AT LEAST SCOTUS DECLARES OBAMA TO BE A ‘MONUMENTAL LIAR’

O-MAN ARGUED THAT INDIVIDUAL MANDATE WAS NOT A TAX; CHIEF JUSTICE DISAGREED

I’ve so far resisted the urge to jump on the bandwagon and commiserate with fellow conservatives over Chief Justice John Robert’s direct assault on liberty and freedom yesterday, but this is such an ironic twist; I simply had to toss in my own two cents. The fact that Roberts swung to the side of the liberal justices and upheld ObamaCare by declaring that the individual mandate is indeed a tax exposes Barack Obama for exactly what he is: a “monumental liar”, as Brent Bozell of the Media Research Center observed:

“The incredible irony here is that in upholding Obamacare, Roberts et. al. have formally also declared Obama to be a monumental liar. Conservatives – Republicans – can now campaign on the line of attack that a) this is the greatest expansion of power in history; b) this is the greatest tax increase in history; and c) this is the greatest presidential deception in history. 

The Supreme Court, in upholding the constitutionality of the Democrats’ ‘Affordable Care Act’ on Thursday, decided that the law’s individual mandate, which requires all Americans to purchase health insurance or pay a fine – ‘may reasonably be characterized as a tax.’

From now til Election Day the GOP should simply run clips of Obama insisting this wasn’t a tax.”

Hey, listen, let’s be “fair” – one of O’s favorite words – and look back at what he told George Stephanopoulos in September 2009:

“It is absolutely not a tax increase. What it’s saying is, is that we’re not going to have other people carrying your burdens for you anymore than the fact that right now everybody in America, just about, has to get auto insurance. Nobody considers that a tax increase. People say to themselves, that is a fair way to make sure that if you hit my car, that I’m not covering all the costs.” 

Before we continue, did you catch the additional unadulterated lie?

“We’re not going to have other people carrying your burdens for you anymore”? Seriously? With a straight face? Not only is wealth redistribution the primary objective of ObamaCare, but “other people carrying your burdens for you” is the fundamental cornerstone of your ideology, O. (See: “The rich need to pay their ‘fair share.'”) Who do you think you’re kidding? (Other than those whose burdens you insist we carry.)

Anyway, Stephanopoulos responded by reading Merriam Webster’s definition of  of “tax increase”, at which point the O-man laughed – which is what he usually does when he’s caught off guard – and replied:

 “George, the fact that you looked up Merriam’s Dictionary, the definition of tax increase, indicates to me that you’re stretching a little bit right now. Otherwise, you wouldn’t have gone to the dictionary to check on the definition.”

Memo to O: When dealing with someone (such as – um – you) who has a propensity to obfuscate, distort facts – and outright lie – it’s best to come prepared with facts and definitions. In that spirit, let’s go to the video, as they say:

And of course, as Bozell correctly pointed out, “the high court of the land” – as the Hypocrite-in-Chief correctly referred to SCOTUS yesterday, (after having dressed them down earlier as “nine unelected people” who had no right to pass judgement on legislation enacted by “elected officials”) disagrees with the O-man. Here’s Roberts, writing for the majority:

“It is reasonable to construe what Congress has done as increasing taxes on those who choose to go without health insurance. Such is within Congress’s power to tax.”

In another ironic twist, Roberts wrote: “The court does not express any opinion on the wisdom of the Affordable Care Act. Under the Constitution, that judgment is reserved to the people.”

Unfortunately, Justice Roberts, you just made the ability of “the people” to reject this direct assault on liberty and freedom“We’re not going to have other people carrying your burdens for you anymore”? Seriously? With a straight face? Not only is wealth redistribution the primary objective of ObamaCare, but “other people carrying your burdens for you” is the fundamental cornerstone of your ideology, O. (See: “The rich need to pay their ‘fair share.'”) Who do you think you’re kidding? (Other than those whose burdens you insist we carry.) Anyway, Stephanopoulos responded by reading Merriam Webster’s definition of  of “tax increase”, at which point the O-man laughed – which is what he usually does when he’s caught off guard – and replied:

 “George, the fact that you looked up Merriam’s Dictionary, the definition of tax increase, indicates to me that you’re stretching a little bit right now. Otherwise, you wouldn’t have gone to the dictionary to check on the definition.”

Memo to O: When dealing with someone (such as – um – you) who has a propensity to obfuscate, distort facts – and outright lie – it’s best to come prepared with facts and definitions. In that spirit, let’s go to the video, as they say:

And of course, as Bozell correctly pointed out, “the high court of the land” – as the Hypocrite-in-Chief correctly referred to SCOTUS yesterday, (after having dressed them down earlier as “nine unelected people” who had no right to pass judgement on legislation enacted by “elected officials”) disagrees with the O-man. Here’s Roberts, writing for the majority:

“It is reasonable to construe what Congress has done as increasing taxes on those who choose to go without health insurance. Such is within Congress’s power to tax.”

In another ironic twist, Roberts wrote: “The court does not express any opinion on the wisdom of the Affordable Care Act. Under the Constitution, that judgment is reserved to the people.”

Unfortunately, Justice Roberts, you just made the ability of “the people” to reject this direct assault on liberty and freedom a hell of a lot harder “under the Constitution.” How’s that for “judgement”?
^
As Yogi used to say, it ain’t over til it’s over – November is right around the corner.

About these ads


Categories: Decline of America, Delusion or Dishonesty?, Don't you just Love the Irony?, Individual Mandate, Obama Hypocrisy, Obama the Laughable, ObamaCare, SCOTUS

Tags: , ,

15 replies

  1. Rat, repeat after me, it is not a tax, it is NOT a tax, it is not a tax. The ruling was that Congress had the power under its taxing authority, not that it was a tax. That’s the penalty if one chooses not to buy insurance.

    • So, you didn’t read Roberts’s opinion, I see.

      Damn, Walt, you sound just like a liberal. Oh, wait – you are a liberal. Read these words, s-l-o-w-l-y:

      “It is reasonable to construe what Congress has done as increasing taxes on those who choose to go without health insurance. Such is within Congress’s power to tax.”

  2. I think, Rat, that Roberts may have done us a huge favor, if we use it correctly. Limits on the commerce clause are no bad thing, and saddling O with this huge tax increase may be even better.

    • You’re absolutely right, nee. Here’s a cut-and-paste from a comment I just made to a Facebook follower:

      “On a positive note, what this has done, has been to galvanize our resolve – perhaps more so than the resolve that led to the results of the 2010 midterms. This is a good thing for conservatives – in the long run. Yesterday was just one more sad day for liberty under this administration.”

    • So it could be. The Federalist Papers said where for us to take out our anger against Congress for tax problems. Let’s do that. I doubt extremists will cause trouble, but hope they don’t as President has peacetime martial law authority, thanks to Dems and Reps alike.

      • My thinking parallels that exactly.

        • Good…and I thought so, from other posts from that I’ve read here there and yonder. Let’s…bad word…shoot… for super majority House and Senate…conservatives, really reactionaries to back of time of founders…so that Pres. really does not matter. I know, Alice in Wonderland dream, but I like to…I can always wake up to tommorrow !

          • Supermajority is key at this time. That said, the favor CJ Roberts did us by making this a tax is that it is subject to reconciliation.

            And besides, Dreams can come true. And the progressives have had a loooong run.3

  3. Youse so right…reconciliation passed it (should not have) but reconciliation can kill it…shoot!…and supermajority would be the exclamation point ! Yes, I’ll dream on for now. There is still real hope,without false promises.

  4. By the way, folks – don’t buy into the argument floating around the web that in his “brilliance”, Roberts sided with the Democrats so as not to hand them a rallying point in November – all the while believing that Republicans and Independents will vote out Obama and recapture the Senate – and right the healthcare ship in January.

    Bull crap. Roberts has set the precedent that Congress can tax us on anything we do – or don’t do – moving forward.

What's Your Take?

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 2,470 other followers

%d bloggers like this: