When Congress required most Americans to obtain health insurance or pay a penalty, Democrats denied that they were creating a new tax. But in court, the Obama administration and its allies now defend the requirement as an exercise of the government’s “power to lay and collect taxes.”
And that power, they say, is even more sweeping than the federal power to regulate interstate commerce.
Administration officials say the tax argument is a linchpin of their legal case in defense of the health care overhaul and its individual mandate, now being challenged in court by more than 20 states and several private organizations.
_________________ “Strong people are harder to kill than weak people, and more useful in general”. - Mark Rippetoe
"The fact that you looked up in Merriam Webster's.. in the dictionary, indicates to me that you're stretching a little bit right now."
I don't think I've ever seen more compelling evidence that liberals are literally trying to change the language to support their ideologies. When you get called out for referring to definitions in support of your opposition to their stance or claims, it doesn't get any clearer than that.
_________________ "Aaaah! Emotions are weird!" - Amdee "... Mirrorshades prevent the forces of normalcy from realizing that one is crazed and possibly dangerous. They are the symbol of the sun-staring visionary, the biker, the rocker, the policeman, and similar outlaws." - Bruce Sterling, preface to Mirrorshades
Joined: Thu Nov 26, 2009 9:40 pm Posts: 2289 Location: Bat Country
Don't use the term liberals. I prefer TAX MONGERS. RAWR!
_________________ "...the line dividing good and evil cuts through the heart of every human being. And who is willing to destroy a piece of his own heart?" -Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn
Joined: Thu Nov 26, 2009 9:40 pm Posts: 2289 Location: Bat Country
Lets have a tax on the internet. A tax on forum posting and a tax on 4chan.
_________________ "...the line dividing good and evil cuts through the heart of every human being. And who is willing to destroy a piece of his own heart?" -Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn
Joined: Thu Nov 26, 2009 9:40 pm Posts: 2289 Location: Bat Country
Arathain Kelvar wrote:
Wwen wrote:
Lets have a tax on the internet. A tax on forum posting and a tax on 4chan.
Oooh, oooh, a tax on creepy avatars.
This was a shirt, but I can't find anyplace selling it anymore. I wanted it so bad. ...the shirt, not gay android sex.
_________________ "...the line dividing good and evil cuts through the heart of every human being. And who is willing to destroy a piece of his own heart?" -Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn
When Congress required most Americans to obtain health insurance or pay a penalty, Democrats denied that they were creating a new tax. But in court, the Obama administration and its allies now defend the requirement as an exercise of the government’s “power to lay and collect taxes.”
And that power, they say, is even more sweeping than the federal power to regulate interstate commerce.
Administration officials say the tax argument is a linchpin of their legal case in defense of the health care overhaul and its individual mandate, now being challenged in court by more than 20 states and several private organizations.
Lol...the last second of that video, Obama's eyes flash anger, which shows that he's frustrated but too insecure to admit his philosophy on taxation is flawed, because the other dude is right. I don't know what's worse...that, or him actually not realizing how wrong he is. What an *******. How can you stretch the definition of a word if you're reading it out of a dictionary? Obama is a f*cking idiot. But more importantly, he's just wrong. Not to mention how he laughed when he said the word "authority". If he was really bothered by the fact that he used a dictionary, that reaction would've come when he said "Merriam-Webster". It wasn't a friendly sarcastic laugh, either, which is what most people who are biased toward Obama would interpret it as...it was a fake polite laugh to disguise his not-so-subtle contempt, and douchebaggism. He wasn't bothered by the dictionary...he was bothered by the fact that he was referred to as "authority". This guy wants to get into your life and f*ck with your sh*t but he wants to be your buddy, too. He wants control, but he doesn't want to act like it. Your own personal friend who not only bullies you into giving you your lunch money, but uses it to buy weapons to beat your children up with. He doesn't listen either...and I'll show you how I know that--when he's not speaking you can tell he's just thinking of how he wants to respond to what he thinks the other guy is trying to say...not to mention how he interrupts the interviewer. He acts straight-forward and confident, but only because he's short-sighted and rude. While you're at it, Obama, why don't you send some more soldiers into battle and kill some women and children....oh, and increase censorship of youtube!
I think the government is like scientology, in that the politicians are good people with good intentions but they brainwash the hell out of them and make them puppets. no offense to any scientologists. Except tom cruise. f*ck that guy.
Joined: Thu Nov 26, 2009 9:40 pm Posts: 2289 Location: Bat Country
I think the good people with good intentions thing is what gets us. I used to believe that, but now I think it's dangerous to assume that they give two shits what we think or are concerned that we might not like something they do. Seems like everyone I've know just take it that politicians lie and seem to not be overly upset about it. Like it's useless, in the way that getting angry at the rain would be a waste of time.
_________________ "...the line dividing good and evil cuts through the heart of every human being. And who is willing to destroy a piece of his own heart?" -Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn
J. KENNETH BLACKWELL AND KENNETH A. KLUKOWSKI wrote:
The Justice Department announced last week that it would defend the new federal health-insurance mandate as an exercise of Congress's "power to lay and collect taxes," even though Barack Obama had insisted before the bill's passage that it was "absolutely not a tax increase." The truth is the mandate is not a tax—and if it were it would be unconstitutional.
A tax is when the government takes money from individuals, puts it in the Treasury, and plans to spend it. With the health-insurance mandate, the government is not taking money from private individuals; rather, it is commanding them to give their money to another private entity, not to the Treasury. If individuals don't obey the mandate, they pay a penalty to the Treasury. But penalties aren't taxes. The mandate is legally separate from the penalty.
Even if the Justice Department were to get the mandate considered a tax, it would be an unconstitutional one. Unlike states, the federal government has limited jurisdiction. Under the 10th Amendment, the federal government has only those powers enumerated by the Constitution, and all other powers are reserved to the people or the states. Every federal action must be authorized by a constitutional provision. If there is no such provision, then the action is unconstitutional. No provision of the Constitution authorizes the federal government to command people to buy insurance.
The Taxing and Spending Clause in Article I of the Constitution gives the federal government broad power to tax the American people. But that power is not unlimited.
The Constitution originally allowed only three types of taxes. The first was a duty, which is a tax on imports. The second was an excise tax, which is a tax for the privilege of doing something, such as buying alcohol or holding a professional license to practice law. Both duties and excise taxes are indirect taxes that can be passed on to consumers.
The third type of tax was a direct tax, which cannot be passed on to someone else. The only type of direct tax permitted by the Constitution was a "capitation tax," or head tax, which every person could be required to pay. The Constitution required that any capitation tax be apportioned, meaning that every person in a given state had to pay the same amount. New Yorkers might have to pay $600 per year while Virginians only pay $500, but every person within each state must pay equally.
When Congress created an income tax in the late 1800s, the Supreme Court struck it down on the grounds that it was a direct tax but not apportioned. That 1895 decision, Pollock v. Farmers' Loan & Trust, rejected the idea that Congress had some generic power to tax outside the three categories laid out in the Constitution.
That's why, in 1913, the 16th Amendment to the Constitution was required in order to institute a national income tax. Since then, a tax on income has been the fourth and final type that the federal government can impose.
The individual health-insurance mandate fits into none of these four categories and is therefore not constitutionally justified as a tax.
But the Constitution is only as good as the Supreme Court interpreting it. The Senate's imminent vote on Elena Kagan's nomination is a poignant reminder that we need a court that faithfully upholds the Constitution. Such a court would strike down ObamaCare.
Mr. Blackwell is the former Treasurer of Ohio and a professor at Liberty University School of Law. Mr. Klukowski is special counsel at the Family Research Council and senior legal analyst at the American Civil Rights Union. They are the authors of "The Blueprint: Obama's Plan to Subvert the Constitution and Build an Imperial Presidency" (Lyons, 2010).
He was originally a professor of constitutional law. It should be obvious he knows more about the limits of government imposed by the Constitution and their true meaning than the 9 in black.
A tax is when the government takes money from individuals, puts it in the Treasury, and plans to spend it. With the health-insurance mandate, the government is not taking money from private individuals; rather, it is commanding them to give their money to another private entity
Ok, then what do you call that? The government forcing you to give money to a third party...what is that called?
_________________ "Therefore do not worry about tomorrow, for tomorrow will worry about itself. Each day has enough trouble of its own." Jesus of Nazareth
A tax is when the government takes money from individuals, puts it in the Treasury, and plans to spend it. With the health-insurance mandate, the government is not taking money from private individuals; rather, it is commanding them to give their money to another private entity
Ok, then what do you call that? The government forcing you to give money to a third party...what is that called?
So if Obama is saying its not a tax, and we don't have a definition for it, how does he think it will be legally justified? Isn't he better off saying that it IS a tax?
_________________ "Therefore do not worry about tomorrow, for tomorrow will worry about itself. Each day has enough trouble of its own." Jesus of Nazareth
He was saying it wasn't a tax prior to the bill passing, otherwise, he would be blatantly breaking his campaign promise about no new taxes on anyone under $250,000 (not that reasonable people believed him).
Now that the bill is under fire, the only defense the DoJ has to present to the USSC is that it is a tax, so they can claim it is legal under the tax and spending clause.
However, the point of that opinion is that the bill is not a tax, since it doesn't work like a tax, and even if it were a tax, its still not one of the 4 types allowed by the Constitution.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 81 guests
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot post attachments in this forum