SCOTUS deals biggest blow to Liberalism in 100 years!

Yurt said:
btw...dixie...this did not repeal the commerce clause.
Click to expand...

btw...yurtsie... I never stated it was a repeal of the commerce clause.

It IS a court-defined interpretation of the commerce clause, which contradicts the often-made liberal interpretations of the commerce clause.

The political ramifications are monumental. These wonderful new ideas Liberals trot out, can no longer be made under their commerce clause interpretations... the court has now defined the parameters, which is in stark contrast to courts of the past who have chosen to sidestep the issue. Now, things like Obamacare, will have to be presented and adopted as a new taxation, which Congress' right to do was reaffirmed.
 
Jarod said:
Uninsured people cost the government lots of money, now we have an uninsured tax. I am happy to be requireing personal responsability from citizens. If you choose to behave in unresponsable ways that cost others money, you should expect to be taxed for it.
Click to expand...

Just curious; but let's say that everyone that is above the "poor" line gets insurance, where is the money going to come from, to pay for those that fall below the "poor" line?
 
Althea said:
Can you point out the liberal intrusions that were passed via the CC?

Can you illustrate how taxes will increase?
Click to expand...

Dixie said:
Not in a way that you are capable of comprehending, sorry, find a retarded person to explain it to you.
Click to expand...
I tried that already. You weren't up to the task.

Now if you want to retract the bogus claim, that'd probably be the easiest way for you to avoid any more humiliation in this thread.
 
Dixie said:
For the FIRST time since its inception, we have a firm and solid court ruling on the limits and bounds of the commerce clause. This fundamentally changes SO many liberal arguments on policy. .
Click to expand...
And yet, you cannot name one?
 
Althea said:
And yet, you cannot name one?
Click to expand...
I can't, if Gonzalez v Raich still stands,,the the Commerce Clasue can still be used by Obama for his war on medical marijuana.

Nothing changes via the Commerce Clause EXCEPT, a "clipping" of any further extension". Been thinking about this....
This is actually better then use of the Commerce Clause, at least we're calling it a tax, which ive always said was the way to go.

Might have been hasty on reconcillation too.. Maybe we'll get to Spay?
 
Althea said:
I tried that already. You weren't up to the task.

Now if you want to retract the bogus claim, that'd probably be the easiest way for you to avoid any more humiliation in this thread.
Click to expand...

You're right, I wasn't up to the task because I don't communicate in retardo-speak.

Nothing I claimed was bogus. Under the SCOTUS ruling, Obamacare exists as a TAX. This is the ONLY way in which it CAN exist... so YES, it IS a TAX INCREASE.

It can't steal funding from Medicare, the court ruled it couldn't do that... which was the entire basis for the claim it didn't increase the deficit... it will MASSIVELY increase the deficit. The provisions will have to be paid for, and the only way to fund it will be to raise Federal taxes on everyone. Substantially!

In the end, Obamacare will be killed by the very same people who Democrats fooled into believing this would be upheld under the commerce clause, who's constituencies will simply not support such a tax hike. You barely got it passed under the guise of it not being a tax... now that it's officially the largest tax increase in human history, do you think it really stands much of a chance? I don't, but we shall see in November, I suppose. Maybe America WANTS to pay 30-40% more tax to have government manage their health care? I'm betting they don't.
 
Dixie said:
<snip>

In the short term, I would have loved to have seen the court strike down Obamacare, and I believe they should have done so. But if the court were going to find in favor of it, there isn't much of a better scenario than this, as a constitutional conservative. The legal barriers Roberts has now placed on future Congresses is monumental, and gives us a commerce clause definition that has been lacking for the past 100 years. It is a victory for states rights as well, and these are the kind of fundamental things that are being overlooked in the decision. But I don't blame pinheads... they needed something "good" to lift their spirits.
Click to expand...

 
Dixie said:
You're right, I wasn't up to the task because I don't communicate in retardo-speak.

Nothing I claimed was bogus. Under the SCOTUS ruling, Obamacare exists as a TAX. This is the ONLY way in which it CAN exist... so YES, it IS a TAX INCREASE.

It can't steal funding from Medicare, the court ruled it couldn't do that... which was the entire basis for the claim it didn't increase the deficit... it will MASSIVELY increase the deficit. The provisions will have to be paid for, and the only way to fund it will be to raise Federal taxes on everyone. Substantially!

In the end, Obamacare will be killed by the very same people who Democrats fooled into believing this would be upheld under the commerce clause, who's constituencies will simply not support such a tax hike. You barely got it passed under the guise of it not being a tax... now that it's officially the largest tax increase in human history, do you think it really stands much of a chance? I don't, but we shall see in November, I suppose. Maybe America WANTS to pay 30-40% more tax to have government manage their health care? I'm betting they don't.
Click to expand...
What does any of this have to do with your claims re. 'liberals, and the Commerce Clause'?
 
Dixie said:
now that it's officially the largest tax increase in human history, do you think it really stands much of a chance? I don't, but we shall see in November, I suppose. Maybe America WANTS to pay 30-40% more tax to have government manage their health care? I'm betting they don't.
Click to expand...

I'm sooooo glad to see the right wing has something new to spread predictions of doom and gloom on....even though it's never worked in the past and merely makes them look like tea-flavored kool-aid buffoons.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top