Winchester
When you need FIREPOWER!
lotstodo said:That's the crux of the question right there. It is constitutional for the government to levy a tax for the purpose of transfer payments, like it or not. It is NOT constitutional for the government to mandate that a private citizen purchase a product from another private citizen, particularly if that product originates within the state of residence (all insurance companies are currently state licensed, not federally licensed).Genevieve said:I know. I'm shocked and saddened. It's constitutional because it's a tax? ??? What is up with that?
The shock is that five justices bought into Obama's 180 claiming it is a tax instead of the "mandate" he sold the American people. He won on semantics. But now the "truth?" is known and the tax can be fought as such.
Oh it just appears that Obummer won but in the end, when we realise everything that just happened, Obummer just lost in a very big way!