SCOTUS to rule on Obamacare sometime this week

[B-Man]

USA Today

 

Supreme Court didn't agree with Obama

 

Last Thursday, President Obama walked before the cameras and said, "Good afternoon. Earlier today, the Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of the Affordable Care Act— the name of the health care reform we passed two years ago. In doing so, they've reaffirmed a fundamental principle that here in America — in the wealthiest nation on earth — no illness or accident should lead to any family's financial ruin."

 

A bit later, Obama added, "Today, the Supreme Court also upheld the principle that people who can afford health insurance should take the responsibility to buy health insurance."

 

The casual listener might take Obama to be saying that the Supreme Court agrees with him and that the ruling was a ringing endorsement of what Obama takes to be the core "principles" of ObamaCare.

 

But that's not the case, at all.

 

The dissenting opinion written by four justices found the whole thing to be an affront to the Constitution. And the majority opinion, written by Chief Justice John Roberts, held that the law is constitutional for reasons the president — a famous teacher of the Constitution — passionately rejected.

 

"You reject that it's a tax increase?" George Stephanopoulos asked the president in a now legendary interview in 2009. "I absolutely reject that notion," replied Obama.

 

In Roberts' words

Obama might respond that regardless of how they got there, the justices did affirm the principles of ObamaCare. Nope. "We do not consider whether the act embodies sound policies," Chief Justice Roberts wrote for the majority. "That judgment is entrusted to the nation's elected leaders." And again, Roberts writes of ObamaCare: "It is not our role to forbid it, or to pass upon its wisdom or fairness."

 

This was Justice Roberts' diplomatic way of paraphrasing Oliver Wendell Holmes' famous defense of judicial restraint: "If my fellow citizens want to go to hell, I will help them. It's my job."

 

No doubt, Obama is delighted with the court's decision. The court might have repudiated the president's own opinions, but as a political matter there's little doubt Obama welcomes such repudiation.

 

Still, it's telling that Obama's fraudulent claim that the Supreme Court agrees with him is not so unusual. The president has a well-known habit of insisting that not only is he right, but also that all smart people agree with him.

 

.

[John Adams]

1341337913[/url]' post='2497342']

I don't see what's so hard about distinguishing between state & federal. I have policies that work great in my house that shouldn't be imposed on the neighborhood.

 

That's politically expedient for candidate Romney but do you think it's really true? Like Obama saying gay marriage was a states issue for years? That's politician speak for head for ze hills on this issue.

This is Romneys thorniest issue and it's a big deal because Rep Congressmen want this to be issue number 1 as they campaign at home. They will come up with a plan but it's clear they don't have one yet.

[John Adams]

1341365214[/url]' post='2497550']

That's politically expedient for candidate Romney but do you think it's really true? Like Obama saying gay marriage was a states issue for years? That's politician speak for head for ze hills on this issue.

This is Romneys thorniest issue and it's a big deal because Rep Congressmen want this to be issue number 1 as they campaign at home. They will come up with a plan but it's clear they don't have one yet.

 

The WSJ chimed in on this, bashing Romney on his mishandling of the decision. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702304141204577506652734793044.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_LEADTop&mod=igoogle_wsj_gadgv1

[Doc]

The WSJ chimed in on this, bashing Romney on his mishandling of the decision. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702304141204577506652734793044.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_LEADTop&mod=igoogle_wsj_gadgv1

The WSJ is off-the-mark. Romney will bring this up during the debates.

[Rob's House]

For all those who get a stiff thinking about how great life will be when the govt runs the Dr.'s office, I was just told I'd have to wait on hold for 21 minutes to speak with one of the brain-dead, dipshit, !@#$s they employ at the DMV. Just a preview of what you have to look forward to.

Edited July 6, 2012 by Rob's House

[Nanker]

Romney said in his opinion - it's a penalty.

The Supreme Court ruled that it's a tax.

Ergo, it's a tax - irrespective of Romney's opinion which differs from that of The Supremes.

It's a tax, and Romney's held a consistent position. He still thinks it's a penalty, but in fact of law - it's a tax.

 

By the way. If "poor" people don't buy health care insurance - how are they going to pay the penalty/tax?

Will their earned income tax credit be reduced? Will their welfare payments be deducted by the amount needed to pay the penalty?

Or will they simply get the healthcare coverage for free? What's the plan to cover their premiums/penalty/tax due when this abortion hits the streets?

[Doc]

Romney said in his opinion - it's a penalty.

The Supreme Court ruled that it's a tax.

Ergo, it's a tax - irrespective of Romney's opinion which differs from that of The Supremes.

It's a tax, and Romney's held a consistent position. He still thinks it's a penalty, but in fact of law - it's a tax.

It will be great seeing Romney make Barry squirm over this.

 

By the way. If "poor" people don't buy health care insurance - how are they going to pay the penalty/tax?

Will their earned income tax credit be reduced? Will their welfare payments be deducted by the amount needed to pay the penalty?

Or will they simply get the healthcare coverage for free? What's the plan to cover their premiums/penalty/tax due when this abortion hits the streets?

I doubt anyone really knows.

[DC Tom]

By the way. If "poor" people don't buy health care insurance - how are they going to pay the penalty/tax?

Will their earned income tax credit be reduced? Will their welfare payments be deducted by the amount needed to pay the penalty?

Or will they simply get the healthcare coverage for free? What's the plan to cover their premiums/penalty/tax due when this abortion hits the streets?

 

In a number of cases, those people are already provided Medicaid.

[John Adams]

1341601873[/url]' post='2498899']

Romney said in his opinion - it's a penalty.

The Supreme Court ruled that it's a tax.

Ergo, it's a tax - irrespective of Romney's opinion which differs from that of The Supremes.

It's a tax, and Romney's held a consistent position. He still thinks it's a penalty, but in fact of law - it's a tax.

 

By the way. If "poor" people don't buy health care insurance - how are they going to pay the penalty/tax?

Will their earned income tax credit be reduced? Will their welfare payments be deducted by the amount needed to pay the penalty?

Or will they simply get the healthcare coverage for free? What's the plan to cover their premiums/penalty/tax due when this abortion hits the streets?

 

So he's now going to hammer Obama that he raised taxes with Omamacare, right? You see the problem? It's Mitt's biggest weakness and it's on one of the defining issues in this campaign.

[WorldTraveller]

So he's now going to hammer Obama that he raised taxes with Omamacare, right? You see the problem? It's Mitt's biggest weakness and it's on one of the defining issues in this campaign.

He won't have to, the superpacs will use the court ruling that it was a tax and bludgeon Obama over and over with his broken promise that he wouldn't raise taxes on the middle class. When you put that in the context of this weak economy, the idea of raising taxes not just on the wealthy but the middle class will be an extremely potent line of attack.

[Doc]

He won't have to, the superpacs will use the court ruling that it was a tax and bludgeon Obama over and over with his broken promise that he wouldn't raise taxes on the middle class. When you put that in the context of this weak economy, the idea of raising taxes not just on the wealthy but the middle class will be an extremely potent line of attack.

Barry has nowhere to go with this. If Romney says it's a tax because SCOTUS ruled it was one, Barry is a liar for claiming he wouldn't raise taxes on the middle class (along with being able to keep your doctor). If he says it's a penalty, he's saying the mandate was unconstitutional and that SCOTUS got it wrong.

[ExiledInIllinois]

Barry has nowhere to go with this. If Romney says it's a tax because SCOTUS ruled it was one, Barry is a liar for claiming he wouldn't raise taxes on the middle class (along with being able to keep your doctor). If he says it's a penalty, he's saying the mandate was unconstitutional and that SCOTUS got it wrong.

 

You don't have to be taxed, you have a choice. Get insurance (most likely forcing your employer to do it) or be a freeloader and get taxed.

 

So you would rather see 30 million people not afforded health insurance because ONLY the freeloaders are getting taxed.

 

What a great tax if there was ever any! Only tax the freeloaders. How perfect is that?

Edited July 7, 2012 by ExiledInIllinois

[Nanker]

In a number of cases, those people are already provided Medicaid.

But what about the millions of people that are unemployed - or under employed without the means to buy insurance? They're going to be taxed or will they be added to the medicaid roles? We're talking about at least twenty million people in that category.

 

So he's now going to hammer Obama that he raised taxes with Omamacare, right? You see the problem? It's Mitt's biggest weakness and it's on one of the defining issues in this campaign.

 

It's not a problem at all. The citizens of Massachusetts wanted Romneycare. He worked with the legislature to help craft a law that - in his view - includes a penalty for not having HCI. The Supremes ruled at the national level that the BO abortion is a tax. Mitt can slam the breaks on its implementation and have congress get to work on passing a reasonable law that doesn't hip check our health care system into the boards.

 

 

Another thing - there are probably 40 or more million people who will be left to their own to find HCI when their company decides to take the penalty and give them the shaft. Nice work BO. Thanks Harry and Nancy. You made !@#$ing history.

 

 

[DC Tom]

But what about the millions of people that are unemployed - or under employed without the means to buy insurance? They're going to be taxed or will they be added to the medicaid roles? We're talking about at least twenty million people in that category.

 

If they're unemployed, they had access to COBRA when they lost their jobs...so they'll be taxed if they don't pick it up.

 

Under-employed...they're employed, so they have means. Or their employer should be providing it.

 

So if they don't have insurance in either case, they get taxed.

 

 

 

 

(I'm assuming - I don't remember what the law says in those cases. I'm not sure anyone knows.)

[Meathead]

You don't have to be taxed, you have a choice. Get insurance (most likely forcing your employer to do it) or be a freeloader and get taxed.

 

So you would rather see 30 million people not afforded health insurance because ONLY the freeloaders are getting taxed.

 

What a great tax if there was ever any! Only tax the freeloaders. How perfect is that?

perfect response

 

now whether the voting public is smart enough to not fall for the same dumb parlor tricks that got the worst president ever junior shrub elected ...

[Doc]

perfect response

 

now whether the voting public is smart enough to not fall for the same dumb parlor tricks that got the worst president ever junior shrub elected ...

Oh, the irony.

[/dev/null]

The 83%...

 

http://dailycaller.com/2012/07/09/report-83-percent-of-doctors-have-considered-quitting-over-obamacare/

 

If you thought Health Care was expensive now, just wait til it's free

[Doc]

The 83%...

 

http://dailycaller.com/2012/07/09/report-83-percent-of-doctors-have-considered-quitting-over-obamacare/

 

If you thought Health Care was expensive now, just wait til it's free

If you're on Medicaid or Medicare, be prepared to wait 5-6 months for an appointment. But hey, the ER is always there and they can't turn you away.

[DC Tom]

If you're on Medicaid or Medicare, be prepared to wait 5-6 months for an appointment. But hey, the ER is always there and they can't turn you away.

 

Hey, all anyone ever said was that health care would be available. They never promised "prompt".

[Doc]

Hey, all anyone ever said was that health care would be available. They never promised "prompt".

I don't even remember them saying that health care would be available; just health insurance. No doubt they figured most people (as you've mentioned) would just assume that insurance = care and that it would be prompt like it was before, to make it easier to foist this upon the unwashed masses. Boy are they in for a rude awakening!