Will there be riots and looting in the streets today?

[Genevieve]

Conservatives don't riot.

Right now I am still in shock. I couldn't riot even if I wanted to.

I'm angry!

I'm stunned. Absolutely stunned.

I am, too. When things go wrong, we always seem to think that the foundations of our country - our Constitution and our system of checks-and-balances will win out. Not today.

I'm stunned, too. There was a quote in the ruling about how, if it were to be found constitutional under the Interstate Commerce Clause, it would fundamentally change the relationship between the American people and their government.

...But why considering it a tax would change that is beyond me... :dunno

 

[honeybunny]

:B_S :B_S :B_S :B_S :B_S :B_S :B_S :B_S :B_S


Network- I'm Mad as Hell

 

[Winchester]

Conservatives don't riot.

Right now I am still in shock. I couldn't riot even if I wanted to.

I'm angry!

I'm stunned. Absolutely stunned.

I am, too. When things go wrong, we always seem to think that the foundations of our country - our Constitution and our system of checks-and-balances will win out. Not today.

I'm stunned, too. There was a quote in the ruling about how, if it were to be found constitutional under the Interstate Commerce Clause, it would fundamentally change the relationship between the American people and their government.

...But why considering it a tax would change that is beyond me... :dunno

This will explaing the commerce clause a bit:

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/scocca/2012/06/roberts_health_care_opinion_commerce_clause_the_real_reason_the_chief_justice_upheld_obamacare_.html

 

[lotstodo]

Conservatives don't riot.

Right now I am still in shock. I couldn't riot even if I wanted to.

I'm angry!

I'm stunned. Absolutely stunned.

I am, too. When things go wrong, we always seem to think that the foundations of our country - our Constitution and our system of checks-and-balances will win out. Not today.

I'm stunned, too. There was a quote in the ruling about how, if it were to be found constitutional under the Interstate Commerce Clause, it would fundamentally change the relationship between the American people and their government.

...But why considering it a tax would change that is beyond me... :dunno

This will explaing the commerce clause a bit:

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/scocca/2012/06/roberts_health_care_opinion_commerce_clause_the_real_reason_the_chief_justice_upheld_obamacare_.html

That article is completely full of feces.

Here is a pretty good summary of the ruling. Roberts is not some cunning evil conservative. He did indeed side with the liberals on the court for reasons he enumerated. I understand that he had to decide if Obama and the Democrats were lying when they passed the law, or if they were lying when they came before the court. They couldn't be seen as truthful both times. He therefore had to decide, in his own mind, if the individual mandate was in fact a tax. He decided that it was a tax all along. I understand his reasoning even if I firmly disagree with his conclusion.

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/summary-of-supreme-court-health-care-decision-2012-06-28?dist=afterbell

 

[Winchester]

Conservatives don't riot.

Right now I am still in shock. I couldn't riot even if I wanted to.

I'm angry!

I'm stunned. Absolutely stunned.

I am, too. When things go wrong, we always seem to think that the foundations of our country - our Constitution and our system of checks-and-balances will win out. Not today.

I'm stunned, too. There was a quote in the ruling about how, if it were to be found constitutional under the Interstate Commerce Clause, it would fundamentally change the relationship between the American people and their government.

...But why considering it a tax would change that is beyond me... :dunno

This will explaing the commerce clause a bit:

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/scocca/2012/06/roberts_health_care_opinion_commerce_clause_the_real_reason_the_chief_justice_upheld_obamacare_.html

That article is completely full of feces.

Here is a pretty good summary of the ruling. Roberts is not some cunning evil conservative. He did indeed side with the liberals on the court for reasons he enumerated. I understand that he had to decide if Obama and the Democrats were lying when they passed the law, or if they were lying when they came before the court. They couldn't be seen as truthful both times. He therefore had to decide, in his own mind, if the individual mandate was in fact a tax. He decided that it was a tax all along. I understand his reasoning even if I firmly disagree with his conclusion.

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/summary-of-supreme-court-health-care-decision-2012-06-28?dist=afterbell

Your article must have been written by an attorney. I hardly understood any of what they said! lol

My link was an early opinion of the ruling. Opinions will most likely change with time but I understood what they were saying. ;-) This is not the only legal action coming on ObamaCare either. Just one battle of this war.

 

[unionmom]

I sincerely hope, agree with his opinion or not, that Roberts did NOT do anything even remotely resembling political game play in coming to his decision. If he decided that he could see the constitutionality of the law and therefore could not strike it down, so be it. If he chose not to strike it down in order to accomplish some other bigger political goal, God help us all.

 

[BeatBoxinGranny47]

Oooohhh lawdy!!!! I'm finally gettin my reperations!!!!

 

[lotstodo]

i wonder why there was none of the feared rioting?

 

[BeatBoxinGranny47]

YOU WHITE DEVILS GONE PAY FOR MY HEALFCARE!!!!! HAHA!!!