(06-28-2012 11:54 AM)BlazerFan11 Wrote:  

(06-28-2012 11:51 AM)UM2001GRAD Wrote:  

(06-28-2012 11:51 AM)BlazerFan11 Wrote:  

(06-28-2012 11:25 AM)UM2001GRAD Wrote:  

(06-28-2012 10:47 AM)RobertN Wrote:  It isn't really a "tactic". THey fear the unknown by nature.

Very true.

Said the two who want to legislate every tiny aspect of life.

Said the idiot.

Don't get so hostile when I call you out for your blatant hypocrisy. It's not like you're even trying very hard to hide it anymore.

Swatting a gnat away isn't being hostile. You simply don't matter enough for me to bother being hostile.

(06-28-2012 12:08 PM)UM2001GRAD Wrote:  

(06-28-2012 11:54 AM)BlazerFan11 Wrote:  

(06-28-2012 11:51 AM)UM2001GRAD Wrote:  

(06-28-2012 11:51 AM)BlazerFan11 Wrote:  

(06-28-2012 11:25 AM)UM2001GRAD Wrote:  Very true.

Said the two who want to legislate every tiny aspect of life.

Said the idiot.

Don't get so hostile when I call you out for your blatant hypocrisy. It's not like you're even trying very hard to hide it anymore.

Swatting a gnat away isn't being hostile. You simply don't matter enough for me to bother being hostile.

Your delusions of grandeur are showing again. Funny how you can say that, yet you've spent countless hours out of your life typing childish insults on this message board, and continue to do so on a regular basis.

I'm thinking that Roberts was playing the long game. Now that it is obviously a tax, and the largest tax increase in history on the middle class, it is going to be pretty hard for democrats to run for office as the big tax and spenders. The public at large did not want Obamacare.

IF the GOP was smart (they aren't) they would play this angle. They should all work at defunding the program and point out that there have been a boatload of waivers issued, many to Obama's friends and supporters such as unions. Can taxes be waived on SOME but not OTHERS?

For a guy who ran saying that taxes won't be raised on those making less than $250K, this will be a problem IF Romney hammers that point.

Watch small businesses start dropping their healthcare plans and hiring more part-time workers with no benefits instead of full-time with benefits.

(06-28-2012 01:09 PM)MileHighBronco Wrote:  I'm thinking that Roberts was playing the long game. Now that it is obviously a tax, and the largest tax increase in history on the middle class, it is going to be pretty hard for democrats to run for office as the big tax and spenders. The public at large did not want Obamacare.

IF the GOP was smart (they aren't) they would play this angle. They should all work at defunding the program and point out that there have been a boatload of waivers issued, many to Obama's friends and supporters such as unions. Can taxes be waived on SOME but not OTHERS?

For a guy who ran saying that taxes won't be raised on those making less than $250K, this will be a problem IF Romney hammers that point.

Watch small businesses start dropping their healthcare plans and hiring more part-time workers with no benefits instead of full-time with benefits.

Lie. In fact, it would be smaller than the tax increase signed into law by Ronnie Reagan in 1982.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/...us-histor/

Looks like this "biggest tax increase" meme is the next bold faced lie the shameless GOP will try to spread like wildfire to scare the uninformed, like "death panels" and "government takeover."

For all of you calling the Democrats liars for one reason or another on Obamacare, please take the time to peruse the hundreds of False and Pants on Fire ratings (including the 2009 and 2010 lies of the year) given to Republicans by Politifact on this issue. And then stop calling Dems liars or admit you're massive hypocrites.

(06-28-2012 10:39 AM)UM2001GRAD Wrote:  Typical right-wing tactic - when all else fails, tell people to be afraid of the unknown.

As opposed to being afraid of dirty air and water, throwing the elderly off a cliff, and all the other stuff the libs accuse republicans of wanting.

(06-29-2012 02:05 PM)Max Power Wrote:  

(06-28-2012 01:09 PM)MileHighBronco Wrote:  I'm thinking that Roberts was playing the long game. Now that it is obviously a tax, and the largest tax increase in history on the middle class, it is going to be pretty hard for democrats to run for office as the big tax and spenders. The public at large did not want Obamacare.

IF the GOP was smart (they aren't) they would play this angle. They should all work at defunding the program and point out that there have been a boatload of waivers issued, many to Obama's friends and supporters such as unions. Can taxes be waived on SOME but not OTHERS?

For a guy who ran saying that taxes won't be raised on those making less than $250K, this will be a problem IF Romney hammers that point.

Watch small businesses start dropping their healthcare plans and hiring more part-time workers with no benefits instead of full-time with benefits.

Lie. In fact, it would be smaller than the tax increase signed into law by Ronnie Reagan in 1982.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/...us-histor/

Looks like this "biggest tax increase" meme is the next bold faced lie the shameless GOP will try to spread like wildfire to scare the uninformed, like "death panels" and "government takeover."

For all of you calling the Democrats liars for one reason or another on Obamacare, please take the time to peruse the scores of False and Pants on Fire ratings (including the 2009 and 2010 lies of the year) given to Republicans by Politifact on this issue. And then stop calling Dems liars or admit you're massive hypocrites.

If I read you right, youre claiming that this isn't the biggest tax increase in history therefore that debunks the right's entire tax argument. Is that really your point?

(06-29-2012 02:05 PM)Max Power Wrote:  For all of you calling the Democrats liars for one reason or another on Obamacare, please take the time to peruse the scores of False and Pants on Fire ratings (including the 2009 and 2010 lies of the year) given to Republicans by Politifact on this issue. And then stop calling Dems liars or admit you're massive hypocrites.

Let's see;

- The dems "sold this" (without a single GOP vote) as a mandate, not a tax

- Obama claims over and over it is NOT a tax but a mandate

- The government's solicitor general goes to SCOTUS and tries to argue it IS a tax afterall (to the amusement of the justices)

- Roberts says that it IS most certainly a tax (and therefore this bunch are all big, fat liars).

- Had the dems written it as a tax, would it have passed the House? But they didn't for political reasons. They wrote it as a mandate and a penalty, not a tax.

Bottom line - this entire bill was sold to the public (who still doesn't like it) on the basis of a lie. A BIG lie.

Once people get that and understand that Roberts just told all of us that, apparently, it is OK for Congress to lie to us to get their pet projects past us. Prepare for the new normal, same as the old but with new super-powers.

I'm not buying any of your B.S. Max. You are just like your hero Zero.

Politifact may believe that they are the arbiter of truth but they aren't infallible and they tend to lean left. Most of us have the capability to dig for truth instead of rely on others to decide what to think. But by all means, Max, keep pushing your propaganda.

"Fathom the hypocrisy of a Government that requires every citizen to prove they are insured ... but not prove they are a citizen."

- Author Unknown

(06-29-2012 02:05 PM)Max Power Wrote:  For all of you calling the Democrats liars for one reason or another on Obamacare, please take the time to peruse the hundreds of False and Pants on Fire ratings (including the 2009 and 2010 lies of the year) given to Republicans by Politifact on this issue. And then stop calling Dems liars or admit you're massive hypocrites.

Somewhere in all this prattle is a tacit admission that Obama lied early and often about his healthcare plan, I just know it.

I'm calling them liars for only one reason: They repeatedly said things they knew to be untrue.

Parse that out any way you feel you need to, Max. I really don't care.

And just for old times' sake, the Mrs. is very clear on this: Oral sex IS sex.

(06-28-2012 09:59 AM)Rebel Wrote:  

(06-28-2012 09:35 AM)THE NC Herd Fan Wrote:  Unemployment will increase as medium and large sized corporations absorb the additional costs. The tax increases baked into the law will be highlighted and become a bigger campaign issue now that it certain they will begin as legislated January 1, 2013. Obama cannot use the SCOTUS ruling as a campaign issue to gain support.

That's not a bright side. You guys aren't looking at the BIG picture. For the first time in history a precedent has been set that mandates you to buy something JUST for Goddamned living. They can now force you to buy ANY fuken thing. Romney getting elected is going to fix it? Roberts stupid ass was a Gdamn Bush appointee. R and D. All the fuken same. Progressive pieces of fly-covered dog sh*t.

+1,000,000

The only way you can possibly spin a bright side is if you're playing politics as a team sport and the other team sucks worse than yours does. And while you're bickering over who sucks worse ... the country goes down the toilet.

There is no bright side. The SCOTUS is dominated by incompetent ***holes every bit as unworthy of office as the other two branches of government. What good is checks and balances when all three branches are full of retards?

(06-28-2012 09:35 AM)THE NC Herd Fan Wrote:  Unemployment will increase as medium and large sized corporations absorb the additional costs. The tax increases baked into the law will be highlighted and become a bigger campaign issue now that it certain they will begin as legislated January 1, 2013. Obama cannot use the SCOTUS ruling as a campaign issue to gain support.

You just claimed that unemployment rising is a 'bright side'. You're literally a bad person, in every meaning of the word.

(06-30-2012 07:16 PM)UCF08 Wrote:  

(06-28-2012 09:35 AM)THE NC Herd Fan Wrote:  Unemployment will increase as medium and large sized corporations absorb the additional costs. The tax increases baked into the law will be highlighted and become a bigger campaign issue now that it certain they will begin as legislated January 1, 2013. Obama cannot use the SCOTUS ruling as a campaign issue to gain support.

You just claimed that unemployment rising is a 'bright side'. You're literally a bad person, in every meaning of the word.

You realize Obamacare is a HORRIBLE POLICY IN EVERY SENSE.

- 30millon newly insured with no plan for new Dr's but plans to add thousands of IRS agents to enforce OBAMACARE taxes.
- 30million newly insured with promises that only 1% will pay for their NEW healthcare coverage WHO pays the rest
- Rationing health care based on cost benefits
- Government directing Dr's on treatment protocol based on cost
- Many companies will drop their healthcare plans and dump employees into the "exchanges" because it's cheaper than providing the benefit
- Individual CHOICE is gone

Don't blame me for pointing out the impact of Obama's HORRIBLE PLAN.

30 million.

Gonna need another sawbones or two.

(06-30-2012 07:51 PM)THE NC Herd Fan Wrote:  

(06-30-2012 07:16 PM)UCF08 Wrote:  

(06-28-2012 09:35 AM)THE NC Herd Fan Wrote:  Unemployment will increase as medium and large sized corporations absorb the additional costs. The tax increases baked into the law will be highlighted and become a bigger campaign issue now that it certain they will begin as legislated January 1, 2013. Obama cannot use the SCOTUS ruling as a campaign issue to gain support.

You just claimed that unemployment rising is a 'bright side'. You're literally a bad person, in every meaning of the word.

You realize Obamacare is a HORRIBLE POLICY IN EVERY SENSE.

- 30millon newly insured with no plan for new Dr's but plans to add thousands of IRS agents to enforce OBAMACARE taxes.
- 30million newly insured with promises that only 1% will pay for their NEW healthcare coverage WHO pays the rest
- Rationing health care based on cost benefits
- Government directing Dr's on treatment protocol based on cost
- Many companies will drop their healthcare plans and dump employees into the "exchanges" because it's cheaper than providing the benefit
- Individual CHOICE is gone

Don't blame me for pointing out the impact of Obama's HORRIBLE PLAN.

You do realize that we've had socialized medicine since Reagan, and that we've simply been passing the buck on paying for it until this legislation right?

(06-28-2012 10:45 AM)RobertN Wrote:  

(06-28-2012 10:10 AM)Ninerfan1 Wrote:  Democrats now plan to tax you if you buy bacon.

I already pay taxes when I buy bacon.

Now they can tax you for your failure to buy bacon

Actually, someone pointed something out in a previous article I read , while oral arguments were going on.

There was an article (I want to say by George Will but don't quote me for sure), that basically said there was a consideration that if the US govt had argued the mandate was a tax, the Supreme Court would have to say they COULDN'T make a decision until the tax was collected. (they believed the SC was going to play "kick the can" until the tax/mandate went into effect.)

So is the door open that now that Justice Roberts said this was a "tax"... if someone argues down the road that (once the tax is collected), that it's an unconstitutional tax, it could go back to the Supreme Court? [albeit it may be TOO late by that point?]

(07-01-2012 10:29 PM)DaSaintFan Wrote:  Actually, someone pointed something out in a previous article I read , while oral arguments were going on.

There was an article (I want to say by George Will but don't quote me for sure), that basically said there was a consideration that if the US govt had argued the mandate was a tax, the Supreme Court would have to say they COULDN'T make a decision until the tax was collected. (they believed the SC was going to play "kick the can" until the tax/mandate went into effect.)

So is the door open that now that Justice Roberts said this was a "tax"... if someone argues down the road that (once the tax is collected), that it's an unconstitutional tax, it could go back to the Supreme Court? [albeit it may be TOO late by that point?]

I am not sure about this ruling but I believe the Arizona ruling included that in the one section that was upheld.

(06-29-2012 03:00 PM)MileHighBronco Wrote:  "Fathom the hypocrisy of a Government that requires every citizen to prove they are insured ... but not prove they are a citizen."

- Author Unknown

That's our leadership.