They wonder where people get the idea that we’re living in a thugocracy.
Today, the House is voting for the 37th time to repeal ObamaCare. As a part of making good on their promise to repeal it, House GOP members are tweeting using #ObamCareInThreeWords and asking other folks to join in.
Because they have nothing better to do, the White House and Barack Obama are trolling the hashtag, literally. The official White House Twitter account (run by OFA Alinskyites) tweeted out this:
I can still hear the voices of Barack Obama and the other con artists behind ObamaCare telling us how it would reduce the deficit. Now it can only survive if we either pour even more taxpayer money into it, or private industry executives agree to pony up a little charity. It’s like a Jerry Lewis telethon, except the disease is bureaucratic sclerosis.
How far did ObamaCare exceed its cost projections?
The Affordable Care Act included $1 billion to be used in overall implementation of the law. Congressional Budget Office projections, however, estimated that federal agencies would need between $5 billion to $10 billion to get the law up and running over the next decade. And as many states have refused to partner with the federal government in setting up the law, the burden on HHS has grown.
Oh, so it was only off by a thousand percent or so! Sebelius shouldn’t have too much trouble getting those health industry executives to shake $9 billion in loose change out of their pockets, right?
***
ObamaCare gives the State vast new powers to control individuals, too. The same IRS that just got busted for using tax audits as weapons against political dissidents – including both Tea Party and pro-Israel Jewish groups – will be among the primary enforcers of ObamaCare. We’re already well into banana-republic territory; we’ll have even more bananas to contend with in the future.
Max Baucus is so fed upwith this trainwreck of a healthcare law, he’s bailing out of the Senate, but the leaders of this Regime are always the last ones to know when there are any problems, so I guess it’s not in the least bit surprising that they would still be gloating that “it’s. the. law.”
Via the Heritage Foundation, here’s a helpful infographic guide to explain Obama’s budget proposal:
Heritage experts immediately went to work analyzing the mounds of new spending on education, manufacturing, “clean energy,” infrastructure, and small business.
But the President didn’t stop at more of the same failed stimulus and Solyndra-type policies. He also piled on the tax increases—including on seniors, the poor, and the middle class.
President Obama is crisscrossing the country to scare Americans about sequestration. But what’s really frightening are the 13 Obama tax hikes that took effect in 2013.
These tax increases, which range from new Obamacare taxes to a payroll tax hike on workers, will slow the economy. Heritage Foundation President-Elect Jim DeMint warned on Fox News last night these tax hikes have the potential to cause more harm than the budget cuts that will happen as a result of sequestration:
Most of the media is so sold out to Obama that they’re missing the obvious. The policies the President has in place, especially the tax increases that just got in, are going to hurt our economy, probably actually bring it down. The President is desperate to blame it on Republicans. He wants to blame it on a reduction in government spending. But the taxes are taking almost two-and-a-half times more out of the economy than this sequester will.
This one’s a toughie because as you may remember, Obama made extremely optimistic predictions regarding healthcare premiums under Obamacare, and we all know this president would never lie:
I guess it depends upon your definition of a “good” answer. Once Obamacare requires insurance companies to cover preexisting conditions, kids under 26, birth control pills and so on, the companies will cover those costs by… raising premiums for all customers.
So that’s a “good answer” in the sense of explaining the situation. But I guess if you’re a fan of Obamacare, it’s not really a good answer.
The Obama administration has Christian businesses like Hobby Lobby stuck between a rock and a hard place. Do they violate their consciences and provide contraception and abortifacients in their health insurance policies, do they drop their health insurance policies entirely, or do they simply refuse to comply and risk the huge fines? This is the America we live in, today, thanks to Obama voters who wouldn’t know what a totalitarian regime looked like unless it kicked them in the a$$.
Following a decision by Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor denying Hobby Lobby’s request for an exemption from the Obama administration’s HHS mandate, the Christian retail company said it will defy the mandate.
As LifeNews reported, Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor has refused to act favorably on an emergency appeal Hobby Lobby stores filed to stop enforcement of the HHS mandate against it.
After a federal court denied a request to temporarily stop enforcement of the abortion pill mandate against the Christian-operated business Hobby Lobby, it took its HHS mandate lawsuit to the Supreme Court. Sotomayor denied its request to block the mandate and the millions of dollars in fines it will be subjected to starting January 1 for not complying.
Sotomayor said Hobby Lobby did not show it met the legal standard for blocking enforcement on an emergency basis, but said the company can continue with its lawsuit in lower court.
Now, an attorney for Hobby Lobby says it will defy the mandate and potentially risk potential fines of up to $1.3 million per day.
Kyle Duncan, an attorney for the pro-life legal group Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, said in a statement that hobby Lobby doesn’t plan to offer its employees insurance that would cover the drug while its lawsuit is pending.
“The company will continue to provide health insurance to all qualified employees,” Duncan said. “To remain true to their faith, it is not their intention, as a company, to pay for abortion-inducing drugs.”
Life News has some rare good news for conservatives on the religious liberty front.
In what a pro-life legal group describes as a “landmark ruling against the HHS Mandate,” a federal judge late yesterday ruled against the Obama administration’s assertion that the government’s supposed “safe harbor” was inadequate to protect religious organizations from suffering imminent harm.
“We are pleased the court recognized the significant harm that the mandate is causing right now,” said Eric Baxter, Senior Counsel for the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty.
He told LifeNews today, ”Religious organizations that object to the mandate are subject to private lawsuits, as well as being faced with critical budgeting, and health insurance decisions in the face of millions of dollars in fines. Truly the ‘safe harbor’ is neither a harbor nor safe.”
The U.S. District Court ruling allows the Archdiocese of New York to proceed with its lawsuit against the Health and Human Services (HHS) mandate.
In it, the concluded that “There is no ‘Trust us changes are coming’ clause in the Constitution.” The court further stated that “ignoring the speeding train that is coming toward plaintiffs in the hope that it will stop might well be inconsistent with the fiduciary duties that plaintiffs’ directors or officers owe to their members.”
Judge Cogan’s said “the First Amendment does not require citizens to accept assurances from the government that, if the government later determines it has made a misstep, it will take ameliorative action. There is no ‘Trust us, changes are coming’ clause in the Constitution. To the contrary, the Bill of Rights itself, and the First Amendment in particular, reflect a degree of skepticism towards government self-restraint and self-correction.”
Bill Donohue of the Catholic League also commented on the decision, in a statement to LifeNews.
“Not only did the Obama administration lose, it got a well deserved lecture from the bench: it was taken to task for misrepresenting the current burdens that the HHS mandate has placed on the New York Archdiocese,” he said. “The Obama team tried to have it both ways, and it failed. On the one hand, it ordered Catholic entities to get ready to implement the mandate, and on the other hand it said that because some modifications may yet be made, complaints that the mandate has already burdened the archdiocese are baseless. But U.S. District Judge Brian Cogan wasn’t buying it.”
Cogan said the Obama administration’s arguments “ring hollow” and quoted the HHS Interim Final Rules back to the Obama lawyers.
The HHS Mandate is the single most egregious attack on religious freedom in the history of our country. This November we must defend that freedom for the sake of our faith and our country.
Compare that to a this sick, exploitative Planned Parenthood “powerful video” using young girls we’re expected to believe are pro-abortion.: “Mommy Vote for Obama” to Protect Abortion:
A new video making the rounds online with liberals has daughters, some of whom are clearly too young to engage in consensual sex, urging voters to support President Obama to protect legalized abortion.
“I can’t vote yet, but you can. Please vote for President Obama, otherwise your vote is a vote against me. Make the right choice so when I grow up, I can still have one,” the girls say.
A vote for Romney is also a vote against the depraved Obamacrat practice of exploiting children in service of his Highness.
Master of Ceremonies, Jack Cashill speaks to a crowd of about 150.
Stand Up for Religious Freedom rallies were held 12:00 pm all over the nation, today, to protest the unjust HHS mandate and other attacks on religious freedom coming from the federal government. Two other Stand Up Rallies were held earlier this year, on March 23 and June 8.
Speakers at the rally, one of many held around the country, urged those in attendance to vote against Obama to get rid of ObamaCare.
My husband and I attended the rally in Kansas City, KS on this beautiful crisp, Saturday afternoon and were pleased to see that KC conservative writer/editor Jack Cashill was the Master of Ceremonies.
Speaking at the Kansas City rally, today, were the Honorable Jeff Colyer, MD, LT Governor of Kansas, Jacob Turk, candidate for US Congress, 5th District – KCMO, Michael Schuttloffel, Director of the Kansas Catholic Conference, Rev. Mike Bronson – West Haven Baptist Church, Tonganoxie, KS, Bill Francis, Director of the Respect Life Office, Catholic Diocese of KCMO, Connie O’Brien – KS State Rep District 42, Rev. Stephen Hansen – Pastor, Coronation of Our Lady Catholic Church, Grandview, Mo, Steve Fitzgerald – candidate for KS State Senate, District 5, Laura Reilly, M.D., Mary Pilcher Cook – KS State Senate, District 10, Mary Kay Culp – Kansans for Life, and Rev. Shawn Tunink – Associate Pastor, Cure of Ars Catholic Church, Leawood, KS.
Left to right: Rev. Shawn Tunink, Jack Cashill, Mary Pilcher Cook, Steve Fitzgerald, Bill Francis, Laura Reilly M.D., Rev. Mike Bronson, Connie O’Brien, Mary Kay Culp, Francis Slobodnik
Lt Governor of Kansas, Jeff Colyer, reminded the crowd of why so many our ancestors came to the United States – to escape religious persecution in their own lands.
Ron Kelsey, the Pro-Life Consultant for the Archdiocese read a statement from Archbishop Joseph Naumann condemning the HHS mandate:
Candidate for US Congress, 5th District – Mo, Jacob Turk, implored pro-lifers to never give up fighting, no matter what happens in this election:
Director of the Kansas Catholic Conference, Michael Schuttloffel, spoke on the robust, expansive nature of religious freedom in this country that has been the envy of the world – ’til now:
Rev. Mike Bronson – West Haven Baptist Church assured Catholics that other Christians shared their dismay. Quoting the Southern Seminary President, he said incredulously, “we have reached the point where Christians may be called to actively defy the government of the United States. I can barely believe those words came out of my mouth.”
Bill Francis is the Director of the Respect Life Office for the Catholic diocese of Kansas City, MO: “We people of faith cannot be silent!”:
Kansas State Rep – Dist 42, Connie O’Brien ran through a litany of assaults on our religious liberties, saying that “we have drifted a long way from what out founders envisioned.”
Reverend Stephen Hansen, Pastor of Coronation of Our Lady Church in Grandview, MO prayed, “God help us, and God help our country…..Our Lady of Guadalupe, pray for us.”
Steve Fitzpatrick, candidate for Kansas State Senate, Dist 5 gave a barn-burner of a speech, explaining how the country got to this point: “We got here today because a majority of Catholics voted for those who are vehemently against our values, we got here today because Christians of every denomination were not registered to vote, or did not vote, or did not inform their consciences before they voted, we got here today because the church – the body of Christ on earth, did not instruct sufficiently, did not exhort sufficiently, did not inform sufficiently, did not stand up as the body of Christ is charged to do”….(yes, that’s me yelling wooo! loudly on the tape – that’s a real sore spot for me. Where are our leaders? Yukking it up with enemies of the church at the Al Smith Dinner — don’t get me started.)
Laura Reilly, MD an adult neurologist, wife, mother and US Navy Veteran warned the crowd that what she had to say might shock some people: “I think that we live at a time of great joy…. we are the salt of the earth – we are the light of the world, Matthew 5:13. “
Mary Kay Culp of Kansas for Life had some closing words:
Finally, The Faith Band performed a lovely rendition of America The Beautiful:
UPDATE!
Meanwhile, Sandra Fluke, the Patron Saint of free Birth Control Pills “took center stage” at a pro-Obama rally in Reno, Saturday:
10 people showed up to see her.
Sandra Fluke, the woman at the center of a media firestorm earlier this year after Rush Limbaugh called her a “slut,” spoke Saturday in front of about 10 people at the Sak ‘N Save in north Reno.The speech was part of a daylong effort by Democrats to get Northern Nevadans to the polls on the first day of early voting.
A Stand Up for Religious Freedom Rally will take place Saturday, October 20 at noon your local time. It will be the third nationwide rally this year – the first two Stand Up Rallies were held on March 23 and June 8.
My coverage of the March 23 rally in Kansas City ishere. I compiled some of the best speeches from the nationwide rallies, here.
This peaceful, nationwide event, the third of its kind, will protest the HHS Mandate and other attacks on religious freedom coming from the federal government, especially during this critical election year.
The first two Stand Up Rallies were held on March 23 and June 8. Over 300 rallies were held in cities and towns across the country, with attendance topping 125,000.
What to expect at the Stand Up Rally
Each of the October 20 Stand Up for Religious Freedom rallies is being locally sponsored and organized, so no two are quite alike. However, you can expect to see colorful signs and banners at the Rally, hear inspiring speeches about fighting the current attacks on religious freedom like the HHS Mandate and join in hymns and prayers for our nation.
For more specific details on your local Rally, look for information below. You may also wish to contact your local Rally Captain (see link below) if you have additional questions.
Don’t see a Rally in a nearby city? Sign your city up!
If you don’t see a city near you on the list below, consider signing on to be a Rally Captain. Just fill out this form, and the Stand Up Rally Team will be in touch with all the information you need.
“At the Al Smith Foundation and the Archdiocese of New York, you show this in the work you do, in causes that run deeper than allegiance to party or to any contest at the moment,” Romney continued. “No matter which way the political winds are blowing, what work goes on, day in day out by this organization and you. You answer with calm and willing hearts and service to the poor and care for the sick, in defense and the rights of conscience and in solidarity with the innocent child waiting to be born. You strive to bring God’s love and every – in every life.”
“I don’t presume to have all your support and on a night like this, I’m certainly not going ask for it, but you can be certain that in the great causes of compassion that you come together to embrace that I stand proudly with you as an ally and friend,” Romney continued.
Romneys said: “The President has put his own stamp on relations with the Church. There have been some awkward moments. Like when the President pulled Pope Benedict aside to share some advice on how to deal with his own critics. He said, “Look, Holy Father, whatever the problem is just blame it on Pope John Paul II.”
“Of course the President has found a way to take the sting out of the Obamacare mandates for the Church: From now on they’re going to be in Latin,” he added.
The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services mandate forces virtually all employers to include sterilization and contraception, including drugs that may cause abortion, in the health insurance coverage they provide their employees.
Biden said:
“With regard to the assault on the Catholic Church, let me make it absolutely clear. No religious institution—Catholic or otherwise, including Catholic social services, Georgetown hospital, Mercy hospital, any hospital—none has to either refer contraception, none has to pay for contraception, none has to be a vehicle to get contraception in any insurance policy they provide. That is a fact. That is a fact.”
Ryan shot back (before he was cut off); “Why would they keep — why would they keep suing you? It’s a distinction without a difference.”
That part of the conversation starts at 4:05 in the video:
The Bishops agreed with Ryan, calling Biden’s comments, “not a fact”:
The HHS mandate contains a narrow, four-part exemption for certain “religious employers.” That exemption was made final in February and does not extend to “Catholic social services, Georgetown hospital, Mercy hospital, any hospital,” or any other religious charity that offers its services to all, regardless of the faith of those served.
HHS has proposed an additional “accommodation” for religious organizations like these, which HHS itself describes as “non-exempt.” That proposal does not even potentially relieve these organizations from the obligation “to pay for contraception” and “to be a vehicle to get contraception.” They will have to serve as a vehicle, because they will still be forced to provide their employees with health coverage, and that coverage will still have to include sterilization, contraception, and abortifacients. They will have to pay for these things, because the premiums that the organizations (and their employees) are required to pay will still be applied, along with other funds, to cover the cost of these drugs and surgeries.
USCCB continues to urge HHS, in the strongest possible terms, actually to eliminate the various infringements on religious freedom imposed by the mandate.
A Stand Up for Religious Freedom Rally will take place Saturday, October 20 at noon your local time. It will be the third nationwide rally this year – the first two Stand Up Rallies were held on March 23 and June 8.
My coverage of the March 23 rally in Kansas City ishere. I compiled some of the best speeches from the nationwide rallies, here.
This peaceful, nationwide event, the third of its kind, will protest the HHS Mandate and other attacks on religious freedom coming from the federal government, especially during this critical election year.
The first two Stand Up Rallies were held on March 23 and June 8. Over 300 rallies were held in cities and towns across the country, with attendance topping 125,000.
What to expect at the Stand Up Rally
Each of the October 20 Stand Up for Religious Freedom rallies is being locally sponsored and organized, so no two are quite alike. However, you can expect to see colorful signs and banners at the Rally, hear inspiring speeches about fighting the current attacks on religious freedom like the HHS Mandate and join in hymns and prayers for our nation.
For more specific details on your local Rally, look for information below. You may also wish to contact your local Rally Captain (see link below) if you have additional questions.
Don’t see a Rally in a nearby city? Sign your city up!
If you don’t see a city near you on the list below, consider signing on to be a Rally Captain. Just fill out this form, and the Stand Up Rally Team will be in touch with all the information you need.
Whoa, I really slept in, today. While I’m still trying to get up to speed on today’s, news, here’s a little something I found in my inbox from the cool folks at Occupy the White House: OCCUPIED! – Obama’s Un-Affordable Health Care TAXES and CONTROL ACT.
This is the ONLY way to listen to an Obama speech:
My favorite part? The freeze frame on Obama’s contempt filled stare. I’ve actually done the same thing while watching Obama videos – freeze-frame on his hateful expressions. There is something very, very wrong with the guy.
From the Occupy the White House YouTube page:
When promoting his legislation “The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act”, H.R. 3590, then-president Obama deceived the public in a myriad of ways including outright lies about the Act and its consequences as well as gigantic omissions regarding its costs, scope of invasive power, implementation and enforcement.
Please READ THE BILL. It’s a behemoth of bureaucracy and encroachment, full of socialistic sounding terms and its dictates are terrifying. It is NOT “European style” health care. Europeans — especially liberal Europeans — would never tolerate the consolidation of so much personal information within one single government agency.
They’ve had their Hitler.
Thanks to so many writers, bloggers, commenters and talk radio hosts — most especially Mark Levin, Americans for Tax Reform and the Western Center for Journalism — who have brought light, knowledge and insight to the UN-affordable Health Care Taxes and Control.
We all want health care reform. We never wanted it this way.
“While all of the liberals are whooping it up and celebrating their “win”, they have lost sight of one very important thing:
The Supreme Court’s ruling gave them nothing.
In fact, in ruling the way that he did, Chief Justice Roberts may have, indeed, been playing 11th-dimension chess with someone who doesn’t appear to be able to see any further than his own naked ambition.”
But according toMark Levin, Roberts’ political, split decision was unnecessary, as the law is hugely unpopular with the public. He eviscerated the ruling,calling it“lawless”, and “a brutal assault on individual sovereignty….We had four justices, including Kennedy who wanted to throw the entire thing out. The Chief Justice saved it. We can repeal ObamaCare, but how do we fix the Constitution now that it’s been abused….again!”
The damage to the Constitution not withstanding, Maggie Thurbermakes a good point on how the decision works in our favor:
If the law is a tax, it’s constitutional because Congress has the legal authority to tax. Whether they should or not is political matter, not a constitutional one for the court. But, as a result of the decision, we now have an individual mandate that is a half trillion dollar tax hike on the middle class.
If the law is NOT a tax, then it’s unconstitutional because they have no other authority on which to enact it.
Going forward, if anyone wants to claim it’s not a tax, as many Democrats will do in this election year and are already doing, then they are admitting the unconstitutionality of the law.
It’s either a tax or it’s unconstitutional – they cannot have it both ways. And we cannot let them get away with pretending anything else.
Alexa Shrugs found CBS’s leaked report about Roberts’ change of opinion to be particularly disturbing:
Some of the conservatives, such as Justice Clarence Thomas, deliberately avoid news articles on the court when issues are pending (and avoid some publications altogether, such as The New York Times). They’ve explained that they don’t want to be influenced by outside opinion or feel pressure from outlets that are perceived as liberal. But Roberts pays attention to media coverage. As chief justice, he is keenly aware of his leadership role on the court, and he also is sensitive to how the court is perceived by the public. There were countless news articles in May warning of damage to the court – and to Roberts’ reputation – if the court were to strike down the mandate. Leading politicians, including the president himself, had expressed confidence the mandate would be upheld.The courts are supposed to be independent and above politics. The notion that the President, the head of a competing branch of government, could browbeat the court into a decision is especially galling. Not to mention the blackmail from the mainstream media and liberal elites, threatening the legitimacy of the court based solely on the outcome of the decision. The fact that a chief justice could be influenced by these external forces is shameful and unbecoming of the prestigious position he holds.
I can’t help but think such a chief justice is unfit for the role. His duty is to the Constitution, not to his own legacy, not to Congress or the President, and not to the perceptions of the Supreme Court.
Ace expressed every conservative’s worst nightmare, one in which I don’t necessarily agree:
He wrote an opinion to get Loved by All the Right People. Well, he has that now, and furthermore, All the Right People are the only people who love him. The wrong people don’t love him any longer. So where do you imagine a weak, affirmation-seeking man would go next?
I think we just saw the birthing of a 5-4 liberal majority, something that will only be undone if a Republican president is elected, and gets to choose two (or at least one) more conservative justices.
Ilya Shapiro of the Cato Institutecame closest to expressing my own pique and despair over the ruling by citing a scene from one of my all time favorite movies:
In the 1966 film A Man for All Seasons (an Oscar-winning adaptation of a play about the life of Sir Thomas More), an ambitious young lawyer named Richard Rich perjures himself so that the Crown can secure More’s conviction for treason. (Sir Thomas More was the 16th-century Lord Chancellor of England who refused to sign a letter asking Pope Clement VII to annul King Henry VIII’s marriage to Catherine of Aragon and resigned rather than take an oath declaring the king to be the head of the Church of England.) Rich is promoted to Attorney General of Wales as a reward. Upon learning of Rich’s connivance, More plaintively asks, “Why Richard, it profits a man nothing to give his soul for the whole world . . . but for Wales?”
***
In short, John Roberts, in refraining from making that hard balls-and-strikes call he discussed at his confirmation hearings, has sold out his legal soul for even less than Wales.
Like Jim Jeffords, David Frum, Joe Scarborough, Meghan McCain, and now John Roberts, Parker gave in to the media’s siren song, which goes a little something like this:
They’re wrong about us. We don’t hate you, we don’t hate conservatives. No one’s asking you to stop being conservative. We would never ask that. All we’re asking for is this one thing. And it’s only a little thing, a small thing, a baby step. What harm can it do — this small thing? Who can it hurt? And look at what you get in return. We’ll love you. We’ll adore. We’ll give you affection, acceptance, and stamp your courage into the history books. It’s warm here and there are cookies and before you decide, I want you to sit back, close your eyes, and just imagine what it’s going to feel like to see your name heralded all across the media, academia and beyond…if you’ll just do this one little thing.
Of course, that “one little thing” is always everything, isn’t it? Jeffords tipped the balance in the Senate and overnight Roberts evaporated the most potent criticism of Obama, his incompetence. To this day, Scarborough, Frum, Meggie Mac, and Parker continue to reaffirm the most damaging media-created narratives about conservatives: Palin is dumb, Fox News is extreme, Republicans have sold out to the extreme Right, and of course racism, homophobia, and blah blah blah.
Over the last few months, Obama’s Media Palace Guards weren’t bullying or beating up on Justice Roberts. What they were doing was offering him a deal that he grabbed with both hands. And what you saw and will continue to see is the media fulfilling its end of the deal.
And somewhere out there is another narcissist among us watching how a such “small” betrayal can pay off in such a big way, and swaying back and forth to the sound of the siren’s song
“Why Robert, it profits a man nothing to give his soul for the whole world….but for The New York Times?”
Obama helped launch this pressure by saying it would be inconceivable for the Court to strike down the law. Likely he would have made Supreme Court bashing a centerpiece of his campaign.
Roberts knew he’d have to take the heat. And so, for this reason perhaps, he got out of the kitchen.
Thanks, now the tea party gets to be the bad guys.
Via the Right Scoop, here’s an inspiring pep talk from the one and only Bill Whittle.
I don’t know about you, but I needed to hear that.
Very true, although Obama keeps insisting, otherwise.
Last Thursday, President Obama walked before the cameras and said, “Good afternoon. Earlier today, the Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of the Affordable Care Act— the name of the health care reform we passed two years ago. In doing so, they’ve reaffirmed a fundamental principle that here in America — in the wealthiest nation on earth — no illness or accident should lead to any family’s financial ruin.”
A bit later, Obama added, “Today, the Supreme Court also upheld the principle that people who can afford health insurance should take the responsibility to buy health insurance.”
The casual listener might take Obama to be saying that the Supreme Court agrees with him and that the ruling was a ringing endorsement of what Obama takes to be the core “principles” of ObamaCare.
Rep. Paul Ryan, appearing on “This Week” with George Stephanopoulos, this morning, blasted Chief Justice John Robert’s ObamaCare ruling, saying he had to “contort logic and reason” in order to make the individual mandate constitutional.
“I’m very disappointed in the ruling. I think the chief justice had to contort logic and reason to come up with this ruling,” he said. “So one man decided against the dissenting opinion, against what I, you know, thought were his — his principles and judicial jurisprudence, he decided to leave this up to the American people. So now the stakes of this election could not be higher.”
This next clip from the show almost looks like a campaign ad for Romney:
Jack Lew, the Obama White House Chief of Staff, was trying to persuade Chris Wallace on FOX News Sunday that Obamacare was not a tax. But it didn’t work out so well for Lew when Wallace played audio of the Obama lawyer arguing that Obamacare was a tax in front of the Supreme Court.
…on Saturday afternoon, I sent out a couple of tweets in which I said: “My sense is that conservatives are getting angrier, not calmer, about Roberts opinion. Shocked/confused on Thursday. Angry of Friday. Really angry on Saturday. Unhappiness trending up, not down.” The tweets sparked an outpouring of impassioned responses.
In a free country, you are not obligated to do things simply for the privilege of breathing oxygen north of the Rio Grande and south of Niagara Falls. But this isn’t a free country anymore; this is a country in which you get things for free. And there is a big difference between those two things.
We are a nation in which everyone is entitled to everything, except the right to opt out of all the entitlements and the cost of paying for them. We may not have the Bill of Rights anymore, but we have a hell of a bill to settle and, every year, the deficits keep making it bigger and bigger. Our forefathers passed on to us a Bill of Rights, and we shall pass on to our descendants a Bill. A tremendous Bill which can be unrolled from the mountains to the prairies to the oceans white with foam… and all the way across the ocean to China.
The November election tracking results are the same after the SCOTUS decision as they were before, according to Rasmussen. Obama received 45 percent of the vote among those surveyed on Sunday and remained tied with Romney.
The White House is encouraging congressional Democrats to go on the offensive after the Supreme Court upheld the president’s signature healthcare legislation Thursday, urging members on the campaign trail to “illustrate how the President and Democrats in Congress are standing up for the middle class.”
The memo, written by White House senior adviser David Plouffe and sent to the House and Senate Democratic caucuses, says the party should be happy to debate Republicans on taxes.
Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal was on ‘Meet the Press’ Sunday morning. He made it clear that he is joining Florida Gov. Rick Scott in not implementing ObamaCare in his state.
O’DONNELL: We’ll start first Jan because you’ve done some reporting. The big question was why did Chief Justice John Roberts do what he did? You’ve learned new details.
CRAWFORD: That’s right, what was striking about this was that it was the conservative chief decisive vote, joining the liberal signature achievement and that was something no one would have expected in 2005 when President George W. Bush put him on the Supreme Court and that was something that not even the conservative justices expected back in march when the court heard arguments in this case. I am told by two sources with specific knowledge of the court’s deliberations that Roberts initially sided with the conservatives in this case and was prepared to strike down the heart of this law, the so-called individual mandate, of course, that requires all Americans to buy insurance or pay a penalty. but Roberts, I’m told by my sources, changed his views deciding to instead join with the liberals. He withstood–I’m told by my sources–a month-long desperate campaign by the conservative justices to bring him back to the fold and that campaign was led, ironically, by Justice Anthony Kennedy and why that’s ironic is because it was Justice Kennedy that conservatives feared would be the one most effort, of course, was unsuccessful, Roberts didn’t budge, the conservatives wrote that astonishing joint dissent united in opposition and Roberts wrote the majority opinion with the four liberals to uphold the President’s signature achievement.
Obama still hasn’t figured out how arrogant and unpresidential public gloating like this looks to the average American…especially since most of us oppose ObamaTax:
Attorney Michael Carvin, one of the lawyers arguing against ObamaCare in front of Supreme Court, told Megyn Kelly that a major fraud had been perpetrated on the American people. If Obamacare would have honestly been represented as the largest tax in history it never would have passed through Congress. Democrats kept this a secret from the American people. Chief Justice Roberts yesterday, in some bizarre twist of logic, decided that it was indeed a massive tax. Americans, you’ve been had.
I am just going to let this video speak for themselves. Obama has shown a pattern of lies and distortions dating back to the 2008 Democratic Presidential primary race against Hillary Clinton. Watch the video, and see how Hillary smacks him down.
He continues spending millions of dollars, perpetuating falsehoods.So shame on you Barack Obama-Hillary Clinton.
Now, Republicans can attack the law not only for being “big government” but for being a huge tax during in weak economy, adding burdens to middle class taxpayers and slowing economic growth. And the GOP doesn’t have to come up with a detailed plan to “replace” Obama’s health care plan.
These via the Americans for Tax Reform. Says the ATR:
Taxpayers are reminded that the President’s healthcare law is one of the largest tax increases in American history.
Indeed. Tax increases which took place in 2010 after the passage of the bill:
Read it all…it’s a nightmare for the American taxpayer.
Like I said, yesterday; Republican candidates have been handed their campaign theme – they had better pound it. Most Americans don’t like being lied to.
“I’m sure they’ll nail us on taxes and I’m sure it will work,” said a senior White House official speaking on condition of anonymity. “But, given the alternative, that’s a bitter pill I’m ready to swallow.”
The White House, realizing how toxic this issue is to them, now essentially saying that the Supreme Court’s ruling was wrong.
Though SCOTUS upheld constitutionality of healthcare mandate under tax law, WH says today the penalty for not buying insurance is not a tax.
Via The Foundry: Sen. Jim DeMint’s Rallying Cry to Repeal Obamacare:
DeMint’s speech, which Heritage excerpted for this short video, came just two hours after the ruling shocked and disappointed many conservatives. After all, tea-party activists swept a group of freshmen lawmakers into the halls of Congress last year and their vote to repeal Obamacare was a major triumph. Equally disappointing for many was the court’s decision.
“We all knew when Obamacare passed that the urgent priority had to be the repeal of that bill and the replacing of the people who imposed it on the American people. That is still the priority today,” DeMint said at Heritage.
Romney, who has pledged to begin the process of repealing the bill on his first day in office, brought in over $3.2 million in online donations from more than 30,000 individual donors in the first 11 hours after the ruling, according to press secretary Andrea Saul. By contrast, in the entire month of May, Romney’s first month as the presumptive Republican nominee, the candidate listed 27,661 individual donations who reached the $200 reporting threshold on Federal Election Commission filings.
Get this:
The Obama campaign repeatedly declined to release information about their fundraising after the decision.
I know….they just don’t want to spike the football, muahahaha.
I spent the better part of yesterday listening to various pundits and reading blogs and columns about the ObamaCare decision. I think a lot of people are missing something here; missing something very important. The Court’s ruling on ObamaCare grants the Congress of the United States the power to command virtually any action – any action that would not in and of itself constitute a crime – of any individual in this country, and to demand compliance with that command or be penalized. The federal government can now regulate virtually any human activity in which you wish to engage, and to regulate whether or not you will be allowed to refuse to participate in that activity, so long as a penalty is attached to your noncompliance.
Now that the Supreme Court has ruled on the individual mandate, what’s next for both conservatives and the Republican party on health-care reform?
***
BRIAN BURCH notes:
Only one man in the last 40 years has been elected president without a majority of the Catholic vote. Even those Catholics who oppose elements of Church teaching don’t want the federal government forcing their Catholic school to provide sterilizations and abortion pills, which the HHS mandate would require. That’s why a majority of Catholicsfavor a clear exemption to the HHS mandate.
But President Obama has refused to grant a workable exemption to Catholic institutions and instead has sought to define the very criteria for what constitutes a religious group. And that’s why states with significant Catholic populations, such as Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania, have suddenly become swing states. If Romney were to win just one of these states, it’s hard to imagine a scenario where Obama wins reelection.
@timothypmurphy: Old enough to remember when reconciliation was an unconscionable abuse of power.
Right, because only you get to use reconciliation to pass a bill, but it would be hypocritical of us to take you at your word — that the bill is subject to reconciliation — to repeal it.
A lot of people are speculating about what John Robert was up to with his ObamaCare decision, today.
Mark Levin is stunned, calling the decision “lawless”, and “a brutal assault on individual sovereignty….We had four justices, including Kennedy who wanted to throw the entire thing out. The Chief Justice saved it. We can repeal ObamaCare, but how do we fix the Constitution now that it’s been abused….again!”
Charles on Fox News’ Special Report with Bret Baier thinks he knows why Roberts did it:
He cranked out a lengthier explanation for his Washington Postcolumn:
National health care has been a liberal dream for a hundred years. It is clearly the most significant piece of social legislation in decades. Roberts’s concern was that the court do everything it could to avoid being seen, rightly or wrongly, as high-handedly overturning sweeping legislation passed by both houses of Congress and signed by the president.
How to reconcile the two imperatives — one philosophical and the other institutional? Assign yourself the task of writing the majority opinion. Find the ultimate finesse that manages to uphold the law, but only on the most narrow of grounds — interpreting the individual mandate as merely a tax, something generally within the power of Congress.
Result? The law stands, thus obviating any charge that a partisan court overturned duly passed legislation. And yet at the same time the commerce clause is reined in. By denying that it could justify the imposition of an individual mandate, Roberts draws the line against the inexorable decades-old expansion of congressional power under the commerce clause fig leaf.
Law upheld, Supreme Court’s reputation for neutrality maintained. Commerce clause contained, constitutional principle of enumerated powers reaffirmed.
That’s not how I would have ruled. I think the “mandate is merely a tax” argument is a dodge, and a flimsy one at that. (The “tax” is obviously punitive, regulatory and intended to compel.) Perhaps that’s not how Roberts would have ruled had he been just an associate justice and not the chief. But that’s how he did rule.
