United States News
See other United States News Articles
Title: More Proof Obama Is A Lying SACK OF SHIT!
Source:
[None]
URL Source: [None]
Published: Jul 18, 2010
Author: .
Post Date: 2010-07-18 16:42:37 by A K A Stone
Keywords: None
Views: 62121
Comments: 67
First watch the sack of shit say his healthcare bill is not a tax
Now look at this article from the New York Times http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/18/health/policy/18health.html?_r=1&ref=politics
Changing Stance, Administration Now Defends Insurance Mandate as a Tax By ROBERT PEAR Published: July 16, 2010
WASHINGTON — When Congress required most Americans to obtain health insurance or pay a penalty, Democrats denied that they were creating a new tax. But in court, the Obama administration and its allies now defend the requirement as an exercise of the government’s “power to lay and collect taxes.”
And that power, they say, is even more sweeping than the federal power to regulate interstate commerce.
Administration officials say the tax argument is a linchpin of their legal case in defense of the health care overhaul and its individual mandate, now being challenged in court by more than 20 states and several private organizations.
Under the legislation signed by President Obama in March, most Americans will have to maintain “minimum essential coverage” starting in 2014. Many people will be eligible for federal subsidies to help them pay premiums.
In a brief defending the law, the Justice Department says the requirement for people to carry insurance or pay the penalty is “a valid exercise” of Congress’s power to impose taxes.
Congress can use its taxing power “even for purposes that would exceed its powers under other provisions” of the Constitution, the department said. For more than a century, it added, the Supreme Court has held that Congress can tax activities that it could not reach by using its power to regulate commerce.
While Congress was working on the health care legislation, Mr. Obama refused to accept the argument that a mandate to buy insurance, enforced by financial penalties, was equivalent to a tax.
“For us to say that you’ve got to take a responsibility to get health insurance is absolutely not a tax increase,” the president said last September, in a spirited exchange with George Stephanopoulos on the ABC News program “This Week.”
When Mr. Stephanopoulos said the penalty appeared to fit the dictionary definition of a tax, Mr. Obama replied, “I absolutely reject that notion.”
Congress anticipated a constitutional challenge to the individual mandate. Accordingly, the law includes 10 detailed findings meant to show that the mandate regulates commercial activity important to the nation’s economy. Nowhere does Congress cite its taxing power as a source of authority.
Under the Constitution, Congress can exercise its taxing power to provide for the “general welfare.” It is for Congress, not courts, to decide which taxes are “conducive to the general welfare,” the Supreme Court said 73 years ago in upholding the Social Security Act.
Dan Pfeiffer, the White House communications director, described the tax power as an alternative source of authority.
“The Commerce Clause supplies sufficient authority for the shared-responsibility requirements in the new health reform law,” Mr. Pfeiffer said. “To the extent that there is any question of additional authority — and we don’t believe there is — it would be available through the General Welfare Clause.”
The law describes the levy on the uninsured as a “penalty” rather than a tax. The Justice Department brushes aside the distinction, saying “the statutory label” does not matter. The constitutionality of a tax law depends on “its practical operation,” not the precise form of words used to describe it, the department says, citing a long line of Supreme Court cases.
Moreover, the department says the penalty is a tax because it will raise substantial revenue: $4 billion a year by 2017, according to the Congressional Budget Office.
In addition, the department notes, the penalty is imposed and collected under the Internal Revenue Code, and people must report it on their tax returns “as an addition to income tax liability.”
Because the penalty is a tax, the department says, no one can challenge it in court before paying it and seeking a refund.
Jack M. Balkin, a professor at Yale Law School who supports the new law, said, “The tax argument is the strongest argument for upholding” the individual-coverage requirement.
Mr. Obama “has not been honest with the American people about the nature of this bill,” Mr. Balkin said last month at a meeting of the American Constitution Society, a progressive legal organization. “This bill is a tax. Because it’s a tax, it’s completely constitutional.”
Mr. Balkin and other law professors pressed that argument in a friend-of-the-court brief filed in one of the pending cases.
Opponents contend that the “minimum coverage provision” is unconstitutional because it exceeds Congress’s power to regulate commerce.
“This is the first time that Congress has ever ordered Americans to use their own money to purchase a particular good or service,” said Senator Orrin G. Hatch, Republican of Utah.
In their lawsuit, Florida and other states say: “Congress is attempting to regulate and penalize Americans for choosing not to engage in economic activity. If Congress can do this much, there will be virtually no sphere of private decision-making beyond the reach of federal power.”
In reply, the administration and its allies say that a person who goes without insurance is simply choosing to pay for health care out of pocket at a later date. In the aggregate, they say, these decisions have a substantial effect on the interstate market for health care and health insurance.
In its legal briefs, the Obama administration points to a famous New Deal case, Wickard v. Filburn, in which the Supreme Court upheld a penalty imposed on an Ohio farmer who had grown a small amount of wheat, in excess of his production quota, purely for his own use.
The wheat grown by Roscoe Filburn “may be trivial by itself,” the court said, but when combined with the output of other small farmers, it significantly affected interstate commerce and could therefore be regulated by the government as part of a broad scheme regulating interstate commerce.
Poster Comment:
Like I said. Obama is a lying sack of shit. No disputing it.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: A K A Stone (#0)
I'm sorry, your thread title is goofed up. It should read "MORE PROOF..."
If you voted for Obama in 2008, you're too blame for this rotten mess we're now in. You broke it, you own it.
Thanks. I'll correct it.
Can't dispute it can ya.
You have a long wait if you expect to get any intellectual honesty out of those three. Lies, obfuscation and distortions with a tad of "taking it out of context" is the trade those three ply.
If you voted for Obama in 2008, you're too blame for this rotten mess we're now in. You broke it, you own it.
Check that.
Dispute what?
There are some people who can receive a truth by no other way than to have their understanding shocked and insulted. -Carl Sandburg describing Creationists
Given the choice between Obama & McCain, I'm still pretty happy with Obama.
So because Palin has repeatedly lied as well, why are you defending her? You don't seem to have a problem with politicians lying as long as they claim to support your views in other areas.
It was obvious months ago that the only way the individual mandate could pass constitutional muster was to classify it as a tax.
That's like saying "given the choice between death by firing squad and death by hanging, I'm still pretty happy with death by firing squad." Which brings me to a question: It is clear to me that anyone who could still write "I'm pretty happy with Obama" is NOT a person who respects The Constitution or a Constitutional Republic. Hell - Zero himself does not like the Contitution: Why don't you Zero democrats just be honest and come out that you like and admire European style governance, and wish to have it here? After all, if it's what people are clamoring for, it should be an easy sell, right? Be honest! Come out with it! Bury The Constitution once and for all! The peasants will rejoice!
If I could, I would. Nope, more like a choice between death by firing squad and a paper cut. :-) I said I'm happy with him given the alternative was McCain/Palin. Have you forgotten that it was Palin who espoused the socialist viewpoint that oil is a shared resource and that everyone is entitled to a cut of oil company profits? Is that what you mean by "European style governance"? I refudiate that remark.
Given that the late Teddy, Biden, Zero (57 states), and Maxine Waters (did they see the flag on Mars?) - to name a few demwit mis-speaking loons - are on your side, I don't think you really want to go there . . .
If I could, I would. And you have David Vitter, John Boehner, Sarah Palin, Mitch McConnel, Michael Steele, and on and on and on. I'll compare my list to your any day. :-)
Answering my question with a question isn't answering my question. I've never said I would vote for Palin, and I don't believe in European style governance. It's obvious that you do. Why not come out of the closet and admit it?
If I could, I would. First define "european style governance" given there are vast differences in government styles between say Italy, the UK, and Germany.
You actually make my point, to wit: Politicians are stupid - it's a "bi-partisan" trait. If they could find honest work, they wouldn't be politicians. I find it amazing and hilarious that posters like you, war, Freddie and Skippy (sorry for any I'm leaving out) seem to believe that stupidity rests only on one party. Stupid viewpoints like that make you guys seem . . . stupid.
If I could, I would. You aren't reading very carefully if you've reached that conclusion.
You got the wrong black woman (I know, they all look alike).
"The ocean will take care of this on its own if it was left alone and left out there. It's natural. It's as natural as the ocean water is." - Rush Limbaugh
May I have a for instance? Thanks...
Thanks... This is that "impossible to prove a negative" thingy. I don't know - perhaps I've missed a post of yours where you pointed out one dem's stupidity. If there is one, though, I'd wager that you think he/she is stupid for not promoting statism enough. Right now, I don't have the desire to go through all your posts. You did make this statement, though:The worst Dem is better than the best republican any day...
If I could, I would. Projecting again?
If I could, I would. What did Palin lie about. I'm honestly not aware of any lies she has told.
Everything she has ever said about McCain for starters.
"See in my line of work, you got to keep repeating things over and over and over again for the truth to sink in, to kind of catapult the propaganda." --- George W. Bush (Rochester NY, 5-24-2005)
So Obama is a liar and he broke his promise. I hate liars don't you?
She said McCain is the Senator from Arizona. So you are what mistaken or a liar? Try being more specific.
You've missed several. It comes down to what you choose to pay attention to. Obama's Errors: Aghanistan Iraq Gitmo Iran protests I've criticized him repeatedly for what I believe are amatuer mistakes. I'lll still take him over McCain any day...or Palin...or Snewt...or Romney...
Do you acknowledge the FACT that Obama is a liar or are you still under self delusion. Or maybe you always knew he was a liar.
Maxine Waters (did they see the flag on Mars?) You got the wrong black woman (I know, they all look alike). Yep. Sheila 'I'm a Queen' Jackson Lee is the clown that wanted NASA to drive the MARS rover 'over to where the astronants landed on the moon...' or words to that effect. Maxine Waters is the clown you hear stuttering 'What this liberal would do is socialize....errrrr, ahhhh...mmm...take over your business...' or words to that effect. Both are African American females. Both are Democrats. Both serve in the House. And both are dumber than dirt.
Obama's first all-by-his-lonesome budget, btw, calls for a $1.17 trillion deficit.
Given that the late Teddy, Biden, Zero (57 states), and Maxine Waters (did they see the flag on Mars?) - to name a few demwit mis-speaking loons - are on your side, I don't think you really want to go there . And you have David Vitter, John Boehner, Sarah Palin, Mitch McConnel, Michael Steele, and on and on and on. I'll compare my list to your any day. :-) Silly you....lol
Obama's first all-by-his-lonesome budget, btw, calls for a $1.17 trillion deficit.
So far, you are correct from what I can see.
Obama's first all-by-his-lonesome budget, btw, calls for a $1.17 trillion deficit.
I acknowledge the fact that all politicians lie and Obama is a politician. But you need to ask yourself why do you have the need to be such an authoritarian. Do you wish to be another Hitler? And have us all saying 'heil' when we greet you? Maybe we should all pledge allegiance to YOU. LOLOL
"See in my line of work, you got to keep repeating things over and over and over again for the truth to sink in, to kind of catapult the propaganda." --- George W. Bush (Rochester NY, 5-24-2005)
As a layperson, I cannot get into all the minute differences between the government styles of the European nations. I'm sure you'll be able to enlighten me. However, I can comment on their overall philosophy vis a vis that which once was ours: Their tradition of cradle to grave socialism vs. our tradition of individualism. Since you haven't answered my original question to you which is: After all, if it's what people are clamoring for, it should be an easy sell, right? let's see if you'll answer another: We are moving toward the European style, while we see some European countries moving away from it. Do you agree - and if yes, why do you think that is?
If I could, I would. Aghanistan Iraq Gitmo Iran protests I've criticized him repeatedly for what I believe are amatuer mistakes. I'lll still take him over McCain any day...or Palin...or Snewt...or Romney... Putting their 2008 campaign rhetoric aside (which we probably both agree was bullshit), tell me how you think McClown's actual governance would have been any different from Zero on the issues you listed: Iraq Gitmo Iran protests But the jury's out as to whether he would have done anything.
If I could, I would. So how does Sarah Palin's belief that everyone should share in oil company profits fit in? Isn't that socialism? Wouldn't the same be true of Republicans? Or did you miss Medicare Part D?
Do you include Palin in that list of liars you hate?
He did. IN fact, I thought that Obama got bullied into making a statement when he should have kept his fucking mouth shut. My issue with McCain - Palin aside - is that he seemed very inflexible and with his rhetoric he could have been running in 1964...putting Palin back into the mix, that was his FIRST "presidential" decision. I actually admire John McCain which doesn't translate into wanting him to be POTUS.
Happy reading: andrewsullivan.theatlanti...dd-lies-of-sarah-palin-a-roundup.html
So how does Sarah Palin's belief that everyone should share in oil company profits fit in? Isn't that socialism? Okay, I'll play. Is this where she was in favor of everyone in Alaska getting a bonus check that was based on the oil that oil companies had taken out of the ground in AK? I'm going out on a limb here, but a case COULD be made (I'm not making it, just stating it) that the oil that was in the ground belonged not to the oil companies, but the the people of the state. As such, the people of the state were entitled to some payment. Is this the case you keep referring to? Okay - can we get past Sarah Palin now? Like I previously said, I've never said I would vote for her. Wouldn't the same be true of Republicans? Or did you miss Medicare Part D? The dems are the marines who land on the beach and push back the enemy (in this case, the American People are the enemy). They take the initial casualties (which they will likely take this November.) Then the reps (army) comes in. Their function is to secure and hold the newly gotten territory against that same enemy (the American People). Your gripe with the reps seems to be they don't advance toward statism fast enough. For instance, George Bush grew government more than any POTUS since LBJ. Yet you bitch and moan about him I never understood this.
If I could, I would. I never understood this. Facts aren't GO65's friend. Hypocrisy is...(laughing)
Obama's first all-by-his-lonesome budget, btw, calls for a $1.17 trillion deficit.
That's because you're confused about the dynamic and, in some cases, you promote the GOP cause over the Dem cause. Your dig about Palin above is a case in point. If we talk about how goddam dumb she is, we're somehow "afraid" of her or she "gets" to us. Palin shouldn't even be a public figure unless she took over the role of Ellie Mae Clampett ina remake of The Beverly Hillbillies. That was the issue with Boy Blunder, too. He's a fucking moron. If I HAD to vote for anyone in an election, I'd always vote for the smarter candidate. ALWAYS.
Comments (42 - 67) not displayed.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#2. To: Nebuchadnezzar (#1)
#3. To: war, skip intro, go65 (#0)
#4. To: A K A Stone (#3)
Can't dispute it can ya.
#5. To: Nebuchadnezzar (#4)
...too blame...
#6. To: A K A Stone (#3)
#7. To: Nebuchadnezzar (#1)
If you voted for Obama in 2008, you're too blame for this rotten mess we're now in. You broke it, you own it.
Being a Republicans means you get to choose your own reality
#8. To: A K A Stone (#4)
Being a Republicans means you get to choose your own reality
#9. To: war (#6)
Dispute what?
Being a Republicans means you get to choose your own reality
#10. To: go65 (#7)
Given the choice between Obama & McCain, I'm still pretty happy with Obama.
“But, the Supreme Court never ventured into the issues of redistribution of wealth, and of more basic issues such as political and economic justice in society. To that extent, as radical as I think people try to characterize the Warren Court, it wasn’t that radical. It didn’t break free from the essential constraints that were placed by the founding fathers in the Constitution, at least as its been interpreted and Warren Court interpreted in the same way, that generally the Constitution is a charter of negative liberties.
--Zero, 2001 radio interview.
But I can't, so I won't.
#11. To: Ignore Amos (#10)
That's like saying "given the choice between death by firing squad and death by hanging, I'm still pretty happy with death by firing squad."
Which brings me to a question: It is clear to me that anyone who could still write "I'm pretty happy with Obama" is NOT a person who respects The Constitution or a Constitutional Republic.
Why don't you Zero democrats just be honest and come out that you like and admire European style governance, and wish to have it here?
Be honest! Come out with it! Bury The Constitution once and for all! The peasants will rejoice!
Being a Republicans means you get to choose your own reality
#12. To: go65 (#11)
I refudiate that remark.
But I can't, so I won't.
#13. To: Ignore Amos (#12)
Given that the late Teddy, Biden, Zero (57 states), and Maxine Waters (did they see the flag on Mars?) - to name a few demwit mis-speaking loons - are on your side, I don't think you really want to go there .
Being a Republicans means you get to choose your own reality
#14. To: go65 (#11)
Have you forgotten that it was Palin who espoused the socialist viewpoint that oil is a shared resource and that everyone is entitled to a cut of oil company profits? Is that what you mean by "European style governance"?
But I can't, so I won't.
#15. To: Ignore Amos (#14)
It's obvious that you do. Why not come out of the closet and admit it?
Being a Republicans means you get to choose your own reality
#16. To: go65, war, Fred Mertz, Skip Intro (#13)
I'll compare my list to your any day. :-)
But I can't, so I won't.
#17. To: Ignore Amos (#16)
I find it amazing and hilarious that posters like you, war, Freddie and Skippy (sorry for any I'm leaving out) seem to believe that stupidity rests only on one party.
Being a Republicans means you get to choose your own reality
#18. To: Ignore Amos (#12)
Maxine Waters (did they see the flag on Mars?)
#19. To: Ignore Amos (#16)
war, Freddie and Skippy (sorry for any I'm leaving out) seem to believe that stupidity rests only on one party.
#20. To: war (#19)
(Edited)
May I have a for instance?
But I can't, so I won't.
#21. To: Skip Intro (#18)
(I know, they all look alike)
But I can't, so I won't.
#22. To: go65 (#8)
So because Palin has repeatedly lied as well
#23. To: A K A Stone (#22)
What did Palin lie about. I'm honestly not aware of any lies she has told.
#24. To: go65 (#9)
It was obvious months ago that the only way the individual mandate could pass constitutional muster was to classify it as a tax.
#25. To: mininggold (#23)
Everything she has ever said about McCain for starters.
#26. To: Ignore Amos (#20)
I don't know - perhaps I've missed a post of yours where you pointed out one dem's stupidity.
#27. To: mininggold (#23)
#28. To: A K A Stone (#25)
#29. To: Skip Intro, Ignore Amos (#18)
#30. To: go65 (#13)
#31. To: A K A Stone (#3)
Can't dispute it can ya.
#32. To: A K A Stone (#27)
Do you acknowledge the FACT that Obama is a liar or are you still under self delusion. Or maybe you always knew he was a liar.
#33. To: go65 (#15)
(Edited)
First define "european style governance" given there are vast differences in government styles between say Italy, the UK, and Germany.
Why don't you Zero democrats just be honest and come out that you like and admire European style governance, and wish to have it here?
But I can't, so I won't.
#34. To: war (#26)
Obama's Errors:
Afghanistan
I'll give you that McClown may have been different re: Iran protests. He might have made some noises about helping them, for instance.
But I can't, so I won't.
#35. To: Ignore Amos (#33)
Their tradition of cradle to grave socialism vs. our tradition of individualism.
Why don't you Zero democrats just be honest and come out that you like and admire European style governance, and wish to have it here?
Being a Republicans means you get to choose your own reality
#36. To: A K A Stone (#24)
So Obama is a liar and he broke his promise. I hate liars don't you?
Being a Republicans means you get to choose your own reality
#37. To: Ignore Amos (#34)
(Edited)
He might have made some noises about helping them, for instance.
#38. To: A K A Stone (#22)
(Edited)
What did Palin lie about. I'm honestly not aware of any lies she has told.
Being a Republicans means you get to choose your own reality
#39. To: go65 (#35)
Their tradition of cradle to grave socialism vs. our tradition of individualism.
As an aside, Palin sure has gotten to you, hasn't she? Why don't you Zero democrats just be honest and come out that you like and admire European style governance, and wish to have it here?
I will allow you one difference between the parties - it's kind of like the difference between the marines and the army in battle.
But I can't, so I won't.
#40. To: Ignore Amos, GO65 (#39)
Your gripe with the reps seems to be they don't advance toward statism fast enough. For instance, George Bush grew government more than any POTUS since LBJ. Yet you bitch and moan about him
#41. To: Ignore Amos (#39)
(Edited)
I never understood this.
.
.
.
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]