If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(US Supreme Court) NewsFlash Supreme Court rules that Obamacare is constitutional. The bland mask that is Mitt Romney's face twitches with something called "emotion"   (supremecourt.gov) divider line 3382
    More: NewsFlash, obamacare, supreme courts, Mitt Romney, supreme court ruling  
•       •       •

14914 clicks; posted to Politics » on 28 Jun 2012 at 10:27 AM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»


Want to get NewsFlash notifications in email?

3382 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | » | Last
 
2012-06-28 11:10:08 AM
Cons: But all those uninsured are driving up healthcare costs and straining our hospitals!
Libs: Fine, everyone must have insurance.
Cons: BUT THAT'S NOT FAIR!
Libs: What are you talking about? Insurance is primarily bought from private corporations, you guys should have wrote this stuff.
Cons: La-la-la, we can't hear you, la-la-la.
Libs: Come on, grow up.
Cons: Wait, we know, this is a new tax!!!
Libs: It's not a tax on the rich, you should be happy. Plus there is no "tax" or fine if you have health insurance, something that is good for everyone.
Cons: Durr, socialism! Impeach Roberts!
 
2012-06-28 11:10:09 AM
Taxes alter behavior by design and often in unintended ways.

Supreme Court amazingly got it right on the Stolen Valor Act overturning as well (against the Administration's defense of the Act). The idea that lying about military service subtracts honor from those who actually earned it is stupid. Fetishizing the military is not a compelling enough interest. to curtail the 1st Amendment. Wonder what their reasoning was...
 
2012-06-28 11:10:14 AM

Glenford: Only in America, where ensuring that citizens have health care is seen as tyranny.


Everybody in America already has healthcare.
 
2012-06-28 11:10:19 AM

Yakk: Headso: based on the comments in this thread it looks like "tax increase" is the talkingpoint people are being told to parrot.

I think it will be: "LARGEST TAX INCREASE EVA!!!"

/This is Obama's Whiskey Rebellion


Larger than the Bear Tax?
 
2012-06-28 11:10:20 AM
So Obama swore up and down this wasn't a tax, but it was obvious all along that it is.
So Romney says this is a bad law, but he was proud to sign it in Massachusetts.

shiat smells the same all over.
 
2012-06-28 11:10:24 AM
What's the over/under for posts in this thread? 5k? 10?
 
2012-06-28 11:10:25 AM

Jjaro: Kennedy went right and Roberts went left? That's surprising.

And are the liberals on Fark and the op-eds around America going to stop complaining about how biased and partisan the Supreme Court is now?


No, because this is still the same SCOTUS that thinks money = speech.
 
2012-06-28 11:10:31 AM

DontMakeMeComeBackThere: Sad how many people here are happy, not because the court ruling was good, but just because the Republicans "lost".

You guys really need to get a life.



i249.photobucket.com
 
2012-06-28 11:10:31 AM

bulldg4life: Dancin_In_Anson: Where will that money come from?

Tax increases.


Yep.

Like I said. It could be his read my lips moment.
 
2012-06-28 11:10:37 AM

LordJiro: mediaho: AmazinTim: NowhereMon: Suck it cons, suck it long and hard

You must mean suck it everyone, now we'll never fix health care. We'll just keep patching scabby band-aids onto the issue, just like this bill.

At least someone bothered with the band-aid when the wound has been festering open for nearly a century.

This. A baby step forward is still a step forward. And as conservative Boomers die off, we might actually get to make more of those steps, until America catches up with the rest of the civilized world.


From what i'm reading, the rest of the civilized world isn't doing to hot right not.
 
2012-06-28 11:10:38 AM

Angry Drunk Bureaucrat: John Roberts siding with the left wing of the court... MY GOD! THE MAYANS WERE RIGHT!


Was my exact thought. WTF ?
 
2012-06-28 11:10:39 AM

WombatControl: Legally, this was a piss-poor decision. Yes, the Commerce Clause end of things was upheld, but the SCOTUS basically saved Congress by doing something that Congress never intended to do. That's judicial activism. If Congress had intended the mandate to be a tax, they could have done so directly. SCOTUS inferred that's what they did, which is not the proper role of a judge.

Politically, anyone who wants to argue this is good for Obama is kidding themselves. This is the worst outcome for Obama. (The best being the bill being upheld under the Commerce Clause, the second best being the bill being totally struck down.) Why is this the worst outcome?

1.) This just energized the living fark out of the GOP base. It was ObamaCare that motivated the Tea Party in 2010. Now it's going to do the same in 2012.

2.) It just took away their "RomneyCare" attacks. (Yes, the whole "RomneyCare" bit was incoherent to begin with, but it's less coherent now.)

3.) Obama is now responsible for a major middle-class tax increase. After saying that he wouldn't raise taxes. Repeatedly. This will be in every Romney attack ad through this election season. It should be in them now.

From now on, it's not "ObamaCare." It's the "Obama Health Care Tax". Let's have the President own his massive tax hike right through to November.


Umm, they upheld the law congress passed. How is that "doing something that Congress never intended to do"? They said it is legal when you look at it like a tax, but they changed nothing.

And taking away the "Romney Care" attacks? This makes them better.... If Romney goes coco-bananas over the law, Obama can point to Romney care and say "He thought it was a good idea before, why not now"

And it's only a tax if you don't have Health Care Insurance.
 
2012-06-28 11:10:42 AM
Glenn Beck: George W Bush was a progressive.

DontMakeMeComeBackThere: Sad how many people here are happy, not because the court ruling was good, but just because the Republicans "lost".


Can it be both? How about 80% Republicans lost, 20% ruling was good.
 
2012-06-28 11:10:45 AM

Actual Farking: JerseyTim: Obama lied to the American people. Again. He said it wasn't a tax. Obama lies; freedom dies.- Sarah Palin (@SarahPalinUSA) June 28, 2012

lol

I'm currently updating my resume to apply for a position on one of the new sharia death panels.


Teh illegals already took those jobs.
 
2012-06-28 11:10:51 AM

Rip Dashrock: What does this mean for healthcare premiums right now? Will they jack them up while they still can or???


They already did that before one of the provisions took place Jan 2010, now they have to spend 80-85% on actual care or give refunds to millions of Americans, which they had to do this year. Farking-A, does anyone pay attention to these things?
 
2012-06-28 11:10:56 AM

WombatControl: Legally, this was a piss-poor decision. Yes, the Commerce Clause end of things was upheld, but the SCOTUS basically saved Congress by doing something that Congress never intended to do. That's judicial activism. If Congress had intended the mandate to be a tax, they could have done so directly. SCOTUS inferred that's what they did, which is not the proper role of a judge.

Politically, anyone who wants to argue this is good for Obama is kidding themselves. This is the worst outcome for Obama. (The best being the bill being upheld under the Commerce Clause, the second best being the bill being totally struck down.) Why is this the worst outcome?

1.) This just energized the living fark out of the GOP base. It was ObamaCare that motivated the Tea Party in 2010. Now it's going to do the same in 2012.

2.) It just took away their "RomneyCare" attacks. (Yes, the whole "RomneyCare" bit was incoherent to begin with, but it's less coherent now.)

3.) Obama is now responsible for a major middle-class tax increase. After saying that he wouldn't raise taxes. Repeatedly. This will be in every Romney attack ad through this election season. It should be in them now.

From now on, it's not "ObamaCare." It's the "Obama Health Care Tax". Let's have the President own his massive tax hike right through to November.


You're so wrong about the legality of this decision. Go ask any Constitutional law professor worth a damn and they'd tell you that this bill was constitutional, at a very minimum, for the reason Roberts wrote. Read the opinion.
There is no requirement in the Constitution, or any federal regulation, or rule, that requires Congress to "cite" to any authority for making their laws. The very fact is, most laws would be valid under one of many different enumerated powers given to Congress, they do not have to just "pick one." What kind of stupid country would it be where we invalidated an entire law that took thousands of man hours and paralyzed Congress for months just because Congress cited to the one section of the Constitution instead of another one 2 inches below it on the same damn page? If it was valid under the taxing clause, it was valid period. That's just how it is. The penalty already operated as a Tax (it was only enforceable by withholding your tax refund) -- no changes have been made at all to the operation of the law Congress duly passed and the President signed into law. You're just wrong if you think that Congress is obligated to state which part of the Constitution gives them the power to create a specific law.
 
2012-06-28 11:10:56 AM

JerseyTim: Oh my god, you guys. Two federal agents just knocked on my door and handed me a letter telling me I have to appear before a death panel next Tuesday. PRAY FOR ME!!!


If you go the Obama "Share the Wealth" Re-Education Camp for the requisite four weeks, and gay marry the fetus you're assigned, you can usually wiggle out of actual death.
 
2012-06-28 11:10:59 AM

bdub77: This just in, Clarence Thomas added the following:


loooooooooooooool
 
2012-06-28 11:11:02 AM
This means my poor parents will see a huge upswing in my crazy uncle's Fw:fw:fw:fw:fw:fw:.....

I changed my email address shortly after 9/11 and forgot to pass it on to him. Oops.
 
2012-06-28 11:11:17 AM

TwistedFark: bdub77: WombatControl: Legally, this was a piss-poor decision. Yes, the Commerce Clause end of things was upheld, but the SCOTUS basically saved Congress by doing something that Congress never intended to do. That's judicial activism. If Congress had intended the mandate to be a tax, they could have done so directly. SCOTUS inferred that's what they did, which is not the proper role of a judge.

Politically, anyone who wants to argue this is good for Obama is kidding themselves. This is the worst outcome for Obama. (The best being the bill being upheld under the Commerce Clause, the second best being the bill being totally struck down.) Why is this the worst outcome?

1.) This just energized the living fark out of the GOP base. It was ObamaCare that motivated the Tea Party in 2010. Now it's going to do the same in 2012.

2.) It just took away their "RomneyCare" attacks. (Yes, the whole "RomneyCare" bit was incoherent to begin with, but it's less coherent now.)

3.) Obama is now responsible for a major middle-class tax increase. After saying that he wouldn't raise taxes. Repeatedly. This will be in every Romney attack ad through this election season. It should be in them now.

From now on, it's not "ObamaCare." It's the "Obama Health Care Tax". Let's have the President own his massive tax hike right through to November.

Doesn't matter. Americans got health care. This is a win for the American people, not just Obama. Obama will now go down as the first president who got Americans health care. His legacy in that regard, not to mention countless other things he's done as president, will solidify him as one of the greats.

And yes I expect him to fully whip Romney's ass in November.

I'm not much of a political fan boy, but I have to agree in regards to Obama's legacy. He's managed to accomplish quite a bit in this term - and a fair bit more than I can recall any of the last 4 President's doing.


He sure has. No President in history has run up the deficit like him and divided the population more.
 
2012-06-28 11:11:20 AM

Adolf Oliver Nipples: Three things:

We can't continue to live off of other peoples' largesse for much longer.



Didn't this ruling just disprove that?
 
2012-06-28 11:11:21 AM

sweetmelissa31: Ah yes, the time when a President did something responsible and everyone got pissed because taxes bad.


It sunk GHWB.
 
2012-06-28 11:11:39 AM

ciberido: ignatius_crumbcake: Two Free Republic headlines got the outcome wrong. The comments are hilarious as they go from smug to petulant as they realize it was wrong:


http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2900385/posts

"This thread has been pulled."

ignatius_crumbcake: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2900380/posts

"This thread has been pulled."


speaking of, what's happened to JimRob's Anti-Romney Yesterday, Anti-Romney Today, Anti-Romney Forever stance? Are pro-Romneys still getting the permaban, or is he in 'the devil we own versus the devil we don't' mode yet?

Because, really, there's no way to spin a win, no matter what the Supreme Court had said, because... Romney.
 
2012-06-28 11:11:42 AM

Jon Snow: YoungSwedishBlonde: Holy farking shiat, Roberts upholds Obamacare? My mind is full of billions and billions and billions upon billions of f*ck.

It was originally a conservative alternative to more liberal policies.

[i.imgur.com image 477x158]

The fact that people are in disbelief just shows how absurdly partisan the Roberts court has been acting of late.


Roberts proved that he's not one of those "Activist Judges" - imagine that
 
2012-06-28 11:11:46 AM

WombatControl: 3.) Obama is now responsible for a major middle-class tax increase. After saying that he wouldn't raise taxes. Repeatedly. This will be in every Romney attack ad through this election season. It should be in them now.

From now on, it's not "ObamaCare." It's the "Obama Health Care Tax". Let's have the President own his massive tax hike right through to November.


My taxes have not been affected. There has been no tax increase.

There has been a new, punitive tax created, but no tax increases for anybody.
 
2012-06-28 11:11:51 AM
This is just going to make the debates that more tasty. Seriously, these guys need to get into the screen-play industry. It needs them.
 
2012-06-28 11:11:57 AM

ocelot: Loading the car and heading for Mexico!!!!


Ya!! They have free healthcare. Makes me wonder why they come here for free care??
 
2012-06-28 11:12:05 AM

Meatwad42: ALL OVER AGAIN


LINK PLEEZ -- that is awesome
 
2012-06-28 11:12:12 AM
dailydish.typepad.com

He just killed teh freedoms.
 
2012-06-28 11:12:13 AM
Rofl from Scotusblog:
By the way, the opinions collectively are a monster. The Chief's opinion is 59 pages, Justice Ginsburg's opinion is 61 pages, the four dissenters are 65 pages, followed by a short two-pager from Justice Thomas. You do the math.

LOLThomas
 
2012-06-28 11:12:14 AM

sweetmelissa31: Ah yes, the time when a President did something responsible and everyone got pissed because taxes bad.


What a boner that was! Can you believe that time GHWB pulled that huge boner?
 
2012-06-28 11:12:15 AM

qorkfiend: Anti_illuminati: fluffytuff: I'm not a very political person, and I haven't really kept up on this whole Obamacare thing. Can somebody explain to me just what the hell happened, or provide a link that explains it short bus style?

/thanks

If you don't have health insurance, when you file your taxes, you'll have to pay a bit more or receive a little less.

It's like not having a mortgage and not having children.


Pfft, according to my mother-in-law, that sh:t isn't a choice though.
 
2012-06-28 11:12:20 AM
I think the Freep thread about Roberts being just like Benedict Arnold is my favorite so far.
 
2012-06-28 11:12:23 AM

DontMakeMeComeBackThere: Sad how many people here are happy, not because the court ruling was good, but just because the Republicans "lost".

You guys really need to get a life.


A fractionally longer life with slightly less easily remedied disease, perhaps.

Me, I'm moving a crapload of cash into KrippleKart International.
 
2012-06-28 11:12:24 AM

LessO2: You KNOW Romney is going to beat his chest about Massachusetts health care law now.

Oh, and abandon his base?

HAHAHHA.....your move. Rmoney.


I am pleasantly surprised by the ruling but this is actually much easier for Romney to deal with than the mandate being shot down.
 
2012-06-28 11:12:35 AM

Wyalt Derp: RantCasey: And commence the Republican butthurt.....NOW.

Is butthurt covered under Obamacare?


You owe me a new keyboard.
 
2012-06-28 11:12:48 AM

Dancin_In_Anson: SevenizGud: Great, now I get to buy health care insurance for another 16 million losers.

No, you get a tax increase.


Please explain how, exactly, my taxes will be increased.
 
2012-06-28 11:12:51 AM
Well, that's three of the ACA cases. What about the other 3? The Cuccinelli, Thomas More Society and Liberty University suits? Did they even make it to the Court?
 
2012-06-28 11:12:54 AM
Some nutball congressman called it the largest tax increase on the poor and middle class in American history. Notwithstanding the fact that the poor already get healthcare and likely will not be taxed.
 
2012-06-28 11:13:05 AM

gregario: PanicMan: My coworker just said "they can't do that because the founding fathers wrote the constitution based on the old testimate". Also, this is the end of the country.

You're kidding, right?

/I hope


No. And something about the bible says a man should work for his money so something something and I stopped paying attention.
 
2012-06-28 11:13:14 AM

Thunderpipes: Still scary. Means Congress can regulate your behavior via taxes.


Your outrage on this particular point is late by about, oh...the entire history of our nation.
 
2012-06-28 11:13:19 AM

DROxINxTHExWIND: Joe Blowme: So much for wanting to help special need kids


14. Flexible Spending Account Cap - aka "Special Needs Kids Tax" ($13 bil/Jan 2013): Imposes cap on FSAs of $2500 (now unlimited). Indexed to inflation after 2013. There is one group of FSA owners for whom this new cap will be particularly cruel and onerous: parents of special needs children. There are thousands of families with special needs children in the United States, and many of them use FSAs to pay for special needs education. Tuition rates at one leading school that teaches special needs children in Washington, D.C. (National Child Research Center) can easily exceed $14,000 per year. Under tax rules, FSA dollars can be used to pay for this type of special needs education. Bill: PPACA; Page: 2,388-2,389



Don't worry. We'll have a benefit concert for you.

/I think we can get Bono


Enjoy more welfare asshat. Maybe this means you can fill your crack pipe using your EBT card, your welcome.
 
2012-06-28 11:13:27 AM
And people laughed when I said I rolled over my entire 401K to popcorn futures.

Who's laughing now, biatches?

/munch munch munch munch
//god, I love the sound of freep wailing in the mourning
 
2012-06-28 11:13:29 AM

sweetmelissa31: Dancin_In_Anson: On the downside, it could be a "read my lips" situation for him.

Ah yes, the time when a President did something responsible and everyone got pissed because taxes bad.


Taxes good. Taxes for the wealthiest good. Taxes for healthcare good. I don't care if I'm taxed. When you start wars in other countries, you have to pay for them. You voted for Bush, you deserve the taxes that result from the failed policies of that administration.

This is what we call responsibility. It should be a core tenet of our country but it isn't. We have become way too fiscally irresponsible.
 
2012-06-28 11:13:31 AM

Waldo Pepper:

so what if you are healthy and simply pay for whatever doctor visits you need at the time you are penalized by the government for not buy a product/service?


That would be fine if the vast majority of those without insurance paid as they went, but they don't. That costs all of the rest of us.

Obamacare isn't a great solution, but it's an attempt to solve a problem that the GOP has ignored.
 
2012-06-28 11:13:33 AM
So, the new tax on healthy people (that don't want or need health insurance) stands.
 
2012-06-28 11:13:38 AM

Yakk: RantCasey: And commence the Republican butthurt.....NOW.

This is beyond butthurt, Free Republic is talking Tax Revolt.


Why don't those a-holes read a history book. The revolution was about taxation without representation, not about paying no taxes.
 
2012-06-28 11:13:40 AM

Space_Poet: Rip Dashrock: What does this mean for healthcare premiums right now? Will they jack them up while they still can or???

They already did that before one of the provisions took place Jan 2010, now they have to spend 80-85% on actual care or give refunds to millions of Americans, which they had to do this year. Farking-A, does anyone pay attention to these things?


This is what will destroy HSA accounts. HSA accounts are considered a deductible so they almost all fail that test. My wife's old employer had a great HSA plan. They will need to completely replace it with a new, more expensive plan. This will happen to 12 million Americans that currently use HSA's. Something liberals of course, ignore.
 
2012-06-28 11:13:45 AM

DontMakeMeComeBackThere: Sad how many people here are happy, not because the court ruling was good, but just because the Republicans "lost".

You guys really need to get a life.


Shatner?
 
2012-06-28 11:14:07 AM

ialdabaoth: If someone can't afford to stay competitive, why do they deserve to compete?

If someone can't afford to keep working, why do they deserve to work?

If someone can't afford to stay healthy, why do they deserve health?

If someone can't afford to stay alive, why do they deserve to live?


You clearly can't afford to or deserve to be liked by other human beings.
 
Displayed 50 of 3382 comments

First | « | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | » | Last

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report