(02-17-2012 08:23 PM)Hambone10 Wrote:  Max is so "in the tank" it's pathetic. I believe he is a lawyer, and like any lawyer, can AND WILL argue virtually any point... Often to the point of arguing about what we are arguing about. His circuitous positions are merely a deflection from the bottom line. The argument by him, or one of his brethren that republicans are the ones shifting was priceless. It's Obamas plan, and it was Obama who described it. Is it a tax, in which case he is a bald faced liar... Or is it NOT a tax, in which case his argument before the appeals courts is flawed on its face? Unlike this conversation, Obama doesn't get two bites at the SCoTUs apple.

Obama has pretty famously insisted he knew how the supreme court would rule on something twice... And was wrong both times. IMO, he will be wrong again... And max's opinion, as colored by his political affiliation as it is, is meaningless to the debate... Because best I know, nobody on here is a SC member, and Obama won't be able to switch gears as max does.

I don't like Obamacare. Seriously, without going and cutting and pasting from somewhere, can ANYONe tell me what will be covered under the plan? I'm willing to bet an equal number of people think "everything" will be covered, and "basics" will be covered, with 14 different definitions of what is basic. Is acne treatment covered? How about varicose veins? What about skin tag biopsies? Can anyone tell me without looking?

Hey I'm not arguing the first point. What I said was that the GOPpers were doing the EXACT SAME THING IN REVERSE. Why do you think Obama was denying it was a tax at first? BECAUSE THE GOPPERS WERE SAYING IT WAS. Now they've just flipped positions.

The original law didn't specify exactly what will need to be covered--that's what's going on right now. This is common procedure. Congress passes an enabling statute, giving broad instructions (Like the Clean Air Act), giving broad directions to an agency (like the EPA to take necessary measures to keep the air clean), and then the agency sorts out the minor details by promulgating regulations to execute the law. Or, if you're the Congressional GOP, you just block all executive appointees for these agencies and hold pro forma sessions in recess because you don't like the law in the first place.

(02-15-2012 05:08 PM)Max Power Wrote:  And let's not pretend the GOP wasn't taking the opposite road.

To the public for PR purposes: IT'S A TAX! OBAMA WANTS TO TAX THE SH!T OUT OF YOU JUST LIKE THE TAX AND SPEND DEMOCRAT HE IS!

To the court for constitutionality purposes: IT'S A FEE NOT A TAX! SO IT'S NOT A USE OF CONGRESS' TAX AND SPEND POWERS!

They're just switching chairs.

Maybe I've just missed it but I haven't heard that this argument is being made. Republicans are arguing that the individual mandate is unconstitutional. Their argument, at least in what I've read, has nothing to do with whether it's a fee or a tax. Obama is acknowledging it's a tax because it has to be a tax to be within the powers of Congress to levy.

I'd be interested if you could provide backup for the assertion the republicans are arguing otherwise.

Obama was denying it's a tax because he's a liar and was trying to deceive the American people. But as you've made clear, you're fine with any lie Obama tells.

Max.... Here's where you lose it. It doesn't matter if the democrats or republicans called it a tax first.

What matters is that Obama said he would not raise taxes on the middle class... Nobody made him say it. So when challenged by Repubicans that this was a tax, he said this wasn't one. Ok. Now he's arguing it IS a tax.

Which is it? That's all that matters. Either he lied in his campaign promise, or he's lying to the court now. You choose.