The Real Meaning of the SCOTUS's ACA (ObamaCare) Ruling... Long Term
by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA
Liberty -vs- Tyranny
Nancy Pelosi once again revealing she just doesn't get what it truly all means. Short term victory versus a very real potentially long term loss. But the Madame will gloat in her delusional euphoric world none the less.
Now, for a clear view of the SCOTUS's decision and its potential longer term impact.
Indeed proponents of limited constitutional government actually had a good day. Pelosites are quite likely looking up a dead go*t* a*s in all reality.
Via: Cato@Liberty
Via: Memeorandun
Rational Nation USA
Liberty -vs- Tyranny
Nancy Pelosi once again revealing she just doesn't get what it truly all means. Short term victory versus a very real potentially long term loss. But the Madame will gloat in her delusional euphoric world none the less.
Now, for a clear view of the SCOTUS's decision and its potential longer term impact.
Indeed proponents of limited constitutional government actually had a good day. Pelosites are quite likely looking up a dead go*t* a*s in all reality.
Via: Cato@Liberty
Via: Memeorandun
There really were only two constitutional issues at stake, the SCOTUS split the baby, but the consequences are the same.
ReplyDeleteBy striking down the state mandate, the SCOTUS delayed the eventual absorption of millions of people into Medicaid in Red States.
I think it was conveniently political, but constitutionally correct. The federal government can not force states to accept federal money.
But in the end, the Red States will have no choice but to take the money because they employ greater numbers of voting, working class, young, white, male people and that demographic requires coverage for everyone's sake.
They have lots of traumatic injuries and illnesses and other healthcare problems. Like car crashes, violence, substance abuse, venereal disease, unplanned pregnancies, personal injuries, and they are a heavy burden on the healthcare system, and millions of them are uninsured.
They drive up the price of healthcare for everyone because they consume a big piece of it for almost free.
So then you'd say, well, why cover them? And I'd say because if they regularly see a doctor, or at least a nurse, they will be more able to know how to at least mitigate their problems. You're teaching to fish here.
So, while the state mandate is unconstitutional, the state opt-in is, and they will eventually all opt in.
As for the tax penalty decision, I am a little surprised. I'm very liberal and progressive, but I don't know if that penalty is constitutional. As I ALWAYS said, taxes should be on transactions between human beings, not lack of transaction, because then you can tax people for not doing anything, and people don't do all sorts of things.
I'm unhappy with that and it smells of sub-politics.
JMJ
Jersey, I'm not sure what the h*ll you're saying here in total but I promise to give it some thought in the morning.
DeleteOh, I really hope you post my comment. I know it's late, but that's my hours!
ReplyDeleteJMJ
Yeah, it is late. But as they say some people do their best work at night.
DeleteI know, I did it for 7 years, it sucked. Never again.
I'm on two years in a row now, and I'm not a kid anymore. It's tough. Keeps me in shape though!
DeleteWhen I was young I did some tough work as a warehouse man and in the auto industry especially. Used to work with side mirrors. One of only three producers back in those days.
Funny, it was a British firm that hired me, then the Germans came in, and the president just happened to be an acquaintance of friggin' Jimi Hendrix, so he thinks I'm this really cool dude, and hires me to do whatever around the shop. I would climb all over those machines. We produced mirrors for so many cars that I guarantee you've looked through a mirror that came out of that factory when I was there at some point in your life.
I worked second and third shift for them for three years. Then they moved to Pittsburgh.
Good times.
JMJ
with that decision, the Supreme Court declared the United State a totalitarian state. the federal government can demand whatever it wants now.
ReplyDeleteit doesn't matter if the right wins the elections this fall and repeals Obamacare. the Supreme court has already decided that there is no limits on the federal government's authority with this decision.
this is direct result of interpreting the Constitution as a living document instead of being see as a contract.
the wars of ideology is essentially over. the left has won.
The important this is that the government's argument that they could do this under the commerce clause was rejected.
ReplyDeleteI agree with you Les. I don't like the ruling, but it is no constitutional catastrophe.
The final vote on Obamacare will be this November.
.
ReplyDeleteWell there goes youse guys argument that USA government can't do nothin right.
The people's Congress passed the ASA bill. The people's President signed the ACA bill. The people's Supreme Court declared the ACA bill is Constitutionally valid. Like positive and popular Social Security, Medicare, and now ACA we witness government of the people, by the people, and for the people in all its glory.
Now is it possible to acknowledge your whole pipe-dream ideology nonsense was foolishly wrong and now past? USA still lives as the land of the free, home of the brave.
Ema Nymton
~@:o?
.
I will grant you this, the system worked. Whether or not the decision was a good one or whether it was a bad (wrong) one will continue to be discussed, debated, hashed over, etc, etc, etc... Showing yet again the system works.
DeleteAs to changing my philosophy, principles, beliefs, not a frigging chance Emma. Like most people I know who have a center.
Comprise, whether we like it or not is a fact of life and a necessary fact if we are to live in a civil society.
What was just witnessed was a sea change in America, and as you said it passed all the hurdles the founders our democratic republic put in place, thus it is what it is.
It was not a good decisions. However, at least states can opt out of the Medicare expansion if they so choose, it did not expand the commerce clause, and perhaps, although highly unlikely it can be repealed.
It is great to live in America... for now anyway.
Les,
ReplyDeleteit doesn't matter that the commerce clause was not expanded. the expansion of power of the federal was and that is all that matters.
with this ruling government can force the people to do whatever it wants thru the powers of taxation. it no longer needs the commerce clause to justify its grab for absolute power.
if you can show me any constitutional means of limitation now, i'd sure like to hear of it.
Well Griper, here is how I've come to view it...
Delete1) The majority of people like and want their SS.
2) The majority of people like and want their Medicare
3) Those that need it like and want their Medicaid
4) Corporations and the pull pedlars like and want their subsidies
The train has been rolling down the track for some time, certainly since FDR, and truth be known for longer than that.
At some point in time one has to begin to believe that the people of the nation in large part want all the taxpayer funded government goodies. I have for many years said the die was cast long ago. We are realizing the the results more each year.
We can keep blogging, we can keep fighting, and the results will be we end up having a huge headache I guess. Oh, I'll keep churning out my views, I'll stand by what I think ought to be, capitalism, limited constitutional government, Objectivism, whatever, and I am sure you and many thousands of others will do the same. And we will go to the polls and vote our principles as best we can by voting for the guy or gal that we think will best represent us and support our views and principles. And at the end of the day the train will keep moving in the same direction it has for 100 years.Until it crashes, or gets tipped over and dismantled by a new young generation of liberty lovers.
Now for some dinner. Before I have to pay a tax for not eating tofu and soy milk.
in other words, you're admitting you can't see any limitations anymore thus as i said we now have a totalitarian government, still a benevolent one, yes, but still totalitarian. the people have, for all intent and purpose, lost their freedom and rights.
ReplyDeleteif so, the fight is a lost cause. every principle you fight for no longer exist. and this next election means nothing anymore.
1) Please don't put words in my mouth.
Delete2) Right now I'm exhausted, have many issues on my personal plate, getting ready for vacation at the same time, and have other priorities at the moment.
3) You may be right, perhaps there are no limitations anymore. I'll consider this issue after my return from vacation.
4) We are statist, we are not yet a totalitarian government. Look the term up Griper.
5) Yes our freedoms are more limited than (we thought they were) yesterday morning when we woke. They are much more limited than they were on 6/28/60 when we awoke in the morning.
6) Principles will always exit Griper, speaking up for proper principles is a proper and just pursuit. The next election between Romney (the architect of RomneyCare and modeler for ObamaCare) and Obama is the difference between a 200 pound gorilla and a 350 pound gorilla. The 200 pond gorilla eventually hits 350 ponds.
7) Turning back the hands of time Griper is what I think you are suggesting. I'll sleep on that one fora week or so.
8) I've stated my case, said my piece on what ought to happen in the next election IMO. Few are listening, few seem to understand Romney is not the answer. So I vote for the only liberty candidate that will be on the ballet. At least MY conscience will be at ease.
Have a wonderful evening. I'll may check in by smartphone periodically next week while on vacation.
Maybe not.
enjoyyour vacation, amigo. and i agree, politics is the last thing that should be on your mind at the moment.
ReplyDeleteThanks amigo. Looking forward to some quality time with the missus and our grandson.
Delete"...with that decision, the Supreme Court declared the United State a totalitarian state."
ReplyDeleteAbsurd and crazily hyperbolic.
Are Canada, Europe, Scandinavia, Japan, Australia, Costa Rica, to name a few, all totalitarian states?
They all have a national health care system.
As far as we can determine, those countries haven't set up death camps or death panels.
When people write nonsense comparing a national health care plan to totalitarianism, you know they've fallen off the Crazy Cliff.
I understand people can be angry because the SCOTUS ruled Obamacare constitutional, but that decision doesn't turn us into North Korea.
Get a grip.