It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Did Roberts Actually Help Bring Down Obamacare?

page: 1
25
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:
+6 more 
posted on Jun, 29 2012 @ 02:28 PM
link   
Roberts may have pulled a fast one on Obama and the left. The bar for repeal has been dramatically lowered. Now that Obamacare has been ruled a “tax” it can be repealed by simple 51 vote majority in the senate.


Because Chief Justice John Roberts' majority opinion ruled the individual mandate a "tax," a Republican-led Senate could repeal that provision--and others--using what is called "budget reconciliation," a procedural tactic that requires only a simple majority vote. The Republican vice president, in this hypothetical scenario, would break the tie. (Democrats used the same method in 2010 to pass the health care bill.)
ABC


All of you celebrating your “victory” might want to tone it down. It appears we will see this unconstitutional law easily dismantled very soon should republicans win the white house and pick up a few senate seats. Based on the outrage this issue is creating and the fact that Obama is making this the central issue of his campaign, I don’t see republicans having a problem gaining seats in November.

The next election will decide the outcome and the bar has been lowered.

Thanks, Roberts!





edit on 29-6-2012 by seabag because: (no reason given)




posted on Jun, 29 2012 @ 02:37 PM
link   
reply to post by seabag
 


Agreed. Roberts managed to pull off a major coup in getting the liberal Judges to sign on to this.....


Des



posted on Jun, 29 2012 @ 02:42 PM
link   
reply to post by seabag
 


Oh boy....

They didn't rule the entire bill is a revenue bill...they ruled the penalty is a tax.

The bill already had plenty of taxes in it...defining one more portion as a tax doesn't change anything at all.


I understand Republicans are desperate to find a silver lining...but you guys are looking silly grasping at every single straw someone comes up with.



posted on Jun, 29 2012 @ 02:45 PM
link   
Well, there won't be a Republican-led Senate, or Willard in the White House... So I'll just keep on celebrating.


+6 more 
posted on Jun, 29 2012 @ 02:47 PM
link   
reply to post by OutKast Searcher
 


The 'penalty' is the 'mandate'….

If the 'mandate' is a TAX, which the SCOTUS has determined, then it can be easily mitigated.

Suck it up! The party is almost over!



posted on Jun, 29 2012 @ 02:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by KireDj
Well, there won't be a Republican-led Senate, or Willard in the White House... So I'll just keep on celebrating.


Is this what your crystal ball tells you?


I will save your prediction for future ridicule!



posted on Jun, 29 2012 @ 02:49 PM
link   


Based on the outrage this issue is creating and the fact that Obama is making this the central issue of his campaign, I don’t see republicans having a problem gaining seats in November.
reply to post by seabag
 


What outrage? The only outrage I see and hear are conservatives and the tea party. There are parts of this law that are helping out many who have pre-existing conditions and college graduates that before wouldn't have had health insurance. Are you or anyone else going to walk with your head held high knowing that sick young children and adults would lose this benefit?

Maybe conservatives should have had the same amount of outrage about the bias 9/11 investigations, the passage of the patriot act, the war in Iraq and other criminal activity during the Bush administration. Instead of attacking a law that will help save lives, instead of illegal wars and occupations that have killed thousands of young men and women because of a lie.
edit on 29-6-2012 by WeRpeons because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 29 2012 @ 02:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by seabag
reply to post by OutKast Searcher
 


The 'penalty' is the 'mandate'….

If the 'mandate' is a TAX, which the SCOTUS has determined, then it can be easily mitigated.

Suck it up! The party is almost over!




*sigh*

Defining one additional part of the bill as a tax in a bill that already has plenty of tax code in it does not change anything about the bill. What do you not understand about this???

They did not define this as a revenue bill...absolutely nothing is changed besides that they clarified that the penalty will be administered as a tax....which it always was anyway.


Grasping....it's sad.



posted on Jun, 29 2012 @ 02:51 PM
link   
reply to post by OutKast Searcher
 



The bill already had plenty of taxes in it...defining one more portion as a tax doesn't change anything at all.


Glad to see you admit that!!!! After all, didn't Obama say it wasn't going to raise taxes?????



posted on Jun, 29 2012 @ 02:53 PM
link   
reply to post by WeRpeons
 



What outrage?


Outrage displayed by everyone who understands that the constitution has just be shat upon AGAIN.

It is the job of the right (and Romney) to stoke the outrage and explain what’s at stake during the next election; Obama will help in this effort.


Are you or anyone else going to walk with your head held high knowing that sick young children and adults would lose this benefit?


So pushing grandma off the cliff wasn’t enough, huh?


Give it a rest.



posted on Jun, 29 2012 @ 02:54 PM
link   
Why would the GOP want to get rid of the mandate? That part was their idea.

If the mandate was removed, and the bill's provisions stood as they were written, it would be a massive blow to the private insurance companies. I seriously doubt the Republicans would do anything to harm corporate interests, even if it would help the American people.



posted on Jun, 29 2012 @ 02:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by seeker1963
reply to post by OutKast Searcher
 



The bill already had plenty of taxes in it...defining one more portion as a tax doesn't change anything at all.


Glad to see you admit that!!!! After all, didn't Obama say it wasn't going to raise taxes?????


The taxes are on businesses and those who make over 250k.

Maybe you should actually be knowledgable before you comment.



posted on Jun, 29 2012 @ 02:58 PM
link   
Yeah Obama care was a gop idea that is why they want to get rid of it ???

Seriously?

Wow.



posted on Jun, 29 2012 @ 03:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by OutKast Searcher
reply to post by seabag
 


Oh boy....

They didn't rule the entire bill is a revenue bill...they ruled the penalty is a tax.

The bill already had plenty of taxes in it...defining one more portion as a tax doesn't change anything at all.


What don’t you understand about it?

If there is no TAX then there is no MANDATE and no FUNDING.

The entire program is build around this TAX…..how do they continue with no funding?



posted on Jun, 29 2012 @ 03:00 PM
link   
reply to post by OutKast Searcher
 



The taxes are on businesses and those who make over 250k.

Maybe you should actually be knowledgable before you comment.


That isn't what you said in your comment now was it????? Maybe you should state the facts before you blindly post in favor of your savior?????



posted on Jun, 29 2012 @ 03:01 PM
link   
It seems Justice Roberts may have baked B.O. and his acolytes a Moose Turd Pie... Five reasons why...


"#5. It made taxation the panacea for constitutional questions

Obamacare is probably the first case to ever involve what is arguably a sleeper tax – that is, a tax that isn’t called a tax in the law itself, but may behave like one. It will also probably be the last, because from now on, every single case that remotely involves IRS penalties as a means of enforcement will be instantly slammed as a sleeper mandate-style tax by its opponents and subjected to the same level of scrutiny as your average tax increase while in Congress. This mandate was able to get by on the fig leaf of being a penalty. Future adventures with the idea won’t have that luxury."



"#4. The liberal judges inadvertently brought Federalism back

Not only did Roberts resurrect states’ rights, but he did it with the blessing of several liberal justices on the court, since the ruling on the Medicaid expansion came down 7-2. This is the equivalent of getting Al Sharpton to vote against affirmative action, and it means that functionally, even the Court’s Left has declared the Constitution itself in favor of state sovereignty over and against Federal overreach."



"#3. Roberts got the liberals to actually set up a limit on the Commerce Clause

Roberts somehow got four of his liberal colleagues to agree to this reading:
“The power to regulate commerce presupposes the existence of commercial activity to be regulated. . . . The individual mandate, however, does not regulate existing commercial activity. It instead compels individuals to become active in commerce by purchasing a product, on the ground that their failure to do so affects interstate commerce. 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. . . . Allowing Congress to justify federal regulation by pointing to the effect of inaction on commerce would bring countless decisions an individual could potentially make within the scope of federal regulation, and — under the government’s theory — empower Congress to make those decisions for him.”
This is the brightest line in the sand ever drawn on the question of where the interstate commerce power ends, and again, Roberts got his liberal colleagues to agree to it."



"#2. This deflates Occupy Wall Street’s biggest cause

Look, we‘re not pretending this case isn’t a victory for the Obama administration. It is. However, it also gives conservatives an unexpected right hook to use against the Obama administration’s Democratic base. Remember how before this decision came out, every liberal within breathing distance was bemoaning the fact that the case Citizens United v. FEC, which they claimed was decided by a runaway “activist court,” had permanently ceded American government to those with money? Obamacare’s decision came down technically in their favor. And that means that all the liberals who were sharpening their knives to go after this “activist court” suddenly have to revise their low opinion and start treating the Court’s decisions as final."



"1. Mitt Romney now will have a much easier time defeating Barack Obama

“This is not politics, this is math.” In the not-quite-24-hours since Obamacare was ruled constitutional, Mitt Romney has raised a breathtaking $3 million. An MSNBC host this morning lamented why after the ruling contributions did not increase for B.O. How else to put it? Romney has been handed an issue where 60 percent of the voting public agree with him...
The Obama administration has to run on their record, and the fact of the matter is that running on a law that imposes a massive, unpopular tax on the whole country, is going to look a heck of a lot worse than running while disowning a previous experiment (Romneycare) with the idea at the state level and promising to do away with the national version once elected. Romney’s moment of heresy was years ago. Obama’s is right now."






www.theblaze.com...
edit on 29-6-2012 by Tworide because: (no reason given)

edit on 29-6-2012 by Tworide because: formatting



posted on Jun, 29 2012 @ 03:02 PM
link   
post removed for serious violation of ATS Terms & Conditions



posted on Jun, 29 2012 @ 03:06 PM
link   
Its almost enjoyable watching the right spin this every witch way.

I have been trying to see how much the GOP and Tea Party groups spent and lost on this effort. Its also interesting to see how they have turned on Roberts.

The argument about whether its constitutional has been decided.

Don't believe the propaganda people Romney will over turn it just like Obama was gonna overturn the patriot act, it isn't gonna happen.



posted on Jun, 29 2012 @ 03:09 PM
link   
Well the fact remains the left lied to pass the bill. they bribed, and threatened, and made back room deals over something that was not a tax.

The scotus ruling opened a door 51 votes and it is gone, no super majority is needed.



posted on Jun, 29 2012 @ 03:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by seeker1963
reply to post by OutKast Searcher
 



The taxes are on businesses and those who make over 250k.

Maybe you should actually be knowledgable before you comment.


That isn't what you said in your comment now was it????? Maybe you should state the facts before you blindly post in favor of your savior?????


My comment was that the bill already had taxes.

You tried to use that to say Obama is raising taxes on everyone...which is false.



new topics

top topics



 
25
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join