9 votes

I think Justice Roberts was being crazy like a fox

The majority of Americans are against Obamacare. He basically just handed the presidency over to Romney if he becomes the GOP nominee. You think the crazy tea party took over Congress in 2010? Now every person out there that was going to sit at home because they didn't like Mittens is going to come out in full force and vote for every tea party candidate they can find. There will hardly be any Democrats at all left in the House and Senate. It will be Mob rule for many, many years in the Congress.

Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

I agree with Robert's logic with a big IF

IF you accept that the government can levy tax breaks for specific actions than this ruling makes sense.

There is no difference between penalizing someone for not buying something and raising taxes on everyone and then giving a tax break for buying something.

Now I don't agree with the original premise. I think taxes should only be used to raise revenue not for social engineering but this is a VERY small minority.

Okay, so it's a new tax. Like

Okay, so it's a new tax. Like social security or medicare, we now have an obamacare tax. But we can get out of paying it if we buy health insurance?

Now that's some twisted a$$ logic that only an apologist weasel could come up with.


I must be willing to give up what I am in order to become what I will be. Albert Einstein

Why is taxation okay?

Doesn't that violate NAP?

'The Anarchists are simply unterrified Jeffersonian Democrats. They believe that “the best government is that which governs least,” and that which governs least is no government at all.'
-Benjamin Tucker

I think he was being statist

like a neocon.


Because trading progressive, corporatist, warmonger, bankster whores for progressive, corporatist, warmonger, bankster whores will work great!

The Teocons are a joke.

After all you have seen......still asleep.

"In the beginning of a change the patriot is a scarce man, and brave, and hated and scorned. When his cause succeeds, the timid join him, for then it costs nothing to be a patriot."--Mark Twain

One problem with your logic

Romney and Obama are part of the same party...The Republicrats.

No Way Out, Slaves

It's a tax whether they choose to call it a tax or not, and that's how Amerikan citizens are going to be screwed to the wall once again. No legal recourse...or at least, none where you have any chance of winning.

Don't pay the tax? Welcome to IRS Tax Court, slave, where guilty until proven innocent is the way things are done around there.

Bend over and grab your ankles...for the public good.

I'm not a lawyer so I'm

I'm not a lawyer so I'm probably all wet here, but Robert's logic behind this ruling seems to me to open the door to fedgov being able to force us to do, well, anything, as long as they apply a penalty (tax) for our non compliance.

So they held the line on the commerce clause, but opened this new window to fedgov overreach.

Can any lawyers out there tell me where my logic falls short?

I must be willing to give up what I am in order to become what I will be. Albert Einstein


They will not mandate "it". But, if you don't do "it" you owe the government tons of money.

But, logic says, if you can't opt out, then it's manditory.

He is a Judge, not a politician.

He is also not conservative, either is Romney, either is Bush. Romney is the inventor of Obamacare. The Republicans voters continue to be duped. When will they wake from their slumber. If they think Romney will fix this they are delusional. The Republican congress had 3 years to fix it and they didn't. Stop playing the rediculous Party games. Ron Paul 2012 or Gary Johnson 2012. No more lessor of two evils.

The problem is politics in the court

These judges all have a political agenda. That is the problem and the reason for these illogical rulings. I am not a legal scholar, but I have read the constitution. There is no doubt in my mind that the mandate to buy insurance is unconstitutional. A political agenda is the only thing that can explain what happened today.

We all want progress, but if you're on the wrong road, progress means doing an about-turn and walking back to the right road; in that case, the man who turns back soonest is the most progressive.

-C. S. Lewis

It is time to double the size

People... we have been losing ground in representation through the years as the population grows.. we lose touch with our representative in Washington D.C. it is hard to contact the person that is there representing us. the majority of congressional districts now have populaces that were once the population of a state. It is time to at least double the size of the house seats of congress. So they better represent and are closer to the people. And are not as easily bought off. imagine them trying to curtail 435 more reps into voting for the obama bulls@#%!!!!!

Population in:
1900 76,094,000
2010 308,745,538. 305 % gain in the populace..

number of house of representatives in:
1900 357 seats
2010 435 seats 21 % gain in the seats...

we have lost power by not gaining seats in congress.

It's time! Rand Paul 2016!

"Truth, Justice, and the American Way!"

I don't think so

Seems to me like that would double our problems!
We need HONEST, God fearing people in there, not more!

" In Thee O Lord do I put my trust " ~ Psalm 31:1~

A better idea

How 'bout we just REDUCE the size of the house by 435 seats?

I must be willing to give up what I am in order to become what I will be. Albert Einstein

Or raise the cloture vote in

Or raise the cloture vote in the senate to 7/8.

nah to both

bad ideas... use your math skills and figure out you have lost representation in the house... it would divide each congressional district... districts now are gerrymandered to favor an individual party. this would allow people that get swallowed up in a district to have a chance to elect someone that would vote their views. in my district it has a heavy democratic base in the north that swallow the republican vote in the southern and eastern portion. that would be split. allowing the north half to vote the same as it has. allowing the other portion to go either way. With less a populace. There would be a bigger chance of third party candidates to make a run for it. It would reduce the cost to run for office allowing less endowed candidates a chance too. Also it would tack on 435 more electors to vote for president.

It's time! Rand Paul 2016!

"Truth, Justice, and the American Way!"

Okay, as long as we cut the

Okay, as long as we cut the salaries and office budgets of the current congress critters in half so that this change doesn't cost us any more, I'll play along.

And I'm not paying for a remodel of the house chamber either. They'll have to bring in some extra chairs or sit on each others laps.

And those 5 minute speech/question segments they get in committee meetings? Those get cut in half too. We have to keep the BS level at current levels.

I must be willing to give up what I am in order to become what I will be. Albert Einstein


i'd agree with the cut in pay.... they could use video instead of being on the floor to make speeches. put them into the 21st century... and the president can make his state of the union address in the day time outside, the same as the getting inaugurated. They all don't have to be on the same committees. Instead of the overlapping of them in many. they would be cut back to a few committees.

It's time! Rand Paul 2016!

"Truth, Justice, and the American Way!"

My first impression is that

My first impression is that this decision was made to inject some 'life' and 'controversey' into an otherwise bland presidential election; i.e., a distraction.

Nope. The simplest

Nope. The simplest explanation is almost always the right one.

Justice Roberts is a typical supreme court apologist for federal government overreach.

He's just... typical.

I must be willing to give up what I am in order to become what I will be. Albert Einstein