Sorry my fellow conservatives, I side with the SCOTUS' decision.

[PredFan]

They were right by saying it isn't Constitutional under the Commerce Clause, and they are right that it is a tax and therefor is constitutional.

Don't get me wrong, Obamacare is a BAD bill and will ruin the economy and healthcare, but the damage was done when we elected obama as POTUS and not when the justices correctly enterpreted the Constitution.

 

[Amelia]

They were right by saying it isn't Constitutional under the Commerce Clause, and they are right that it is a tax and therefor is constitutional.

Don't get me wrong, Obamacare is a BAD bill and will ruin the economy and healthcare, but the damage was done when we elected obama as POTUS and not when the justices correctly enterpreted the Constitution.

It it was a tax, then the court should have rejected the case and said come back when the tax goes into effect, right?

 

[Moonglow]

is it time for mass suicide?

 

[The Rabbi]

The administration and the democrats denied it was a tax. They denied it vehemently. They said in no uncertain terms it was not a tax. The statute does not call it a tax.
Roberts had to rewrite the statute to call it a tax before allowing it.
That is no way to run a court.

 

[The Rabbi]

is it time for mass suicide?

Right after Election Day and the Dems get shellacked again.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

1) They were right by saying it isn't Constitutional under the Commerce Clause, and they are right that it is a tax and therefor is constitutional.

2) Don't get me wrong, Obamacare is a BAD bill and will ruin the economy and healthcare, but the damage was done when we elected obama as POTUS and not when the justices correctly enterpreted the Constitution.

1) Good for you.

2) Your opinion is overly alarmist.

you have earned the respect of Dante.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

The administration and the democrats denied it was a tax. They denied it vehemently. They said in no uncertain terms it was not a tax. The statute does not call it a tax.
Roberts had to rewrite the statute to call it a tax before allowing it.
That is no way to run a court.

Obama's Solicitor General and others insisted they get to argue it as a tax. So bwahahaha!


How they argued it is a matter of legal strategy. No one lied.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

They were right by saying it isn't Constitutional under the Commerce Clause, and they are right that it is a tax and therefor is constitutional.

Don't get me wrong, Obamacare is a BAD bill and will ruin the economy and healthcare, but the damage was done when we elected obama as POTUS and not when the justices correctly enterpreted the Constitution.

It it was a tax, then the court should have rejected the case and said come back when the tax goes into effect, right?

nope.


next

 

[signelect]

They were right by saying it isn't Constitutional under the Commerce Clause, and they are right that it is a tax and therefor is constitutional.

Don't get me wrong, Obamacare is a BAD bill and will ruin the economy and healthcare, but the damage was done when we elected obama as POTUS and not when the justices correctly enterpreted the Constitution.

None of the justices or the congress are impacted by this law because the have passed their own plan. This is congress and the SC saying screw you, you don't count. Next case please.

 

[PredFan]

They were right by saying it isn't Constitutional under the Commerce Clause, and they are right that it is a tax and therefor is constitutional.

Don't get me wrong, Obamacare is a BAD bill and will ruin the economy and healthcare, but the damage was done when we elected obama as POTUS and not when the justices correctly enterpreted the Constitution.

It it was a tax, then the court should have rejected the case and said come back when the tax goes into effect, right?

Ask the judges. I'm just saying that upholding it was the correct interpretation of the Constitution, and that the damage was done 3 1/2 years ago. The blame for this terrible bill lies with the voters and not the SCOTUS.

 

[WillowTree]

They were right by saying it isn't Constitutional under the Commerce Clause, and they are right that it is a tax and therefor is constitutional.

Don't get me wrong, Obamacare is a BAD bill and will ruin the economy and healthcare, but the damage was done when we elected obama as POTUS and not when the justices correctly enterpreted the Constitution.

No WE fuckikng didn't elect obama, you may have but WE didn't.

 

[PredFan]

is it time for mass suicide?

Absolutely! You go first we'll be right behind you.

 

[WillowTree]

They were right by saying it isn't Constitutional under the Commerce Clause, and they are right that it is a tax and therefor is constitutional.

Don't get me wrong, Obamacare is a BAD bill and will ruin the economy and healthcare, but the damage was done when we elected obama as POTUS and not when the justices correctly enterpreted the Constitution.

well, I guess if you agree with judges re writing legislation to fit their ruling we'll go with that. shades of Kagen.

 

[PredFan]

The administration and the democrats denied it was a tax. They denied it vehemently. They said in no uncertain terms it was not a tax. The statute does not call it a tax.
Roberts had to rewrite the statute to call it a tax before allowing it.
That is no way to run a court.

It doesn't matter what those idiots call it. The question for the SCOTUS is only wether it's constitutional or not.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

They were right by saying it isn't Constitutional under the Commerce Clause, and they are right that it is a tax and therefor is constitutional.

Don't get me wrong, Obamacare is a BAD bill and will ruin the economy and healthcare, but the damage was done when we elected obama as POTUS and not when the justices correctly enterpreted the Constitution.

No WE fuckikng didn't elect obama, you may have but WE didn't.

We the people of the United States of America

elected Barack Hussein Obama II

to the office of the Presidency of the United States of America


I personally did not vote for him, but I will this time around.

 

[swizzlee]

NO! That's not correct.

Roberts had to rewrite the statute to call it a tax before allowing it.

He agreed with the oral arguments of the DOJ who, being very concerned that the Commerce Clause argument would be declared unconstitutional, emphatically stated to the court that the "mandate penalty" was a tax and therefore constitutional.

Nowhere in the bill itself was this mandate called anything but a penalty. The DOJ defined it as a tax.

 

[PredFan]

They were right by saying it isn't Constitutional under the Commerce Clause, and they are right that it is a tax and therefor is constitutional.

Don't get me wrong, Obamacare is a BAD bill and will ruin the economy and healthcare, but the damage was done when we elected obama as POTUS and not when the justices correctly enterpreted the Constitution.

None of the justices or the congress are impacted by this law because the have passed their own plan. This is congress and the SC saying screw you, you don't count. Next case please.

You are right about the (then) Congress, but I have to disagree about the SCOTUS. They ruled correctly.

Would the SCOTUS have ruled differently if they didn't have a safety net of their own? I don't think they would have ever seen the case as it would have been ruled unconstitutional by all of the lower court judges who realized they would suffer under this law as well.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

The administration and the democrats denied it was a tax. They denied it vehemently. They said in no uncertain terms it was not a tax. The statute does not call it a tax.
Roberts had to rewrite the statute to call it a tax before allowing it.
That is no way to run a court.

It doesn't matter what those idiots call it. The question for the SCOTUS is only wether it's constitutional or not.

yes, true.

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. - Chief Justice John Glover Roberts, Jr., the 17th Chief Justice of the United States.

 

[The Rabbi]

The administration and the democrats denied it was a tax. They denied it vehemently. They said in no uncertain terms it was not a tax. The statute does not call it a tax.
Roberts had to rewrite the statute to call it a tax before allowing it.
That is no way to run a court.

It doesn't matter what those idiots call it. The question for the SCOTUS is only wether it's constitutional or not.

No, it matters a lot. If it's a tax then Congress maybe has that power. But the case could not have been brought.
If it's not a tax, then they have no power to implement such a thing.
The Dems swore it was not a tax. The legislation does not call it a tax. How can Roberts invent things in a bill and then pass judgment on it?

 

[PredFan]

They were right by saying it isn't Constitutional under the Commerce Clause, and they are right that it is a tax and therefor is constitutional.

Don't get me wrong, Obamacare is a BAD bill and will ruin the economy and healthcare, but the damage was done when we elected obama as POTUS and not when the justices correctly enterpreted the Constitution.

No WE fuckikng didn't elect obama, you may have but WE didn't.

WE as a country did. I think you know that.

(I voted for McCain)