A Supreme Disgrace....

[Backlighting]

by the Men/Women in Black. Makes me want to vomit.

[BaalChatzaf]

Boo! Hiss!

Ba'al Chatzaf

[Brant Gaede]

To improve the Court, replace the Justices with Chimps. They will randomly generate decisions some of which might be right.

--Brant

[GALTGULCH8]

I have a vivid recollection of my first realization of the nature of sophistry by our Supreme Court. I was subscribing to The Objectivist and discovered the article by Henry Mark Holzer entitled The Constitution and the Draft which had to do with the case brought to the SC by the men who contested the Selective Service Act of 1917. To my simplistic way of thinking the Draft was clearly a horrific form of "involuntary servitude" and I could hardly wait to see how the SC justices argued to justify the law.

As distressing as these events are I think we must keep in mind that we are involved in a struggle for Man's Life and Freedom and that the struggle is philosophical. That being the case we must not lose heart rather should bolster our resolve to fight all the harder in whatever way makes sense to us individually. After all we do have the most rational philosophy on our side and we know it.

The population isn't static rather there are always younger generations coming up and trying to make sense out of what is happening. For a change they should be hearing or reading or seeing debates or essays or speeches in which our reasons are expressed exposing the errors of the premises underlying the policies being implemented such as the present administration has fought for and which has been upheld by the Justices of our Supreme Court today.

[Selene]

I have a vivid recollection of my first realization of the nature of sophistry by our Supreme Court. I was subscribing to The Objectivist and discovered the article by Henry Mark Holzer entitled The Constitution and the Draft which had to do with the case brought to the SC by the men who contested the Selective Service Act of 1917. To my simplistic way of thinking the Draft was clearly a horrific form of "involuntary servitude" and I could hardly wait to see how the SC justices argued to justify the law.

As distressing as these events are I think we must keep in mind that we are involved in a struggle for Man's Life and Freedom and that the struggle is philosophical. That being the case we must not lose heart rather should bolster our resolve to fight all the harder in whatever way makes sense to us individually. After all we do have the most rational philosophy on our side and we know it.

The population isn't static rather there are always younger generations coming up and trying to make sense out of what is happening. For a change they should be hearing or reading or seeing debates or essays or speeches in which our reasons are expressed exposing the errors of the premises underlying the policies being implemented such as the present administration has fought for and which has been upheld by the Justices of our Supreme Court today.

Schenck v. United States, 249 U.S. 47 and the most misquoted passage from any courts decision. The Holmes quote about theaters and fires. The actual quote which established the clear and present danger test for speech was:

The most stringent protection of

free speech

would not protect a man in

falsely

shouting fire in a theatre and causing a panic. [...] The question in every case is whether the words used are used in such circumstances and are of such a nature as to create a

clear and present danger

that they will bring about the substantive evils that

Congress

has a right to prevent.

[3]

The "falsely" gets omitted in 98% of the quotes by "informed" pundits.

Schenck served six (6) months in Federal prison for his actions.

[Jerry Biggers]

Never fear, the Republicans are just about to nominate former Governor of Massachusetts, and architect of that state's "Romneycare" mandatory health plan, which Obama credits, whenever he gets the chance, as the inspiration for Obamacare. Romney, on that basis alone, is just about the worst possible choice to run against Obama.

When challenged by the other six contenders for the nomination in the 16 televised debates, this vulnerability was consistently brought up. In response, Romney's answers were facile and pathetic. For example, on the issue of mandatory payments by Massachusetts citizens, he refused to challenge the mandate per se, saying it was "what was right for Massachusetts." When asked how he would confront the issue of Obsamacare in the campaign, he simply said that he would craft a better plan. In other words, he has conceded the battlefield (and maybe the whole battle), to Obama. No argument about principle, only about details of a national healthcare plan.

Yet Romney won the majority of the delegates to the GOP convention, so those Republican voters have only themselves to blame for this predicament. What were they thinking? .

Expect four more years of Obama, who will view his re-election as an endorsement (and, one of his favorite words, mandate) of his plan to move us toward the "social democracies": (the polite, if cowardly,, term for democratic socialism).of Europe.. And everyone knows how successful.those states have been.

[Brant Gaede]

http://whitehouse12.com/2012/06/28/chief-justice-roberts-is-a-genius

--Brant

[Mikee]

http://bidinotto.blogspot.com/2012/06/us-constitution-rip.html

[Selene]

http://whitehouse12....rts-is-a-genius

--Brant

"His ruling means Congress can’t compel American citizens to purchase anything. Ever. The notion is now officially and forever, unconstitutional. As it should be."

Absurd statement. It can be over ruled by a left wing majority in the near future.

Second, Congress can compel American citizens to act in a prescribed manner or be taxed into jail.

What planet does this gentleman come from...

[jts]

To improve the Court, replace the Justices with Chimps. They will randomly generate decisions some of which might be right.

--Brant

Damn good idea.

[Selene]

[Brant Gaede]

"Hit him again! The son-of-a-bitch is from New Jersey!"

--Brant

1930s' union (?) turf war

[Brant Gaede]

http://whitehouse12....rts-is-a-genius

--Brant

"His ruling means Congress can’t compel American citizens to purchase anything. Ever. The notion is now officially and forever, unconstitutional. As it should be."

Absurd statement. It can be over ruled by a left wing majority in the near future.

Second, Congress can compel American citizens to act in a prescribed manner or be taxed into jail.

What planet does this gentleman come from...

It's not so much Congress as all the regulation and regulations Congress has let the bureaucrats promulgate.

--Brant

more interesting commentary to come in the next few days, I'm sure

[Selene]

Below is a full list of all taxes that hit Americans, as written into the White House Healthcare Tax. The list is expanded on and explained in the full post over at ATR.

Taxes that took effect in 2010:

1. Excise Tax on Charitable Hospitals (Min$/immediate): $50,000 per hospital if they fail to meet new “community health assessment needs,” “financial assistance,” and “billing and collection” rules set by HHS. Bill: PPACA; Page: 1,961-1,971

2. Codification of the “economic substance doctrine” (Tax hike of $4.5 billion). This provision allows the IRS to disallow completely-legal tax deductions and other legal tax-minimizing plans just because the IRS deems that the action lacks “substance” and is merely intended to reduce taxes owed. Bill: Reconciliation Act; Page: 108-113

3. “Black liquor” tax hike (Tax hike of $23.6 billion). This is a tax increase on a type of bio-fuel. Bill: Reconciliation Act; Page: 105

4. Tax on Innovator Drug Companies ($22.2 bil/Jan 2010): $2.3 billion annual tax on the industry imposed relative to share of sales made that year. Bill: PPACA; Page: 1,971-1,980

5. Blue Cross/Blue Shield Tax Hike ($0.4 bil/Jan 2010): The special tax deduction in current law for Blue Cross/Blue Shield companies would only be allowed if 85 percent or more of premium revenues are spent on clinical services. Bill: PPACA; Page: 2,004

6. Tax on Indoor Tanning Services ($2.7 billion/July 1, 2010): New 10 percent excise tax on Americans using indoor tanning salons. Bill: PPACA; Page: 2,397-2,399

Taxes that took effect in 2011:

7. Medicine Cabinet Tax ($5 bil/Jan 2011): Americans no longer able to use health savings account (HSA), flexible spending account (FSA), or health reimbursement (HRA) pre-tax dollars to purchase non-prescription, over-the-counter medicines (except insulin). Bill: PPACA; Page: 1,957-1,959

8. HSA Withdrawal Tax Hike ($1.4 bil/Jan 2011): Increases additional tax on non-medical early withdrawals from an HSA from 10 to 20 percent, disadvantaging them relative to IRAs and other tax-advantaged accounts, which remain at 10 percent. Bill: PPACA; Page: 1,959

Tax that took effect in 2012:

9. Employer Reporting of Insurance on W-2 (Min$/Jan 2012): Preamble to taxing health benefits on individual tax returns. Bill: PPACA; Page: 1,957

Taxes that take effect in 2013:

10. Surtax on Investment Income ($123 billion/Jan. 2013): Creation of a new, 3.8 percent surtax on investment income earned in households making at least $250,000 ($200,000 single). This would result in the following top tax rates on investment income: Bill: Reconciliation Act; Page: 87-93

11. Hike in Medicare Payroll Tax ($86.8 bil/Jan 2013):

12. Tax on Medical Device Manufacturers ($20 bil/Jan 2013): Medical device manufacturers employ 360,000 people in 6000 plants across the country. This law imposes a new 2.3% excise tax. Exempts items retailing for 13. Raise “Haircut” for Medical Itemized Deduction from 7.5% to 10% of AGI ($15.2 bil/Jan 2013): Currently, those facing high medical expenses are allowed a deduction for medical expenses to the extent that those expenses exceed 7.5 percent of adjusted gross income (AGI). The new provision imposes a threshold of 10 percent of AGI. Waived for 65+ taxpayers in 2013-2016 only. Bill: PPACA; Page: 1,994-1,995

14. Flexible Spending Account Cap – aka “Special Needs Kids Tax” ($13 bil/Jan 2013): Imposes cap on FSAs of $2500 (now unlimited). Indexed to inflation after 2013. There is one group of FSA owners for whom this new cap will be particularly cruel and onerous: parents of special needs children. There are thousands of families with special needs children in the United States, and many of them use FSAs to pay for special needs education. Tuition rates at one leading school that teaches special needs children in Washington, D.C. (National Child Research Center) can easily exceed $14,000 per year. Under tax rules, FSA dollars can be used to pay for this type of special needs education. Bill: PPACA; Page: 2,388-2,389

15. Elimination of tax deduction for employer-provided retirement Rx drug coverage in coordination with Medicare Part D ($4.5 bil/Jan 2013) Bill: PPACA; Page: 1,994

16. $500,000 Annual Executive Compensation Limit for Health Insurance Executives ($0.6 bil/Jan 2013). Bill: PPACA; Page: 1,995-2,000

Taxes that take effect in 2014:

17. Individual Mandate Excise Tax (Jan 2014):

18. Employer Mandate Tax (Jan 2014): If an employer does not offer health coverage, and at least one employee qualifies for a health tax credit, the employer must pay an additional non-deductible tax of $2000 for all full-time employees. Applies to all employers with 50 or more employees. If any employee actually receives coverage through the exchange, the penalty on the employer for that employee rises to $3000. If the employer requires a waiting period to enroll in coverage of 30-60 days, there is a $400 tax per employee ($600 if the period is 60 days or longer). Bill: PPACA; Page: 345-346

Combined score of individual and employer mandate tax penalty: $65 billion/10 years

19. Tax on Health Insurers ($60.1 bil/Jan 2014): Annual tax on the industry imposed relative to health insurance premiums collected that year. Phases in gradually until 2018. Fully-imposed on firms with $50 million in profits. Bill: PPACA; Page: 1,986-1,993

Taxes that take effect in 2018:

20. Excise Tax on Comprehensive Health Insurance Plans ($32 bil/Jan 2018): Starting in 2018, new 40 percent excise tax on “Cadillac” health insurance plans ($10,200 single/$27,500 family). Higher threshold ($11,500 single/$29,450 family) for early retirees and high-risk professions. CPI +1 percentage point indexed. Bill: PPACA; Page: 1,941-1,956

Click here for a fully explained view of each tax found in the White House Healthcare Tax.

[william.scherk]

Expect four more years of Obama, who will view his re-election as an endorsement (and, one of his favorite words, mandate) of his plan to move us toward the "social democracies": (the polite, if cowardly,, term for democratic socialism).of Europe.. And everyone knows how successful.those states have been.

This could be true, that 'everybody knows' how successful the so-called 'social democracies' have been, but we don't know which countries you indicate by your term, and which criteria of success you use.

I would argue that the 'social democracies' in the European world today include the following countries, from the far north to the edges of the Mediterranean.

Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Finland, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, (Poland, Hungary, Slovakia), Czech Republic, Austria, Germany, Netherlands, UK, Ireland, Belgium, France, Spain, Italy, Switzerland, Slovenia, Croatia, Cyprus, (Greece) ... and Israel.

Further afield, but tied to Europe through the English language and British-derived governance, Australia and new Zealand. To the north of you, too, another 'European' social democracy, the confederation we call Canada.

What criteria do I use? Universal mandates for heath care, the notion (often rigidly inscribed in law/constitutional documents) that citizens cannot be excluded from services of the government because of individual ability to pay, in the areas that we call (in Canada) 'social programmes.' These include the oldest (State old age pensions and State-mandated Worker's Compensation schemes, unemployment insurance) to the 'newest' mandates (marriage without reference to gender), with the middle comprising all the things that disgust on principle an Objectivist: mother's allowances, Welfare, State Orphanages, State Parks, State Mental Hospitals, Public Education, Public Health Services, Legal Aid ...

Now to the criteria for 'success.' Shall we use criteria like economic freedom, tax levels, difficulties in starting and operating a business, a relatively accessible non-corrupt public system of justice, a relatively light burden of so-called environmental regulation? How about the level of social mobility (can a poor man get rich by his own individual efforts), or the level of income/poverty itself? Or health indicators, or levels of education or industrial might or even the level of happiness.

If what you say is true, Jerry, we should be able to demonstrate a lack of success in all these places relative to their non social-democratic peers.

Edited June 30, 2012 by william.scherk

[jts]

I probably posted this before, but it seems so extremely relevant to the thread topic that I figure it should be posted again.

10:29

[Peter]

Jerry Biggers wrote:

Never fear, the Republicans are just about to nominate former Governor of Massachusetts, and architect of that state's "Romneycare" mandatory health plan, which Obama credits, whenever he gets the chance, as the inspiration for Obamacare. Romney, on that basis alone, is just about the worst possible choice to run against Obama.

end quote

Not necessarily. Romney has said he will work to repeal it on day one of his Presidency and something else may weigh upon this subject before then. Take a closer look at Brant’s link and then look at the Constitution. Article One, Sections 7 and 8 of The Constitution of the United States reads:

“All Bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives; but the Senate may propose or concur with Amendments as on other Bills.

Every Bill which shall have passed the House of Representatives and the Senate, shall, before it become a Law, be presented to the President of the United States: If he approve he shall sign it, but if not he shall return it, with his Objections to that House in which it shall have originated, who shall enter the Objections at large on their Journal, and proceed to reconsider it. If after such Reconsideration two thirds of that House shall agree to pass the Bill, it shall be sent, together with the Objections, to the other House, by which it shall likewise be reconsidered, and if approved by two thirds of that House, it shall become a Law. But in all such Cases the Votes of both Houses shall be determined by yeas and Nays, and the Names of the Persons voting for and against the Bill shall be entered on the Journal of each House respectively. If any Bill shall not be returned by the President within ten Days (Sundays excepted) after it shall have been presented to him, the Same shall be a Law, in like Manner as if he had signed it, unless the Congress by their Adjournment prevent its Return, in which Case it shall not be a Law.

Every Order, Resolution, or Vote to which the Concurrence of the Senate and House of Representatives may be necessary (except on a question of Adjournment) shall be presented to the President of the United States; and before the Same shall take Effect, shall be approved by him, or being disapproved by him, shall be repassed by two thirds of the Senate and House of Representatives, according to the Rules and Limitations prescribed in the Case of a Bill.

Section. 8.

The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States . . . .

end quote

The Obamacare tax did not originate in the House. A fine originated in the House. Chief Justice Roberts originated the word “tax,” therefore the tax must be re-voted upon by the House and Senate and if approved, signed by the President.

Peter Taylor

[jts]

Romney is a ... uh ... I will let him speak for himself.

3:54

[GALTGULCH8]

The 500 some odd Ron Paul advocates who are going to Tampa as Mitt Romney delegates will try to change the minds of those other Romney delegates to vote for Ron Paul who consistently adheres to the Constitution. This video above should help to persuade them!

[BaalChatzaf]

The 500 some odd Ron Paul advocates who are going to Tampa as Mitt Romney delegates will try to change the minds of those other Romney delegates to vote for Ron Paul who consistently adheres to the Constitution. This video above should help to persuade them!

Have you considered entering the Olympic Vertical Rope Urination event in the forthcoming Summer Olympics?

Ba'al Chatzaf

[jts]

The 500 some odd Ron Paul advocates who are going to Tampa as Mitt Romney delegates will try to change the minds of those other Romney delegates to vote for Ron Paul who consistently adheres to the Constitution. This video above should help to persuade them!

Have you considered entering the Olympic Vertical Rope Urination event in the forthcoming Summer Olympics?

Ba'al Chatzaf

Abandon all hope. Humanity is doomed.

[Brant Gaede]

The 500 some odd Ron Paul advocates who are going to Tampa as Mitt Romney delegates will try to change the minds of those other Romney delegates to vote for Ron Paul who consistently adheres to the Constitution. This video above should help to persuade them!

Have you considered entering the Olympic Vertical Rope Urination event in the forthcoming Summer Olympics?

Ba'al Chatzaf

Abandon all hope. Humanity is doomed.

So what?

--Brant

so's the planet

even me

[BaalChatzaf]

Abandon all hope. Humanity is doomed.

Humanity has been doomed since it first emerged.

Ba'al Chatzaf

[Selene]

Romney is a ... uh ... I will let him speak for himself.

3:54

Hilariously, this was in my daily Rasmussen e-mail today!

Daily Presidential Tracking Poll: Romney 46%, Romney 44%

[rhartford]

"We lost on health care. But the Constitution won."

Must reading: Randy Barnett's opinion piece in the Washington Post, 6/29/12.