Thread: I don't think folks are getting the genius in Robert's decision....

Here's the deal...this ruling actually puts limits on the Commerce Clause. With today's ruling claiming that the mandate was unconstitutional, but as a tax can stand, Chief Justice Roberts is creating precedent that opponents of using the Commerce Clause as a catch-all to provide ever widening social services is a doomed idea. According to USSC watchers:

The rejection of the Commerce Clause and Nec. and Proper Clause should be understood as a major blow to Congress’s authority to pass social welfare laws. Using the tax code — especially in the current political environment — to promote social welfare is going to be a very chancy proposition.

Roberts gave up on ACA (which can, and hopefully will be repealed) to create that precedence.

I think this is a GOOD thing.

The problem is that the tax clauses now replaces the general welfare and interstate commerce clauses as the elastic clauses.

IMHO an constitutional convention is quickly needed to put some boarders around the taxing authority.

Originally Posted by Checkm8r

Here's the deal...this ruling actually puts limits on the Commerce Clause. With today's ruling claiming that the mandate was unconstitutional, but as a tax can stand, Chief Justice Roberts is creating precedent that opponents of using the Commerce Clause as a catch-all to provide ever widening social services is a doomed idea. According to USSC watchers:



Roberts gave up on ACA (which can, and hopefully will be repealed) to create that precedence.

I think this is a GOOD thing.

It is a good thing that this is now a part of our tax code? You don't see the legal precedence that this has set???

Wow.

True, but do you think that this ACA would have ever been passed if it had been labeled a TAX from the start? Heck no. And now, with today's decision, the end-around of disguising a tax as a 'mandate' can not be used again.

Again, I think Roberts was spot on!

Think about it. Remember that the ONLY way they got this passed was by NOT calling it a tax. Had they been forced to call it a tax it would have failed as it narrowly passed as a mandate. This ruling takes a HUGE arrow out of the big government types' quiver.

Sheer and utter genius on Roberts' part.

Originally Posted by Checkm8r

True, but do you think that this ACA would have ever been passed if it had been labeled a TAX from the start? Heck no. And now, with today's decision, the end-around of disguising a tax as a 'mandate' can not be used again.

Again, I think Roberts was spot on!

I can't put a smiley face on this. The government now has the ability to tax you if you don't buy something they want you to buy. This was a HUGE victory for the Marxist statists who are at war with America. Why do you think they are celebrating this?

Originally Posted by Checkm8r

True, but do you think that this ACA would have ever been passed if it had been labeled a TAX from the start? Heck no. And now, with today's decision, the end-around of disguising a tax as a 'mandate' can not be used again.

Again, I think Roberts was spot on!

Social security wasnt called a tax, but was upheld as a tax....

and decades later the same thing.

All I know is that it is (*)(*)(*)(*)ed funny listening to Romney rail against the mandate.

Originally Posted by Checkm8r

True, but do you think that this ACA would have ever been passed if it had been labeled a TAX from the start? Heck no. And now, with today's decision, the end-around of disguising a tax as a 'mandate' can not be used again.

Again, I think Roberts was spot on!

You have a naive faith that this wasn't the game plan from the start. Actually read the Patriot Act sometime, written by the guy that also put Roberts on the court. Check out how friendly Obama and Bush are. Ask yourself where the hell did Barak Obama come from, and why we get a candidate who basically has done everything Barak has done in Massachusetts while he was governor.

Each year we lose more and more rights and liberties. Neither left nor right slows the slow bleed, but instead inserts the knife deeper.

You know the truth is that you have to vote third party to see an actual difference but you have too much invested in your party to do that.

Originally Posted by Checkm8r

True, but do you think that this ACA would have ever been passed if it had been labeled a TAX from the start? Heck no. And now, with today's decision, the end-around of disguising a tax as a 'mandate' can not be used again.

Again, I think Roberts was spot on!

So now private insurance companies are setting my tax rates?

Roberts is nothing more than a progressive hack.

Roberts is the verification that "W", who was the one who appointed Roberts, was the worst president of all time.