smart by half, it is a very much a long shot the political would pan out. Meanwhile, we are stuck with a terrible analysis of what is a tax justifying congressional action and the liberals have a new argument. So no matter how nominal the tax associated the gov’t has the power. Thank you Mr. Roberts.

  116. What’s going to happen to the people who have individual medical policies when insurance companies can no longer afford to keep administering these policies and exit the market? All of these people will be left without insurance. We’re going to see huge rate increases and people will no longer be able to afford the premiums, many already can’t. This is will force the insurance companies to stop offering this kind of coverage and hundreds of thousands will be uninsured. Whether people like it or not the insurance industry is a business not a christian charity group. The entire health care system needs to be overhauled not just insurance companies…drug companies, hospitals, Dr’s office’s etc, they each feed on each other. Right now the insurance companies are the scapegoat.

  117. Roberts or his family was threatened if he voted to throw out the bill. There is no logical explanation to the totally illogical reasoning for giving Congress the power to tax inactivity.

    The tax was related to the :”Shared Responsibility” provision. At least the Commerce Clause and Necessary and Proper were kicked to the curb.

    Obozo was armed with a fist full of fiats to pass if ObamaCare failed.

    We need to concentrate on getting solid majorities in the House and Senate – filibuster proof – and throw out of office everyone who voted for ObamaCare, and anyone who will not sign a promise to repeal all of it if elected.

    BTW, Mitt Romney is NOT the GOP nominee.for President. Here’s hoping that the delegates decide on electing real change not status quo.

    • 1. Not likely Romney will be elected president.

      2. Not likely that anybody but Romney will be nominated by the Republican Party.

      3. You seem to be living in a dream world where everything, and every one is right wing.

  118. The problem now is that virtually everything can be taxed – even breathing – and the Left will use Roberts’ precedent in the new EPA regulations that would tax anyone exceeding a predefined limit on how much carbon dioxide a person can make.

    CO2 has beenruled to be a “pollutant” without which all life on Earth would perish in a year’s time.

    • I’m already taxed for breathing. I need to eat and have clothing and shelter or I will stop breathing. Unless I get everything given to me by charity in a shelter somewhere, or bum off my friends or family. In which case they will be paying my tax share on my consumption. I pay the same line tax on my phone whether I use it or not, tax for police and fire and schools, whether I use them or not, gas tax for highways even if I’m just filling the lawn mower, etc, etc. I read a list of some of the punitive taxes yesterday already in place for years, and can’t bring them to mind at the moment, but seriously, you’re stretching as far as the guy in NH of the T-Party who says kindergarten causes crime rates to be higher.

    • Well, Pace…for us Liberals, the “elite establishment” in the USA is very conservative, and usually corporate. We Liberals do battle with the “elite establishment every day.

    • You can’t live very long breathing CO2, so if it is getting to be a problem, taxing it is probably a very good idea.

  119. […] 12 Originally Posted by Sano The first bill that I can think of that has things that had nothing to do with the original bill itself is the Patriot Act. Living in the U.S. is living in a police state. Why do I believe this? You can not do as you wish or the police will slap disrupting the peace on your happy ass when all you were doing was being loud at a protest. The U.S. government is broken. Really? we live in a fucking police state? I disagree. the gestapo doesn't bust down my door and search my house in the middle of the night. I am pretty sure I am allowed across state lines or free travel around the country any time I want. Im pretty sure people are allowed to speak your mind about a public official or better yet write into a news paper about how much they hate the president. What about all the yahoo's burning the flag in the streets and the police just watch!? Protests at soldiers funerals.. Im sorry Sano, but we live in a free country. If you are fortunate enough to live in the commonwealth of Florida, it is extremely American they don't tax your income. When I lived in Alabama, I used to carry a loaded in the open, and no body said a word, infact everyone was packing and guess what the crime rate was? less than 2% violent crime. Someone tried to rob a store with shotgun while I was down there… they got shot and are now dead. we have it VERY GOOD in this country, however the past couple generations of people have been lost their since of Patriotism, and traditional american values. Like hard work and service to the nation, via miltary or civil. Politicians have lost sight of what defines leadership they are crooked, bent and selfish. Do I agree the Gov't in broken? NO. It's still there and it still works, we need real men and women of character, integrity and patriots in the seats of this nations leadership, not cowardly self serving mouth breathers who have a hard time distinguishing mouth from their sphyncher because they spend so much time talking out their ass it might as well be their mouth. Canada does their own fucking thing and no one cares about what they do. They export lumber, lumberjacks, bad hockey teams and good beer, that's IT. Why the fuck would you want to live there? Obnoxious french people? Cold? Snow?? More bears? Fuck that man Im good. Just like they wouldn't want to live here. They have a good enconomy, because they are not the global hegemony. The United States is the Global Hegemony, China is catching up to us, we are trying to shake our addiction of oil from the most volitile regions on the planet like it's some sick fetish, we are Trillions of dollars in debt. and we are worried about FUCKING HEALTH CARE!? who is going to pay for it? Not us says Cheif Justice Roberts with 1 caveat: Only if the dems raise taxes to ensure they're shitty shitty shitty program gets funding will we pay for it, which they will have to in order for it to get funded. ALSO: it's up to the states what they want to do. The Feds cannot yank their medicaid program funding, so unless a state volunteers to accept the Obama-care program and the money that funds it from our federal tax dollars the current administration is SOL if the state senates like the engineer say "NOPE!" As Read here: Chief Justice Roberts Is A Genius ? White House 2012 […]

  120. Although I agree with your premise that Roberts ruled in an unemotional, unbiased manor, he failed to see the spirit of the argument and the technical side of it. I feel that this ruling, although beneficial on the long-term, will have ramifications that require much prerequisites to change. I do not believe this can be repealed by Congress unless Republicans have control of the Senate, the House, and the Oval Office. This will be difficult.

    Regarding the ruling, the AHA is still unconstitutional. This is because the Congress cannot levy a tax like this to an individual. The only taxes, as I understand, are are excise taxes on purchases and income taxes. The individual mandate is neither. It is a tax on the lack of behavior, which opens the door to unprecedented power to the House. It essentially means that Confress can levy a tax on whatever it wishes individuals to do with a “tax” that punishes them for not doing it. Republicans and Democrats will abuse this power. Mark my words.

    Secondly, and more importantly, the argument Democrat legal representatives made that AHA was a tax was secondary to the legal argument of the commerce clause. It was a subsidiary point that was more a reach than the crux of why AHA should be upheld. To be crude, a similar parallel could be drawn on the unintended consequences of abortion. Abortion, for the left, is a woman’s rights issue. Meaning, you will never hear the argument that crime decreases in communities where abortion is legal. This is being proven by statistics simply because less children are born into destructive home environments. It makes sense, but no sensible democrat would argue it. In the same way, no sensible democrat would argue for an increase tax on the poor even though it could benefit society. Therefore, legalizing abortion to reduce crime, although true, is not what the issue is about. I think, in the same way, Justice Roberts missed the point by arguing that the AHA was legal as a tax when the law was not pitched, sold, and defended to the public by increased taxation.

    I think it was a cop-out and and the ramifications are paramount. If there was ever a time to stand for the Constitution, this was it. He could have done it legally and with dignity, but he did not. I am neither surprised in our situation or appalled. We got what society voted for and we are reaping why we have sown. If America truly desired individual freedom, we would not be squabbling about the letter of the law; rather, we would be debating the spirit of it.

  121. His decision was based on his interputation of the constitution. It in neither liberal or conservative. Just because you don’t understand the constitution or don’t like the result of the ruling does not make his decision wrong. Grow up and deal with the negative consequences or make sure your voice is heard in your realm of the US and get out the vote for Romney as the lessor if the two evils.

  122. […] Some other Roberts friendly musings here, here and here, and especially here. […]

  123. […] Jeepers I love Marc Barnes! More stuff about RobertsJune 29, 2012 By Mark Shea Leave a CommentI’m sure the author *thinks* this will raise the hopes of conservatives. But, honestly:Before you look to do harm to Chief Justice Roberts or his family, it’s important […]

  124. I say FUCK OBAMA!! and all the other crooked, lying pieces of political trash!! obamas days are numbered, THANK GOD!!

    • If we were both single, I would be tempted, but both of our spouses wold object. I have no desire for Mittens, Boehnor, Cantor, or any other republican though.

      I wonder why democrats are just plain more attractive than republicans? Maybe because they have at least a shred of humanity and empathy, even when they are crooked? Or maybe because honest politicians stay bought, and never forget to keep the potholes filled and the buses on time for their constituents, and I haven’t seen but one or two honest republicans in years.

    • Spoken like a true conservative. BTW, when do you think Romney will begin to take the lead in the polls?

  125. […] there are the speculation that Roberts is a genius, Was Judge Roberts Just Playing Bridge? or as Michael Savage said: Roberts Epilepsy Medication […]

  126. Whats really funny? Obama is in love with Roberts (well today that is). You think our little dictator has figured it out yet?

  127. I concur with your observations!
    View from my facebook timeline:
    Can anyone point to a legal expert who predicted this result?
    All who favored the mandate expected it to be upheld under the commerce clause. THAT view was slammed, shut down and stomped on. Many on both sides argued it WOULD have been legal as a tax, but supporters didn’t want to go there!
    No one would have expected a Justice, let alone the Chief Justice, to interpret the law as it SHOULD have been written (to be constitutional) rather than the ACTUAL WORDS OF THE LAW!
    There are years of fall-out from this decision…
    – strong signal indicating serious limit on Comerce Clause use;
    – serious refocus on the power to tax (including procedural questions as to if the law passed followed the rules of Congress dealing with tax legislation)
    – question now if the regulatory mandates (e.g. new limit on religious freedom excluding a church’s charitable institutions from conscience exception, etc) can inherit constitutionality from interpretation as a tax, or does the commerce clause limitation undermine ALL regulatory penalties not structured as a tax?
    – can the ruling blocking the federal government from withdrawing ALL Medicare subsidies if new mandates are not met by the states mean, for example, that federal highway funds for maintenance of OLD highways not be withdrawn if states refuse to accept funding for a new bridge or highway …or speed limit?
    – does Roberts willingness to “fix” the logical/constitutional errors of lawmakers signal a new type of “legislating from the bench” that seriously undermines the separation of powers?
    For example, if Obama can simply choose to not enforce a law he believes is unconstitutional (e.g. DOMA), can the Chief Justice simply order federal courts to not hear cases on specific issues he thinks is settled law (e.g. refuse to hear cases related to gay marriage discrimination!) What’s good for the goose is good for the gander …even if not for the nation!
    The mind boggles at the unexplored implications! What really happened …in the truest sense… won’t be known for years!

  128. You can put lipstick on a pig but it is still a pig. No, this is a terrible decision and Roberts is a coward, not a genius. Your article state: “He ruled that the government can not force the people to purchase products or services under the commerce clause and he forced liberals to have to come clean and admit that Obama-care is funded by tax increases.” That’s nice. Now we are left with a law that will create only more lawsuits while small businesses go under by the thousands. That is genius? No that is insane. Strike down the mandate but leave in the tax penalty??? Now we are taxed not only for what we produce and purchase but also for what we fail to purchase??? How is that still not a mandate?

    Where is the limit to federal power now? According to Roberts the government can’t force you to eat broccoli, but it can tax you if you don’t. You don’t want to replace your SUV with a Chevy Volt, fine here is your tax bill. You want to eat that hot fudge sundae, okay but first you must pay our glutton tax. This is not genius. This is tyranny. It is behavior modification. It is Nazi Germany.

    As for our private insurers whose policies Obama promised we could keep if we wanted…how can they possibly insure an “unknown” like the number of people who now can choose not to buy insurance until they get sick? How is that feasible? This decision almost guarantees the death of private health insurance to be ultimately replaced with government health insurance. Isn’t that what Obama and the progressives wanted all along? Ya call that genius???

    There are 21 new taxes in this law including a new 3.8% tax on investment income to help fund Medicare. So the idea that the SCOTUS declared this a tax bill in order to get Obama and the Democrats to admit it was a tax bill all along just does not wash. It has always been a tax bill so that isn’t new. What IS new is it imposes a tax on NOT purchasing something.

    I agree that the decision might give Romney a boost by taking the issue away from the Democrats and putting it in his lap and firing up his voter base. But the fact is even if Romney is elected it is going to be nearly impossible for him to repeal this law even if elected. Only a filibuster proof Senate would guarantee that. Despite what Romney says he cannot repeal it with a simple executive order.

    And even if Romney is successful in repealing this law – this Supreme Court decision sets a precedent that government can not only regulate commerce….now it can even regulate and compel behavior through taxation. That is not genius. That is fascism. That is the end of America.

    In the grand scheme of things Roberts passed the buck at best. He did not want to be the Chief Justice that struck down “affordable health care for everybody” as the media spins it. That is cowardice, not genius.

    As Anthony Kennedy (for whom I have a renewed faith in) stated in the dissent: “But that failure—that abstention from commerce—is not “Commerce.” To be sure, purchasing insurance is ”Commerce”; but one does not regulate commerce that does not exist by compelling its existence.”

    No, Kennedy, Scalia, Thomas, and Alito are the only geniuses here. Roberts is nothing more than a coward. There is no way to spin this any other way.

    And to President Bush, you should have named Scalia Chief Justice, not Roberts. Thanks a lot.

  129. But why would Romney WANT to oppose Obamacare? After all, Obamacare IS Romneycare!

    Unless, of course, Romney is an amoral, opportunistic Machiavellian, who will change his position in whatever way will get him votes, without regard for principle.

    As for me, I shall go with the one man who has shown even the slightest modicum of moral principle, not to mention his top-notch knowledge of economics. Oh, and he is a medical doctor to boot.

  130. The statement “His ruling means Congress can’t compel American citizens to purchase anything. Ever.” is ludicrous. What Roberts established out of thin air is that Congress can make Americans do or purchase ANYTHING THEY WISH, simply by assessing a penalty for non-compliance and calling it a “tax”.

  131. People who think it’s a right not to have health insurance should not then feel that it is their right to healthcare. You can’t have it both ways. And you can’t buy car insurance AFTER you’ve been in an accident. I don’t agree with the mandate, but I also don’t agree with healthcare being a God given right. If you want to be covered then get insurance, if you can’t afford it then too bad. We can’t all drive luxury cars and live in luxury homes, why do we demand luxury healthcare at no cost? There should be graded healthcare, you get what you can pay for just like everything else in life.

  132. You know who won’t have Obama care??? Obama himself, His Family and all the trash sitting on Capital Hill. How fare is that Shit?? If we gotta have Obama Care then everyone in America Should have Obama care Period!

  133. True!

  134. I like your analysis, but to say that Chief Justice Roberts “did his part” confounds the purpose of the Court.

  135. Whether Roberts is a genius or the biggest dolt on the planet…It is up to the American People now. No more Obama or any other Socialist democrat and no more squishy Rinos! GAME ON!

  136. Funny, just yesterday, Glenn was calling Chief Roberts a weasil and a coward.

  137. Subject: HIDDEN TAXES IN OBAMACARE! Tue 14 Sep 2010, 8:58 am
    Surprise!There are at least 20 hidden taxes in the Obama Health care plan coming down upon us the next few years.

    Now, along with rationed care for seniors and forced health insurance, we now find there is a Real Estate Tax snuck into the Health care plan. You may ask, what in God’s green earth does health care have to do with Real Estate taxes??? Absolutely nothing, that is precisely why one got snuck in there.

    There has never been any rhyme or reason to this administration other than redistribution of wealth, socialism and inserting cradle-to-grave control. Using Health care as an excuse for seizing control of accounts and businesses is just one strategy. Who cares what the American people think and what the constitution says! You are just in the way…..take, take, take.

    Starting in 2013, not only will you pay the closing costs and real estate fee when you sell your house but now you will pay a 3.8% Sales Tax. So, if you sell your home for $400,000, perhaps wanting to down size if you are a senior you will pay $15,200 in Tax. Many seniors downsize their homes as retirement comes closer, so along with long lines and rationed care that is substandard, seniors and anyone will have to pay more tax on the home they just sold.

    Penalties for individuals: We will pay 2.5% of our annual income as a fine/penalty if we don’t purchase the government approved health care plan.

    Penalties on families: Parents will pay a yearly $347 per kid if they don’t purchase a government approved health care plan.

    Penalties on employers: If you are a business with 50 or more employers you will get fined at least $2,000 per employee if you don’t provide, once again the ‘government approved health care plan.

    Other special taxes and fees:

    Investment income: Anyone making $200,000 or over gets to pay 3.8% of their annual investment income.

    Fancy health care plan, paid by an individual, $10,200 or $27,800 for a family, you get to pay a 40% annual tax on those health care plans.

    Medical aid devices have gotten hit hard as well. They will see a 2.9% tax hike. Sorry if you have an artificial limb….you are screwed.

    Medicare gets more money because if you earn $200,000 or more you pay a special Medicare tax of 3.9.%

    Then there is the 10% tax on tannins. Perhaps you should consider an ‘Albino’ beauty treatment.

    This Health care bill is nothing but an orgy of controls, tax schemes and rationed care. Now add Real Estate tax to the ridiculous list. If this does not grab your attention then you are one of two things. Dead in mind and thought or part of the 50% who are not tax payers!

  138. […] moves in all of recorded history, worthy of Machiavelli. One writer even decided the ruling was payback for Obama’s verbal assault on the Supreme […]

  139. Roberts didn’t help anything. Roberts sold Americans out. There is no victory for limiting government expansion under the commerce clause or any hogwash that conservatives are trying to claim as a victory. There is no victory. WE LOST – GET IT?

    These people are lawless communists who don’t care about the constitution or what the decision means for jurisprudence. They supported Al Qaeda in overthrowing Libya. They supported the Muslim Brotherhood in the overthrow of Egypt. They funneled guns to the cartels in Mexico and got two Federal Law Enforcement agents killed and refuse to accept responsibility for it. They offered to work with the “former” KGB on getting rid of our missile defense shield in Europe and are seeking the destruction of the United States by reducing our nuclear arsenal to less then 300 nuclear missiles at a time when every enemy nation in the world is in a nuclear arms race against us.

    There is no victory. We live in a post constitutional society. America is dead. Get your beans and bullets and get ready because this is only the beginning.

  140. Most people responding here are getting lost in the weeds. The author’s point that Roberts is a genius for now codifying a limit to the commerce clause. Woohoo great, I am so happy. Sarcasm intended. By choosing to codify the commerce clause he has guaranteed that some sort of government run health care will happen, what the final result will be depends on what happens in November. I ask what would have happened if Roberts had NOT joined the liberal wing of SCOTUS? Sure the commerce clause would not be limited, but we would also not be subject to taxes for not buying a private sector product. Is a limit to the commerce clause really that important? Would not the Legislative and/or Executive branches still try to expand the commerce clause to suit their needs? Would there not be other cases that could limit the commerce clause? I reject the author’s premise that Roberts was a genius. In my thinking Robert’s action shreds the constitution, expands government exponentially and limits liberty. We have fought wars for liberty and do believe it is time to water the tree of liberty. Now is the time for all good people to come to the aid of the Constitution. Since we are effectively dis-enfranchised and we cannot support the Constitution in any other way, it is time to succeed. Let the liberals starve in the dark.

  141. I have thought the same thing and would add: CJ Roberts intends to give impetus to a flat tax movement. Look at all taxes as penalties. The government has a set of preferred behavior, e.g., paying interest on a home mortgage, charitable giving, buying health insurance, etc., and if you engage in the preferred behavior the government will reduce or eliminate your penalty (tax). Once you start down the road of using the tax code to influence (punish or incentivize) behavior, you’re leaving an opening for being manipulated – which is not what freedom loving people desire. What we need is a flat tax based on income with no deductions, credits, or progressivity, because they all are used to favor certain behavior. Progressivity even, paradoxically, favors earning fewer marginal dollars. We shouldn’t have a government tax policy which encourages people to limit their earning. It’s just not the ‘right thing to do’.

  142. Roberts also established that one part of the Constitution nullifies another, i.e., the taxing power over the Commerce Clause. Not a good thing. Congress cannot compel you to engage in commerce but it can tax you if you don’t. Well, isn’t the purpose of the tax to compel? I appreciate what he is trying to accomplish with this ruling but it is disgraceful reasoning to leave in the history books.

  143. We can engage in meaningless sophistry and debate about this decision. It is what it is. Sure, it limits Congressional authority on the Commerce and Necessary & Proper Clauses, but grants tremendous authority under the Taxation Clause. Given how far the government has stretched the boundaries of the Commerce and N&P clauses, I do not doubt that the government will push this new realm of authority to the greatest extent possible.

    This may help the GOP politically in November, but given that neither party is bashful about increasing the scope and reach of government, that makes no substantive difference in the long term.

    The net result of this decision is that government has even more ‘Constitutional’ authority to invade and regulate our lives and choices. This is a tragic irony as the Constitution was intended to restrict the powers of government. Since 1789 the various branches of government have done their utmost to reduce these Constitutional restrictions, and we have no reason to believe that this continuous attack upon our personal rights and liberties will cease.

    As to any repeal of the ACA: The House may vote to repeal, but it is doubtful the Senate will do so. Unless the GOP has a 2/3 majority in both chambers of Congress, when the repeal goes to the current administration, we can rest assured it will be vetoed, and without that 2/3 majority any repeal measure will die. Realistically, even if there is a change in Presidential administration, the likelihood of getting a 2/3 majority in the Senate is quite remote.

  144. to Keith Grimes and any other person calling this great nation a democracy, you need to learn what this country really is. It is a republic.
    some states have started using the democracy form of gov’t, I.E. California, using initiatives and referendums to create law.
    But the United States of America is a Republic. “And to the republic for which it stands”.

  145. Personally, I would have preferred allowing mandate under the commerce clause to the tax clause. Now congress has the power to legislate pretty much anything (constitutional or not), as long as the penalty can be construed as a tax, and he seemed to give the Supreme Court the power to legislate in the process. It may be genius, but I would place it more in the early Hitler power grab realm of genius, rather than something to applaud.

  146. Doesn’t matter one way or another. America is about to experience the “Boot of Marxism” being slammed down hard on the neck of our freedoms, liberties, Constitution, and Bill of Rights. America’s “Ignorant Class” is totally clueless to this reality. America’s big cities will be flowing with blood in the streets. Just a fact of life. Reality is a hard thing to accept sometimes. This is one of those times people. Get ready. Hugo Chavez is so excited.

  147. Shouldn’t the bumper stickers read not only REPEAL but -REPEAL THE TAX! Americans don’t like taxes but that is what we have until the tax is repealed.

  148. Hogwash. No where in my Constitution is the federal government granted authority to regulate health care.

    The tax is unconstitutional as it is for an unconstitutional purpose.

    If people want social services they should seek them from their state governments.

  149. Optimism is good…..but….the reality is that the media will always use the terms that the Democrats want the media to use to hide tax increases.

    Obama’s campaign is still saying the tax is still a penalty for not buying health insurance…… after the ruling.

    We have found that propaganda, when the entirety of the Media is in the tank for Democrats, is still a working tool for Socialists, Fascists, and of course, Communists to lie to the general & highest percentage of the public to get their message out.

    The Conservative media and Conservatives as a whole are in the minority. This victory by Obama is only proof of this statement that I have made.

    I hope Romney wins and does change some things. It is yet to be seen if political suicide overrides the commitment to do the right things for this Nation. It will be Political suicide to stop Obama care in my opinion. I wish it were not so.

    The media will have a field day with any tinkering Romney might do to the present Obamacare bill.

    Sorry, but this is the way it is. A few Conservatives, not Republicans, can not change this situation.

  150. I know!!! When I first heard Mr. Roberts had voted this way I was like…”What? WHAT!?!” But then I read this article in the Economist that basically says what you are saying, and….yeah. He’s basically a genius.

  151. Hey, CLEAN UP YOUR HOUSE, house!! C.J. Roberts may have been too clever by half in this case. Why ignore that which just about every court looks to in consrtruing a law–its legislative intent/history. Congress founded the act on the Commerce Clause amd maybe the tax issue was a throw it in for what it’s worth in the arguments. Roberts had to reach deep into the intellectual “scout team” or “scrub line up” to find support for this one. Shame on the C.J.!!

  152. Supreme Court’s decision on Obamacare was an extra ordinary gesture of patriotism by a brilliant Chief Justice. Please keep in mind that Chief Justice Roberts was the only one with the audacity (cajones) to express his feelings during Obama’s State of the Union speech. Chief Justice Roberts mouthed “Not True” during that speech and express that he felt that Obama is a liar & deceptive individual.
    After the speech, Progressives(commies) and the lap-dog media went hysterical to say the least. Today, the same lame-stream media Prosocialist political stooges are enthusiastically gloating that Chief Justice Roberts has seen the light. ‘Truth be told’ and it was effectively done so publicly, Chief Justice Roberts has exposed Obamacare as the largest tax ever in the history of the United States. In doing so, Obama has also been exposed for the lying Marxist he is. For all his denials that Obamacare mandate was not a tax, today Obama embraces the Supreme Court Decision that it is infact a Tax! The hypocrite has been exposed by the Highest Court in the Land and true American patriots will be energized to exercise their right to vote scumbag ProMarxists out of office.
    Like a very skillful diplomat that can tell a moron to “go to hell” and the moron looks forward to the trip, and specifically with the complicit eagerness of the Promarxist on the bench the high court sets the record straight! Thank you Chief Justice Roberts for such a brilliant way to stick it to the Progressive agenda!

  153. Take off the tin-foil hat. Or is this satire?

    Can’t tell if it’s a conservative desperately deluding themselves or satire meant to make fun of them.

  154. If we had true competition between health care providers across state lines health care costs would come down. The more Govt is in it the more screwed up it is. How’s the Post Office doing ? How’s the price of PCs now compared to what they cost in early 90s.

    Because health care obviously touches everyone Progressives want to control it … they don’t want to fix it.

  155. This article is absolutely ridiculous. If Roberts was concerned about how this law could be overturned, he could have done it with his vote. He had the power right then and there, and he did not use it. He’s not a genius. He’s also not for freedom.

  156. Irresponsible blogger. Most of what was written IS true but it is NOT true that states can opt of obama care – that issue with states was with regard to expanding medicaid to reach more people by raising the poverty level to qualify, so basically instead of only being able to make say 17,000.00 a year to get medicaid, they wanted states to raise that to say 23,000.00 a year, but if they didn’t, they threatened to withhold federal funding, that is what was ruled unconstitutional. So the only thing states can opt of, without federal funding being withheld, is expanding the medicaid program to reach more people. I wish bloggers would actually read the court decision instead of spreading lies.

  157. There are a few minorities as candidates… Question did you ask for their birth certificate… This website is horrible and everyone who cant handle an educated black man to hell with you… You are disrescpectful… And if any one from the National Black Caucas would have said half of the things you say to President Obama you would probably try to lynch them…. Obama will win again Nov…. go kill yourself… have a nice day losers!

  158. History will judge Chief Justice Roberts actions in this matter. I believe that he failed in his duty to the Constitution of the United States and the American people in an effort to do his duty to the Supreme court(credibility preservation at any cost). I do not hold him personally responsible for this. For a fair man with a balanced political approach this was a very hard choice. He chose wrong and he may yet be judged for it but that is the responsibility the ultimate judge, if one exists. In any regard this is now water under the bridge we(conservatives) have bigger fish to fry this November if we are to preserve our way of life and perhaps the union.

  159. By finding that Obamacare is a tax, Robert put a silver bullet in its heart. Our Constitution provides this about taxes in Article I, Section 7:

    Section 7 – Revenue Bills, Legislative Process, Presidential Veto

    All bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives; but the Senate may propose or concur with Amendments as on other Bills.

    If you recall, Obamacare BEGAN in the Senate. Therefore, this tax does not comport with Constitutional requirements!!!!! Now we just have to sit back and watch for the next challenge based on this, and watch it work its way back to the Supremes.

  160. Hey Keith, as a wounded Vietnam vet,( I volunteered for the Army—–volunteered to go to nam–volunteered to become a door gunner and fight for my Country to keep it free from ASS HOLE liberals like you and I don’t care what your label is (D/R/I).As a young democrat,I watched the party go far liberal–the party left tons of conservatives like myself no choice but to leave the party—sadly,too many Republicans are more liberal than they should be—so the TEA PARTY seems to be the movement to first replace the liberal Republicans and then we’ll take our fight against you liberals/progressives/communist/fascist ASS HOLES!! I’ve found out that you libs don’t like nobody or nothing that is good–that is the darkness you live in–want everything for free and bitch about it—you’re not a man–you are a bunch of freeloaders and if I could,I’d load all of you up on a ship and sail you ass out to sea–and then you could sail to some distant Island to live together in total love with each other!! Now that would be fun to watch!

  161. I get so tired of people and Obama saying it is just like you having to have automobile insurance. I say that is a big bunch of BS. That is like comparing apples to oranges. You have to have auto insurance to protect other people on the road who drive along with you. Health insurance protects the person who purchased it ulike liablity auto insurance that protects people and property other than the purchaser.

  162. Instead of trying to create a universal healthcare program for the entire country at the taxpayers expense—–why not fix the Insurance companies & force them into affordable insurance for all ?? They also need to go after the people that sue under false claims which escalates the insurance premiums. There is so much fraud within this industry and it is not going to stop unless the government puts restrictions on them. I’m sick of Obamba and his craziness –the man is in way over his head–God help us if he gets in for another four years !!!

    • E Schulte: Instead of trying to create a universal healthcare program for the entire country at the taxpayers expense—–why not fix the Insurance companies & force them into affordable insurance for all ??

      So then you’re all for the government telling private companies what to do?

  163. So are most of the faculty of Harvard geniuses. And as Bill Buckley said: I’d rather be ruled by the first 2000 names in the Boston phone book than the faculty of Harvard.
    Roberts has simply blow up restrictions on Congress’s ability to tax and the limitation on the commerce clause may or may not be regarded as precedent.

  164. Get a grip. We pay for everything in this world , there is no free ride. Highways, sewers, municipal buildings, military, bridges(going no where in Alaska) harbors,on and on and on. . In short it is called infastructure, which all of us use whether u drive or not. Health care is just another service that every person uses at some time in their life . We still pay for it just like we do all of these other services. Lets stop fighting wars all over the world and start using that money for our own citizens. Lets also start all welfare reform NOW. After 2 or 3 yrs you are shut off. Job training provided, if you still can’t get a job after training ,get up and report every day to a work site, like the CCC camps in the 30’s, or be a child care provider in a goverment program, be on time , ready to work an 8 hour day. Just like the working folks do now.

  165. Comments by Joe Bonham and everyone else who feels they are unable to express themselves on blogs without using profanity, F-words and B-words, etc., need to be deleted or flagged or something. Does anyone know how to squelch these comments?

  166. When is anyone going to consider that the Presidential oath is being violated by the “One” who swore (not on a Christian Bible?) to “preserve, protect and defend the CONSTITUTION of the United States of America?

  167. […] guy at D.C. cocktail parties” while others have deemed his ruling pure genius – even payback for Obama’s “numerous, ill-advised and childish insults directed toward SCOTUS.&#82… One school of thought, as voiced by Charles Krauhammer is that John Roberts, concerned that the […]

  168. For those who say love it, or leave it. SIX MILLION ARE DOING EXACTLY THAT AND HAVE FOR THE LAST THREE YEARS!
    Expats are leaving as fast as they can. No wonder Oblaba is trying to stop the wealthy leaks from bleeding across the border each year, soon we won’t even NEED a border patrol as even Illegals won’t cross and risk their lives for trying to do so. The economic factors come into play, and then they won’t want to live here anyway.

  169. Well it’s “nice” to see the Leftist propaganda useful idiots are out in full force trying to defend the Obamacare fiasco. These morons will truly try to silence anyone not spouting the approved party line and “current truth”. The only thing they are more pissed at, then people questioning the Dear Fuhrer about Obamacare, is that they didn’t get the expansion of the Commerce Claus or Single Payer nonsense. But just like NAZI’s, Stalinists, Maoists, Fascists, and every other Totalitarian they are ideologically linked to, they will continue to justify the means with the ends that they see as “noble”………….right to the dictatorship they crave without knowing reality.

  170. After reading the opinion twice, the author’s assertion that:

    “His ruling means Congress can’t compel American citizens to purchase anything. Ever. The notion is now officially and forever, unconstitutional.”

    is absurd in my opinion.

    Under the Commerce Clause theory, Congress could mandate that you engage in commerce, via a compelled contract, the terms of which are set by government, or pay a penalty. That was rejected.

    Under the Tax Clause theory, Congress cannot mandate that you engage in commerce, via a compelled contract, the terms of which are set by government, but if you fail to engage in or secue this contract you will pay a penalty now called a tax. That was affirmed.

    And the difference is????

    When it comes to actions by a Court, there is no such thing as “forever” because a future Court could overturn or modify it.

    Robert’s decision was as big a perversion of the taxing clause as the government’s perversion of the commerce clause has been for the last 85 plus years.

  171. Not necessarily. Roberts Commerce Clause ruling (part IIIA) of the decision, was joined by no other justice. The dissent of 4 judges was parallel, but they did not join with Roberts at all. So his opinion on the Commerce Clause is only orbiter dicta (or personal commentary), not precedent. Roberts did note that the conservative dissenters were in accord with his opinion on the Commerce Clause, but there certainly isn’t a concurring nod of approval from the dissent that would turn Roberts’ comments into precedent.

    Besides, the logic of prohibiting a mandate under the commerce clause but permitting taxation for failure to comply is beyond anything reasonable.

  172. I think the author of this piece got it exactly right. And moving the argument from the legal mumbo jumbo of the Commerce Clause to the you-know-it-when-you-feel-it-in-your-pocketbook Taxing Power was brilliant, giving everyone skin in the game.

  173. The only problem with this analysis, and with the ruling, is that SCOTUS has established a precedent whereby the federal government can tax the citizens for not purchasing something. This could lead to a tax levied on our savings accounts balances because that money was saved and was NOT used to purchase something in the economy.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: