Registered Member #2392 Joined: Wed Feb 09 2011, 07:23PM : Posts: 1909
Why Chief Justice Roberts Made the Right Long-Term Decision With ObamaCare Bert Atkinson Jr.
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 threw his windshield. Oh, and he’ll be home in time for dinner.
Registered Member #2392 Joined: Wed Feb 09 2011, 07:23PM : Posts: 1909
And the game is afoot...
Far from being discouraged by the Supreme Court decision upholding the federal health care overhaul, Republican governors are cranking up opposition to the law's implementation -- refusing to carry out two key provisions in the hope November's election will give the party enough votes to repeal it.
The list of GOP governors who have announced they will not move forward on the law has grown significantly since the high court ruling last Thursday.
At least 18 governors now say they are at least considering not expanding Medicaid -- effectively exploiting the one part of the ruling that came down in Republicans' favor. Previously, the law called on states to expand their Medicaid rolls and threatened to withhold money to those states that did not agree. The Supreme Court nixed that prescribed punishment, taking away the federal government's stick.
Aside from resisting the Medicaid expansion, several GOP governors have also said they will not move forward on creating so-called insurance exchanges. Those exchanges, set to go into effect in 2014, are meant to be the state-based marketplaces where strictly regulated insurance plans will be available for purchase.
States, though, have made little progress toward that call. According to a detailed list maintained by the Kaiser Family Foundation, just 15 states are in the process of setting them up.
In the wake of last Thursday's ruling, GOP-led states in particular are digging in their heels on both fronts.
Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal told Fox News on Tuesday that he wants governors to "stand up and say no."
"It makes no sense. This is a bad law," he said. Jindal is among the governors who have vowed to block the Medicaid expansion and the set-up of exchanges.
"We're not expanding Medicaid. We're not implementing the health exchange. Instead we're going to do everything we can to elect Mitt Romney to repeal this bad law and replace it," he told Fox News.
Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker and Florida Gov. Rick Scott -- whose state was pivotal in the health care lawsuit and who was a major opponent of the bill dating back to its infancy -- are on the same page.
Scott told Fox News earlier that he does not believe the rest of the law will take effect in 2014. And he too said Florida will not go forward with the Medicaid expansion. Though states that opt in would receive federal help, Scott warned that any federal aid would eventually be cut back.
"We're not going to implement that," he told Fox News. "We just can't afford it."
New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie on Tuesday told Fox News that his state will consider its options when it comes to the exchanges. Under the law, states have the option to either set up their own exchanges or leave that to the federal government.
"We're going to consider both of those options," Christie said.
But the governor said he sees little need to go much further on Medicaid.
"Medicaid is pretty well expanded in our state already because of the legacy of previous Democratic governors, and so I don't think there's a lot more for us to do in New Jersey in that regard," he said.
Meanwhile, Republicans in Congress are weighing their options -- teeing up votes on yet another bill to repeal the law as well as one that reportedly would bar the IRS from receiving federal dollars to implement the law.
The Obama administration is pleading with the law's critics to move on in the wake of the high court ruling.
On "Fox News Sunday," White House Chief of Staff Jacob Lew said governors who don't implement parts of the law will "have to answer to the people in their state."
"I, for the life of me, don't understand why a governor would refuse to let the people in their state take advantage of Medicaid coverage that is 100 percent paid for out of the federal budget," Lew said, while acknowledging the federal aid declines slightly in later years.
"I think the vast majority of states will come in right away. That is the right thing to do, that is what I think most states will do," he said. Lew said states should have "a lot of flexibility," but said he hopes "the states come around."
Registered Member #659 Joined: Sat Sep 15 2007, 01:32PM : Posts: 8634
and the big blue marble spins through space.
So does that mean they have to take the money from a different pocket.... of us Don't argue with an idiot; people watching may not be able to tell the difference.
Someone who thinks logically provides a nice contrast to the real world.
"I solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same"
WE LIVE IN THE LAND OF THE FREE, ONLY BECAUSE OF THE BRAVE!
Registered Member #2392 Joined: Wed Feb 09 2011, 07:23PM : Posts: 1909
The reality for the expanded Medicare is simply stolen from another pocket on the same pair of pants -- those worn by the working stiff. And Uncle Sam's hand is digging deeper and taking more in the process once again claiming it's for the "good of the people."
If it's so good, then let all government workers, starting with the President, Congress on down be part of the exact same plan.
Registered Member #659 Joined: Sat Sep 15 2007, 01:32PM : Posts: 8634
They better send us some cargo pants. I am down to the little watch pocket in my levi's to hold what is left. Come to think of it I wonder why they still put that pocket on levi's Maybe they should make it a little bigger so it could hold a cell phone Don't argue with an idiot; people watching may not be able to tell the difference.
Someone who thinks logically provides a nice contrast to the real world.
"I solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same"
WE LIVE IN THE LAND OF THE FREE, ONLY BECAUSE OF THE BRAVE!
Registered Member #2392 Joined: Wed Feb 09 2011, 07:23PM : Posts: 1909
Two patients limp into two different medical clinics with the same complaint. Both have trouble walking and appear to require hip surgery.
The FIRST patient is examined within the hour, is x-rayed the same day and has a time booked for surgery the following week.
The SECOND sees his family doctor after waiting 3 weeks for an appointment, then waits 8 weeks to see a specialist, then gets an x-ray, which isn't reviewed for another week and finally has his surgery scheduled for 6 months from then pending the review boards decision on his age and remaining value to society.
Why the different treatment for the two patients?
The FIRST is a Golden Retriever taken to a vet.
The SECOND is a Senior Citizen on Obama care...In November if he and his Czars get another term, we'll all have to find a good vet.
Registered Member #1405 Joined: Sun Jan 27 2008, 06:35AM : Posts: 818
Oso wrote ...
Two patients limp into two different medical clinics with the same complaint. Both have trouble walking and appear to require hip surgery.
The FIRST patient is examined within the hour, is x-rayed the same day and has a time booked for surgery the following week.
The SECOND sees his family doctor after waiting 3 weeks for an appointment, then waits 8 weeks to see a specialist, then gets an x-ray, which isn't reviewed for another week and finally has his surgery scheduled for 6 months from then pending the review boards decision on his age and remaining value to society.
Why the different treatment for the two patients?
The FIRST is a Golden Retriever taken to a vet.
The SECOND is a Senior Citizen on Obama care...In November if he and his Czars get another term, we'll all have to find a good vet.
Sorry, but thanks to a great deal of seniors, their AARP and their incessant propagating (and believing) of the "left's" fear mongering is what gets these clowns voted into office, which inevitably leads to them enacting stupid and dangerous legislation like Obamacare. Hopefully their AARP membership card buys then some extra time when been reviewed by the Ezekiel Emmanuel "death panels" within Obamacare!
“No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms.” “The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government.” ― Thomas Jefferson
3rd MAW, MAG 11, VMFA 531, MCAS El Toro, CA (1982 - 1986) Semper fi!
Registered Member #659 Joined: Sat Sep 15 2007, 01:32PM : Posts: 8634
I dumped them when they begin supporting nobamacare.
I always felt the rank and file senior was a conservative? And have been blaming younger people for supporting liberal causes. I guess we all have our own perspective.
AARP does suck. They should not have a political stand. At least not if they want my support Don't argue with an idiot; people watching may not be able to tell the difference.
Someone who thinks logically provides a nice contrast to the real world.
"I solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same"
WE LIVE IN THE LAND OF THE FREE, ONLY BECAUSE OF THE BRAVE!
BIG BEAR CITY 291 UNITS INVESTIGATING A POSSIBLE SMOKE ON LOOKOUT MOUNTAIN SOUTH OF THE BIG BEAR HIGH SCHOOL. PICKING UP POSSIBLY A SMALL VEGETATION FIRE. FOREST SERVICE IS ALSO RESPONDING.
Checkmate -- Why Chief Justice Roberts Made the Right Long-Term Decision With ObamaCare
