Common sense from Wild Bill


23 Comments (+add yours?)

  1. Kim
    Jun 29, 2012 @ 08:31:36

    Chief Justice John Roberts has handed a remarkable victory to American conservatives by threading the judicial needle with perfect precision. The initial disappointment collectively felt by Americans who had hoped for a Supreme Court ruling that would overturn Obamacare soon will be replaced, upon further reflection, by the excitement that will come with a fuller appreciation of what the Chief Justice has wrought.


    • Kim
      Jun 29, 2012 @ 08:36:43

      There is now a formal United States Supreme Court opinion on the books, overdue by nearly a century, holding that the federal government may not wield the Commerce Clause to impose on American citizens the obligation to buy health insurance or anything else we do not want. An American cannot be compelled by federal mandate to eat or even to buy a proverbial stalk of broccoli. As a kosher consumer, the federal government cannot wield that clause to impose on me an obligation to purchase non-kosher food supplements. The rules guiding lower-court wrestling matches over federal power to invade Americans’ private lives now have been reset remarkably by Chief Justice Roberts. Few today notice what he has done. Long after many of us are gone, this 5-4 opinion finally setting limits on the reach of the Commerce Clause will continue to affect American lives and protect private citizens from Washington’s intrusions.


      • Kim
        Jun 29, 2012 @ 08:54:25

        Instead, even as he cast a powerful vote to rein in the Commerce Clause as our Founding Fathers intended for it to be applied against federal intrusiveness, Chief Justice Roberts returned Obamacare front-and-center back into the November elections debate. Defining it for what it really is — a new, enormous federal tax on at least four million Americans (Slip op. at 37) — the Chief Justice has lobbed a fat hanging curveball for conservatives to clobber. The ObamaCare tax does not apply to those who presently are untaxed, and it will not apply to the more wealthy, who will be excused because they carry health insurance anyway. Rather, the President who promised no new taxes against the middle class conclusively has been “outed” by the Chief Justice as having imposed the biggest tax on middle-class Americans in a generation.

    • Sherry
      Jun 29, 2012 @ 08:40:03

      Well, he did prevent the abuses that could come from using the Commerce Clause. Someone said that if this was a TAX it should not be decided on by the SCOTUS but by Congress. SCOTUS said Obamacare was unconstitutional-Roberts sided with the others who wanted to scrap it-yet if it was changed from a penalty to a tax so it would be. As another commentor said, most activist judges change the Constitution’s meaning to make a law fit but this time the law’s meaning was changed to make it fit the Costitution.


  2. Sherry
    Jun 29, 2012 @ 08:31:46

    Hey! He has hair under that hat! lol
    As per usual-a good assessment of this latest fiasco for the American people. Last night, on Redeye Radio, the host said that even the Dems should get upset over this army of the IRS.


  3. Kim
    Jun 29, 2012 @ 08:38:59

    Sherry, can you please post the American Thinker article on Facebook for me?


  4. Sherry
    Jun 29, 2012 @ 08:42:23

    Okay. I’ll post your blog addy and mention to check out AT’s article.


  5. Kim
    Jun 29, 2012 @ 09:25:15


  6. Kim
    Jun 29, 2012 @ 09:31:24


  7. Kim
    Jun 29, 2012 @ 10:12:29


  8. Kim
    Jun 29, 2012 @ 10:18:22

    You could pretty much say this about the Obamacare case. Hundreds of pages of analysis and predictions and few if any reflected the final, rather surprising outcome: Four ,and potentially five justices if one reads Roberts carefully, have for the first time since the FDR court recognized there are substantial limitations on the power of Congress to regulate behavior under the cloak of the Constitution’s Commerce Clause and, just as significantly, seven justices determined that Congress cannot blackmail the states into accepting new federal programs by threatening to cut off funding under existing programs should they refuse to accept the expanded programs.


    • Kim
      Jun 29, 2012 @ 10:19:07

      (a) First looks at the opinion suggest the gloom of many conservatives is not warranted: The decision has much to commend it.

      As a starter, Justice Roberts’ statement: ” It is not our job to protect the people from the consequences of their political choices.” is as clear a statement of conservative thought about the Court’s role as one might find in a Supreme Court case of recent vintage.


  9. Kim
    Jun 29, 2012 @ 10:45:04


  10. Kim
    Jun 29, 2012 @ 10:46:12


  11. Kim
    Jun 29, 2012 @ 11:13:04


  12. Kim
    Jun 29, 2012 @ 12:01:50


  13. Kim
    Jun 29, 2012 @ 12:24:54


  14. Kim
    Jun 29, 2012 @ 12:57:07


  15. Kim
    Jun 29, 2012 @ 13:54:41

    the woman is delusional


  16. Kim
    Jun 29, 2012 @ 14:09:06

    Did the Supreme Court just make the Affordable Care Act much less affordable?

    The calculations are complex, and the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office has said it will need some time to review the situation. But an early back-of-the-envelope analysis by a former CBO director suggests that Thursday’s ruling could sharply raise the cost of President Obama’s signature legislative achievement.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: