Supreme Court hands President Obama a major victory on health care

Do the whining reflubs realize that NO ONE reads their long rants?

Just Sayin wrote:

What Next?
The ball is now in the Republicans' court. They've already scheduled a repeal vote on July 11. Once before the Democrat-controlled Senate was able to scotch the effort by threat of filibuster. Had the mandate stood as mandate they could do so again. But now that it's a tax, it can be passed by a simple majority. And if it is, the president will be forced before the election to veto a repeal of a law a majority of the voters keep indicating they want repealed.
Every Democrat running in November will be forced to defend what amounts to the biggest tax increase-about $400 billion dollars-in American history, a tax largely levied against the young and the middle class who don't normally carry health insurance.
Professor Ann Althouse sets out the state of play for Obama and his party:
I have said repeatedly that Obama would be worse off if Obamacare were upheld, but what I'm really seeing is how bad it is for him with the mandate declared a tax.
Remember the Democrats got the statute passed by insisting it was not a tax. Now, we learn it is only constitutional because it is a tax. That's got to hurt politically.
ADDED: Romney has at least 3 big arguments:
1. Obama imposed a huge new tax on working people.
2. Obama deceived the American people by saying it was not a tax, when it was.
3. The law made it look like money would go to insurance companies - in the form of new premiums - that would keep premiums low as the companies were required to take on people with pre-existing conditions, but now we find out that the money is really going to go to the federal government.[ADDED: So get ready for your premiums to spiral up and/or for insurance companies to be ruined.]
(c) In the end Republicans have a sharp new limitation on the expansion of federal power, and a very good political platform to run against the President and the Democrats, as Erick Erickson notes:
It seems very, very clear to me in reviewing John Roberts' decision that he is playing a much longer game than us and can afford to with a life tenure. And he probably just handed Mitt Romney the White House.
Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/06/obamac ...

See? See? I knew that was what that damn George Bush lackey Roberts was doing.
I have had a bad feeling all week and a gut wrenching hurt inside that was what Roberts was doing giving Romney a big club to use against President Obama and Democrats in congress.
THINK DEMOCRATS THINK! This justice Roberts is the chief, he decides who and what cases get decided and when.
Don't you see what this bastard has done? He could have waited until next year to decide this case but noooooooo, he wanted to do it right now because he knew he was going to call it a tax when it isn't and hurt President Obama's re-election chances.
George Bush stole the 2000 election and then won 2004 under questionable tactics, DON'T TRUST ROBERTS!!!!!!!!!!
He is a wolf in sheeps clothing, he has never been a liberal, he has never been on our side, George Bush the thief appointed him!!!!!! THINK PEOPLE THINK!!!!!!
This is evil George Bush laughing at us, this damn Roberts is a George Bush devil!
Please write your congressman and warn them what Roberts is doing before it's too late!!!!
THINK PEOPLE!!!!! A conservative court on everything else any other time but this year they side with President Obama on Heathcare and illegal immigration?
Almost every President who raised taxes gets DEFEATED!!!!
Justice Roberts court called it a damn tax!!!!!!
It's a trick, don't you see what he is doing?
He is making President Obama look like he raised taxes in a bad economy.
I hate you evil Republicans you no good Bastards!!!!!!!!!!

Constitution-lover wrote:

<quoted text>
Ok enough with the crap. If we cut spending we wouldnt have to borrow.

Did you mention that to George Bush before he got us involved in 2 wars? Or before he cut taxes? Or before he expanded medicaid benefits? The budget was already balanced. All George had to do was NOT borrow! You can pretend that the spending didn't get out of control under Reagan/Bush and then again under Bush. I know why you refuse to acknowledge the facts. Commies like you love it when you get other people to pay your way. As long as you can force future generations to pay for your government and benefits you will take advantage of the situation. Try paying your own way you lazy bum!

SIR LANCELOT wrote:

<quoted text>Well Mykro answer this: I see many posters on here advocating left and right positions who have made thousands of comments on here, with some being members only a few months.
I have been a member since april '07 and believe me it has been hard to work and put in the 7,000+ post i have written considering many have put in far more in no time at all.
I think that yes it is very possible that some on here are millionaires just like i think many are welfare basket cases and i also think it is very easy to figure out who fits in each category.
People who want a handout and for goverment to solve all thier problems are most likely welfare recipients who just want more free goodies and who have this mentality that the world owes them something, many are nothing more than Obamabot racist who think, "THINK" that Obama is going to take from whitey and give them a bunch of free sh*t, not going to happen.
I am self made, no not a millionaire, but self made as a business owner, i am also conservative, i also understand what makes business work and the economy turn and that is something Obama will never understand because he has never even had a job much like most of his supporters who believe everything comes from the government tooth fairy unless your born wealthy.
Here is a few facts for you:
1} The wealthy are going to stay wealthy no matter who is in charge, they will simply hide thier money or move out of the country and take it with them, trust me, they are not going to leave you a goodie bag when they leave no matter what Messiah Obama tells you.
2} Free healthcare. NOTHING is free and once the government runs it, quality goes down and costs go up.
Social Security is broke, Medicare is broke, The Postal Service is broke.
3} Who is going to suffer through this nightmare of government run healthcare?
The poor first and foremost, then the vast bottom middle class thats who once it is implemented.
The rich are still going to get the best care money can buy along with the upper middle class like me who can afford to go to a private doctor which now there is going to be two classes of physicians, one for the vast majority and one for people who can afford better health care.

No one ever said health care was free. The government isn't running health care. The insurance industry is. All businesses should be behind a single payer system. It's cheaper and better for everyone. It takes the burden of health care off the backs of business. The government should be running health care just like it runs the military you frightwingwers are proud of. If it runs that, it can run health care. Of course big pharma and the insurance industry definitely don't want to hear this. We have to make health care NOT PROFIT driven.

Just Sayin wrote:

What Next?
The ball is now in the Republicans' court. They've already scheduled a repeal vote on July 11. Once before the Democrat-controlled Senate was able to scotch the effort by threat of filibuster. Had the mandate stood as mandate they could do so again. But now that it's a tax, it can be passed by a simple majority. And if it is, the president will be forced before the election to veto a repeal of a law a majority of the voters keep indicating they want repealed.
Every Democrat running in November will be forced to defend what amounts to the biggest tax increase-about $400 billion dollars-in American history, a tax largely levied against the young and the middle class who don't normally carry health insurance.
Professor Ann Althouse sets out the state of play for Obama and his party:
I have said repeatedly that Obama would be worse off if Obamacare were upheld, but what I'm really seeing is how bad it is for him with the mandate declared a tax.
Remember the Democrats got the statute passed by insisting it was not a tax. Now, we learn it is only constitutional because it is a tax. That's got to hurt politically.
ADDED: Romney has at least 3 big arguments:
1. Obama imposed a huge new tax on working people.
2. Obama deceived the American people by saying it was not a tax, when it was.
3. The law made it look like money would go to insurance companies - in the form of new premiums - that would keep premiums low as the companies were required to take on people with pre-existing conditions, but now we find out that the money is really going to go to the federal government.[ADDED: So get ready for your premiums to spiral up and/or for insurance companies to be ruined.]
(c) In the end Republicans have a sharp new limitation on the expansion of federal power, and a very good political platform to run against the President and the Democrats, as Erick Erickson notes:
It seems very, very clear to me in reviewing John Roberts' decision that he is playing a much longer game than us and can afford to with a life tenure. And he probably just handed Mitt Romney the White House.
Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/06/obamac ...

LOL .. you friggen right-wingnuz GOPers are so f-ing stupid it is downright embarrassing, you could have at least used Rush Limbaugh’s pronouncement of "Obamacare is ... the largest tax increase in the history of the world!" It is simply moronic grandstanding lies of utter stupidity!
The CBO estimates that by 2019 the government will see increased revenues of $120 billion. The projected GDP for 2019 according to the CBO forecast is $22 trillion. That would mean the tax increase provisions of the health care law would amount to 0.49% of total GDP.
That would mean the tax increases resulting from the health care law would be less than the size of tax increases proposed and passed by Presidents Carter, Reagan, G. H.W. Bush and Clinton.

This is a temporary win for the President, and a win for Romney, because he can talk for the next 4 months about the largest tax increase ever. Americans will revolt at the ballot box. Thank you Justice Roberts.

George H W Bush read my lips "No New Taxes" what a liar.

OBAMA 2012 wrote:

Do the whining reflubs realize that NO ONE reads their long rants?

We know the formula for talking to liberals.
7 words max,and say dooty a lot.

Cat74 wrote:

This is a temporary win for the President, and a win for Romney, because he can talk for the next 4 months about the largest tax increase ever. Americans will revolt at the ballot box. Thank you Justice Roberts.

If it only was true, even Saint Reagan signed bigger tax increases than that! According to your hero Rush the Lush Limbaugh: "Obamacare is ... the largest tax increase in the history of the world!" Makes you wonder, you think that includes the Roman Empire?

Mykro wrote:

<quoted text>No one ever said health care was free. The government isn't running health care. The insurance industry is. All businesses should be behind a single payer system. It's cheaper and better for everyone. It takes the burden of health care off the backs of business. The government should be running health care just like it runs the military you frightwingwers are proud of. If it runs that, it can run health care. Of course big pharma and the insurance industry definitely don't want to hear this. We have to make health care NOT PROFIT driven.

Not profit driven?
That ought to encourage a lot of people to spend a fortune on the longest and most intense job training there is for a chosen profession.
Or do you apply the usual liberal fix and lower the bar again?

Are the RINOs still whining that their free ride on the healthcare train is over? They sound like a bunch of food stamp recipients who have to pay for their own food.

Pay for your own healthcare costs! Those of us who are insured are tired of picking up your costs!

Cat74 wrote:

This is a temporary win for the President, and a win for Romney, because he can talk for the next 4 months about the largest tax increase ever. Americans will revolt at the ballot box. Thank you Justice Roberts.

How many people do you think will "revolt" because the people that refuse to have health insurance are going to be taxed? Can you tell me how many Massachusett's residents have revolted because of the tax under Romneycare? I hope you are right. I hate insurance mandates. It is a scam that benefits insurance companies. It is with car insurance, health insurance and every other law that requires people to buy insurance. This law needs to be overturned so that we can fix the healthcare system the right way. Get the insurance companies out of it and move to a single payer system.

Cat74 wrote:

This is a temporary win for the President, and a win for Romney, because he can talk for the next 4 months about the largest tax increase ever. Americans will revolt at the ballot box. Thank you Justice Roberts.

LOL. I doubt the father of the individual mandate, ex-Massachussetts governor Rich Money, is going to refer to it as a tax increase.

Romney's Platform: "12 Sound Reasons to REPEAL Obamacare"

No Matter what the Leftist Court stacked with 2 Political Appointees says, Obamacare Has To Go and I will REPEAL IT.
So, let us count the ways that it violates basic principles of sound policy.

1. It discriminates against young people, forcing them to purchase health insurance at inflated prices in order to subsidize older beneficiaries.

2. Simultaneously, the law imposes severe penalties on young people who use Health Savings Accounts to secure health benefits for themselves in later years.

3. Already the administration has granted a long list of exemptions to various companies and unions.

4. Recently, the Department of Health and Human Services dictated that employers, including religious organizations, must cover contraception and abortion-causing drugs in their health plans. Apart from any moral objections to such provisions, why should the federal government tell employers and employees what their health insurance has to cover?

5. Good public policy would encourage health care consumers to shop around and purchase insurance policies that are best suited to their own needs and spending priorities. The health care reform bill does the opposite. Decision-making power is turned over to bureaucrats, who pay no price for decisions that are costly or wrong-headed.

* Good public policy does not raise false expectations. Backers of the health reform bill violated this principle three times over.
Here are those Obama LIES:

6. They promised a) anyone can "keep their plan if they like it'; FALSE.

According to a McKinsey & Co. study, a third to a half of employers plan to stop offering health insurance beginning in 2014. Faced with expensive mandates and less expensive fines, many employers will choose the fines and cause their employees to move to government-sponsored plans.

7. the plan would mandate many new benefits and still reduce the average family premium by $2,500; which is clearly FALSE.

Another study concludes that a typical family health insurance plan costing $12,300 today will cost more than twice that by 2019.
There are no "free" mandates or other benefits -- to paraphrase Milton Friedman.

8. That it wouldn't add "a single dime" to the federal deficit. FALSE. It adds over $1.76 TRILLION to the Debt.

Last October, the administration dropped the long-term care program known as the Class Program from implementation of the new law as financially unworkable. It also added $111 billion premium subsidies to its proposed fiscal 2013 budget.

9. Good public policy avoids ticking time bombs. The legislation will increase Medicaid enrollment by an estimated 24 million new users by 2015. This will put states further into Debt.

10. The law includes a massive new health entitlement/income redistribution program for families earning more than three times the poverty level. In 2014, it will channel up to $3,000 in taxpayers funds to families making up to $95,000.

11. The law is fiscally irresponsible. It includes a raft of new taxes. But these appear to be wholly inadequate to the task of paying the bill for over-promising and extending new entitlements to tens of millions of people. That leaves rationing as a last resort, and the government's own reports contemplate major cutbacks in Medicare spending down the road.

12. The Affordable Care Act is truly unaffordable… and unsustainable. Our government should not erode our freedoms, degrade our quality of life, or bankrupt our future. The health care reform bill does all those things. If it is not struck down, it should be repealed.

Mykro wrote:

<quoted text>No one ever said health care was free. The government isn't running health care. The insurance industry is. All businesses should be behind a single payer system. It's cheaper and better for everyone. It takes the burden of health care off the backs of business. The government should be running health care just like it runs the military you frightwingwers are proud of. If it runs that, it can run health care. Of course big pharma and the insurance industry definitely don't want to hear this. We have to make health care NOT PROFIT driven.

So you want to Make Health Care Driven By Bureaucrats, Rationing, more Expensive Drugs because Obama banned imports, and Higher National Debt.

You are An Idiot.

Frank wrote:

Its a TAX, and the Obama Admin continues to lie and say its not. The only reason it was not knocked down is because its a tax!!
Obamas own team argued on its validity during the SCOTUS hearings that it was a TAX know they want us to forget that.

Are you the founding father of the individual mandate? Are you the leader of the RINO Party? Are you ex-Massachusetts governor Rich Money?

NO!Let's hear what the founding father of the individual mandate has to say on that. Last we heard from him it was not a tax. Surely, the GOP Rich Money didn't raise taxes on the people of Massachusetts.

GBPfan wrote:

<quoted text>
How many people do you think will "revolt" because the people that refuse to have health insurance are going to be taxed? Can you tell me how many Massachusett's residents have revolted because of the tax under Romneycare? I hope you are right. I hate insurance mandates. It is a scam that benefits insurance companies. It is with car insurance, health insurance and every other law that requires people to buy insurance. This law needs to be overturned so that we can fix the healthcare system the right way. Get the insurance companies out of it and move to a single payer system.

Obamacare is Designed to Crash the Insurance Companies dummy and imposes government Only Health Care that RATIONS to everyone except the governing class.


You're an Idiot too.

downhill246 wrote:

<quoted text>
Won't the president repeal the individual mandate since SCOTUS ruled it is a tax? The president said on numerous occasions that he wouldn't raise taxes on the middle class....
truncated.......

I agree!

Instead, next time, Obama should say: "besides on the very few American freeloaders, I will not raise taxes on the Middle Class"

. Obama got them confused: GOP crooks are now fighting for looters and freeloaders???????

OBAMA 2012 wrote:

Do the whining reflubs realize that NO ONE reads their long rants?

You can barely read so please don't blame others for your deficiencies.




You have nothing to say so your posts are non-existent or extremely short! LMAO!

CBO: ObamaCare Price Tag Shifts from $940 Billion to $1.76 Trillion

By Brian Koenig
Wed, Mar 14, 2012

President Obama's landmark healthcare overhaul is projected to cost $1.76 trillion over a decade, reports the Congressional Budget Office, a hefty sum more than the $940 billion estimated when the healthcare legislation was signed into law. To put it mildly, ObamaCare's projected net worth is far off from its original estimate -- in fact, about $820 billion off.

Backtracking to his September 2009 remarks to a joint session of Congress on healthcare, Obama asserted the following: "Now, add it all up, and the plan I'm proposing will cost around $900 billion over 10 years -- less than we have spent on the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, and less than the tax cuts for the wealthiest few Americans that Congress passed at the beginning of the previous administration."

When the final CBO report was released before the law's passage, critics surmised that the actual 10-year cost would far exceed the advertised projections. In other words, the numbers were seemingly obscured through a political ploy devised to jam the legislation through Congress.

"Democrats employed many accounting tricks when they were pushing through the national health care legislation," asserted Philip Klein of the Washington Examiner, "the most egregious of which was to delay full implementation of the law until 2014." This accounting maneuver allowed analysts to cloak the true cost of ObamaCare, Klein alleged, making the law appear less expensive under the CBO's budget window.

If that doesn't tickle your fancy, maybe this will: "President Obama's healthcare reform law coverage provisions will cost less but cover fewer people than first thought," the Hill reported, considering data from the CBO's Tuesday report. Revised estimates of ObamaCare's coverage provisions indicate that 2 million fewer people will acquire coverage by 2016.

Moreover, the CBO estimates that 4 million Americans will lose their employer-sponsored health plans by 2016, a far cry from the 1-million-person figure forecasted last year. Further yet, 1 million to 2 million fewer people will be granted access to the federally-subsidized healthcare exchanges, while an additional 1 million are estimated to qualify for Medicaid and the Children's Health Insurance Provision.



OBAMA LIED, as usual.



http://news.yahoo.com/cbo-obamacare-price-tag...