Author Topic: Something to ponder (Read 9968 times)

SSG Snuggle Bunny · « **on:** June 28, 2012, 05:35:40 PM »

The RW is absolutely dead-set against this. They are as unified as they are pissed. They have but one singular purpose.

DU, however, is--as it always does on most things--tearing itself down the middle.

We are barely 8 hours past the rendering of the decision and they cannot figure out whether to shoot, salute or sing "Hallelujah!" They ONLY ones among them celebrating are those who absolutely refuse to recognize any threat to the polls, liberty or economy.

Imagine the reverse. Imagine we had won. Who would be bickering within our own ranks that this was bad for November or our freedoms or the economy?

Sometimes the fox does gets the grapes...and sometimes the grapes really are sour.

thundley4 · « **Reply #1 on:** June 28, 2012, 05:45:18 PM »

I had said somewhere before that if it was shot down, then it would energize Obama's base. The exact opposite of what is happening now.

SSG Snuggle Bunny · « **Reply #2 on:** June 28, 2012, 05:47:34 PM »

Quote from: thundley4 on June 28, 2012, 05:45:18 PM

I had said somewhere before that if it was shot down, then it would energize Obama's base. The exact opposite of what is happening now.

That would be 4/5 of the 35% that think Bush plotted 9/11.

I'll take those electoral odds.

Would an ObamaCoup defeat have energized the middlers?

vlad335 · « **Reply #3 on:** June 28, 2012, 07:50:01 PM »

Quote from: SGT Snuggle Bunny on June 28, 2012, 05:35:40 PM

Imagine the reverse. Imagine we had won. Who would be bickering within our own ranks that this was bad for November or our freedoms or the economy?

Nope. Great post!

Admittedly, the Tea Party was getting a bit lethargic. Now the Dems grabbed a tiger by the tail and awoke a sleeping giant. Roberts may have done us a huge favor.

Freeper · « **Reply #4 on:** June 28, 2012, 07:53:48 PM »

Quote from: vlad335 on June 28, 2012, 07:50:01 PM

Nope. Great post!

Admittedly, the Tea Party was getting a bit lethargic. Now the Dems grabbed a tiger by the tail and awoke a sleeping giant. Roberts may have done us a huge favor.

Lethargic? I don't think so, the Tea Party has been just as strong as ever, they just haven't been in the streets like they were the past couple of years, they have been working behind the scenes. However I do agree that this will further energize the Tea Party.

vlad335 · « **Reply #5 on:** June 28, 2012, 07:54:48 PM »

Something else to ponder...

We are told that it is discriminatory to require Americans to produce identification to vote. Hey, they may not be able to afford it.

However, wouldnâ€™t the Government need to identify everyone to implement these Health Exchanges? Using an ID of sorts?

Instant voter ID.

How could the left spin against that? Say it is unconstitutional? Lol.

Vagabond · « **Reply #6 on:** June 28, 2012, 08:05:45 PM »

Mark Levin is right. The ruling is an assault on individual sovereignty. The Supreme Court just said you can't regulate inactivity but you can tax it. What the hell is that supposed to mean? How do you determine the appropriate tax for an economic activity that did not occur?

I hate to say it, but this whole mess is going to collapse. It's on autopilot and headed straight at debt mountain. People, good and bad, republican and democrat, conservative and liberal are going to get hurt and die because eventually, and now sooner, it can't be paid for without destroying the economy. The system can't be reformed because the system won't be reformed. Everybody receiving checks from the government, people and corporations alike, know where their bread is buttered and would rather the whole system collapse later than experience any pain now.

Maybe I'm over reacting, so I'm stopping this rant before it really get's rolling.

SSG Snuggle Bunny · « **Reply #7 on:** June 28, 2012, 08:22:31 PM »

Look at them over there.

There isn't a single thread that hasn't degenerated into a shit-flinging monkey cage brawl.

USA4ME · « **Reply #8 on:** June 28, 2012, 08:25:23 PM »

In their world, Citizens United is the keymaster to permit multi-national corps to control the gov't. Obamacare forces those who don't have insurance to buy it from a private corp. The primitives are clouding the issue by saying those who can't afford it will pay a tax and still be covered (as though that's a good thing). The point is most uninsured can afford to purchase insurance, they just choose not to do so. Now they'll have to. That money will go in the pockets of the multi-national corps who will, in turn, spend the money to enrich themselves.

And those who pay the tax because they can't afford insurance will still get the same treatment they got before, and the same bill they'll have to pay. If this thing still stands, give it until late 2014 or 2015 and you'll see the primitives complaining that the tax those who can't obtain insurance is too much to pay, they're still stuck with the bill, and their quality of care is less than those who do have insurance. But it's too late, they've given up the power to the insurance companies and Citizens United.

This is what they're facing given what they believe.

Yeah, they're twisted in knots.

.

SSG Snuggle Bunny · « **Reply #9 on:** June 28, 2012, 08:39:43 PM »

EXHIBIT A:

Quote

stockholmer (3,534 posts)

Roberts & Dems Deliver a Grand Slam for the Right: Obamacare Wins, We Lose

http://www.counterpunch.org/2012/06/28/obamacare-wins-we-lose/

It was a brilliant move by far Right (but oh so likable) Chief Justice Roberts to side with the Dem-appointed Justices and uphold ObamaCare. After all, this is a massive victory for corporate power, forcing citizens to buy an expensive insurance product that wonâ€™t serve our needs very well but will profit industry, in lieu of receiving real health care.

Obamacare and its corporate mandate were born on the Right (as in Heritage Foundation) as a way to destroy the political prospects of any single payer system that would cover all Americans with a tax-funded system of guaranteed medical care. This is the way all other industrial societies protect the right to health care, by taking it out of the hands of the giant insurance industry. The right to health care is like the right to not be enslaved â€“ there are no half measures, and the insurance industry is the slave master. Roberts may have brilliantly scored a â€œ4-ferâ€ victory:

Quote
1.) He now has an interesting historic legacy.

2.) He and his Dem-appointed colleagues have given huge new powers to corporations, and further reduced the rights of citizens.

3.) Any real reform â€” call it single payer, or medicare for all â€” is doomed in bipartisan fashion. The â€œpragmatistsâ€ who are for Obamacare are duped if they think it is going to be expanded to single payer. From this point on, it will only be picked over and further reinvented to empower the insurance and drug industries.

4.) Roberts siding with Dems has probably bounced Obama right out of office. The public overwhelmingly hates Obamacare, and this pours gas on the electoral fire.

No wonder Roberts delivered the goods! What a great Right Wing Justice he is.

snip

--------------------------------------------------

Obama Wins the Battle, Roberts Wins the War: The chief justiceâ€™s canny move to uphold the Affordable Care Act while gutting the Commerce Clause.

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/scocca/2012/06/roberts_health_care_opinion_commerce_clause_the_real_reason_the_chief_justice_upheld_obamacare_.html

There were two battles being fought in the Supreme Court over the Affordable Care Act. Chief Justice John Robertsâ€”and Justice Anthony Kennedyâ€”delivered victory to the right in the one that mattered. Yes, Roberts voted to uphold the individual mandate, joining the court's liberal wing to give President Obama a 5-4 victory on his signature piece of legislation. Right-wing partisans are crying treason; left-wing partisans saw their predictions of a bitter, party-line defeat undone. But the health care law was, ultimately, a pretext. This was a test case for the long-standingâ€”but previously fringeâ€”campaign to rewrite Congress' regulatory powers under the Commerce Clause.

snip

Roberts was smarter than that. By ruling that the individual mandate was permissible as a tax, he joined the Democratic appointees to uphold the lawâ€”while joining the Republican wing to gut the Commerce Clause (and push back against the necessary-and-proper clause as well). Here's the Chief Justice's opinion (italics in original):

Quote
Construing the Commerce Clause to permit Congress to regulate individuals precisely because they are doing nothing would open a new and potentially vast domain to congressional authority. Congress already possesses expansive power to regulate what people do. Upholding the Affordable Care Act under the Commerce Clause would give Congress the same license to regulate what people do not do. The Framers knew the difference between doing something and doing nothing. They gave Congress the power to regulate commerce, not to compel it. Ignoring that distinction would undermine the principle that the Federal Government is a government of limited and enumerated powers. The individual mandate thus cannot be sustained under Congressâ€™s power to â€œregulate Commerce.â€

The business about "new and potentially vast" authority is a fig leaf. This is a substantial rollback of Congress' regulatory powers, and the chief justice knows it. It is what Roberts has been pursuing ever since he signed up with the Federalist Society. In 2005, Sen. Barack Obama spoke in opposition to Roberts' nomination, saying he did not trust his political philosophy on tough questions such as "whether the Commerce Clause empowers Congress to speak on those issues of broad national concern that may be only tangentially related to what is easily defined as interstate commerce." Today, Roberts did what Obama predicted he would do.

Note that he's citing leftist rags like counterpunch and slate...

...which means they're starting to hate it too.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002870676#post14

dixierose · « **Reply #10 on:** June 29, 2012, 07:20:24 AM »

Ponder this....Mitt Romney's campaign pulled in over 4 MILLION dollars yesterday alone...

67 Rover · « **Reply #11 on:** June 29, 2012, 07:44:37 AM »

Quote from: dixierose on June 29, 2012, 07:20:24 AM

Ponder this....Mitt Romney's campaign pulled in over 4 MILLION dollars yesterday alone...

Mitt Romney cannot argue against Obamacare and simultaneously praise Romneycare as he is doing now they are the same damn thing. Now that healthcare is the number one issue for this election, Romney is the one and only candidate for President that cannot win in November.

I'm sorry but I will will be sitting this one out.

txradioguy · « **Reply #12 on:** June 29, 2012, 07:47:28 AM »

Quote from: 67 Rover on June 29, 2012, 07:44:37 AM

I'm sorry but I will will be sitting this one out.

And the Obama/Biden 2012 re-election campaign thanks you for your support.

Are you that self righetous and pretentious that you'd rather let Obama win again than get off your ass put your petty differences with Romney aside and do what you can to get Obama out of office?

Seriously?

AprilRazz · « **Reply #13 on:** June 29, 2012, 08:08:27 AM »

They also struck down the Stolen Valor act as well yesterday. Not a peep from the monkey cage on that one.

OK I found one thread on it and it had this hidden gem.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1014154449

Quote

magic59 (96 posts)
24. As FOX news and 8 years of George Bush has shown us
Its the right of every American to lie.

and in response...

Quote

shcrane71 (1,426 posts)
27. The SCOTUS: No law shall get in the way of Americans electing LIARS & FRAUDS. nt

Do they even know that they are so funny sometimes?

SSG Snuggle Bunny · « **Reply #14 on:** June 29, 2012, 08:11:11 AM »

Quote from: 67 Rover on June 29, 2012, 07:44:37 AM

Mitt Romney cannot argue against Obamacare and simultaneously praise Romneycare as he is doing now they are the same damn thing. Now that healthcare is the number one issue for this election, Romney is the one and only candidate for President that cannot win in November.

I'm sorry but I will will be sitting this one out.

Romney made a federalist argument for RomneyCare and while I think RomneyCare is just as retarded as ObamaCare patterened off of it my federalist streak says I can't live in Colorado and tell Massachusetts what to do inside their own asylum no matter how retard Yankees get.

More importantly Roberts agrees in his writing for the majority (TRANSLATION: he got the liberals to agree). On federalist grounds the mandate cannot be upheld because it would warp the Commerce Clause beyond original intent.

Now, Romney has vowed to overturn ObamaCoup and says states are free to ****-up their own lives.

Please tell me how you think you'll get a better deal by conceding a vote to Obama.

Don't pass up this opportunity to reaffirm federalism in exchange for a continuation of the very thing that has you upset.

Ballygrl · « **Reply #15 on:** June 29, 2012, 08:14:33 AM »

SGT, can you guys look at this youtube, the important part to look at starts at around 3:40 in the video, and tell me what your thoughts are on this reasoning please:

[youtube=425,350]iyLU9-VqVxY[/youtube]

67 Rover · « **Reply #16 on:** June 29, 2012, 08:16:24 AM »

Quote from: txradioguy on June 29, 2012, 07:47:28 AM

And the Obama/Biden 2012 re-election campaign thanks you for your support.

Are you that self righetous and pretentious that you'd rather let Obama win again than get off your ass put your petty differences with Romney aside and do what you can to get Obama out of office?

Seriously?

My differences with Romney are more than just a single issue (the AWB is a big sticking point with me). Unlike the losers that inhabit the island of DU I will not be put into a position where I have to be constantly twisting into a knot defending my vote or be put into a position of perpetual disappointment.

Seriously? YES.

Rebel · « **Reply #17 on:** June 29, 2012, 08:27:05 AM »

Quote from: Ballygrl on June 29, 2012, 08:14:33 AM

SGT, can you guys look at this youtube, the important part to look at starts at around 3:40 in the video, and tell me what your thoughts are on this reasoning please:

[youtube=425,350]iyLU9-VqVxY[/youtube]

Basically, it wasn't passed by the House, it was "Deemed and passed" by the senate and since it's now recognized as a "tax":

Article One, Section Seven:

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.

Not to mention, since they're already talking about exempting anyone making under a certain amount of money, and since this isn't an "income tax", which was passed by the 16th amendment, whether you believe that or not, but an "excise tax":

The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

"Excise taxes are taxes paid when purchases are made on a specific good, such as gasoline. Excise taxes are often included in the price of the product. There are also excise taxes on activities, such as on wagering or on highway usage by trucks. Excise Tax has several general excise tax programs. One of the major components of the excise program is motor fuel."
http://www.irs.gov/businesses/small/article/0,,id=99517,00.html

docstew · « **Reply #18 on:** June 29, 2012, 08:33:57 AM »

Quote from: 67 Rover on June 29, 2012, 08:16:24 AM

My differences with Romney are more than just a single issue (the AWB is a big sticking point with me). Unlike the losers that inhabit the island of DU I will not be put into a position where I have to be constantly twisting into a knot defending my vote or be put into a position of perpetual disappointment.

Seriously? YES.

Just remember, if you don't voteagainst O, you can't complain about his overt gun grabbing after his re-election.

Quote from: SGT Snuggle Bunny on June 29, 2012, 08:11:11 AM

Romney made a federalist argument for RomneyCare and while I think RomneyCare is just as retarded as ObamaCare patterened off of it my federalist streak says I can't live in Colorado and tell Massachusetts what to do inside their own asylum no matter how retard Yankees get.

More importantly Roberts agrees in his writing for the majority (TRANSLATION: he got the liberals to agree). On federalist grounds the mandate cannot be upheld because it would warp the Commerce Clause beyond original intent.

Now, Romney has vowed to overturn ObamaCoup and says states are free to ****-up their own lives.

Please tell me how you think you'll get a better deal by conceding a vote to Obama.

Don't pass up this opportunity to reaffirm federalism in exchange for a continuation of the very thing that has you upset.

This.

BlueStateSaint · « **Reply #19 on:** June 29, 2012, 08:44:11 AM »

Quote from: docstew on June 29, 2012, 08:33:57 AM

Just remember, if you don't vote against O, you can't complain about his overt gun grabbing after his re-election.

And he will go after the 2nd Amendment. If you have to hold your nose and vote, do so.

SSG Snuggle Bunny · « **Reply #20 on:** June 29, 2012, 08:48:09 AM »

Quote from: 67 Rover on June 29, 2012, 08:16:24 AM

My differences with Romney are more than just a single issue (the AWB is a big sticking point with me). Unlike the losers that inhabit the island of DU I will not be put into a position where I have to be constantly twisting into a knot defending my vote or be put into a position of perpetual disappointment.

Seriously? YES.

The AWB is DOA in congress. Nobody will touch it except for the hardcore lefties.

That's why Obama started Fast and Furious: to generate the needed moral outrage to overcome the fact the American people are pro-RKBA.

Oh--by the way--Romney wouldn't murder hundreds of people to fabricate a bogus need for an unconstitutional law.

Obama already has.

Please consider this carefully.

67 Rover · « **Reply #21 on:** June 29, 2012, 08:51:42 AM »

Quote from: docstew on June 29, 2012, 08:33:57 AM

Just remember, if you don't voteagainst O, you can't complain about his overt gun grabbing after his re-election.

This.

O.K. fair enough, but keep in mind it always hurts worse when your own side/guy does it to you. I lived in Massachusetts through ORomneys term what you see him saying and campaigning on now does not match his actions of the recent past.

SSG Snuggle Bunny · « **Reply #22 on:** June 29, 2012, 09:05:46 AM »

Quote from: Ballygrl on June 29, 2012, 08:14:33 AM

SGT, can you guys look at this youtube...

No-can-do but subsequent comments lead me to believe that it has something to do with the fact the bill originated in the senate rather than the COTUS requirement of the HoR.

I suspect this is an extremely valid case against ObamaCoup but 1 that will have to be resolved once the "tax" is actually levied due to the requirements of the Anti-Injunction act.

But the dems will have to endure 2 more election cycles before that happens (2015) and the much ballyhooed benefits of ObamaCoup will not have kicked-in but the pain is accumulating here and now and forever forward.

There may not be enough Dems left to defend it.

BlueStateSaint · « **Reply #23 on:** June 29, 2012, 09:30:22 AM »

Quote from: SGT Snuggle Bunny on June 29, 2012, 09:05:46 AM

No-can-do but subsequent comments lead me to believe that it has something to do with the fact the bill originated in the senate rather than the COTUS requirement of the HoR.

I suspect this is an extremely valid case against ObamaCoup but 1 that will have to be resolved once the "tax" is actually levied due to the requirements of the Anti-Injunction act.

But the dems will have to endure 2 more election cycles before that happens (2015) and the much ballyhooed benefits of ObamaCoup will not have kicked-in but the pain is accumulating here and now and forever forward.

There may not be enough Dems left to defend it.

Not only that, at that point it may be just a bad memory in the eyes of the American people.

USA4ME · « **Reply #24 on:** June 29, 2012, 09:34:21 AM »

Quote from: 67 Rover on June 29, 2012, 08:51:42 AM

O.K. fair enough, but keep in mind it always hurts worse when your own side/guy does it to you. I lived in Massachusetts through ORomneys term what you see him saying and campaigning on now does not match his actions of the recent past.

I would expect that.

I'm inclined to back you up on your decision. I'm not one of those who believes a non-vote for a candiate is a vote for the other candidate. I believe a non-vote is what it is; a non-vote. If you choose not to vote at all, I can understand that viewpoint.

It's still late June and way too many things can happen between now and November. There's plenty of time to think things through and be sure. No doubt we'll all spend time carefully considering what we plan to do.

.

News:

Author Topic: Something to ponder (Read 9968 times)