Recent Activity
Search BL Rag
About This Site

The BL RAG is dedicated to the idea of free expression, thus we welcome and encourage reader  commentary on current events and issues, music, sports, or other topics of interest, no matter what one's political leanings or worldview.

  

Site Management:

Front Page Section Editors: Machiavelli, Skinnydipinacid, and Redbeard

Miscellanea Editor: Zoy Clem

Poetry Editor: Lenny

Music Editors: see schedule below

***

Site Editors: Skinnydipinacid and Zoy Clem

Maintenance Man: Master Admin Dude

 

Alumni:
Eric Olsen, Fornax, GrayRider, Winston, Jimmmco, and WesMorgan1

 

KRAG Music Section Schedule:

Sunday - Jgeagle5

Monday - Rhythm & Truth

Tuesday - Machiavelli

Wednesday - GrayRider

Thursday - Skinny

Friday - Fornax

Saturday - Zoy Clem

On-call - Schwabman

Powered by Squarespace
« UPDATED: Eric Holder Found in Contempt of Congress | Main | US Border Agents Taught to "Run Away" and "Hide" When Encountering Shooters »
Thursday
Jun282012

Supreme Court Rules 5-4 in Favor of ObamaCare

 

UPDATE:   ObamaCare stands

 Mandate survives as tax.

Vote split 5-4 as Chief Justice Roberts votes in favor.

This thread is open, so have at it.

----

The 2012 Candidates Respond

First there was Obama's Victory Dance:

 

 

 

Followed up by Mitt Romney's Response:

PrintView Printer Friendly Version

EmailEmail Article to Friend

Reader Comments (63)

Remember: No matter how the Supreme Court rules, Ann Romney’s tap-dancing hobby horse will get better healthcare than many Americans. And it’ll be tax-deductible.

June 28, 2012 at 10:09 | Registered CommenterWinston

Is John Roberts willing to be the twentieth-first century’s Roger Taney? We'll know very soon.

June 28, 2012 at 10:22 | Registered CommenterWinston

Constitutional, bitches.

June 28, 2012 at 10:56 | Registered CommenterChoy Lee Mu

Piss on the Feds. I'm not going pay their tax. Period.

June 28, 2012 at 11:20 | Registered CommenterMachiavelli

Now it becomes even more crucial (if that's possible, since the Crucial Meter has been pegged since 2008) to throw out the Quisling-in-Chief and as many of his socialist congressional lackeys as possible.

Obamacommiecare must be tossed out by the next Congress.

Too bad the Supreme Court wasn't ruling on the political or fiscal responsibility of the law, neither of which passes the test of common sense.

June 28, 2012 at 11:47 | Unregistered CommenterRedBeard

Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha.

June 28, 2012 at 11:50 | Registered CommenterWinston

What the hell... It's only money

June 28, 2012 at 11:52 | Registered Commenterskinnydipinacid

Come and collect your tax, bitches. I'll have the tar and feathers waiting.

June 28, 2012 at 11:53 | Registered CommenterMachiavelli

lmao Mach, you're cracking me up.

Maybe instead of blaming Obama, the Feds or anybody else you should at least look at blaming Foxnews and other right wing media sources for once again trying to convice you to believe things that aren't true.

This is the exact ruling from the court that most constitutional scholars thought would happen in a vacuum (without politics influencing the decision). Hell, as has been pointed out numerous times by numerious people, the mandate was a right wing idea in the first place.

June 28, 2012 at 12:25 | Registered Commenterkwawk

That tar is too messy. I prefer the torch-and-pitchfork strategy.

June 28, 2012 at 12:27 | Unregistered CommenterRedBeard

I don't care whose idea it is. I'm not paying a tax for the privilege of being an American, not to an insurance company and not to any government. Anyone who comes to my house to collect is going to be very sorry, that's a promise.

June 28, 2012 at 12:43 | Registered CommenterMachiavelli

Also a ruling that went virtually unnoticed by many, primarily because of today's ObamaCare ruling, was the Stolen Valor Act being struck down.

June 28, 2012 at 13:25 | Registered Commenterskinnydipinacid

Skinny - I cas see both sides of the Stolen Valor Act. It an awful act to walk around claiming to have military service that you don't, but at the same time I have a hard time seeing it as a good thing to make being an asshole illegal.

June 28, 2012 at 13:42 | Registered Commenterkwawk

Mach - Might I suggest that moving might be better than getting into an armed stand-off with the government?

Wikipedia has a really good map of your options of places to live. My geography isn't the best but I think that's either Belarus or Ukraine that's an option, along with Romania and Bulgaria. Most of Africa is open along with most of Central America and western South America.

China or Mongolia may be a good choice, or maybe one of the central asian -Stan countries. There's also Indonesia and Malaysia.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Universal_health_care.svg

June 28, 2012 at 13:49 | Registered Commenterkwawk

I have no intention of moving. I intend to live free or die.

June 28, 2012 at 14:08 | Registered CommenterMachiavelli

Skinny - I cas see both sides of the Stolen Valor Act. It an awful act to walk around claiming to have military service that you don't, but at the same time I have a hard time seeing it as a good thing to make being an asshole illegal.

I have to agree with you there... it's a slippery slope, but it's definitely a dick move on the part of whomever would do such a thing. If they allow it, they should put a clause in it that will allow one's ass to get whooped by a veteran and/or active military officer for heinous acts, or some other legal mumbo jumbo. ;o)

June 28, 2012 at 14:23 | Registered Commenterskinnydipinacid

...that's either Belarus or Ukraine that's an option, along with Romania and Bulgaria. Most of Africa is open along with most of Central America and western South America.

China or Mongolia may be a good choice, or maybe one of the central asian -Stan countries. There's also Indonesia and Malaysia.

No need to move to one of those 3rd world cesspools; the cesspools are being built right here, thanks to dedicated scumbag leftists and their ignorant lackeys.

June 28, 2012 at 14:36 | Registered CommenterRedBeard

Winston likes to say I'm wrong on everything and he was correct on my prediction for this one. I got off a plane two hours ago and when I read the headline and brief summary you could have knocked me over with a feather. John Roberts votes with the libs? He will never live this down. Anything called a tax seems to be the foundation to make a law legal? Is there nothing the federal government can't force us to do under the guise of a tax?

I have a sick feeling in my stomach for the future of this once great country.

June 28, 2012 at 16:33 | Unregistered CommenterThomas Miller

Actually, not really, the 16th amendment allows for taxation on income however derived. It is literally that unspecific.

Out of curiousity I was looking that the Wiki entry for the 16th amendment and there were some pretty interestinig things. The first state to ratify the 16th amendment?

Alabama

Followed by:

2) Kentucky
3) South Carolina
5) Mississippi
6) Oklahoma
8) Georgia
9) Texas

How much things have changed in 100 years ehh?

Also came across this quote from William Howard Taft in expressing his support for a Corporate Income Tax....

Upon the privilege of doing business as an artificial entity and of freedom from a general partnership liability enjoyed by those who own the stock

June 28, 2012 at 17:02 | Registered Commenterkwawk

My question is how do Democrats plan to run on tax increases?
You obviously can't call it a "mandate" or it'd be unconstitutional.

You wanted Obama, now you have to admit it's a tax increase.

June 28, 2012 at 17:20 | Registered Commenterskinnydipinacid

Roberts and the liberal justices rewrote the law to make non-compliance with the mandate a tax. This is not the legislation our elected representatives voted on.

June 28, 2012 at 17:24 | Registered CommenterMachiavelli

This led me to another couple of facts. The reason for the Roosevelt/Taft spllit that led to Bull Moose Party? Taft broke up US Steel as a trust, and Roosevelt had declared it to be a good trust.

Even more fun is to look at Teddy Roosevelt's Progressive Party platform from 1912....

A National Health Service to include all existing government medical agencies.
Social insurance, to provide for the elderly, the unemployed, and the disabled
Limited injunctions in strikes
A minimum wage law for women
An eight hour workday
A federal securities commission
Farm relief
Workers' compensation for work-related injuries
An inheritance tax
A Constitutional amendment to allow a Federal income tax
Women's suffrage
Direct election of Senators
Primary elections for state and federal nominations
The recall election (citizens may remove an elected official before the end of his term)
The referendum (citizens may decide on a law by popular vote)
The initiative (citizens may propose a law by petition and enact it by popular vote)
Judicial recall (when a court declares a law unconstitutional, the citizens may override that ruling by popular vote)
Strict limits and disclosure requirements on political campaign contributions
Registration of lobbyists
Recording and publication of Congressional committee proceedings

Anybody want to argue that Teddy Roosevelt would be called a socialist/communist by the foxnews guys if he were alive today?

June 28, 2012 at 17:26 | Registered Commenterkwawk

Mach - I was making the same arguement here two years ago, that the law didn't mandate you buy health insurance, it only made you pay a tax if you didn't. There was no re-write of a law.

Skinny - Democrats don't have to run on the difference between a mandate and a tax. The law was passed years ago.

June 28, 2012 at 17:29 | Registered Commenterkwawk

I was making the same arguement here two years ago, that the law didn't mandate you buy health insurance, it only made you pay a tax if you didn't. There was no re-write of a law.

The legislation made no mention of a tax, the proponents of the legislation argued vehemently that the penalty for non-compliance with the mandate was not a tax, and, furthermore, where in the Constitution is the government empowered to create such a tax? Is it a direct tax (Article I, Section 2, Clause 3)? Is it an excise tax (Article I, Section 8)? Is it an income tax (Amendment 16)?

June 28, 2012 at 19:13 | Registered CommenterMachiavelli

For whatever it's worth, maybe nothing, political gadfly Dick Morris says that this ruling will hurt Obama badly in November. We can only hope Morris is right for once.

June 28, 2012 at 20:58 | Unregistered Commenter1RedBeard

I wouldn’t put a lot of stock in anything Dick Morris says; he’s wrong almost as consistently as Tom Miller. But that video of Romney is really quite bizarre. Not only does the man lie constantly, it’s quite stunning, but someone apparently told him his task was to repeat the dumbass term “Obamacare” absolutely as many times as he possibly could shoehorn it into a sentence. Romney repeats “Obamacare” so often he starts sounding deranged or retarded. Watch the video and tell me I’m wrong here. It’s pretty strange.

June 29, 2012 at 01:09 | Registered CommenterWinston

Can’t wait to get my job with the death panel. You guys are toast.

June 29, 2012 at 03:12 | Registered CommenterWinston

You want a war, Winston? Well, you've got one, you insufferable buffoon. Screw you, Obama, Pelosi, and every other leftist working toward the decline and fall of America.

This draconian "tax" and the foul oligarchy behind it cannot stand. As I recall, revolutions have been fought over principles of fair taxation, with results hardly favorable to the oppressors.

June 29, 2012 at 06:56 | Unregistered CommenterRedBeard

Earth to Winston... when the topic of a speech is about ObamaCare (which is what it's been referred to for years now, duh) there's a pretty good chance he's going to mention the word "ObamaCare" often. You're nitpicking over his wordage, lol... good luck with that. I think you're playing up the amount of times he said it as well.... I'm sure those less blinded by liberal ideology will see it the same way.

My guess is you'll probably hear another word you're uncomfortable with too: Socialist
Get used to them, they'll be throw out a lot over the next 5 months or so.

June 29, 2012 at 07:22 | Registered Commenterskinnydipinacid

Skinny, I don't have to "play up" Romney's skipping-record effect. It appeared that a damaged chip somewhere inside the Romnitronic Candidate Unit 2.0 was making him sound like Max Headroom (if anyone remembers that). I can't imagine any actual human beings were impressed. I'm very glad you posted the videos. The contrast was striking between the President's warmth, intelligence and common sense (he refocused attention on what the Affordable Care Act will actually mean for ordinary Americans outside the Beltway) and the Candidate Unit's incessant lying and demented yammering over and over and over and over of a dumbass epithet. (The irony is, now the President can claim the term as an achievement and the dumbasses who coined it--it was originally "Romneycare", you know--can go suck eggs.)

Shorter Redbeard.

Tears of impotent wingnut rage . . . more delicious to me than the finest wine. Weep, Nooshans! Gnash your teeth and rend your garments! I love hearing your lamentations!

June 29, 2012 at 08:03 | Registered CommenterWinston

Calling Romney’s response “brazenly dishonest” is actually an understatement.

The peculiar broken-record aspect aside, it was just ridiculous lies from beginning to end.

June 29, 2012 at 08:21 | Registered CommenterWinston

You want a war, Winston? Well, you've got one, you insufferable buffoon.

Bring it on, you preposterous hyperventilating dickweed. And prepare to have your ass handed to you.

June 29, 2012 at 09:03 | Registered CommenterWinston

What's been a lie has been ObamaCare itself...
... from when it wasn't a tax all the way up until now
(which we knew he was lying anyway)

The contrast was striking between the President's warmth, intelligence and common sense

Did it send tingles up your legs?

June 29, 2012 at 09:03 | Registered Commenterskinnydipinacid

This draconian "tax" and the foul oligarchy behind it cannot stand. As I recall, revolutions have been fought over principles of fair taxation, with results hardly favorable to the oppressors.

It's amazing to me how no taxation without representation gets morphed in the minds of wingnuts into, I DON'T EVER WANT TO PAY TAXES!!!

June 29, 2012 at 09:44 | Registered Commenterkwawk

Did it send tingles up your legs?

It sent tingles up my legs to know that the lives and homes of many thousands of ordinary Americans touched by illness or injury will be saved by the Affordable Care Act’s provisions while a bunch of stupid lying crazy people lose their minds with indignation. So, the answer would be yes.

kwAwk, what amazes me is that "freedom" to Nooshans means "a license to make others pay when I get sick or injured."

June 29, 2012 at 09:45 | Registered CommenterWinston

"It sent tingles up my legs to know that the lives and homes of many thousands of ordinary Americans touched by illness or injury will be saved by the Affordable Care Act’s provisions"

We ain't through yet windy. We've got November and beyond. We'll keep fighting the good fight til all poor folks die from lack of health care and we're rid of them once and for all. Angry, white, racist, elitist nooshans are persistent if we are anything and there is nothing we hate more than poor folks. Oh, and old folks. And black folks. And women. And gays. And.... Sheeeez, I didn't realize just how many folks I actually hated until I started listing 'em all. White Anglo-Saxon Protestant heterosexual males will never give up til we've starved the children, thrown all the old folks (cept me) off a cliff and put black folks back on the plantation. Standby.

BTW, you might want to start working on acquiring your 2nd million in case your pipe dream should actually come into fruition so's you don't have to stand in line like the rest of us for that life saving surgery/treatment you may need some day.

June 29, 2012 at 10:41 | Registered CommenterTijuana

Since Obamacare worked so well for the dems as the basis for the 2010 elections some might say what the f**k are they thinking that this will change for 2012? Well, demwits now think Americans will love Obamacare because supposedly it's constitutional under the proviso that's it a tax and not a Commerce Clause play. Never mind Barry slobbering, stuttering and pleading with Stephanopoulos that it's "NOT A TAX on the throat of middle class Americans. On most things Americans are a divided nation, when it comes to Obamacare, were not. It’s despised. Get ready for that campaign commercial 24/7 for the next oh' 130 days.

As for Obamacare, it's been front loaded with the "best parts" to kick in first and over 60% of Americans still hate it. Wait until the IRS knocks on your door at mid-night asking for your medical papers, that should drive its popularity way up! Yesterdays court ruling for Barry and the demwits fits perfectly under the definition of 'Pyrrhic Victory.'

June 29, 2012 at 10:45 | Unregistered CommenterThomas Miller

Warning: Moonbat Alert

Taxes are merely "technical terms"
Just a bunch of "Washington talk"

June 29, 2012 at 10:47 | Registered Commenterskinnydipinacid

that should drive its popularity way up! Yesterdays court ruling for Barry and the demwits fits perfectly under the definition of 'Pyrrhic Victory.'

Does some provision of the Wingnut Code of Conduct prohibit learning? I only ask because Nostradumbass apparently cannot restrain himself from offering predictions, no matter how disastrously that keeps turning out for him. He must have had his humilation gland removed.
I didn't realize just how many folks I actually hated until I started listing 'em all.

Seriously, dude. Ever listen to yourself?

June 29, 2012 at 11:25 | Registered CommenterWinston

Winston says I don't learn? See 2010 elections, now 2012. Same issues. Different result? LOL. Well unless taking a historic electoral ass kicking is your idea of a 'win.'

June 29, 2012 at 11:37 | Unregistered CommenterThomas Miller

I’m kind of collecting these.

This is the greatest destruction of individual liberty since Dred Scott. This is the end of America as we know it. No exaggeration.— benshapiro

You thought the low-hanging fruit of the Karl Rove marchers was funny? Try “Obamacare will drive me to Canada.”
Indiana congressman and gubernatorial candidate Mike Pence likened the Supreme Court's ruling upholding the Democratic health care law to the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks

former Michigan Republican Party spokesman and Lansing attorney Matthew Davis sent the email moments after the Supreme Court ruling . . . with the headline: “Is Armed Rebellion Now Justified?”
His answer: Yes!
“Just because a couple people on the Supreme Court declare something to be ‘constitutional’ does not make it so,” says Rand Paul. “The whole thing remains unconstitutional.”
Yeah, he said that. Out loud. With people around.
Someone got to Roberts. I bet they got to him and told him he has to vote this way or members of his family . . . were going to be killed. Later this afternoon, it’s going to come out that Roberts was coerced. ... the whole story will come out, Roberts will issue his REAL opinion, and Obama and Axelrod will be taken away in handcuffs.

These people are deranged, way-over-the-top, cruel, stupid, America-hating bigots, idiots and seditious fascists. It’s time we stopped pampering them and tolerating their outrageous bullshit. It’s time to burn to the ground everything these Confederate assholes care about. It’s all they understand.

June 29, 2012 at 11:56 | Registered CommenterWinston

1). A 5-4 decision to overturn was seen as 'political' by the left. A 5-4 decision to uphold, perfectly reasonable and not political.

2). If Breyer had jumped to the conservatives in a 5-4 decision, the left would call for his impeachment, jailing for crimes against the ‘state’ or an "Occupy SCOTUS" would be in place as we stand. Absent, Michael Savage, the right has been very disappointed but respectful of the court decision and strengthened to beat Obama in 2012.

This reflects the decency of Republicans and exposes the shit bags the left is.

June 29, 2012 at 12:01 | Unregistered CommenterThomas Miller

disappointed but respectful of the court decision . . . the decency of Republicans . . .

What universe do you live in, Tom? Republicans across the fruited plain are calling for sedition.

For such bitter people, your tears sure are sweet.

June 29, 2012 at 12:06 | Registered CommenterWinston

I actually agree with what Paul said, and apparently so do 4 of the Supreme Court justices. It is unconstitutional. They've taken out the word mandate (after deemed unconstitutional, like conservatives have been saying all along) only to rephrase it as a tax. Is it everybody's understanding that the tax is going to be mandatory if you don't have insurance? How does that make it any more constitutional? They're still forcing you to pay for something, which was the whole basis of them rewriting the legislation in the first place.

June 29, 2012 at 12:13 | Unregistered CommenterBadger

The legislation was written this way on purpose. It didn't make it a crime not to have insurance, it simply inplemented a tax penalty if you chose not to have insurance.

It was written with this specific constistutional logic in mind. It was written with the intent that it was valid under the 16th amendment if the commerence justification wasn't held up. There is no mystery here except why you guys keep listening to Foxnews and right wing media which doesn't present you with all the facts.

June 29, 2012 at 12:25 | Registered Commenterkwawk

There is no mystery here except why you guys keep listening to Foxnews and right wing media which doesn't present you with all the facts.

It was on ABC News that Obama swore the mandate wasn't a tax.

June 29, 2012 at 12:47 | Registered CommenterMachiavelli

KwAwk, please stop with the childish crapola about conservatives wanting no taxes. If you want a discussion, first you have to stop making things up.

June 29, 2012 at 12:55 | Unregistered CommenterRedBeard

I'm aware that Obama's Twitter account listed the words "still a BFD" after Obamacare was found constitutional as a tax that Obama says it wasn't. Classy Prez huh? It's going to take an over-whelming electoral beat down because this loser won't leave the WH any easier than trying to evict a Section-9 housing squatter who hasn't paid his share of the rent for six-months.

June 29, 2012 at 13:19 | Unregistered CommenterThomas Miller

It was written with the intent that it was valid under the 16th amendment...

If that's true, then why didn't the legislation originate in the House, as the Constitution requires of all tax bills?

June 29, 2012 at 13:35 | Registered CommenterMachiavelli

PostPost a New Comment

Enter your information below to add a new comment.

My response is on my own website »
Author Email (optional):
Author URL (optional):
Post:
 
Some HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>