The Greatest Republican Ad Evahhhh

The Greatest Republican Ad Evahh is about a tedious issue debunked by Fact Check. Romney “outsourcer in chief” claims? Yawn. Bain Capital is dull but it has produced the greatest Republican ad ever.

Bain Capital? Yawn. Can’s we discuss something more exciting. We have yet to discuss the Fast & Furious contempt citation by the House of Representatives against Eric Withholder. We have not yet touched on the latest developments such as E-mails reveal retaliation, cover-up at ATF, DoJ following Fast & Furious exposure. There’s also something else, something more exciting that everyone wants to discuss. Bain is a yawn.

The Obama health scam ruling by the Supreme Court is still top of the charts. Many are taking issue with our point of view on this. Roberts pulled off one of the great constitutional finesses of all time and politically gave Barack Obama a radioactive enema but that apparently is not enough for some. They did not get their pony for Mandate-mas so they are petulant, upset, churlish. Well that’s not exactly fair.

Most of the critiques are well thought out and reasoned – but wrong. Our evaluation on the current political/legal situation will be published soon.

We’ll be proven right in years to come and the left will eventually bemoan the Obama health scam ruling and conservatives will see it as a Thurgoodian pool game that set the table up for them. We stated well before the decision came down that Obama was in a lose/lose situation. The Obama health scam was not struck down but Obama is still in a lose scenario. Right now though Coral Sea conservatives are determined to stomp their feet and be angry that Mitt Romney is not the right messenger, that their guy (or Bachmann) would be better against Barack Obama on health care.

We too warned, in hot language against Mitt Romney – particularly on the issue of health care. But for all the defects and boringness of Mitt Romney let’s give him his due – Romney is running a smart campaign.

Right around this time in 2009 we wrote an article called The Republican Secret Weapon – Hillary Clinton. John McCain failed to use the weapon in 2008. Mitt Romney has picked up the weapon and already fired some warning shots.

* * * * * *

There are a lot of Republican ads coming out this year. Most of them are ineffective. Most of them play Obama audio of something stupid he has said then follow-up with mocking/clever refutations in text form. This is “creative class” DailyKooks level stupidity. Paying to propagate Obama’s own words without a verbal substantive attack only helps Obama.

The way many people watch ads, even Internet ads, is by using their eyes and ears. Yes, the primary stimulus is visual, but surrendering the auditory line of attack and providing Barack Obama the audio propagation of his message is counterproductive.

Televised ads are even more dangerous when this clever/mocking tactic is employed. Television ads are often heard, not seen. When commercials come on many people are waking around or doing other things. It’s only when something heard pricks up your ears that you rush to the TV and look. So fix up these ads Rove, you’re wasting money.

Mitt Romney has a very effective ad airing in Ohio that fits in beautifully with what we discussed in our 2009 article The Republican Secret Weapon – Hillary Clinton.

The attack line which is heard and seen in the ad comes from the Secret Weapon herself:

“A new ad from former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney uses a clip of Hillary Clinton to say “Shame on you, Barack Obama.

The ad starts with quotes from the Post’s Factchecker deeming a recent anti-Romney ad misleading, unfair and untrue. That ad attacked Romney as an outsourcer. It came out before the recent Washington Post article on Romney’s record at Bain Capital, relying instead on the then-governor’s veto of a bill that would have barred Massachusetts from contracting with companies that outsourced.

“But that’s Barack Obama,” the narrator says. “He also attacked Hillary Clinton with vicious lies.”

The ad then cuts to a video clip from 2008, when Clinton attacked her then-rival Obama for mailers claiming she called the North American Free Trade Agreement a “boon” for the economy. (Clinton never actually used that word). “Shame on you, Barack Obama,” Clinton says in the footage.

The Romney campaign has tried to drive a wedge between Obama and the Clintons before, trying to peel off voters who have fond feelings towards the last Democratic president. Given that Hillary Clinton is now Obama’s Secretary of State, it seems likely that someone in her circle will respond.”

The response is not so secret cheers from the Hillary Clinton circle.

Compare what we wrote in 2009 and this description of the ad from the Washington Post, “But that’s Barack Obama,” the narrator says. “He also attacked Hillary Clinton with vicious lies.” This is what we wrote in 2009:

“What we found interesting was how Andrea Tantaros bolstered her argument when she invoked the name of Hillary Clinton as one who had been targeted by the same forces of ignorance and bullying. Those ignorant bullies parade about as forces of knowledge and understanding but we now know them for what they really are.

Republicans and Conservatives should take a clue from Ms Tantaros – utilize the history of the 2008 primaries and what was done to Hillary Clinton to expose the intolerant bullies who pose as progressives.

Sean Hannity in particular constantly attacks Bill Clinton and Hillary Clinton in ugly, gratuitous ways. Hannity is living in the 1990s. Even the biggest Bill and Hillary haters, such as Richard Mellon Scaife, now recognize they were fools drunk with destructive Clinton hate. Hannity would make a stronger case against Barack Obama if he would invoke the nastiness of the Obama campaign against Hillary and stop the nastiness against Hillary himself.

Some Republicans will fan the flames of Hillary hatred. These are Republicans who are afraid of Sarah Palin and do not want to do anything that might help women, such as attack sexism and misogyny.

Other Republicans will finally realize that the stale Bill Clinton jokes on late night television will now be augmented by attacks on Republicans and fools like John “Are You My Daddy?” Edwards. But Barack Obama will be protected by his Big Media masters.”

Every time a Republican/conservative vents his/her spleen in E/I stupidity against the Clintons, Barack Obama smiles. Donald Trump understood what we wrote back in 2009:

“On May 7, 2009 we advised the secret weapon be unleashed. Trump does just that very thing in this interview.

Who ran the most negative campaign? Against whom? Against what woman and against what men?

Four minutes into the interview Trump lays it out, hits it out of the ballpark. Who ran the most negative campaign?

Clinton hater Sean Hannity finally discards his silly Bill Clinton impressions and learns from The Donald how to use the secret weapon – four minutes and ten seconds into the interview.

Sean Hannity has long been an E/I conservative. With this interview Hannity demonstrates he can become an I/E conservative. “Intelligence over Emotion“.

Who was the “least racist person” who was race-baited by Barack Obama? Ask Sean Hannity. Ask Donald Trump. Ask Bill Clinton. Ask Hillary Clinton.

Tonight Mormon Mitt Romney will likely win a big victory in the heavily Mormon populated state of Nevada. How much easier will it be for Mormon Mitt Romney to be smeared as a “racist”?

The “least racist person”, Bill Clinton was smeared as a “racist” by Barack Obama. We Hillary Clinton supporters, many of whom organized and worked for years to community organize in black neighborhoods and fought more for civil rights than Barack Obama ever did, were smeared as “racists” by Barack Obama and his Chicago thugs. How much easier will it be for Mormon Mitt Romney to be smeared as a “racist”?



Trump understands what we are talking about. He is an I/E businessman. Mitt Romney is showing signs of full out I/E:

“New Romney Ad Features Hillary Clinton Saying ‘Shame On You, Barack Obama’

In a new TV ad running in Ohio, Mitt Romney‘s campaign features a somewhat unexpected politician attacking President Barack Obama: Hillary Clinton, the current Secretary of State and former Obama rival. According to POLITICO, the ad uses 2008 footage in which Clinton said, “Shame on you, Barack Obama.”

The footage is from Clinton’s campaign stop in Ohio with then-Gov. Ted Strickland. At the time, she had denounced Obama and his campaign for “perpetuating falsehoods.” The clip is meant to convey that Obama’s attacks against Romney are “just not true.” That he used the same kinds of “vicious lies” against former opponent Clinton.

Specifically, the ad notes the Washington Post‘s “Fact Checker” response to Obama’s previous ads that singled out what their campaign claims is Romney’s record as an outsourcer. The Post gave the ads four Pinocchios.

The ad’s script, via POLITICO:

NARRATOR: Barack Obama’s attacks against Mitt Romney: they’re just not true. The Washington Post says, ‘On just about every level, this ad is misleading, unfair and untrue.’ But that’s Barack Obama. He also attacked Hillary Clinton with vicious lies.

CLINTON (file footage): He continues to spend millions of dollars perpetuating falsehoods.

NARRATOR: Mitt Romney has a plan to get America working. Barack Obama? Worst job record since the Depression.

CLINTON (file footage): So shame on you, Barack Obama.

ROMNEY (voice-over): I’m Mitt Romney and I approved this message.”

This Mitt Romney ad is smart on three levels. Smart #1: because it employs our “secret weapon” strategy.

Smart #2: because it puts Obama’s attacks into a greater narrative that Obama is a filthy liar who smears his political opponents.

Smart #3: because it does not yet deploy the best and most effective Romney retort against the Obama Bain attacks – Bill Clinton. A strong response on Bain from Romney will come not now, as we approach the July 4 holiday and the Summer vacation season. After Labor Day Mitt Romney will deploy ads with Cory Booker, Deval Patrick and Bill Clinton defending Mitt Romney’s business acumen and Bain Capital. Bill Clinton will be deployed to devastating effect by Mitt Romney after Labor Day and not just on Bain Capital.

But those ads are for after Labor Day. They will be modeled on the Greatest Republican Ad Evahhh:



Share

220 thoughts on “The Greatest Republican Ad Evahhhh

  1. I have to reading to catch up with, Admin. This is a repost as was on the tailend of the last article.

    ShortTermer
    June 30th, 2012 at 12:55 pm
    Okay, I did it. I bit the bullet. Let us see how long I live. On my big facebook community that is about my hometown area and people, I finally came to the decision that it matters little to me if I lose ‘friends’ and have started a campaign to WAKE UP the citizens there as best I can to the effects of this Fundamental Transformation of America under the current regime. I posted my first comments in my fight against ObamaCare and in turn the current regime and those who support it. I posted my first last night and it has had quite an effect; a handful of ‘liberals’ do not like it. I premised my idea on that if there are not more hometown folks who love this country and want to see the future secure for the coming generations than those who don’t then that little historical site did not matter to begin with.

    A second post was written like this:I got this in an email from a friend: Subject: The Country of Texas ~ especially for my Texas buddies
    Please note that Texas is the only state with a legal right to secede from the Union . (Reference the Texas-American Annexation Treaty of 1848.)

    We Texans love y’all, but we’ll probably have to take action if Barack Obama wins the election. We’ll miss you too.

    Here is what can happen:

    1: Barack Hussein Obama is President of the United States, and Texas secedes from the Union in summer of 2013.

    2: George W. Bush will become the President of the Republic of Texas . You might not think that he talks too pretty, but we haven’t had another terrorist attack, and the economy was fine until the effects of the Democrats lowering the qualifications for home loans came to roost.

    So what does Texas have to do to survive as a Republic?

    1. NASA is just south of Houston , Texas . We will control the space industry.

    2. We refine over 85% of the gasoline in the United States .

    3. Defense Industry–we have over 65% of it. The term “Don’t mess with Texas,” will take on a whole new meaning.

    4. Oil – we can supply all the oil that the Republic of Texas will need for the next 300 years. What will the other states do? Gee, we don’t know. Why not ask Obama?

    5. Natural Gas – again we have all we need, and it’s too bad about those Northern States. John Kerry and Al Gore will have to figure out a way to keep them warm….

    6. Computer Industry – we lead the nation in producing computer chips and communications equipment -small companies like Texas Instruments, Dell Computer, EDS, Raytheon, National Semiconductor,Motorola, Intel, AMD, Atmel, Applied Materials, Ball Microconductor, Dallas Semiconductor, Nortel, Alcatel, etc, etc. The list goes on and on.

    7. Medical Care – We have the research centers for cancer research, the best burn centers and the top trauma units in the world, as well as other large health centers. The Houston Medical Center alone employees over 65,000 people.

    8. We have enough colleges to keep us getting smarter: University of
    Texas , Texas A&M, Texas Tech, Texas Christian, Rice, SMU, University
    of Dallas , University of Houston , Baylor, UNT ( University of North
    Texas ), Texas Women’s University, etc. Ivy grows better in the South anyway.

    9. We have an intelligent and energetic work force, and it isn’t restricted by a bunch of unions. Here in Texas , it’s a Right to Work State and, therefore, it’s every man and women for themselves. We just go out and get the job done. And if we don’t like the way one company operates, we get a job somewhere else.

    10. We have essential control of the paper, plastics, and insurance industries, etc.

    11. In case of a foreign invasion, we have the Texas National Guard, the Texas Air National Guard, and several military bases. We don’t have an Army, but since everybody down here has at least six rifles and a pile of ammo, we can raise an Army in 24 hours if we need one. If the situation really gets bad, we can always call the Department of Public Safety and ask them to send over the Texas Rangers.

    12. We are totally self-sufficient in beef, poultry, hogs, and several types of grain, fruit and vegetables, and let’s not forget seafood from the Gulf. Also, everybody down here knows how to cook them so that they taste good. Don’t need any food.

    13. Three of the ten largest cities in the United States , and twenty- three of the 100 largest cities in the United States , are located inTexas. And Texas also has more land than California , New York , New Jersey , Connecticut , Delaware , Hawaii , Massachusetts , Maryland , Rhode Island and Vermont combined.

    14. Trade: Three of the ten largest ports in the United States are located in Texas .

    15. We also manufacture cars down here, but we don’t need to. You see, nothing rusts in
    Texas, so our vehicles stay beautiful and run well for decades.

    This just names a few of the items that will keep the Republic of Texas in good shape. There isn’t a thing out there that we need and don’t have.

    Now to the rest of the United States under President Obama: Since you won’t have the refineries to get gas for your cars, only President Obama will be able to drive around in his big 5 mpg SUV.The rest of the United States will have to walk or ride bikes.

    You won’t have any TV as the Space Center in Houston will cut off satellite communications. You won’t have any natural gas to heat your homes, but since Mr. Obama has predicted global warming, you will not need the gas as long as you survive the 2000 years it will take to get enough
    heat from Global Warming.

    Signed,
    The People of Texas

    P.S. This is not a threatening letter – just a note to give you something to think about!
    SLEEP WELL TONIGHT – THE EYES OF TEXAS ARE UPON YOU!!
    ________________________________________________________
    That second post has become an active little Civics and history lesson. And someone posted this:

    Comment: Alaskan Islands Being Given To Russia By Obama | Franklin County Va. Patriots – Fighting For Freedom
    http://www.franklincountyvapatriots.c​om

    Comment: Obama’s giveaway: Oil-rich islands to Russia
    http://www.wnd.com
    A Free Press For A Free People Since 1997

  2. I have had little success in educating Republicans around here that the Clintons and what happened to them in the 2007 primary were useful lessons to be made into something for the greater good in 2008 and in 2012. When will they ever learn?

  3. I recall Hillary saying “Shame on you, Barack Obama” at some campaign stop when someone showed her an Obama flyer about a health care issue.

    Maybe she said it about some other issue, too.

  4. Karma.
    How can Obama possibly counter Mitt’s Hillary ad???
    Revising the egregious past. 🙂
    Reminding some like us about the travesties, but also laying them bare for those who had not a clue back in 2008 🙂 🙂
    Imagine the sputtering by tee vee and all on their side.
    Will anybody ask Ax to respond to this?
    Your own SOS chewing you out 4 years ago. On the tee vee.

  5. Something rotten in the state of New York….

    Rangel’s race is still not settled, 6% of ballots still missing as are over 2500 absentee ballots.

    Rangel somehow seemingly leading by less than 2% now over the hispanic challenger in a district that is now 55% hispanic.

    Suspicion some real dodgy stuff has been happening.

    What’s known is this: As of Friday evening, 32 precincts – six percent of all votes cast – had yet to be accounted for. And another 2,447 affidavit ballots and 667 absentee votes hadn’t been counted yet either. According to the city Board of Elections, Rangel’s lead over second-place finisher state Sen. Adriano Espaillat stood at 1,032 votes, with enough outstanding ballots to alter the outcome.

    Naturally, the courts are now involved. On Friday, the state Supreme Court agreed to hear a lawsuit brought by the Espaillat campaign, asking it to examine the squirrelly vote-counting process. A hearing is scheduled for Monday.

    Before things went off the rails, Tuesday night had been an evening of celebration and vindication for Rangel, who seemed to have survived the most serious reelection threat of his 42-year career in the House. After initial tallies showed the congressional titan jumping to a 20-point lead over Espaillat, Rangel took to the stage at Sylvia’s, the famed soul food institution located on Harlem’s Lenox Avenue, to declare victory and then party late into the evening with boisterous supporters.

    But as Tuesday turned to Wednesday and more votes trickled in, something strange happened: Rangel’s margin of victory began to shrink, first to five points and then, by midday Wednesday, to two points.

    After delivering a concession statement the previous night, Espaillat released a new statement Wednesday that suggested the race wasn’t yet settled. “Our message of bringing bold, new ideas to change Congress connected with voters, as demonstrated by our strong show of support and the voting results that continue to come in,” he said.

    Not much has changed since then. And the race might remain in limbo for days, if not weeks. Valerie Vazquez, a spokeswoman for the New York City Board of Elections, said that with the July 4th holiday approaching, officials wouldn’t begin processing the affidavit and absentee ballots until the end of next week. And should the margin between the two candidates diminish to one-half of one percent or less of all votes cast, she said, the elections board would undertake a manual review of all ballots cast.

    The spectacle — and the surrounding chaos — has the city’s political class staring in disbelief.

    “The fact that we’re wondering who won the race at this point is a little silly,” said Doug Forand, a New York-based Democratic consultant whose firm worked for Espaillat. “It could end up being a long time before we know the outcome.”

    “Between questions about vote totals and paper ballots, it’s enough to throw the race into question,” he added. “I think Rangel comes out on top, but at this point it’s no guarantee.”

    The race continued to play out Friday, as election workers in three offices in New York City scrambled to reassess votes that had been cast three days earlier. At one office in lower Manhattan, officials hunched over computers in a heavily air-conditioned room, trying to determine whether voters who filled out affidavit ballots on Tuesday would be eligible for their votes to be counted.

    At another location, election workers gathered in a cavernous, warehouse-like room and, one by one, uploaded memory cards from voting booths across the upper Manhattan congressional district onto computers in hope of coming to a final vote tally that, to this point, has been elusive.

    How the fate of a congressman who was once one of the most powerful officials in Washington came to be decided under banana republic circumstances is a question that has baffled even seasoned New York pols.

    “How can it be that two days after the primary, things are such a mess? Is this how a democracy functions?” Ruben Diaz Sr., a state senator from the Bronx who was neutral in the race, wrote in an essay published in local papers Friday. “Will this mean that from now on, candidates will have to wait two or three days before conceding the seat, or do we have to send the people from the Board of Elections to a counting and additions course?”

    http://dyn.politico.com/printstory.cfm?uuid=0CF5F050-D321-484F-A9AF-CD9356209F3B

    …………………………………

    Have the AA’s in the district tried to pull a fast one to win over the hispanic.

  6. If there has been any dodgy fraud dealings in this race between the hispanics and the AA’s in NY, the shit will hit the fan.

  7. Whatever happens the whole race is tainted, open hostility has broken out and the hispanics in NY13 suspect rampant voter fraud on their hispanic candidate for the seat. This could be a nightmare.

  8. http://thehill.com/homenews/house/235747-vulnerable-republicans-backing-repeat-healthcare-repeal-vote

    House Republicans in tight races this fall say they are on board with the leadership’s plan to hold a repeat vote to repeal the 2010 healthcare law, even though they acknowledge it won’t go anywhere in the Senate.

    In an election season when every floor vote is scrutinized for its political impact, the decision by the leadership to forge ahead – with the encouragement of its most vulnerable members – underscores how confident the GOP is that the law remains unpopular with the public. [snip]

    Rep. Tom Rooney (R-Fla.) said the GOP had argued consistently that the healthcare law hamstrings businesses and that the repeal push was “completely connected to jobs and the economy.”

    Other Republicans said a second repeal vote was justified by the high court’s holding that the individual mandate at the center of the healthcare law was a tax – contradicting the longstanding political position of the Obama administration and congressional Democrats.

    This is a huge tax increase. It was not sold that way, so they misled the American public when they said it wasn’t a tax increase,” said Rep. Denny Rehberg (R-Mont.), who is challenging Sen. Jon Tester (D) in a critical Senate race.

    “So it is a good use of our time. I think any way we can stand with the American people against this huge tax increase we ought to do.”

    Rep. Bobby Schilling (R-Ill.), whose re-election race is considered a toss-up, said the tax ruling changed the political equation.

    “Now you’re going to put people on record saying they want to go ahead and tax the American people,” he said, “because when you voted the last time, it didn’t have the tax. It was a mandate. Now it’s confirmed that it’s a tax.”

  9. Greatest ad now spreading to Florida:

    http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2012/06/29/game-on-in-florida-romneys-first-general-election-ads-go-up/

    (CNN) – Mitt Romney’s campaign bought its first ad spots in Florida since he became the presumptive Republican nominee for president, according to a GOP ad buying source.

    The campaign is spending $631,685 on ads that began airing Friday in four of the ten Florida media markets – Tampa, Orlando, Jacksonville, and Ft. Myers. They represent essential battleground territories as Romney will need to win Florida’s 29 electoral votes this November.

    Featured in the spot that airs until July 3rd is the president’s former opponent – Hillary Clinton. Using footage from a 2008 press conference, the Romney campaign accuses the president’s team this year of dishonest tactics a charge similar to one from Clinton four years ago.

  10. admin
    June 30th, 2012 at 5:26 pm
    ————————————————–

    somewhere out there, i hear a very loud cackle.

  11. SEND THIS TO ALL YOUR FRIENDS THAT DON’T THINK OBAMACARE WILL AFFECT THEM

    Stephen Moore, an economist with the Wall Street Journal, appeared on Fox News recently to discuss the ramifications of the president’s new health care law…and his analysis is sure to come as a shock to those who haven’t been following the matter closely.

    Though Barack Obama assured the middle class he would not raise taxes on those making less than $200,000 a year, Moore’s research shows that in reality, a significant percentage of the burden will be shouldered by those making $120,000 or less by the year 2016.

    The link: http://www.theblaze.com/stories/wsj-economist-brunt-of-obamacare-costs-will-be-shouldered-by-those-making-under-120k/

  12. The Star Spangled Banner has been been referred to by Daniel Tosh, a comedian, as “it blows” and by a liberal radio Bill Press as embarrassing and he’s on a crusade to get rid of it.

    PLEASE go listen to this rendition of the Star Spangled Banner by a group called Madison Rising. They would like a million hits on YouTube by the election of November 6th. LET’S SUPPORT THEM. Brought a tear to my eye.


  13. big thumbs up, admin…agree…rove and crew must always include voiceovers…

    also start targeting the seniors and young women and men who are going to be saddled their entire life with this health care scam…whether they want it or not…and they should also target the AA community because I will bet my last buck that many have no idea they are going to have to pay for this or get penalities from O

    …also MR and crew need to start preparing ads that will scream out that the IRS will be controlling your life with Otax…and also MR should include the thousands of new people that will be employed at the IRS to monitor everyone and their health TAX!!!!

  14. ‘Many are taking issue with our point of view on this. Roberts pulled off one of the great constitutional finesses of all time and politically gave Barack Obama a radioactive enema but that apparently is not enough for some.’

    admin,

    As one who does not favor Roberts’ ruling I would like to point out that is in no way a critique of your POV. As always, this site remains a beacon for the truth.

    Personally, I am sure you are quite right that the ruling can and most likely will prove disastrous to BO and advantageous to the anti-BO contingent and for that I am thrilled.

    But I am not a politician or involved in political campaigns and so while I understand the long-term benefits possible from Roberts’ ruling I feel betrayed by the blatant lies and astonishing distortion of fact, truth and trust in his decision.

    I am no constitutionalist, no lawyer, no analyst but my gut and my common sense screams it is a bogus decision crafted from the slimmest of evidence and imposed on the American people with the same regal imperiousness that BO flaunts.

    I am dismayed there is, apparently, nowhere to turn for even a modicum of justice and for that reason and because I despise liars, verbal contortionists, propagandists and brainwashers above all else I hope Roberts rots for his treachery,

    I don’t care if he was bullied, threatened, on meds or hungry for approval from the Washington elite, he has made it impossible for many to have any faith in the judicial branch.

    Add his decision on the ACA to the rulings on Arizona, the DOJ’s refusal to prosecute Holder to BO’s flagrant disregard for the country and I am beyond sickened.
    Worse of all, for me, is not only the rewriting of the law but the invention of new meanings for words like tax, penalty and mandate all of which apparently now have the same definitions.

    I find that horrifying. If people can’t rely on their understanding of what words mean then honest communication is impossible.

    I hope that in future legislation lawyers are careful to differentiate specifically what the meaning of tax, penalty, mandate and other words are to preempt the false associations.

    Words matter.

    “Congress may not be able to directly force us to buy electric cars, eat organic kale, or replace oil heaters with solar panels. But if it enforces the mandates with a financial penalty then suddenly, thanks to Justice Roberts’s tortured reasoning . . . the mandate is transformed into a constitutional exercise of Congress’s power to tax.” John Woo, WSJ.

    Could it turn out well for the anti-BO’s – yes. But even if this action puts a nail in the coffin for his re(s)election I will never agree with the process. The end doesn’t always justify the means. And I am not pouting or petulant. Just saddened and dismayed at the betrayal.

    But that doesn’t mean I don’t have the ultimate respect for your words of wisdom.

  15. admin,

    Bravo for this. It has long been a sore-point for me.

    “The way many people watch ads, even Internet ads, is by using their eyes and ears. Yes, the primary stimulus is visual, but surrendering the auditory line of attack and providing Barack Obama the audio propagation of his message is counterproductive.

    Televised ads are even more dangerous when this clever/mocking tactic is employed. Television ads are often heard, not seen.”

  16. I know alot of Americans wanted Roberts to blow Obamacare away, but I think he did the best thing. It really is not his place to be the 1 deciding vote on the matter and it should be tossed back to the American people through their elected officials.

    We will now have to choose between what is offered. But it seems larger than ObamaTaxCare to me. I wonder about those “unitemized” donations and where they really come from. I came across the following video and it gives me the willies. Somebody thell me it is not so: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ip4t0is1_Eo&feature=player_embedded

  17. the invention of new meanings for words like tax, penalty and mandate all of which apparently now have the same definitions.

    =================

    I haven’t been keeping up with this decision in detail (Admin’s take seems reasonable to me). But I wonder if there could be some confusion in antecedents here. Did Roberts really say the money paid to the insurance companies is a ‘tax’? Or did he just say that the money paid to the IRS for NOT buying insurance, ie the ‘penalty’, will be a ‘tax’?

  18. Democrats in default…..if they can’t even run their own finances…….

    Democratic convention changes renew concerns about financial risk to backers

    The decision this week by the host committee of the Democratic National Convention to scrap a major event has sparked new concerns about the committee’s financial situation — including a $10 million line of credit and a utility company’s connection to the deal.

    Stimulus-backed Duke Energy Corp. last year agreed to guarantee the line of credit for the party affair. This decision was a big help for the organizers, as the credit line was required by the Democratic National Committee. But it also came with a risk for Duke Energy’s shareholders.

    If the host committee defaults, the shareholders, and not ratepayers, would be on the hook for the loss.

    “It’s clear the convention is facing some economic uncertainty,” said Tom Borelli a senior fellow at the conservative FreedomWorks, who complained that the deal has left shareholders at risk even though they did not make the decision to guarantee the credit line.

    http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/06/30/reports-about-democratic-convention-changes-fundraising-renew-financial/

  19. Hey campers! Happy Half Year!!! (ya know, july 1st).

    Also, Tour de France has started, today with the “First stage”, which is not the first stage, but it’s called the Prolouge.

    Much the way it is way other symantec sophistries, such as:

    Obamacare is not funded by a “tax” (although that’s what 5 of the 9 Supremes snuck it over the goal line using that terminology);

    it’s not a “penalty” (except when Obama has to say it is, even though it was BAD when Hillary proposed mandates);

    It’s just goodness and mother pie, that “someone” will have to pay for.

    Jeesh, pity (or not!) the poor mother fuckers in the Obummer campaign who will have to try to rally the troops or come up with ads to defend Obummer’s Rube Goldberg of a law.

    Jim Messina: “So is it a tax? We can’t call it a tax, right?”

    Axlerod: “Right. But we can’t call it a penalty either. He was against that in 2008.”

    JM: “So…”

    DA: “Hmmm…”

    JM: “Grrrrr….

    DA: “I need a drink.”

    JM: “I think we’re just left with name calling and questioning if Romney is truly American born and highlighting concerns about the first Mormon president”.

    DA: “Yeah, that’s all we got. Certainly can’t talk about the fucking economy.”

    JM: “Hey, wanna talk about dead triple-voters in inner cities?”

    DA: “Just don’t mention ACORN. Let’s refer to them as NUTS… Neighborhood United Truth Squads.”

    JM: “NUTS to you!!”

    DA: “Ahh…it’s going to be a tough few months”.

  20. moononpluto
    June 30th, 2012 at 8:20 pm

    Democrats in default…..if they can’t even run their own finances…….

    Democratic convention changes renew concerns about financial risk to backers
    &&&&&&

    How many people want to foot the bill and/or show up to the Big Party for the Local Neighborhood Bully? The same bully who is not even competent in his job as Head Bully.

    So people are backing out, Dems suddenly announce they have “other plans”, sponsors suddenly say “we have to do right by our share holders”. Poor Obummer, with his little party hat on, the Grand Britney pillars still in place, festooned with balloons but the place half-empty, Mee-shell yelling:

    “I have on my best sleeveless gown, and for this shit? Place fuckin’ half empty, you idiot handlers couldn’t even get enough black folks here? I’m going to need a REALLY expensive vacation, because I don’t know if I’m going to be on the public dime after January. Yes, uh-huh, bru-tha, I’m reading the polls, I know they already have a 10 point slant, and you and whats-his-face are like fucking tied.”

    Ah, the Democratic National Convention…. when a democracy celebrates one of its two major parties “selecting” their standard bearer. At this patriotic time of the year, why, it simply makes me well up…

  21. Hard cases make bad law, as the saying goes.

    And so it was with Obama care.

    FROM A LEGAL STANDPOINT, it is an unmitigated disaster. It provides a roadmap for the unprecedented expansion of federal power, and the concominant destruction of the old republic.

    FROM A POLITICAL STANDPOING, it is manna from heaven for the Republican Party. Admin has explained quite nicely as Admina aways does why this is so.

    The part of this that interests me is the irony of it all.

    First, Obama wanted this case decided before the election. Why? Because he expected to lose. Why would he want to lose? Because that would allow him to claim credit for the act, blame republicans for its defeat, and thereby avoid a reprise of the mid-term defeat. Simply put, he wanted to lose so he could campaign in exactly this manner.

    Second, Roberts is not some brilliant strategist who figured all this out. He is a moral coward, and if you do not believe me ask his colleagues, or better yet read the Kennedy dissent. Roberts was very sensitive to the attacks levied against him by the New York Times. Therefore, he was determined to find a way to uphold the act, and thereby avoid the Bush vs Gore dilemma. His decision reminded me of the late great chief justice Rober Tanney.

    Romney came out of this whole thing smelling like a rose. He calls it a tax. Meanwhile, Obama says it is not a tax, then send his solicitor general in to argue that it is a tax, the court rule it is a tax, and Obama sends his campaign operative out to argue that it is not a tax.

    In sum, what I see here is a comedy of errors worth of either Shakespeare–or Groucho Marx.

  22. I just completed reading The Amateur–which was the talk of Washington, and one of the many subjects that big media refuses to tell it viewing audience about because it shows Obama for what he is. That much is a given. But nobody is analyzing the motives of the 200 people who consented to be interviesed by Ed Klein, and that is the question that most interests me. Two points in that respect are salient.

    First, a number of these people are examples of the lover scorned, therefore they want tell us how ungrateful Obama is, that he will not so much as return their phone calls. But the larger point is these people are sending a signal to Obama that he has better pay attention to them. These people are not interested in justice. All they are really interested in his power. And Jarrett who is running the country today, as much as anyone is, and denying them the place they believe they deserve at the table.

    Second, a few of them are using the interview to create a politically useful narrative for themselves. Case in point, the discussion between Bill and Hillary about whether she should run against Obama. It was no accident that this discussion was conducted before witnesses. The subtext reads, I am loyal to the party come what may. That is intended to reassure senior officials who betrayed her that they would not be subjected to a vendetta if she again aspires to the presidency. The other thing that did not ring true was the assertion that Obama micromanages foreign policy, ergo whatever bad happens is his doing. Suffice it to say, Obama is no manager. How then could he possibly be a micromanger?

  23. PLEASE folks, scroll up and listen to the version of the Star Spangled Banner I posted at 6:24 p.m.

    It made me feel better because there are still young people out there who love our country and are fighting for it any way they can including making music. Listening to it and watching the images me me even more proud of our Great America.

    I can sense everyone here on the blog is down in the dumps and I know it sure made me feel a little hope for this country.

  24. YHEITMAN,

    Ummmmmmm . . . Not crazy about that botched version of the National Anthem. Optics are good but I don’t like the musical arrangement at all. That may be because I am a musician partial to more stylistically accurate renditions of great classics, especially National Anthems.

    Guess that makes me a conservative. I feel the same way with botched interpretations of the constitution.

    😉

  25. yheitman July 1st, 2012 at 4:15 am It made me feel better because there are still young people out there who love our country and are fighting for it any way they can including making music
    ———————–
    You make an excellent point as to their enthusiasm; that is good news. Thanks for bringing it the the fore. However with rare exception, I’m another who appreciates music performed as it was written. Borrowing from Amadeus the movie and paraphrasing, our National Anthem is perfect just as was written.

  26. Obama bundler has ambassador nomination withdrawn after DUI and arrest.

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2166951/Timothy-Broas-White-House-pulls-ambassador-nominee-facing-drunk-driving-charges-hes-raised-500-000-Obama.html

    The White House has withdrawn the nomination of a top Obama campaign fundraiser for the Netherlands ambassador post after he was charged with DUI and resisting arrest.

    In Thursday’s announcement White House officials did explain why they were withdrawing Washington attorney Timothy M Broas as nominee.

    However the next day, the Center for Public Integrity reported that the 58-year-old had been pulled over by Maryland police at 1am on June 19 and charged with ‘attempting to drive [a] vehicle while under the influence of alcohol’.

    He also faces a charge a resisting arrest and was cited for driving 47 mph in a 35 mph zone, according to court records.

    Broas, who was announced as Obama’s nominee in April, has raised more than $500,000 for Obama’s re-election efforts.

    Only 117 fundraisers have raised this much.

    Broas, a partner at Winston & Strawn law firm, also raised between $200,000 and $500,000 for Obama’s 2008 campaign, reported the Center for Public Integrity.

    Debra Reed, a spokeswoman from the White House, refused to go into details only saying that Broas ‘withdrew his nomination for personal reasons’.

    She added that Broas believed his charges would be resolved ‘under the transportation code’.
    asdf

    Fundraiser: Broas, who was announced as Obama¿s nominee in April, has raised more than $500,000 for President Obama¿s re-election efforts. The Washington attorney also raised between $200,00 and $500,000 for Obama’s 2008 campaign

    Broas’ trial date has been set for August 6 in Rockville, Maryland.

    The attorney was praised by Chairman John Kerry, D-Mass when he appeared before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on June 13.

    Introducing Broas as a ‘quintessential family man’ Kerry continued that he ‘embodies not just the accomplishments to which every American should aspire, but he is a living example of the kind of compassion and strength that we expect from our nation’s diplomats.’

    In December 2010, Obama nominated Broas to serve as a trustee for the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, a Washington-based think tank.

    According to his official biography, Broas was named in the last three editions of Best Lawyers in America. He specialises in white-collar criminal defence.

  27. Florida says NO.

    Gov. Scott Says Fla. Won’t Comply with Health Care Law
    The governor announced Friday night the state would not expand the Medicaid program to lower number of uninsured residents

    http://www.nbcmiami.com/news/local/Gov-Scott-Says-Fla-Wont-Comply-with-Health-Care-Law-160943495.html

    Florida Gov. Rick Scott now says Florida will do nothing to comply with President Barack Obama’s health care overhaul and will not expand its Medicaid program. The announcement is a marked changed after the governor recently said he would follow the law if it were upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court.

    “Florida is not going to implement Obamacare. We are not going to expand Medicaid and we’re not going to implement exchanges,” Scott’s spokesman Lane Wright told The Associated Press on Saturday. Wright stressed that the governor would work to make sure the law is repealed.

    Scott told Fox News the Medicaid expansion would cost Florida taxpayers $1.9 billion a year, but it’s unclear how he arrived at that figure.

    Scott said the state will not expand the Medicaid program in order to lower the number of uninsured residents, nor will Florida set up a state-run health exchange, a marketplace where people who need insurance policies could shop for them.

    ………………………….

    Is Obama gonna go to war again with Florida/

  28. The morning talk shows…MTP and FOX News Sunday have Democrats on with the same talking point. THe people will not want to go backwards and keep fighting an old fight about Obamacare. Now it is time to move forward and talk about the economy.

  29. Obama complains Romney isn’t McCain.

    http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/06/30/exclusive-president-obama-asks-campaign-donors-to-send-him-more-money.html

    Exclusive: President Obama Asks Campaign Donors to Send Him More Money

    In an anxious conference call from Air Force One, Obama asked campaign donors to send more money. Lloyd Grove obtained the tape and describes the presidential pitch.

    President Obama sounded weary and maybe a tad worried late Friday during a rambling conference call with campaign donors whom he repeatedly begged to send money—and send it now. [snip]

    In his most detailed assessment of the race so far, Obama lamented the cash advantage of Republican nominee-designate Mitt Romney, but offered hope that he could win reelection with a superior ground game and a more popular message. “We don’t have to match these guys dollar for dollar because we’ve got a better grassroots operation and we’ve got a better message,” he said. “The American people—the nice thing is they agree with our message when they hear it. We just can’t be drowned out … A few billionaires can’t drown out millions of voices.”

    Obama noted that campaign-finance law requires both him and Romney to release monthly reports on fundraising—“and that could be a double-edged sword,” he said. “The downside is that the media hear these numbers and hyperventilate over it, and there’s a tendency to blow them out of proportion. But it does make the process more transparent. We see where we stand. And right now on a month-to-month basis, we’ve fallen behind.”

    The president added: “Last month the Romney campaign raised $76 million. We raised $60 million.” That determines “our planning for whether or not we are gonna go on the air in Florida or Ohio or any of these battleground states, how much advertising we buy, what we spend when it comes to organizing teams.”

    He added: “The truth is that early money is always more valuable than late money. And what we don’t want to do is be in a situation where, because everybody thinks that somehow we’re gonna win or people will just think Mr. Romney doesn’t know what he’s talking about—and then suddenly we get surprised later because it turns out that a couple of billionaires wrote $20 million checks and have bought all the TV time and we find ourselves flat-footed in September or October … We’ve got to make sure that we purchase advertising through August and September before the conventions,” he went on. “I think it’s fair to say that if we wait till the last minute we could be in for a pretty rude surprise, and that’s part of what we’re trying to avoid.” [snip]

    Obama contrasted the former Massachusetts governor unfavorably with Sen. John McCain of Arizona, the Republican nominee last time around. “We’re facing a much different opponent than last time,” the president warned. “I don’t mean just the candidate—although last time we were running against somebody who at least believed in climate change, believed in campaign-finance reform, believed in immigration reform.”

  30. And I might add that I’ve not seen Chuck Todd and Eugene Robinson in a long time. Now I remember why I never watch NBC!

  31. Southern Born quoting Dems: Now it is time to move forward
    ——————
    They were saying the same thing 4 years ago about BO nomination.
    Now it’s about BO Healthcare.
    Always about BO.
    BO always something we are supposed to get over.

  32. Florida Gov. Rick Scott now says Florida will do nothing to comply with President Barack Obama’s health care overhaul and will not expand its Medicaid program.
    ———————————-
    Like Obama will do nothing to allow Arizona to enforce immigration laws.

    What is Washington really, but a bunch of self serving asshole lawyers, bureacrats, staffers, think tanks, left wing organizations, ivy league remittance men, big media whores and academics with this to the manor borne attiude.

    Yes, they have leverage, but only up to the point that it does not blow back in their faces. Where would this group of deities be if the country as a whole, or the states, or the people took the position that we will comply with none of you edicts.

    In the final analysis, the notion of comity which exists wholly apart from the Supremacy clause, creates friction in the system, and if there is enough friction the gears will jam. The feds would do well to learn from the Mafia expression–everybody’s got to eat.

    Any more, these people are so drunk on power that they do not get it.

  33. We don’t have to match these guys dollar for dollar because we’ve got a better grassroots operation and we’ve got a better message,” he said. “The American people—the nice thing is they agree with our message when they hear it. We just can’t be drowned out … A few billionaires can’t drown out millions of voices.”

    ——————
    a better message? Like um er bankruptcy? Like American decline? Like racism? Where is this better message which the messiah is referring to? Which billionaires is the messiah referring to? Soros? Pearlman? Lewis? Couldn’t be now could it? They are Obama scumbags. A better grassroots operation or a program to cheat?

  34. Somewhat healthcare related: The New York Times has a very interesting article by Gary Taubes called “What Really Makes Us Fat”. Conclusion: carbohydrates.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/01/opinion/sunday/what-really-makes-us-fat.html?ref=opinion

    The fewer carbohydrates we eat, the more easily we remain lean. The more carbohydrates, the more difficult. In other words, carbohydrates are fattening, and obesity is a fat-storage defect. What matters, then, is the quantity and quality of carbohydrates we consume and their effect on insulin.

    From this perspective, the trial suggests that among the bad decisions we can make to maintain our weight is exactly what the government and medical organizations like the American Heart Association have been telling us to do: eat low-fat, carbohydrate-rich diets, even if those diets include whole grains and fruits and vegetables.

    A controversial conclusion? Absolutely, and Dr. Ludwig’s results are by no means ironclad. The diets should be fed for far longer than one month, something he hopes to do in a follow-up study. As in any science, these experiments should be replicated by independent investigators. We’ve been arguing about this for over a century. Let’s put it to rest with more good science. The public health implications are enormous.

  35. Just saw this comment at a blog I frequent.
    This line of questioning was available long before this ruling and without the America-killing, irrational decision by Benedict Roberts. The fact that the media would have waited until after the SCOTASS decision that turned the United States into the American Socialist Superstate is just one more bit of evidence to their utter and complete lack of competence or integrity. Verilli made this argument some time back and no one in the media bothered to hop on it. Only now, when it’s too late and when the word “tax” has been so stretched, perverted and abused by the SCOTASS (when it no longer matters) do these idiots finally happen upon the bald-faced lies of this administration (just one more in the constant stream of ridiculous and intellectually offensive lies that have poured out the Dog-Eater and his administration).

    Thanks for nothing, MSM slime. When it could have mattered, you couldn’t be bothered. When the point is rendered moot and our Constitutional Republic strangled to death you become courageous truth-tellers.

  36. wbboei
    July 1st, 2012 at 2:50 am

    Hard cases make bad law, as the saying goes.

    ——
    I agree with your perception on this wbb, and I agree with admin that this situation of the mandate being called a ‘tax’ is kicking the tin halo off of Barry’s noggin.

    I do not see Roberts as some sort of brilliant double agent either.

  37. The war in NY13 heats up.

    Rangels lead dips to 800 and still over 3000 ballots “missing”.

    http://www.politico.com/blogs/burns-haberman/2012/06/rangels-lead-shrinks-127804.html

    After a re-examination of the votes, the New York City Board of Elections released unofficial results tonight including votes cast in all of the district’s 506 precincts that show Mr. Rangel defeating Mr. Espaillat by a margin of just 802 votes. According to the BOE, Mr. Rangel received 18,075 votes, or 44.29 percent of the total cast, compared to Mr. Espaillat’s 17,273, 42.33 percent of the votes cast. These unofficial results do not include paper affidavit ballots cast by absentee voters and those whose name is not on the voter rolls when they arrive at the polling place. Those paper ballots, which include votes for both candidates, will be counted by the BOE next Thursday and will be the deciding factor in this tight race.

    Espaillat’s camp claims there are over 3,000 paper ballots, and that they’re mostly from election districts that would favor the challenger. A lead of 802 votes is still a lot to overcome. But the process in this post-election count has been messy.

    ……………………….

    The hispanics in NY13 are really not happy as to what has gone on up there.

  38. moononpluto
    July 1st, 2012 at 9:21 am

    Florida says NO.

    Gov. Scott Says Fla. Won’t Comply with Health Care Law
    The governor announced Friday night the state would not expand the Medicaid program to lower number of uninsured residents

    ———–
    And this is the spark that is going to ignite a huge bonfire of states that will not participate in the HellCare Plan, and will therefore make it financially unaffordable. Without a massive amount of participants in this scamPlan it will not be able to support itself and will become the rabbit hole for billions of our tax dollars.

    I hope Mitt is getting lots of coaching from Trump on hard-hitting this issue.

  39. admin

    In an anxious conference call from Air Force One, Obama asked campaign donors to send more money.

    —-
    I can also tell by the floor of spam emails from the DNC that Barry and his gang are really, really worried.

    They should be. They lost the votes of half of their party and have driven the bus over the cliff.

  40. This is turning into a complete cluster for the Dems, they are chasing their tails and getting all in a flap, it looks duplicitous and looks shady everytime they try and spin it. Jack Lew absolutely fluffed it this morning. This ruling is nothing short of a disaster for Dems, i really think Obama thought it was gonna be thrown out.

    http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/07/01/Obama-team-Obamacare-still-not-a-tax

    Obama Team: Obamacare Still Not A Tax

    The only legal peg on which Chief Justice Roberts was able to hang his hat in ruling Obamacare constitutional was a broad reading of the Taxing Clause. In order to do so, he had to deliberately misread the Obamacare law; had he not done so, the law would have been struck down as a violation of the Commerce Clause.

    Nonetheless, the Obama administration insists that Obamacare isn’t a tax.

    The latest Obama spokesperson to deny Roberts’ logic and essentially admit that Obamacare is unconstitutional is Jack Lew, the White House Chief of Staff. This morning, he appeared on CNN to explain:

    First of all, the law is clear, it’s called a penalty. Second of all, what the Supreme Court ruled is that the law is constitutional. Actually, they didn’t call it a tax. They said it was using the power under the constitution that permits it. It was not labeled.

    This is, simply put, a lie. Lew’s first two sentences are in direct conflict with one another. The law is clear – it’s called a penalty. But if the administration is going to stand by its original construction of the statute, they can’t then claim that the Supreme Court ruled it constitutional on their basis. The notion that the Supreme Court ruled the statute constitutional without any specific basis is simply false. Lew continued:

    This is a penalty. It’s something that only 1 percent of people who can afford insurance and choose not to get it will pay. Everyone who has insurance, everyone who chooses to buy insurance will not pay it. What they’re going to get is security — they’re going to get lower premiums and better health care. That’s a good thing for the American people.

    It’s also a lie that a tiny percentage of the population will pay the penalty. The fact is that under the new Obamacare regime, millions will opt for the penalty, simply because there’s no purpose to paying $1,500 per year for health insurance when you can pay a $750 penalty, wait to get sick, then jump on a federally-mandated health plan. And it’s also a lie that we’re all going to get lower premiums and better health care. Who’s going to pay for that? And how are we going to achieve that if the insurance companies are forced to bear the brunt of restrictions that force them to take those with pre-existing conditions, charge men and women equally, do away with coverage limits?

    The key here is that the Obama administration is now caught between a rock and a hard place. They can either admit that this is an unconstitutional seizure of individual liberty (i.e. it’s a mandate) or they can admit that the statute is the single largest tax increase in world history. Neither position will be attractive to voters.

  41. What planet is Chuckles on, they are even lying about the polls now.

    http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/235803-schumer-gop-wont-win-house-senate-or-presidency-if-they-push-repeal-efforts

    Sen. Charles Schumer on Sunday warned Republicans that they would suffer at the polls if they continued to push for a repeal of the president’s healthcare reform bill.

    “If Republicans make that their number one issue, the repeal of healthcare, they are certainly going to lose the election, in the House and the Senate and the presidency,” said Schumer on CBS’s “Face the Nation”.

    “Bottom line is most Americans are not for repeal. If you look at all the polls, a little more than a third are for repeal,” he said.

    Congressional Republicans and GOP presidential candidate have vowed to undo the law, after the Supreme Court upheld much if the Affordable Care Act in a 4-4 ruling Thursday.

    A House vote on repeal is expectd on July 11 and Sen. Minority Leader Mitch McConnell said Sunday that senators will need only 51 votes under reconciliation to repeal the health law after the high court said a central provision, the individual mandate, was constitutional under Congress’s taxing powers.

    Schumer though cautioned Republicans that calling for full repeal would kill many popular provisions in the bill, including many that GOP lawmakers backed.

    “The bill overall people do not want repealed,” insisted Schumer.

    House Speaker John Boehner on Sunday said he supported full repeal despite the presence of some “good” measures in the legislation. He promised that lawmakers would take up those individual provisions through a “step-by-step” approach, but only after the full law was voided.

    Also appearing on CBS, Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) reiterated GOP criticisms of the bill, saying it was fundamentally flawed and did little to address the real issues with healthcare.

    “The disease is healthcare costs too much and with the Affordable Care Act it’s going to cost a whole lot more,” said Coburn. “Now the estimate with the Supreme Court ruling is about $1.9 trillion.”

    We have to fix the problems not the symptoms and you’re hearing all this politics about it, what we should have is real access and real care for people without an insurance company or the government between the patient and the physican. We’ve not done that with this bill and a lot of the programs that are out there today don’t do it and we need to change healthcare in America, but what we’ve done is make the problem worse not better,” he added.

    The Oklahoma senator also defended his statement made last week to a local state newspaper that the healthcare reform bill would “Sovietize” medicine in the U.S.

    Asked about those remarks, Coburn responded, “that means that the bureaucrats and politicians are in charge of your healthcare and that’s exactly what this has done. There’s not going to be individual choice. “

    Schumer said that GOP lawmakers should shift their attention from healthcare to passing measures to help boost the economy.

    “The number one thing people want us to focus on is jobs, the economy, increase middle class paychecks,” Schumer said. “The GOP is in a box, the Tea Party is pulling them over to talk about repeal, that’s only six or seven in the polls. The economy, jobs, paychecks number one.”

    “The way we get back to Congress it’s going to be a great contrast,” he said. “They are going to vote on repeal of healthcare, litigating a battle that’s been going on for four years that the American people want us to move on and we are going to put forward a small business jobs tax cut.”

    Schumer also took a shot at GOP claims that the healthcare bill was a tax increase. “Mitt Romney’s in a total pickle here. He prescribed this. This was his bill,” said Schumer, referring to the healthcare reform package Romney signed as governor of Massachusetts. “Speaker Boehner is saying it’s a tax increase… are they going to say that Mitt Romney passed the biggest tax increase in Massachusetts? Forget about it.”

    Democrats have rebuffed Romney’s criticisms of the president’s healthcare plan, by claiming the reforms he implemented in Massachusetts were a blueprint for the administration. Romney though has said that he never intended those measures to be implemented nationally.

    ………………………………………………….

    Hello …………………Schumer today “Bottom line is most Americans are not for repeal. If you look at all the polls, a little more than a third are for repeal,” he said.

    Er i think you’ll find about 60% want it repealed, is he just a liar or stupid.

  42. There was a poll I saw on the MSN homepage day before yesterday and the split was 60/32/8. There were 392,000+ votes when I last saw it and it was 60% against it, 32% for it, and 8% undecided. MSN is liberal and when they post political articles and you go to the comments after the article, the comments are 80%-90% pro-Obama so I was pretty surprised by the poll numbers. 392,000+ people is a pretty good sampling and if the MSN homepage is as liberal as I think it is, does that mean that the percentage of people against the Obamataxcare bill is must higher than 60%? I think the Gallup poll which I think I saw yesterday morning that shows the split at 46/46 is completely incorrect.

    Even if that 60% is about right, that puts Romney’s chances of winning this election pretty high in my book. Just my opinion.

  43. While I agree with admin’s conclusion that the SC constitutionalizing the ACA is a potential detriment of BO I still believe that the decision harms the anti-BO brigade more than it hurts the POS.

    To begin with, the repubs now have to basically hit the trifecta – win the houses, senate and presidency in order to have a chance to repeal the bill. That is possible but a real stretch.

    If, on the other hand, the SC had done the right thing, invalidating the ACA on the basis of the unconstitutnality of the mandate based on the commerce clause BO would have been forced to take up the measure again, as a tax, and there is no way in he11 it would have passed now just as it did not in 2010 without a lot of bribing, kickbacks, arm twisting and threats.

    The bill is a monstrosity. Medicare will be stripped of half a billion in order to fund Medicaid. The nations’ senior citizens who paid all their lives into the system will be forced to pay for those who have not while simultaneously seeing their own car erode, the wait times to see doctors increase and the services they now receive diminished.

    By funneling money to the younger portion of the population while stripping money from retirees the bill promotes and supports ageism.

    Additionally, the young people who do have jobs will now have to buy insurance even though many of them need nothing more than catastrophic coverage.

    Personally, I didn’t have insurance until I was close to 40 because I didn’t need it. If I had had to pay for it during my younger years it would have cut into my ability to pay for food and shelter.

    So by passing the law and making it constitutional the SC has trapped millions of younger adults into decades of subsidizing care for the 50% of people who don’t pay taxes, illegal immigrants and millions with no incentive to do anything other than live on the government dole.

    And the idiots who try to be responsible and do the right thing are screwed.

  44. “If Republicans make that their number one issue, the repeal of healthcare, they are certainly going to lose the election, in the House and the Senate and the presidency,” said Schumer on CBS’s “Face the Nation”.
    —————————
    Why would Senator Slimeball (D-NY) say that Republicans are “certainly going to lose the election” if they make the repeal of health care (by which he means Obamacare which has been shown to raise costs and limit coverage) the central issue of the campaign? Logic suggest two possible reasons for this:

    Either-

    Senator Slimeball Schumer is bi-partisan, knows Obama is all fucked up, wants the Republicans to win the election for the good of the nation. Consequently, he is simply giving them helpful advise to demonstrate his bona fides,

    Or

    Senator Slimeball Schumer is scared to death of the issue, and knows that his party cannot win if the election becomes a referendum on Obamacare.

    Since Slimeball Schumer is known to be a bottomfeeder, backstabber etc. logic suggests the second possibility. Put differently, he has no bona fides/

  45. Obama ran on healthcare in 2010…..look where that got them, biggest losses in decades.

  46. Hahahaha Shadwofax.

    I was wondering what the heck that was. Maybe a newly invented phrase to refer to something which has long been known as a different word?

    “I can also tell by the floor of spam emails”

    Anyway, I am not on the dims email radar so could you share a couple?

  47. BASIL99
    July 1st, 2012 at 2:07 pm
    —————–
    Agreed. However, if Obama is defeated, you will find a few Democrat senators–Manchin for example, who will cross the line and vote it down–if there are recipricol assurances that the policy issues which gave rise to it are being addressed in a more responsible fashion. This is why this campaign must be about Obamacare.

  48. I can see Manchin actually crossing the floor and joining the republicans in Jan if they take over the senate.

  49. Basil, here is one of the emails I posted on the last thread.

    ——-
    Shadowfax
    June 29th, 2012 at 6:54 pm

    Okay, I posted the weeping email from Joe above and thought that was the most pitiful of emails to try and get money for his bro Barack…but this one takes the freakin’ cake!!

    This one is from the damned DCCC:

    Hi xxxxxxxxxxx –

    We’re reviewing our Democratic supporter records in advance of tomorrow’s Federal Election Commission (FEC) deadline. Your record is copied and pasted below:

    Supporter record: xxxxxxxx
    Name: xxxx xxxxxx
    2012 Online Support: Pending
    Suggested support: $3.00

    If you’re planning to contribute to our campaign to win a Democratic Majority for President Obama, it’s critical that you make your donation in the next 24 hours. Tomorrow is the midyear FEC reporting deadline of the 2012 general election. We’re relying on your support: 80% of our contributions are $35 or less.

    You can click this personalized link to make your contribution of $3 or more today >>

    Thanks for standing with us.

    Brandon English
    DCCC Digital Director

    P.S. Our records show your email address as xxxxxxx. If you’ve made a contribution offline or our records are incorrect, and you have made a recent online donation, please click here to let us know.

  50. wbboei,

    IF:

    “If if’s and and’s were pots and pans, there’d surely be dishes to do.”

    “If wishes were horses, beggars would ride”

    “If wishes were fishes we’d all cast nets.”

    It looks like Roberts’ relied on Cochrane’s defense of Simpson. “If it doesn’t fit you must aquit” translated in Roberts mind to “If we can’t
    pass the bill based on the legal arguments I’ll just rewrite it.”

    Anyway, the IF is a big one here. But had the SC reached the reasonable conclusion that the bill was unconstitutional and thrown it back to congress to rework it as a tax bill BO would have been fatally injured, I believe. Then MR could have pointed out the entire first three years of the presidency was wasted on a pie-in-the-sky scam and had not improved the plight of ordinary Americans on any level, especially economically.

    Even though junkies like those here know much about how the DC sausage is made those who don’t follow the news haven’t a clue. What they’re hearing is, “BO won on healthcare” not Bo LIED about the tax, the congress LIED about the constitutionality of the bill, the dims LIED that its passage would not adversely affect most middle class Americans and that Roberts’ LIED in his ruling while simultaneously implying BO was a liar.

  51. Shadowfax,

    I read that one. Creepy, like they’re stalking former contributors. And what will happen to them if they don’t cough up another contribution?

  52. Admin: I concur wholeheartedly with your advice to the Romney campaign on the ad strategy. So much money is wasted showing over and over that Obama’s campaign promises mean less than nothing. To that people will say all politicians change their mind. But an ad which proves that Obama is not simply inconsistent, but a vicious liar, and invokes as Exhibit A what Obama and his racist Chicago thugs did to Hillary in the primary, and how she responded–that is firing for effect. One ad like that played over and over and over does more good than one hundred ads recouning his inconsistencies, changes in position, etc. The key point is not that he is weak, indecisive and inexperienced, but that he will look you right in the eye and lie through his teeth, and no one can trust a liar, expecially as president. Let the liars at big media respond to that one without lying. For them, that is asking the impossible.

  53. Some good news. No bounce for BO.

    A Rasmussen daily tracking poll showed President Barack Obama did not receive a bounce from the Supreme Court’s ruling upholding Obamacare.

    The November election tracking results are the same after the SCOTUS decision as they were before, according to Rasmussen. Obama received 45 percent of the vote among those surveyed on Sunday and remained tied with Romney.

    The poll also found the anti-Obama intensity among conservatives has increased since the ruling, while the ratings for the Supreme Court actually decreased. According to Rasmussen, 36 percent “said the high court was doing a good or an excellent job” last week. This week, only 33 percent said so. Further, 28 percent said the “court is doing a poor job,” which was up 11 points from last week.

    http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/07/01/No-Bounce-Poll-Shows-Obamacare-Ruling-Did-Not-Help-Obama-Energized-Conservatives

  54. Shadowfax,

    Is this the article you are referring to?

    In a conference call on Friday, conducted from Air Force One, a reportedly tired and weary President Obama pled with donors to send cash now. “The majority on this call maxed out to my campaign last time. I really need you to do the same this time,” Obama said. He continued:

    In 2008 everything was new and exciting about our campaign. And now I’m the incumbent president. I’ve got gray hair. People have seen disappointment because folks had a vision of change happening immediately. And it turns out change is hard, especially when you’ve got an obstructionist Republican Congress.

    Nevertheless, we’ve gotten more done in the last three years than most presidents do in eight years … I just hope you guys haven’t become disillusioned. I hope all of you still understand what’s at stake and why this is so important … I still believe in you guys, and I hope you still believe in me and the possibilities of this campaign …. I can’t do this by myself, and the progress we’ve made could unravel pretty quickly.

    http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/07/01/desperate-Obama-donors-gray-hair

  55. Hmmmmmmmmm………

    Is this true?

    Roberts Switched His Vote in May
    —rdbrewer

    OUT: Arguing your case in court. IN: Lobbying Supreme Court justices.

    Volokh Conspiracy has the transcript of Jan Crawford reporting on CBS Face the Nation that Chief Justice Roberts switched his vote in May.

    I am told by two sources with specific knowledge of the court’s deliberations that Roberts initially sided with the conservatives in this case and was prepared to strike down the heart of this law, the so-called individual mandate, of course, that requires all Americans to buy insurance or pay a penalty. but Roberts, I’m told by my sources, changed his views deciding to instead join with the liberals.

    More from CBS:

    Roberts then withstood a month-long, desperate campaign to bring him back to his original position, the sources said. Ironically, Justice Anthony Kennedy – believed by many conservatives to be the justice most likely to defect and vote for the law – led the effort to try to bring Roberts back to the fold.

    “He was relentless,” one source said of Kennedy’s efforts. “He was very engaged in this.”

    But this time, Roberts held firm. And so the conservatives handed him their own message which, as one justice put it, essentially translated into, “You’re on your own.”

    The conservatives refused to join any aspect of his opinion, including sections with which they agreed, such as his analysis imposing limits on Congress’ power under the Commerce Clause, the sources said.

    Instead, the four joined forces and crafted a highly unusual, unsigned joint dissent. They deliberately ignored Roberts’ decision, the sources said, as if they were no longer even willing to engage with him in debate.

    http://ace.mu.nu/

  56. Anyway, the IF is a big one here. But had the SC reached the reasonable conclusion that the bill was unconstitutional and thrown it back to congress to rework it as a tax bill BO would have been fatally injured, I believe. Then MR could have pointed out the entire first three years of the presidency was wasted on a pie-in-the-sky scam and had not improved the plight of ordinary Americans on any level, especially economically.
    ———————-
    True. But compare that argument to the one we are left with, namely that he forced a huge tax increase on the middle class during a depression. As between the former argument and this one I think this one is more likely to hit home with voters, because it hits them where it hurts–the pocket book.

    .

    The White House insisted Sunday the consequence for Americans not having health insurance is a penalty fee, despite the Supreme Court ruling that it is a tax, and said the debate on the Affordable Care Act should finally end.

    White House Chief of Staff Jack Lew said on “Fox News Sunday” that “when the Supreme Court rules” the country “has a final decision” and that the presidential campaigns should focus on the economy and jobs.

    “What we need to do is go forward with the implementation” of the law, Lew said.

    He also argued the health care law will not result in a tax increase on the middle class, despite a Congressional Budget Office report that it would result in a roughly $27 million increase over the next 10 years.

    Lew’s remarks were met with strong opposition from GOP congressional leaders.

    “He’s doing the best he can with a tough situation,” said Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky. “It’s a middle-class tax increase.”

    McConnell also said the debate will continue and that the final say will perhaps come in the fall.

    “We have one last chance to defeat ObamaCare,” he said on “Fox News Sunday.” “And we can do that in the November elections

    Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/07/01/white-house-says-health-care-penalty-not-tax-debate-is-over/#ixzz1zRDgn9MY

  57. BASIL99
    July 1st, 2012 at 2:58 pm
    Hmmmmmmmmm………

    Is this true?

    Roberts Switched His Vote in May
    —rdbrewer
    —————-
    I would venture to say “yes”.

    I believe his days as Chief Justice are numbered.

    He cannot command the respect of his colleagues.

    I am not sure if there is a procedure other than retirement which will get us a new Chief Justice. But it needs to happen.

  58. wbboei

    IF the voters hear about it.

    “True. But compare that argument to the one we are left with, namely that he forced a huge tax increase on the middle class during a depression. As between the former argument and this one I think this one is more likely to hit home with voters, because it hits them where it hurts–the pocket book.”

    I hope you’re right but IMHO that outcome stands only IF the voters hear about it. The dim media will do their best to continue the lie the mandate is a penalty not a tax despite the SC ruling and those who do not delve into the fine print and understand how when and why the dims lied simply won’t get it.

  59. Even though junkies like those here know much about how the DC sausage is made those who don’t follow the news haven’t a clue. What they’re hearing is, “BO won on healthcare” not Bo LIED about the tax, the congress LIED about the constitutionality of the bill, the dims LIED that its passage would not adversely affect most middle class Americans and that Roberts’ LIED in his ruling while simultaneously implying BO was a liar.

    ======================

    Unfortunately true. The only people with enough information to see these contradictions, are already in the choir.

  60. I bet Obama is dreading the debates this year because he is gonna get totally battered from everything from economy to healthcare to executive orders to Fast n Furious.

  61. I am not sure if there is a procedure other than retirement which will get us a new Chief Justice. But it needs to happen.

    ======================

    Maybe we could re-use some of those old “Impeach Earl Warren” billboards.

  62. Shadowfax
    July 1st, 2012 at 12:24 pm

    admin

    In an anxious conference call from Air Force One, Obama asked campaign donors to send more money.

    —-
    I can also tell by the floor of spam emails from the DNC that Barry and his gang are really, really worried.
    &&&&&&

    I have not been getting DNC mailings begging for money, even though I am a registered Dem.

    Can they tell I hate Their Leader?

    Or do they give up on people who have not donated to the Democrats since Rules and Bylaws Committee Massacre of June 2008 installed Obama as the Tin Pot Dictator of the party???

  63. Shadowfax
    July 1st, 2012 at 2:34 pm

    Basil, here is one of the emails I posted on the last thread.

    ——-
    Shadowfax
    June 29th, 2012 at 6:54 pm

    Okay, I posted the weeping email from Joe above and thought that was the most pitiful of emails to try and get money for his bro Barack…but this one takes the freakin’ cake!!

    This one is from the damned DCCC:

    Hi xxxxxxxxxxx –

    We’re reviewing our Democratic supporter records in advance of tomorrow’s Federal Election Commission (FEC) deadline. Your record is copied and pasted below:

    Supporter record: xxxxxxxx
    Name: xxxx xxxxxx
    2012 Online Support: Pending
    Suggested support: $3.00

    If you’re planning to contribute to our campaign to win a Democratic Majority for President Obama, it’s critical that you make your donation in the next 24 hours. Tomorrow is the midyear FEC reporting deadline of the 2012 general election. We’re relying on your support: 80% of our contributions are $35 or less.
    &&&&&&&&

    1. any email requests of mine will remain “pending”. Ha!

    2. “80% of our contributions are $35 or less.” Yeah, and from overseas money laundering operations. With the minimum of $200 needed to be reported, I am sure there were TONS of “donations” of $199.99, from “inspired contributors who prefer to remain anonymous”.

  64. …i hate to agree with Rupurt Murdoch…but MR needs to hit harder and get specific…and he needs stronger spokespeople…

    this is going to be hardcore Chicago hardball…he needs tough guys on the air pushing back for him

    …now perhaps the strategy is to stay vague until after labor day but i hope he is preparing specifics to show a stark contrast…people are going to want to know what he is going to do…he must create an either/or…

    …hopefully as Admin alludes, the Romney camp is getting all their ducks in order…but they are going to have to come out tough, strong and with some meat on the bones…he needs some guys around him who are not afraid of the chicago cabal…

    …OT…Paul Ryan is a very smart and appealing character…I know the talk is that he wants to stay in the house…but he could be compelling as a VP choice…he comes across so earnest, likeable and he explains things so the fog goes away…
    …and being youthful and good looking doesn’t hurt…

  65. I agree, S. It seems, though, there’s no point in saying anything until after the July 4 holiday which, it seems the POS is spending overseas.

    Anyone else ever hear of a POTUS holding fundraisers in other countries? 1 is in France and the other in Geneva.

  66. BASIL99
    July 1st, 2012 at 2:43 pm

    Shadowfax,

    I read that one. Creepy, like they’re stalking former contributors. And what will happen to them if they don’t cough up another contribution?

    ————-
    I have gotten at least 12 more emails from the gang, spam emails from:

    The Fraud and one from his wife
    Donna Brazillnut
    Nasty
    James Carville
    Howard Dean
    Debbie Ugly Hair
    and everyone you can think of right after the one I posted.

    They are desperate.

    Why are they sending them to me? Who knows, I donated to Hillary but never another candidate in my life.
    I have cussed at them, told them to take me off of their mailing list, told them I will never vote for Barry…on and on.

  67. I WATCHED THE WALLACE INTERVIEW WITH JACK LEW. WALLACE FAILED TO HONE IN ON THE CENTRAL CONTRADICTION IN LEW’S ARGUMENT.

    LEW CLAIMS THAT OBAMACARE IS I)CONSTITUTIONAL, AND II) IT IS NOT A TAX.

    THAT IS AN INTELLECTUALLY DISHONEST ARGUMENT.

    THE SOLE BASIS ON WHICH THE COURT HELD OBAMA CARE TO BE CONSTITUTIONAL WAS THAT IT WAS IN FACT A TAX.

    THEREFORE, LEW HAS TWO CHOICES:

    HE CAN ARGUE THAT OBAMACARE IS CONSTITUTIONAL, BUT IN THAT CASE, BY THE COURT’S EXPLICIT LOGIC OBAMACARE IS PER FORCE A TAX.

    OR-

    HE CAN ARGUE THAT OBAMACARE IS NOT A TAX, BUT IN THAT CASE, BY THE COURT’S EXPLICIT LOGIC OBAMACARE IS UNCONSTITUTIONAL.

    BUT-

    THE ONE THING HE CANNOT DO IS ARGUE THAT OBAMA CARE IS CONSTITUTIONAL BUT IT IS NOT A TAX, BECAUSE THAT IS A LIE. ————————————————–

    REPEAT AFTER ME: THE OBAMACARE INDIVIDUAL ‘MANDATE’ WAS ACTUALLY A TAX.

    Posted by Moe Lane (Diary)

    Sunday, July 1st at 10:00AM EDT
    66 Comments

    And that affects profoundly the question of how to get rid of it. Mickey Kaus is correct, and Ryan Lizza & David Frum are wrong on this: the only reason that Obamacare was not cast down was because the US Supreme Court decided 5-4 that the so-called ‘individual mandate’ was constitutional if it was considered to be a tax. The US Supreme Court also decided, 5-4, that the so-called ‘individual mandate’ was not Constitutional if done under the Commerce Clause. So anyone who wants to argue that the Obamacare health tax is not actually a tax must also admit that Obamacare is unconstitutional. Supporters of Obamacare do not get to have it both ways. The Supreme Court has ruled that Obamacare’s centerpiece is a half trillion dollar tax hike on the middle class. This is a thing that has happened. And it means, among other things, that the Democrats’ threat of a filibuster is an empty one when it comes to repealing it next January. We have a Senate majority, we can remove the health tax. Simple as that.

    DO NOT LET THE OTHER SIDE GET AWAY WITH PRETENDING OTHERWISE. I understand fully why the Democrats don’t want to campaign on the position that their ‘signature’ accomplishment is a horrific, promise-breaking middle class tax hike; it’s only slightly better than campaigning on a promise to give kittens leprosy. But that’s the Democrats’ problem, not ours. All we have to do is figure out new ways to keep the gloating albatross around their collective neck until the election. And one way to do that is to never, ever, ever let any apologist for the Democrats and/or Barack Obama get away with pretending that Obamacare is unconstitutional unless it’s a tax. If they get upset about that… good. That means that what you’re doing is working.

    Karma. It’s what’s for breakfast.

    Moe Lane (crosspost)

    PS: Obamacare passed by reconciliation; it can darn well be gutted by it, too. But thanks for the precedent! …You know, I was once told that one should never assume that one’s opponents will never win another election. The next few years promise to be, ah, instructive in that regard.

    PPS: I know that Mickey – who is, after all, an honest Democrat who likes the basic idea of Obamacare – thinks that Mitt Romney won’t necessarily repeal it. Two problems with that, though. First off, large portions of Obamacare’s repeal aren’t under his control; it’s under Congress’s control, and the 113th Congress will be full of people who ran on the promise to kill the stupid thing. Second, Mitt Romney knows full well that when the Republican base makes a Deal with a candidate, we expect the Deal to be upheld. We don’t forgive as readily as the Democratic base does; in fact, you can make a case that we don’t ever forgive at all

  68. who don’t follow the news haven’t a clue. What they’re hearing is, “BO won on healthcare” not Bo LIED about the tax, the congress LIED about the constitutionality of the bill, the dims LIED that its passage would not adversely affect most middle class Americans
    ——————————
    Don’t have a clue? Perhaps not if they have been living in a cave these past two years, and never realized what happened in 2010. And even if what you are saying is true in some cases, just think of the wonderful opportunity the Republicans have to disabuse them of their myopia in the next six months. Starting with the word tax, uttered from the mouth of the Chief Justice of the United States. When the forces of darkness attempt to spin that one, it will be a simple task to show the public their sophistry. In the final analysis, then, it is messiah obama who will be shown to be the liar.

  69. FYI: only for those interested. Others, please scroll on by. It’s because time is short that I have this here at all.

    Tea Party Patriots just held a telephone town hall. It included President Jenny Beth Martin, Rep Michelle Bachman, and John Eastman: Constitutional law professor in CA. It lasted about 50 minutes. Questions from the listeners were answered, and TPP’s very specific action points were given: researching what public events our various Senators and House Reps will be attending back home this week. They have some of that info, but welcome additions.

    With that info in hand, they are hoping that many of us will seek out our Congress critters at these events, ask them if they are willing to vote to repeal ObamaCare and get their answer on video which would then be uploaded to the TPP site. Their goal is a scorecard.

    It all goes on their site which is teapartypatriots.org. First up when you go there is an annoying pledge which I have so far refused to sign (so childish say I). But I may have to in order to get to these categories:

    1. Submit Candidate/Reps Event Info
    2. Submit On Record Videos of Candidate/Reps
    ############
    Bachmann put more detail to how it ObamaCare will work. Honestly I don’t know what to believe but will mention what she said.
    When a patient seeks a diagnosis and treatment, Dr. will put personal info and symptoms into his computer. It goes to Obama computer to state recommended treatment, and that goes back to Md. If s/he does more for patient than what Feds said, he will receive a lower payment than if he followed govt. guidelines.

    I could not tell how many were on the call, but they set it up very nicely – called yesterday afternoon to inform that they’d be calling 7:30 tonight.

    They are looking at this as a clear chance to eviscerate O’Care, but stressed that it would have to be an overwhelming vote.

    See you tomorrow.

  70. The relevant point here is Obama is not getting the same pass he did before. There is alot of buyers remorse, and some people are seeing him as their Frankenstein. I think in some ways a tipping point has been reached with some outlets in big media, and with others it will never change, until their business is gone. The NBC organization will always be unrepenant nazis, but the rest of the networks will feel intense pressure to change.

  71. wbboei,

    “Don’t have a clue? Perhaps not if they have been living in a cave these past two years, and never realized what happened in 2010.”

    I stand by my comment. I have been out and about the population of two counties for the past three years and the issue is neither known nor do people care about it. I’m talking about regular working class types who are just scraping by. The middle class in this area, at least north of me, is mostly employed by Albany State Government and, as you would imagine, are primarily dims. My county is majority repub but most people are apathetic about politics in general.

    I speak with younger people who run the gym I belong to and they don’t listen to news, read the papers or have an interest in what’s going on beyond their immediate small circle.

    Though I speak rarely to my siblings when we do talk they are neither shocked nor surprised by information about BO and OC. They simply don’t care.

    I wish this were not so but so far that’s been my experience.

  72. What Did SCOTUS Just Do?

    11:31 AM, Jun 28, 2012 • By JAY COST

    Single PagePrintLarger TextSmaller TextAlerts

    Was today’s Supreme Court Obamacare decision a win for conservatives or a loss? It depends on what you were rooting for.

    If you were above all interested in the bill being struck down, it was mostly a loss. On the other hand, if you were more concerned about the qualitative expansion in the power of the government that the bill represented, it was definitely a win.

    First, the Roberts Court put real limits on what the government can and cannot do. For starters, it restricted the limits of the Commerce Clause, which does not give the government the power to create activity for the purpose of regulating it. This is a huge victory for those of us who believe that the Constitution is a document which offers a limited grant of power.

    Second, the Roberts Court also threw out a portion of the Medicaid expansion. States have the option of withdrawing from the program without risk of losing their funds. This is another major victory for conservatives who cherish our system of dual sovereignty. This was also a big policy win for conservatives; the Medicaid expansion was a major way the Democrats hid the true cost of the bill, by shifting costs to the states, but they no longer can do this.

    Politically, Obama will probably get a short-term boost from this, as the media will not be able to read between the lines and will declare him the winner. But the victory will be short-lived. The Democrats were at pains not to call this a tax because it is inherently regressive: the wealthy overwhelmingly have health insurance so have no fear of the mandate. But now that it is legally a tax, Republicans can and will declare that Obama has slapped the single biggest tax on the middle class in history, after promising not to do that.

    Related Stories
    Conservative Group to Spend $9 Million Against …
    Will the Court Revitalize the Tea Party?
    Obamacare: 0-98
    Romney: Obama ‘Out of Touch’ on Obamacare
    Obamacare on Trial: The Individual Mandate

    More by Jay Cost
    Morning Jay: The Case for John Roberts
    The Mandate Represents What’s Wrong With Democrats
    Morning Jay: Is Gallup Biased Against Obama?
    Morning Jay: The Myth of GOP Intransigence
    Morning Jay: Obama’s Dilemma

    Conservatives have a shot at getting the best of both worlds: having the Supreme Court use Obamacare as a way to limit federal power while also using the democratic process to overturn the law. I didn’t think we could have one without the other, but now maybe we can.

    If Obama loses in November, that is…

  73. “they are neither shocked nor surprised by information about BO and OC. They simply don’t care….”
    ********
    Same with my Obot relatives. He could burn kittens on the White House lawn and they wouldn’t care….If Obama does it, it’s OK!!!!

  74. I interrupted a robbery at a 7 Eleven tonight without even realizing it until after the fact. I felt bad for the store clerk who was by herself. I stayed with her until the police arrived. I thought that she was going to hyperventilate. Needless to say, it was an interesting night.

  75. Glad you got out of that ok, such despicable pieces of trash terrorising people like that, perhaps you saved that poor woman from something worse if she had been there alone.

  76. nobobama – Please do tell how you interrupted the robbery. Did you walk into the middle of it? Were you shaking in your oyster boots afterwards? I know I would have been.

  77. ABC is reporting this exactly like admin:

    Hillary Clinton attacks Obama in latest Romney ad

    By Holly Bailey
    June 29, 2012

    Mitt Romney has enlisted a surprising new surrogate in his effort to challenge President Barack Obama’s attacks on his jobs record: Hillary Clinton.

    The Romney campaign quietly launched a new 30-second television ad Friday featuring footage of Clinton campaigning against Obama during the 2008 Democratic presidential primary, in which she accused Obama of lying about her record.

    “Shame on you, Barack Obama,” Clinton says in the footage recycled in the Romney spot.

    The Romney ad uses the Clinton footage to back up a recent Washington Post Fact Checker item which said a recent Obama ad accusing Romney of outsourcing jobs overseas while he was governor of Massachusetts was “misleading, unfair and untrue.”

    “But that’s Barack Obama,” a narrator in the Romney ad declares. “He also attacked Hillary Clinton with vicious lies.”

    The Clinton footage comes from a campaign event held just before the Ohio primary in 2008, when Clinton attacked Obama for mailers she said mischaracterized her positions on health care reform and the North American Free Trade Agreement.

    “He continues to spend millions of dollars perpetuating falsehoods,” Clinton said at the time—footage that has been recycled in Romney’s latest ads to cast doubt on Obama’s claims about Romney.

    Clinton, who is now Obama’s secretary of State, has not commented on the ad, and her spokesman did not respond to a request for comment.

    Unlike other ads, the Romney campaign did not publicly announce its latest campaign spot, which was first reported by Politico’s Maggie Haberman. The ad was uploaded Friday morning to Romney’s YouTube channel.

    A Romney spokeswoman did not respond to a request for comment on the ad, including where it is airing or how much the TV ad buy is for. But a Republican source tells CNN the Romney campaign reserved $2 million in airtime in seven key battleground states, including Colorado, Iowa, Nevada, New Hampshire, North Carolina and Virginia.

  78. Sorry, I fell asleep. I will fill you in more when I log back in again sometime Monday or Tuesday. I will say this, though. I went out to my car to get some money, and it was then that the guy went into the store not thinking that I was going to be coming back in. He had only been in there with her for maybe 10 to 15 seconds. He told the young lady that he wanted all the money in her drawer. She told me that she just looked at him thinking it was a joke. That’s when I re-entered the store, and he ledt
    quickly. He was a big guy, but sloppy big. He had been sitting in a pick up truck when I go there. The clerk said she recognized him, and even knew his first name from the local area. We gave the police lots of information. The first officer to respond liked my written report and said he was probably going to use it for his notes. The girl who was between 25 to 30 was petrified. There was no weapon pulled, but he was so much bigger than her. There’s more to this story, but it wasn’t a case of masks, hoodies, and guns blazing (thank God). I don’t know if he had a weapon on him or not, but I do know my re-entering the storr caused him to rush past me out the door. He is definitely going to be charged with attempted robbery. They had the store taped off, and the police forensics were there obtaining evidence. I will tell a little more later. I was even considered a suspect as part of their routine, but it wasn’t serious as I was able to walk around outside the store without having an officer breathing down my neck.

  79. moononpluto
    July 1st, 2012 at 3:48 pm
    I bet Obama is dreading the debates this year because he is gonna get totally battered from everything from economy to healthcare to executive orders to Fast n Furious.
    ***************

    No he won’t, they will protect him, make no mistake about that…

  80. After last week’s historic Supreme Court ruling to allow Obamacare to stand as a tax, one might assume liberals would be celebrating.

    However, according to a New York Times poll, just 34 percent of Americans supported Obamacare’s passage, and one-fifth of those who didn’t were “frustrated liberals” who felt President Obama sold out and should have gone farther enacting a so-called “single-payer” system that would have given the federal government total control of the healthcare industry.

    One such liberal is Dr. Margaret Flowers, a pediatrician and single-payer activist. Dr. Flowers says Obamacare is nothing but “crony capitalism on steroids”:

    The individual mandate requiring people to purchase private insurance and using hundreds of millions of our public dollars that go directly to the private insurance companies is outrageous. If you look at it people having private insurance still doesn’t guarantee that you could see the doctor that you need to see, get the treatment that you need to seek; [it doesn’t guarantee] that you can afford the healthcare because of co-pays and deductibles…The greatest cause of bankruptcy is medical [costs] and 80 percent of those people that went bankrupt from medical cost had health insurance. So, we’re forcing people to purchase a defective product, we’re putting our private dollars into a private corporation that’s just going to take that money as profit and not give it out to the people for care.

    Perhaps this helps explain why Mr. Obama has not seen an uptick in the polls since the Supreme Court ruling on Obamacare.

    http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/07/01/Surprising-Number-of-Liberals-Unhappy-With-Obamacare

  81. They can try and shield him all they want but when its one on one and Romney starts the battering rams, they wont be able to stop him stuttering and stammering.

  82. Roberts Switched His Vote in May…ACE
    —rdbrewer
    OUT: Arguing your case in court. IN: Lobbying Supreme Court justices.

    Volokh Conspiracy has the transcript of Jan Crawford reporting on CBS Face the Nation that Chief Justice Roberts switched his vote in May.

    I am told by two sources with specific knowledge of the court’s deliberations that Roberts initially sided with the conservatives in this case and was prepared to strike down the heart of this law, the so-called individual mandate, of course, that requires all Americans to buy insurance or pay a penalty. but Roberts, I’m told by my sources, changed his views deciding to instead join with the liberals.
    More from CBS:

    Roberts then withstood a month-long, desperate campaign to bring him back to his original position, the sources said. Ironically, Justice Anthony Kennedy – believed by many conservatives to be the justice most likely to defect and vote for the law – led the effort to try to bring Roberts back to the fold.
    “He was relentless,” one source said of Kennedy’s efforts. “He was very engaged in this.”

    But this time, Roberts held firm. And so the conservatives handed him their own message which, as one justice put it, essentially translated into, “You’re on your own.”

    The conservatives refused to join any aspect of his opinion, including sections with which they agreed, such as his analysis imposing limits on Congress’ power under the Commerce Clause, the sources said.

    Instead, the four joined forces and crafted a highly unusual, unsigned joint dissent. They deliberately ignored Roberts’ decision, the sources said, as if they were no longer even willing to engage with him in debate.

    So Roberts knew better than the other justices, the circuit court judges, the district court judges, the attorneys, and the American public.

    OUT: The rule of law. IN: The rule of Roberts.

  83. So Roberts knew better than the other justices [….]

    ===============

    Which other justices? The ones he voted with? Or the ones who agreed with him about the Commerce Clause?

  84. Trump: Health care ruling a ‘disaster,’ Roberts ‘extremely disloyal’

    …And Trump said he sensed Republicans were more motivated after the ruling, saying that there was noticeably more buzz at a fundraiser he attended with Romney the day the ruling was announced.”The energy in that room was five times greater than it would have been a month ago,” Trump said.
    It was Trump’s first time publicly addressing the fundraiser, a point of confusion last week after the Romney campaign initially indicated that it would not occur, and then refused to comment on it. Trump, however, accused the press of trying to undermine the GOP candidate. “We had a big fundraiser that everybody said, ‘Oh, they’re not going to have the fundraiser,’ the press said, ‘The fundraiser’s not going to happen, Trump’s going to be embarrassed,’ then all of a sudden we had a fundraiser that raised millions of dollars, it was a great success,” Trump said. “It’s amazing how the press can be so dishonest. They were told it was going to happen, it’s amazing.”
    http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/235829-trump-health-care-ruling-a-disaster-roberts-extremely-disloyal

  85. Here’s another 2008 ad video harmful to the OFA 2012 campaign.
    “It Gets Worse” Ad – YouTube
    Uploaded by BarackObamadotcom on Oct 15, 2008
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7l8ZOMd468o

    Incredibly their campaign returned to the site to update it with this: You should be with us in 2012, join now: my barackobama com/itgetsworseadvid

    Anyone with a brain would have swept it down the memory hole.

  86. Obama Takes the Week Off | The Blog on Obama: White House Dossier
    …The president has grumbled that Mitt Romney can campaign full time while he continues to have to perform his day job, but it’s questionable how many hours he’s putting in at the office. Obama found time for 33 fundraisers in June and campaigned widely, sometimes returning to the White House after Midnight and then sleeping in the next day.
    Obama will return to the the White House from Camp David Tuesday and then preside over the White House Fourth of July festivities Wednesday. He will be campaigning in the critical battleground states of Ohio and Pennsylvania Thursday and Friday….
    http://www.whitehousedossier.com/2012/07/02/obama-takes-week/

  87. Roberts has lost his legacy with the American people…Just another fraud love affair, I wonder if his leg was tingling

    We’ll write him a new legacy, I don’t think he will like it.

  88. Can you say selfish narcissistic as8HOLE…
    ————-
    Yes I can. And I can say this too: lately pix of Roberts show the same shit-eating grin SenBobCasey has worn ever since 2008 when he screwed The People on behalf of Obama.

  89. “I wonder whether the chief justice realizes what he and the progressive wing of the court have done to our freedom. If the feds can tax us for not doing as they have commanded, and if that which is commanded need not be grounded in the Constitution, then there is no constitutional limit to their power, and the ruling that the power to regulate commerce does not encompass the power to compel commerce is mere sophistry–Andrew Neopolitano . . .”

    When I first heard about the decision, I said legally this is a disaster, economically it is a debacle, but politically it is manna from heaven. My legal concerns are accurately expressed below by Judge Neopoliano. In sum, in his effort to get himself off the hot seat, and not be criticized as he was at the State of the Union, Roberts betrayed the Constitution. The Washington elites go easy on him because he is one of them, and the practical effect of this travesty of a decision is to enhance their power and their wealth at the expense of the rest of the country. As I have said so often in connection with them and their spokesmen at big media–it is never really about the country, the Constitution and the American People. Rather, it is first, last, always about them, those precious people. Here we do not say God Save the Queen, but it amounts to the same thing.

    As for Roberts, he is receiving the rebuke and condemnation now that he richly deserves. Like actor John Houseman famously said in the old E F Hutton commercial–he’s EARNED IT. His legal position draws its essence, not from the Constitution, but by a cowardly motive to insulate the Court, and even more so himself from adverse publicity.The 11 percent drop in Supreme Court polling tells the story. Until now the institution was seen as largely non partisan by the public at large, but after what Roberts has done, it is now viewed as political in the worst sense of the word.

    Even those who do are pure non partisans tell me I do not have a dog in the political side, but how can anyone who wishes to be thought of as Chief Justice hang his hat on such a feeble political argument as this one, as a pretext to radically alter our system of government, and not expect the outrage he is seeing now. As for his conservative colleagues, the read my lips lie by Poppy Bush proves that unlike too man liberals, we do not forgive and forget.
    ——————————————-

    A Vast New Power To Tax
    Judge Neopolitano

    If you drive a car, I’ll tax the street, If you try to sit, I’ll tax your seat.
    If you get too cold, I’ll tax the heat,
    If you take a walk, I’ll tax your feet.
    — The Beatles in “The Taxman”

    Of the 17 lawyers who have served as chief justice of the United States, John Marshall — the fourth chief justice — has come to be known as the “Great Chief Justice.” The folks who have given him that title are the progressives who have largely written the history we are taught in government schools. They revere him because he is the intellectual progenitor of federal power. Marshall’s opinions over a 34-year period during the nation’s infancy — expanding federal power at the expense of personal freedom and the sovereignty of the states — set a pattern for federal control of our lives and actually invited Congress to regulate areas of human behavior nowhere mentioned in the Constitution. He was Thomas Jefferson’s cousin, but they rarely spoke. No chief justice in history has so pronouncedly and creatively offered the feds power on a platter as he.

    Now he has a rival.

    No one can know the true motivations for the idiosyncratic rationale in the health care decision written by Marshall’s current successor, John Roberts. Often five member majorities on the court are fragile, and bizarre compromises are necessary in order to keep a five-member majority from becoming a four-member minority. Perhaps Chief Justice Roberts really means what he wrote — that congressional power to tax is without constitutional limit — and his opinion is a faithful reflection of that view, without a political or legal or intra-court agenda. But that view finds no support in the Constitution or our history. It even contradicts the most famous of Marshall’s big government aphorisms: The power to tax is the power to destroy.

    The reasoning underlying the 5 to 4 majority opinion is the court’s unprecedented pronouncement that Congress’ power to tax is unlimited. The majority held that the extraction of thousands of dollars per year by the IRS from individuals who do not have health insurance is not a fine, not a punishment, not a payment for government-provided health insurance, not a shared responsibility — all of which the statute says it is — but rather is an inducement in the form of a tax. The majority likened this tax to the federal taxes on tobacco and gasoline, which, it held, are imposed not only to generate revenue but also to discourage smoking and driving. The statute is more than 2,400 pages in length, and it establishes the federal micromanagement of about 16 percent of the national economy. And the court justified it constitutionally by calling it a tax.

    A 7 to 2 majority (which excluded two of the progressive justices who joined the chief in rewriting tax law and included the four dissenting justices who would have invalidated the entire statute as beyond the constitutional power of Congress) held that while Congress can regulate commerce, it cannot compel one to engage in commerce. The same majority ruled that Congress cannot force the states to expand Medicaid by establishing state insurance exchanges. It held that the congressional command to establish the exchanges combined with the congressional threat to withhold all Medicaid funds — not just those involved with the exchanges — for failure to establish them would be so harmful to the financial stability of state governments as to be tantamount to an assault on state sovereignty. This leaves the exchanges in limbo, and it is the first judicial recognition that state sovereignty is apparently at the tender mercies of the financial largesse of Congress.

    The logic in the majority opinion is the jurisprudential equivalent of passing a camel through the eye of a needle. The logic is so tortured, unexpected and unprecedented that even the law’s most fervent supporters did not make or anticipate the court’s argument in its support. Under the Constitution, a tax must originate in the House (which this law did not), and it must be applied for doing something (like earning income or purchasing tobacco or fuel), not for doing nothing. In all the history of the court, it never has held that a penalty imposed for violating a federal law was really a tax. And it never has converted linguistically the congressional finding of penalty into the judicial declaration of tax, absent finding subterfuge on the part of congressional draftsmanship.

    I wonder whether the chief justice realizes what he and the progressive wing of the court have done to our freedom. If the feds can tax us for not doing as they have commanded, and if that which is commanded need not be grounded in the Constitution, then there is no constitutional limit to their power, and the ruling that the power to regulate commerce does not encompass the power to compel commerce is mere sophistry.

    Even The Beatles understood this.

    COPYRIGHT 2012 ANDREW P. NAPOLITANO
    DISTRIBUTED BY CREATORS.COM

    Andrew P. Napolitano, a former judge of the Superior Court of New Jersey, is the senior judicial analyst at Fox News Channel. Judge Napolitano has written six books on the U.S. Constitution. His latest is “ It is Dangerous To Be Right When the Government Is Wrong: The Case for Personal Freedom.”

    Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2012/07/02/vast-new-federal-power/#ixzz1zQ90u0wl

  90. Well done, Obama setting new records……Breaking : “Largest manufacturing decline since 9-11, and 2nd largest since 1980”

    http://www.aei-ideas.org/2012/07/has-the-u-s-economy-fallen-back-into-recession/

    New data suggests the three-year economic expansion — as anemic as it has been — may be at an end, or is at least perilously close. The Institute for Supply Management’s factory index unexpectedly fell to 49.7 in June from 53.5 a month earlier. A reading of less than 50 signals contraction.

    Not one of 70 economists interviewed by Bloomberg thought it would be below 50.5.

    Here is RDQ Economics:

    The drop of 12.3 points in the orders index is the largest since October 2001 (when, in the wake of 9/11, the index dropped 12.4 points) and the second largest decline since December 1980. Thus we are dealing with an event that occurs in roughly one in 100 reports. … Our best guess is that manufacturing growth is downshifting (but still positive as suggested by the relative strength in the employment index) and that commodity prices will stabilize and recover somewhat. However, uncertainty about the state of the economic expansion just got ratcheted up a notch with this report.

  91. Concerning the Roberts decision, apart from upholding the Constitutionality of Obamacare as a tax rather than a penalty, which was terrible, his supporters point out that he did manage to engineer a 7 to 2 majority, against further expansion in the Commerce clause, and against the ability of the Federal Government to coerce states into accepting vastly enlarged medicaid obligations, by holding the existing moneys they receive hostage to those new obligations. Whether this was the quid pro quo for his surrender to 2 members of the leftist wing on the court, i.e. Breyer and Kagen, is far from clear. But if that was the inducement, it is not enough, because if he had stuck with the conservatives, he would have prevailed in those two areas, only by a 5 to 4 margin AND he would have driven a silver spike through the vampire of Obamacare by the same margin. Therefore, arguments in his favor by people like Jay Cost, who is trying to salvage some value out of what Roberts did, do not wash.

  92. A friend told me that the ceo of one of the insurance companies made half a billion dollars last year (salary, bonus, options). That money should have gone to the uninsured. To defend this system as the best system possible is ridiculous. The problem with Obama’s solution is five years from now he will be making a billion per year, we will be paying double the amount we are now, and employers will opt out. Then, one day an insurer will teeter on the edge of bankruptcy and Obama will bail them out with taxpayer dollars on the notion that they are too big to fail. And Roberts decision will impel him in that direction, rather than toward single payer–I suspect.

  93. holdthemaccountable
    July 2nd, 2012 at 11:37 am
    ————————-
    Absolutely.

    And we now know why Roberts did not demand that she recuse/

  94. OBAMA’S “ENDLESS SUPPLY OF YOUNG VOTERS” STARTING TO RUN DRY.

    It was obvious that Obummer would lose some of his youth vote from 2008, due to disappointment, or “didn’t we already break the color barrier already?”…

    So they were already thinking of how to milk the newbies, those who were too young to vote in 2008. It turns out they, along with those who were old enough to vote last time, are NOT all gung-ho for “another four years”.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/02/us/politics/economy-cuts-into-obamas-youth-support.html?_r=1&ref=todayspaper

    Stung by Recession, Young Voters Shed Image as Obama Brigade
    ===========================

    By SUSAN SAULNY
    Published: July 1, 2012

    Maria Verdugo, a 20-year-old graduate of the University of California, Santa Cruz, barely remembers the presidential election of 2008 — the one that spawned a youth movement that was singular in its scope and political effectiveness — except for “something about Obama saying we needed a change.”

    These days, Ms. Verdugo is so busy working to pay off her student loans that she has not decided whether to register “as a Democrat, a Republican or what,” she said.

    Chad Tevlin, 19, a student trying to pay for college by cleaning portable toilets in South Bend, Ind., cannot recall if he registered to vote at all. “Pointless” is how he describes politics.

    And Kristen Klenke, a music student in central Michigan, has decided to skip this election altogether. “I know it sounds horrible,” said Ms. Klenke, 20. “But there’s a lot of discouragement going around.”

    In the four years since President Obama swept into office in large part with the support of a vast army of young people, a new corps of men and women have come of voting age with views shaped largely by the recession. And unlike their counterparts in the millennial generation who showed high levels of enthusiasm for Mr. Obama at this point in 2008, the nation’s first-time voters are less enthusiastic about him, are significantly more likely to identify as conservative and cite a growing lack of faith in government in general, according to interviews, experts and recent polls.

    Polls show that Americans under 30 are still inclined to support Mr. Obama by a wide margin. But the president may face a particular challenge among voters ages 18 to 24. In that group, his lead over Mitt Romney — 12 points — is about half of what it is among 25- to 29-year-olds, according to an online survey this spring by the Harvard Institute of Politics. And among whites in the younger group, Mr. Obama’s lead vanishes altogether.

    Among all 18- to 29-year-olds, the poll found a high level of undecided voters; 30 percent indicated that they had not yet made up their mind. And turnout among this group is expected to be significantly lower than for older voters.

    “The concern for Obama, and the opportunity for Romney, is in the 18- to 24-year-olds who don’t have the historical or direct connection to the campaign or the movement of four years ago,” said John Della Volpe, director of polling at the Harvard Institute of Politics. “We’re also seeing that these younger members of this generation are beginning to show some more conservative traits. It doesn’t mean they are Republican. It means Republicans have an opportunity.”

    Experts say the impact of the recession and the slow recovery should not be underestimated. The newest potential voters — some 17 million people — have been shaped more by harsh economic times in their formative years than by anything else, and that force does not tend to be galvanizing in a positive way.

    For 18- and 19-year-olds, the unemployment rate as of May was 23.5 percent, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. For those ages 20 to 24, the rate falls to 12.9 percent, compared with the national unemployment rate of 8.2 percent for all ages. The impact of the recession on the young has created a disillusionment about politics in general, several experts suggested.

    “I think the lack of excitement right now is palpable enough to be a challenge to the re-election campaign” of Mr. Obama, said Peter Levine, director of the Center for Information and Research on Civic Learning and Engagement at Tufts University.

    The Romney campaign intends to seize the moment, with new online and campus-based initiatives rolling out in the next few weeks, said Joshua Baca, the campaign’s national coalition director. He said the message would be simple: Mr. Obama’s economic policies are not working for young people.

    The strategy? “Dorm room to dorm room” or “parent’s basement to parent’s basement, wherever they are because of the economy, that’s where we’ll be going,” Mr. Baca said. “The key to this is having a very strong volunteer base to knock on doors.”

    For its part, the Obama campaign has already started outreach efforts focusing on teenagers in high school. It has organized youth rallies in swing states over the last few months and plans to be a force on college campuses in the fall.

    Campaign officials expressed confidence.

    “Young people know what’s at stake,” said Clo Ewing, an Obama campaign spokeswoman. “So just as they came out in huge numbers to organize and lead a movement in 2008, their energy and commitment will help build this campaign again in 2012.”

    In 2008, Mr. Obama was the first to recognize the full power of the youth vote as a game changer, and his timing coincided with a political awakening among young Americans after a tumultuous period that included the Sept. 11 attacks, the beginning of the Afghanistan and Iraq wars and the government failures during Hurricane Katrina.

    But since then, the mood of the country has changed. Beyond that, Republicans in several states have recently passed more restrictive election laws, which they say will fight fraud; Democrats say they will make it harder for some of their main constituencies — youths, for instance — to vote.

    Mr. Tevlin, the Indiana student, said his exhaustive search for meaningful summer employment was so futile that he took a job cleaning toilets and septic tanks. “I think we’re in pretty deep trouble, and the future, as far as jobs, is not looking good at all,” he said.

    A political science major, Mr. Tevlin has become more cynical over recent years. “I see lies and I hear lies, nothing gets past partisanship, and I don’t believe anything,” he said. “I think the party system is stupid.”

    In the last three general elections, young voters have given Democrats a majority of their votes, according to exit polls.

    Today, specifically, the youngest potential voters are more likely than their older peers to think it is important to protect individual liberties from government, the Harvard data suggest, and less likely to think it is important to tackle things like climate change, health care or immigration.

    Mr. Tevlin, for instance, found the Supreme Court ruling upholding Mr. Obama’s health care law troubling.

    “I don’t think the government should force you to buy anything,” he said.

    Brandon Dennis is one voter who says he is open to someone new. Mr. Dennis, 20, comes from a black family of Obama supporters. But when he came of age to vote, he registered as an independent. He is listening to Mr. Romney’s appeals.

    “This time, it’s more about what you’re going to do for the economy,” said Mr. Dennis, a chemistry major at Clark Atlanta University.

    Vanessa Espinoza, 19, who lives in eastern Iowa, says she does care about this election but has been unable to commit to a political party. As a conservative Catholic, she sides with Republicans on issues like abortion. As a full-time factory worker without health insurance, she favors the president’s health care law, which may have finally swayed her.

    Still, her endorsement is less than resounding.

    “I lean a little toward Obama,” she said. “I guess.”

  95. Secret Service Stops ‘Fire Holder’ Protest At White House | The Daily Caller

    WASHINGTON — Secret Service agents shut down a protest outside the White House on Monday where about 30 young protesters demanded President Barack Obama fire Attorney General Eric Holder. Agents on scene claimed a backpack abandoned on a sidewalk was a “suspicious package,” closing the Pennsylvania Avenue pedestrian mall in front of the White House, and the adjoining Lafayette Park, from protesters and tourists. All pedestrian traffic, including media, was forced to retreat to side streets. Officers roped the streets off with bright yellow crime scene tape and brought in bomb-sniffing K-9 dogs….
    http://dailycaller.com/2012/07/02/secret-service-shuts-down-fire-holder-protest-outside-white-house/

  96. holdthemaccountable
    July 2nd, 2012 at 8:15 am

    Trump: Health care ruling a ‘disaster,’

    ———
    The best part of Trump’s opinion of the HellCare ruling was when he said that even if, God forbid, Mitt doesn’t win, “…there is a lot Congress, (and the States) can do to dismantle this law

  97. Oh Yeah Obama that record holder of democratic rights.

    Its ok to protest in Tahrir Sq but not at 1600 Penn.

  98. OBUMMER DOWN -0.5% IN RCP

    And that’s with the Bloomberg +9 outlier (countered by the -9 Newsweek. Rasmussen has been yoyoing up and down, back to -7 now.

  99. Things are slow here because of the holiday. We may have a vistor reader here soon, Admin. Please welcome him and them, if others choose to read here. It was the lead Republican for my complex. He called to ask me to help again at the local headquarters like I did four years ago. I told him I had worked hard to elect McPalin. He said he knew I did. I told him about telling Palin about the 18 million cracks in the glass ceiling, and she seemed to use it. I told him I was a registered Independent and he said they would welcome help from Independents or Democrats. So…

    I proceeded to give him a brief synopsis of what the Hillary supporters had gone though, that Obama had been ‘selected’ not ‘elected.’ I gave him the name of this blog and the keywords to search for the May 31st Rules and Bylaws Committee Meeting with Harold Ickes. I stated that there are a huge number of the 18 million cracks just wanting a reason to vote with the Republicans again this time and I asked him to visit here. I stated that they still wanted Hillary to run, but she has not yet; but mostly there is a consensus that it must be ANYBODY BUT OBAMA.

    I forgot to tell him about our massive research efforts and only got about half way through how we boycotted the lamestream media and news outlets, boosted the Fox News programs and come back here to report so that scores of us will not have to go to the deep and dark media places. I stated that barring Hillary running, that the 18 million voters would be a great assett to defeating Obama; and that tapping that resource might put Romney over the edge to win.

    I explained a little about how those who were kicked out of the Dimocratic Party are now considered former Democrats, or FDR Democrats, or are still registered as Democrats for the effect that could have on the restructuring of the party in the future, but that MANY are just wanting to be asked to hold their nose and vote Republican.

    He knew of Harold Ickes….I hope that he reads here and watches the video. And if he is reading this post, then I implore him to take full use of this advantage to restore our once great country to the republic, and hopefully my littlest ones can live the Norman Rockwell life I enjoyed – and to share the information here and else of those who were kicked out of the Democratic party by Donna Brazille and her ilk.

  100. My concern about the SC possibly upholding the mandate turns out to be true. It was NOT struck down as some swore up and down it would be. And I was reading everything I could get my hands on about the case. I just had a feeling things were not going to shake out the way so many staked their reputations on. Turns out I was not unreasonable, ignorant, petulant. I was right. Just had to toot my horn about that.

    Gut instinct and common sense may not be substitutes for legal credentials but they don’t hurt.

  101. Rangel’s race just exploded. Missing precincts, opposition precincts mysteriously reporting no votes?

    http://politicker.com/2012/07/espaillat-compares-election-to-florida-vows-to-go-to-final-final-round/

    Espaillat Compares Election to Florida; Vows to Go to ‘Final, Final Round’

    Welcome to the Florida of Upper Manhattan and the Bronx.

    State Senator Adriano Espaillat, who had originally conceded the race against Congressman Charlie Rangel last Tuesday, clearly isn’t ready to go there just yet. At a packed press conference held in front of a senior center on 187th Street, Mr. Espaillat slammed the Board of Elections, lobbed allegations of voter suppression, and explained his plans going forward.

    “Mayor Bloomberg said a couple days ago that this electoral process is easily corruptible, that, in fact, the Board of Elections is a board that the average New Yorkers cannot trust,” Mr. Espaillat declared. “I agree with him.”

    “Our country has to rely on an election process and an election system that is verifiable, that is transparent and brings about confidence to everybody,” he continued. “We cannot have a Florida type situation in New York State, it’s just impossible that in the northeast of our country, that we have a situation similar to what happened in Florida between Gore and Bush!”

    Later this afternoon, his campaign will head to court to seek an injunction to allow more transparency in the tallying process. Describing the organization’s secrecy as illegal, Mr. Espaillat vowed to seek every vote counted (for every candidate in the race, he stressed).

    “If we cannot get relief in the process, we will go to the courts, and we will go to the final, final round, to ensure every vote … is counted, so that tomorrow, when the senior citizen or the young voter goes to the polls, they can be reassured that this democratic process works for them and not that it is rigged, or perhaps that there are backroom strategists put in place to prevent them from voting or to skew the results.”

    Mr. Espaillat cited a number of what he described as “irregularities” on Election Day, including an unusual lack of bilingual inspectors, the absence mailed notifications alerting voters to the new Election Day date this year, and Spanish language speakers being handed affidavit ballots instead of regular ones.

    “I have family members that were prime voters that go out to vote every single year, and when they went to vote, they were told this year that their name was not the list,” he said.

    He also argued that the missing precincts came overwhelmingly from his base of support in the Latino communities of northern Manhattan and the Bronx, as opposed to the Harlem neighborhoods that favored Mr. Rangel.

    “We had to beat up the Board of Elections to give us some level of answers, that 70 Electoral Districts came in at zero? That’s totally unacceptable in New York State. I thought that stuff happened in Florida or Mississippi somewhere, but not here,” he explained, adding later, ”I believe it was 23 ED’s that were reported as zero in the Bronx. There were 24 ED’s right here in my original 72nd Assembly District where I represented for 13 years, 13 … in the 71st. And only 7 in Harlem and East Harlem.”

    “I think that’s highly irregular.”

  102. Basil99
    ———
    You were listening to the right vibes and you did call it. Good on you!

    Here’s another angle of Oh’s alleged lack of money: [I left most of the text at the link.]
    Frantic Fundraising on Air Force One « Commentary Magazine

    …Obama is under pressure to provide evidence he outraised Romney, which explains the desperate phone call. snip. He’s also been burning through money at a much faster rate than Romney. Then there’s the legal questions about raising money on Air Force One. The plane must count as federal property, so is fundraising solicitation prohibited on it? President Clinton came under fire in 1997 for making fundraising calls on the Oval Office phone, which seems like a similar situation.
    http://www.commentarymagazine.com/2012/07/02/frantic-fundraising-on-air-force-one/

    On car radio Laura Ingraham (sp) was playing Flipper for Roberts. But he’s not the first to get that recognition….

  103. Whoops……………such class.

    Caught on Video: Arkansas Democrat Tells Story of Obamacare Opponent and ‘N***er Babies’

    http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/07/02/Caught-on-Video-Arkansas-Democrat-Tells-Story-of-Obamacare-Opponent-and-N-er-Babies

    Arkansas Democrat State Senator Gene Jeffress is perfectly comfortable saying the word “ni**er” at public events.

    Jeffress, who is running for Congress against Republican Tom Cotton, had a bizarre campaign event in which he tried to convince those in the room that Obamacare opponents are racist by telling a story about a woman who had told him she did not “want to pay for no more ni**er babies in Chicot County.”

    Jeffress then, essentially patting himself on the back, tells the small group that, based on the woman’s use of the “n-word,” he came to the conclusion that this sounded like “racism.”

    The bizarre video can be seen here

  104. Obama Administration Intimidation – “We Need To F-ck These Guys – We Need To Take Them Down”

    Following last week’s House contempt vote against Obama Attorney General Eric Holder, more evidence proves an aggressive campaign by administration officials to silence whistleblowers attempting to tell the truth about the failed and deadly Fast and Furious gunrunning operation.

    EXCERPT:

    In a Friday letter to the DOJ’s Inspector General Michael Horowitz, Grassley and Issa said they’re now concerned retaliation is much more likely following Thursday’s votes to hold Attorney General Eric Holder in criminal and civil contempt of Congress.

    “We just learned that ATF senior management placed two of the main whistleblowers who have testified before Congress about Fast and Furious under the supervision of someone who vowed to retaliate against them,” they wrote before describing how senior political figures have made dangerous threats before.

    Grassley and Issa said that in early 2011, right around the time Grassley first made public the whistleblowers’ allegations about Fast and Furious, Scot Thomasson – then the chief of the ATF’s Public Affairs Division – said, according to an eyewitness account: “We need to get whatever dirt we can on these guys [the whistleblowers] and take them down.”

    Thomasson also allegedly said that: “All these whistleblowers have axes to grind. ATF needs to f—k these guys.”

    According to Grassley and Issa, when Thomasson was asked about whistleblowers’ allegations that guns were allowed to walk, Thomasson said he “didn’t know and didn’t care.”

    http://theulstermanreport.com/2012/06/30/obama-administration-intimidation-we-need-to-f-ck-these-guys-we-need-to-take-them-down/

  105. Exclusive – The Vetting – Obama Praised Private Equity When He Needed Cash

    http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/07/02/Barack-Obama-Champion-of-Private-Equity

    President Barack Obama has attacked Gov. Mitt Romney’s record in the private equity industry as CEO of Bain Capital. But ten years ago, as he struggled to raise funds for his long-shot U.S. Senate campaign, then-State Senator Obama decided to embrace the private equity industry and its wealthy Chicago political donors. At one point, Obama even co-sponsored a resolution in the Illinois Senate calling calling private equity firms like Bain “the best opportunity for long-term economic vitality” and for “the creation of jobs.”

    Obama’s campaign ads dismissively compare Romney’s work at Bain to that of a “vampire” draining jobs and money from vulnerable companies and workers. After pushback from a handful of pro-free market Democrats in late May, the President himself publicly defended his campaign’s attacks on private equity firms like Bain.

    But records from Obama’s time as a state senator in Illinois, along with recollections of those who worked with him, present a very different stance. They indicate that Obama worked hard to position himself as a strong supporter of the venture capital industry. Obama attended industry social functions and used his position in the state senate to propose bills consistent with the legislative goals of the venture capital industry in the state.

    “The Barack Obama I knew in Springfield was very pro-private equity, private capital, and high technology” Republican State Senator Kirk Dillard, who served with Obama in the Illinois State Senate, said in a telephone interview with Breitbart News about Obama’s record last week. “Mr. Obama clearly had many friends in the private equity business when he was a legislator,” Dillard added.

    Maura O’Hara, the Executive Director of the Illinois Venture Capitalist Association, concurred with Dillard’s assessment: “When he was in the State Senate I would describe him as a supporter of our industry.” She recalls meeting Obama in 2002 at the IVCA’s annual award dinner. That year, the IVCA’s lifetime achievement award for “service to the private equity/venture capital community” was given to Jack Levin of Kirkland & Ellis Law Firm. State Senator Obama was asked to deliver the award because both he and Mr. Levin had attended Harvard Law School, albeit several decades apart. A photo from the event shows Obama grinning as he stands with his arm around Mr. Levin. Both men hold the award up between them.

    read on for the full hypocrisy…………..

  106. July 2nd, 2012 at 3:30 pm

    =================

    That’s Breitbart twisting a story. Quoting an enemy saying a dirty word, is not being “comfortable” with using it yourself.

  107. sorry, but Eric Ferhnstrom cannot…cannot be MR’s media spokesperson…he is not strong enough…and not quick enough to anticipate and/or pivot…

    MR needs a Rahm E, type A personality speaking for him…Eric seems nice enough but he is not going to be able to withstand the Chicago cabal…

  108. Re: BASIL99
    July 2nd, 2012 at 3:00 pm

    I am just as upset as you about the [supposedly] conservative Roberts voting on the liberal side; especially after it appears correct that he changed his vote in May after a decision had been made and rendered. How can anyone trust any politician when they go over to the other side; even if it was under ‘pressure.’If a politician goes for office; then they should know in their hearts and souls that they may have to lay down their life for their country and be willing to do so, if not do not run for office. My read on him was that he could have been strong enough to go against the headwind of a threat, but not one on his family. There was some brouhaha about him being targeted on the specifics of adoption of his children back in 2005. But the coverup of him caring about ‘opinions’ is just not working in my gut.

    That being said, it does not alter what just happended. Roberts has a life tenure; and the Supreme Court is the FINAL say, there is no recourse from the Supreme Court. HOWEVER, the silver lining is that he may have worked it to thwart the intentions of the threats or intimidation; and handed the citizens a victory that we should be grateful for. I will not document that here and now; others have been a great account of how it KILLED the use of the Commerce Clause for politicians elected or not to further erode the liberty of the citizens; and it gave ObamaTAXcare a pyrrhic win while the other side of that razor sharp sword gave the citizens a do over with the NOvember election. Now the questions remain: are the Republicans serious about winning this time, and are the citizens informed enough to care or to vote. I, for one, am thankful for the political win this decision gave. It this SC decision does not light a fire under Republican, Independents, and former Democrats, then all is lost and nothing will.Color me disappointed that Roberts was a wolf in sheep’s clothing; but happy that Romney just got handed the keys to the Oval Office. 🙂

  109. S
    July 2nd, 2012 at 4:22 pm

    sorry, but Eric Ferhnstrom cannot…cannot be MR’s media spokesperson…he is not strong enough…and not quick enough to anticipate and/or pivot…

    MR needs a Rahm E, type A personality speaking for him…Eric seems nice enough but he is not going to be able to withstand the Chicago cabal…
    ==========================

    Hi. I’ve been lurking on this site for a very long time. Romney needs to take a stand on this before his team blows it. Is he going to go after Zero for his obamatax or isn’t he?

    Romney adviser: Health care not a tax

    http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/jul/2/romney-adviser-health-care-not-a-tax/

  110. From my earlier post, the man who tried to rob the 7 eleven store that I had stopped at to make a purchase is in police custody according to some automated phone calls that I have been getting from Kentucky today. It appears that there is some type of process in which the police enter the phone number of a witness to a crime into a database that is used to keeps tabs on a criminal’s status. The system is called “the vine” or something like that, and the messages promise to keep me informed of the robber’s confinement status. Although I doubt that he will be released anytime soon, I suppose this system would make an automated call to me to let me know as a means for self-protection. I never knew this system existed, but I think it is a good idea. So, justice has been served so far to this creep who thought that he was going to take something by bullying a defenseless person. If you could have seen the clerk’s face after I came back into the store. She looked distressed or like she was sick to her stomach or something, and she was waving her hands to her face as if she needed air. She couldn’t talk nor catch her breath. She then said something about not being able to breathe. Poor girl. That’s when I asked her “did he do something to you”? I thought that maybe he was her boyfriend or someone she was involved with, and that he had verbally threatened her in some way.

  111. holdthemaccountable
    July 2nd, 2012 at 6:27 pm
    ————————–

    Now_ THAT_ WAS_ A_SMART_ THING_TO_DO.

    There is no question in my mind that Romney does not want to win this election. He is sparring with Obama and his posse from the get go. And, this is important for me to see because I was not a believer in Romney having that capability. Obama xoes know how to respond to him in a reasonable manner. Poor baby.

    Another one besides Jarret, Axelcrud, and Obama whi I can’t stand is Plouffe. He is vicious, and one of these days Plouffe will pull something out of his butt that just might stick to Romney. I hope that will not be the case, but It wouldn’t surprise me.

  112. In case I wasn’t clear, I believe that Romney wants to beat Obama and he will do
    what he deems necessary to accomplish that goal.

  113. I wonder how many of these people worked on the Twin Towers cleanup, Katrina toxic cleanup and other such hazardous work?
    —-

    (CNSNews.com) – A record of 8,733,461 workers took federal disability insurance payments in June 2012, according to the Social Security Administration. That was up from 8,707,185 in May.

    It also exceeds the entire population of New York City, which according to the Census Bureau’s latest estimate hit 8,244,910 in July 2011.

    There has been a dramatic shrinkage in the United States over the past 20 years in the number of workers actually employed and earning paychecks per worker who is not employed and is taking federal disability insurance payments.

    http://cnsnews.com/news/article/8733461-workers-federal-disability-exceed-population-new-york-city

  114. I wonder how many of these people worked on the Twin Towers cleanup, Katrina toxic cleanup and other such hazardous work?
    —-

    “(CNSNews.com) – A record of 8,733,461 workers took federal disability insurance payments in June 2012, according to the Social Security Administration. ”

    =====================

    Good point.

    CNS is “Conservative News Service/System/Something.” They make twisted stories that sound good till you examine them.

    “There has been a dramatic shrinkage in the United States over the past 20 years in the number of workers actually employed and earning paychecks per worker who is not employed and is taking federal disability insurance payments.”

    Funniest thing — since jobs have been shrinking ever since Bill Clinton left office. But most SS disabilities are permanent.

    And what does New York have to do with it? Any number out of the national population is going to match the population of some city somewhere. Maybe they set it up to look at a quick reading like more people were disabled in NY than working, oh noes!

  115. As I said the other day, I think Roberts will have to step down as Chief Justice. The more details that emerge on this disastrous decision, the more obvious it becomes that he was improperly influenced by external sources after the case was presented. That situation cannot exist at the highest level of the judicial system. Rather than stability he has given chaos to the country, and has politicized the one institution which the country looked to until now as a defender of the Constitution. All my instincts tell me there is something going on here that is even worse than what we know at this point. I find it more than significant–I find it telling that Roberts refused to articulate to conservative colleagues on the court a convincing explanation for his diametic change. ANY PROSECUTING ATTORNEY would be highly suspicous of this entire scenario, which goes light years beyond what has happened in the past. One could argue, I suppose, that his namesake, the earlier Justice Roberts of Philadelphia, made a similiar flop, as did Charles Evans Hughes during the Roosevelt era, under the direct public threat by Roosevelt to expand and pack the Court. But whatever inducement happened here was not done in public, and the explanation that this Roberts reads newspapers and cares more about his personal reputation than his duty to uphold the Constitution, that he would invent an excuse to uphold this act, suggests that what we know about the risk to his reputation is merely the tip of the iceberg. Knowing the modus operandi of the Chicago machine, it is not beyond the pale that they have something on him. I would like to believe otherwise, but in the absense of a coherent explanation for this amazing and unprecedented flop what else are we to assume?
    ———————————————-
    More Scorn for Chief Justice Roberts as Details of Switch Leak

    219

    26

    39

    ——————————————————————————–

    Email Article
    Print ArticleSend a Tip

    by Joel B. Pollak2 Jul 2012, 5:03 AM PDT414post a comment

    As Breitbart News suggested last week, it appears Chief Justice John Roberts did, in fact, switch his vote on the Obamacare decision under pressure from President Barack Obama, the Democrats, and the mainstream media. John Fund at National Review has more details today–including evidence about a bizarre address by Senator Patrick Leahy (D-VT), chair of the Judiciary Committee, that singled out Roberts himself:

    Indeed, Senator Patrick Leahy (Vt., D.) , the chair of the Judiciary Committee, suddenly took to the floor on May 14 and directly addressed Roberts, urging him in harshly partisan tones to uphold Obamacare and maintain “the proper role of the judicial branch.”

    Stewart Baker, a partner at the Washington law firm Steptoe & Johnson, writes at the Volokh Conspiracy that he found the whole campaign against Roberts weird and unusual, given that the justices’ conference vote on Obamacare had been held six weeks earlier. Why “would the chair of the Judiciary Committee risk the appearance of trying to harshly strongarm the Court when his remarks wouldn’t make the slightest difference?” he asks. “The Leahy speech reads like it was written for an audience of one. It offers flattery and it offers threats, all of them personalized to appeal to Chief Justice Roberts alone.”

    Fund adds that the White House likely benefited from leaks at the Court, and almost certainly knew of Roberts’s switch–just as it almost certainly knew of the initial vote to throw out the individual mandate in March:

    The week before the Supreme Court announced its decision, the White House was clearly hinting to many in the media and on Capitol Hill that they expected a 5–4 opinion that would hinge on the taxing-power issue. Did someone leak? Sunday on Face the Nation, Jan Crawford of CBS News said that two reliable sources told her that Roberts originally voted, in late March, with the four conservative justices to invalidate the individual mandate. According to Crawford, Roberts suddenly changed sides some six weeks later and then resisted “a month-long desperate campaign by the conservative justices to bring him back to the fold.”

    I’ve learned from my own sources that after voting to invalidate the mandate, the chief did express some skepticism about joining the four conservatives in throwing out the whole law. At the justices’ conference, there was discussion about accepting the Obama administration’s argument, which was that, if the individual mandate was removed, the provisions governing community rating and guaranteed issue of insurance would have to go too but that the rest of the law might stand. The chief justice was equivocal, though, in his views on that point.

    The more the public learns about Roberts’s decision, the more people are likely to hate it. Fund notes that even David Brooks of the New York Times agrees that Roberts “had to get to a certain result, and he was going to find a way by hook or by crook.” It’s a conclusion that aptly expresses how Obamacare was conceived, how it was passed, and now how it has been upheld by one of the worst decisions in recent years

  116. father_moray

    Robert’s school days clearly offer you a clue as to what Democrats have on him…positions of power require adequate vetting. Because as we all have seen, what one appears to be may only hide what actually exists.
    These God damned shapeshifters…

  117. You all have to see this to truly understand the Dean/Pelosi/Brazille version of the Democrat party. No wonder Obama was the “chosen one” and not Hillary.
    ——————-
    This young punk should be selling crack on the street corner rather than on MSNBC. He looks the part. Government must demand people accept change? This statement rests on the fundamental non-sequitur of perfect government. Also, it belies the entire notion of representative democracy which is the foundation of the old republic. Time and again what we have seen is those with supposedly superior intellect and knowledge telling us there is a crisis when there is none, formulating over broad solutions that employ lots of bureacrats and solving nothing, and then refusing to take feedback from reality. This is what this young msnbc crackhead is peddling to the junkies who are desparate enough to buy it.

  118. Don’t be fooled by the false praise being heaped upon Chief Justice John Roberts by the mainstream media and its favorite go-to legal commentators. Jeffrey Toobin, no less, of the New Yorker and CNN, lets the cat out of the bag–they are celebrating Roberts’s opinion in the Obamacare case, even though they know it is a total farce:

    In the end, of course, Roberts did uphold the A.C.A. as an exercise of the constitutional power to tax. Frankly, that argument is not a persuasive one. As the conservative Justices wrote in their joint dissenting opinion, taxes are enforced contributions to support a government; penalties are punishments for unlawful acts. The individual mandate is clearly designed to induce the purchase of insurance, and the only people who have to pay the fees are the ones who refuse to go along. That sounds a lot like a penalty. But it was good enough for Roberts, and it led to the correct result. Any port will do in a constitutional storm.

    A constitutional storm, yes–one of Obama’s own creation, when Obamacare passed in March 2010 and when he attacked the Supreme Court in March 2012.

    It’s in the left’s interest to praise Roberts now, having demonized him in the weeks leading up to the decision. Not only does the ruling uphold Obamacare and give apparent substance to the Obama presidency, but it also gives the left an excuse to keep beating up the so-called conservative, “politicized” Court over its Commerce Clause holding, while demonstrating that such bullying is devastatingly effective.

    As the Wall Street Journal notes today, Roberts’s decision is a blow to the rule of law. And the left is laughing.

  119. Chief Justice Roberts’s ruling is careless about these bedrock tax questions, and they are barely addressed by either the Court’s liberal or conservative wings. His ruling, with its multiple contradictions and inconsistencies, reads as if it were written by someone affronted by the government’s core constitutional claims but who wanted to uphold the law anyway to avoid political blowback and thus found a pretext for doing so in the taxing power.

    If this understanding is correct, then Chief Justice Roberts behaved like a politician, which is more corrosive to the rule of law and the Court’s legitimacy than any abuse it would have taken from a ruling that President Obama disliked. The irony is that the Chief Justice’s cheering section is praising his political skills, not his reasoning. Judges are not supposed to invent political compromises.

    “It is not our job,” the Chief Justice writes, “to protect the people from the consequences of their political choices.” But the Court’s most important role is to protect liberty when the political branches exceed the Constitution’s bounds, not to bless their excesses in the interests of political or personal expediency or both. On one of the most consequential cases he will ever hear, Chief Justice Roberts failed this most basic responsibility

    http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702303561504577496603068605864.html?mod=WSJ_hp_mostpop_read

  120. To repeat, the pattern of behavior here is most disturbing:

    1. First, Roberts opposes the individual mandate.

    2. Second, Leahy (aka Senator Joke–to his colleagues) makes a speech aimed at Roberts threatening to screw up his reputation.

    3. Third, the suggestion above that the dims have something on him from his school days, plus the standard practice of the Chicago Machine to deal in blackmail.

    4. Fourth, in the aftermath of that speech he switches his position and decides to uphold the individual mandate.

    5. Fifth, when asked why he switched he fails to articulate a convincing explanation to his fellow members on the court.

    6. Sixth, when pressed by his conservative colleagues to return to the fold he refuses to budge.

    7. Seventh, he issues which ignores the constitution in order to uphold the mandate.

  121. The commentary on John Roberts’s solo walk into the Affordable Care Act wilderness is converging on a common theme: The Chief Justice is a genius. All of a sudden he is a chessmaster, a statesman, a Burkean minimalist, a battle-loser but war-winner, a Daniel Webster for our times.

    Now that we’ve had more time to take in Chief Justice Roberts’s reasoning, we have a better summary: politician. In fact, his 5-4 ruling validating the constitutional arguments against purchase mandates and 5-4 ruling endorsing them as taxes is far more dangerous, and far more political, even than it first appeared last week.

    This is a minority view. By right-left acclaim, at least among elites, the Chief Justice has engineered a Marbury v. Madison-like verdict that camouflages new limits on federal power as a reprieve for President Obama’s entitlement legacy and in a stroke enhanced the Supreme Court’s reputation—and his own. This purported “long game” appeals to conservatives who can console themselves with a moral victory, while the liberals who like to assail the Chief Justice as a radical foe of democracy can continue their tantrum.

    It’s an elegant theory whose only flaw is that it is repudiated by Chief Justice Roberts’s own language and logic. His gambit substitutes one unconstitutional expansion of government power for another and rearranges the constitutional architecture of the U.S. political system.

    ***
    His first error is the act of rewriting the plain text of a law, instead of practicing the disinterested interpretation that is the task of the judiciary, regardless of the partisan outcome. The second error is converting the health insurance mandate’s penalty into a tax. Ninety years of precedents have honed precise and widely divergent legal meanings for taxes and penalties for violating laws or regulations, and they are not interchangeable.

    The Chief Justice did not simply change a label—as if Congress said something was a penalty when it was really a tax. Rather, these categories are defined by their purposes and effects, by how they operate in practice. Taxes are “exactions” whose main goal is raising revenue, while penalties punish individuals for breaking the law. The boundaries can blur—legitimate taxes may also have strong punitive aims—but scarcely so in this case. ObamaCare’s mandate was designed to regulate individual conduct to help achieve universal coverage. If it succeeds perfectly, it should collect $0.

    Even if Democrats had passed the mandate tax as rewritten by the Chief Justice, and they did not, the Supreme Court until Thursday has never held that Congress can call anything it wants a tax. The taxing power like the Commerce Clause is broad, and the courts are generally deferential. But all powers the Constitution enumerates are also limited, and these limits—unique to each power—must be meaningful and enforceable by the legal system.

    Enlarge Image

    Close
    Associated Press

    Chief Justice John Roberts.
    .
    The Chief Justice’s compounding errors deprive the taxing power of any viable limiting principles. Article I, section 8 gives Congress an independent grant of 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.” Taxes must originate in the House, the political body designed to be most responsive to voters. There are also important additional safeguards on the type of exactions known as “direct taxes.”

    Indirect taxes—”duties, imposts and excises”—are taxes on activities and products. They are passed on by a seller, triggered by a transaction and more or less optional: Consumers don’t have to buy taxed goods and services. Direct taxes, on the other hand, are those that the federal government is empowered to impose on individuals as citizens. They cannot be avoided because they are levied on the existence of people.

    America has its origins in a rebellion against arbitrary and pernicious taxation and the Framers wanted to make it extremely difficult to impose or raise direct taxes. These can easily morph into plenary police powers, the regulation of private behavior and conduct that the Constitution vests in the states. For this reason, while the taxing power in addition to raising revenue can achieve regulatory results, those regulatory results must be constitutional themselves.

    ***
    That boundary held for 225 years until Thursday’s ruling, as the Court had repeatedly struck down Congress’s efforts to arrogate to itself police powers under either the Commerce Clause or the taxing power. The Chief Justice ruled instead that the mandate was an unconstitutional exercise of federal police powers under the Commerce Clause, only to transform the taxing power into a license for the federal government to impose taxes whose defining feature is commanding people as members of society.

    Chief Justice Roberts concedes that “Congress’s ability to use its taxing power to influence conduct is not without limits” and that in the 19th and early 20th centuries the Supreme Court “policed these limits aggressively, invalidating punitive exactions obviously designed to regulate behavior otherwise regarded at the time as beyond federal authority.” But then he writes that “more recently we have declined to closely examine the regulatory motive or effect of revenue-raising measures.”

    His error—or more likely, his deliberate sleight-of-hand—is that this modern jurisprudence does not deal with direct taxes but indirect taxes and income taxes. Income taxes were authorized in 1913 by the Sixteenth Amendment, which was necessary to bypass the other important limit on direct taxes, called apportionment.

    The Constitution says that “No Capitation, or other direct, Tax shall be laid, unless in Proportion to the Census or enumeration herein before directed to be taken.” Colloquially, direct taxes are known as head taxes and they must be spread among the states according to population. Apportionment’s onerous limits were meant to protect against abuse and sectional favoritism. If Congress uses direct taxes, the residents of South Carolina will pay the same overall share as Massachusetts, and so forth.

    But apportionment would defeat the mandate tax’s “whole point,” the Chief Justice writes, since every state will have a different percentage of citizens that are uninsured. So he cryptically rules that “A tax on going without health insurance does not fall within any recognized category of direct tax.”

    But if not a direct tax, then what kind of tax is it? It is not an indirect tax because it applies to a failure to purchase something, what the Chief Justice calls “an omission,” not an optional transaction. It is not a tax on income because that merely hits “accessions to wealth,” not what people choose or choose not to do with those accessions.

    The result is that Chief Justice Roberts has created the only tax in U.S. history that exceeds its own constitutional limits and is meant to execute powers that the Court otherwise ruled were invalid. His discovery erases the limiting principle—apportionment—that constrains the taxing power for everything besides income and excises.

    In the process, Chief Justice Roberts has hollowed out dual federal-state sovereignty and eviscerated the very limit on the Commerce Clause that he posits elsewhere in his opinion and that has some conservatives singing his praises. From now on, Congress can simply regulate interstate commerce by imposing “taxes” whenever someone does or does not do something contrary to its desires.

    The Chief Justice seems to understand this, so he tries to articulate his own new limiting principle for the tax power. His mandate tax isn’t a mandate but merely a suggestion: choose to buy insurance or “pay money into the Federal Treasury, no more,” an act he likens to a tax on gasoline. He also temporizes that “taxes that seek to influence conduct are nothing new.”

    True enough, but the punishments in the tax code for inactivity come in the form of not being able to claim benefits that Congress in its graces bestows. Such as: If you don’t borrow to buy a home, you don’t get a mortgage interest deduction.

    Congress has never passed a tax on a lack of gasoline or a tax on a failure to buy gasoline, any more than Congress can regulate inactivity under the Commerce Clause by telling people to buy gasoline or else pay a penalty. The reality is that Washington would love to regulate the ordinary economic choices that used to be beyond its purview, and now it will be able to abuse the ad hoc “tax” permit that the Chief Justice has given it.

    ***
    The John-Roberts-as-Daniel-Webster school argues that the long-term limits on the Commerce Clause and other aspects of the ruling are a good trade for the loss of upholding ObamaCare, and government excess has now reached its high-water mark and will recede over time. That false hope seems unlikely given the subversion of the taxing power and unleashing a general federal police power. This is equally harmful to liberty and dual sovereignty.

    One possible saving grace is that this center-right country remains suspicious of taxation, and therefore the Chief Justice increases accountability somewhat through truth-in-labeling. But note how Democrats are already claiming that the ObamaCare mandate is not really the tax that is the only reason it was upheld.

    White House chief of staff Jack Lew said Sunday that “The law is clear. It’s called a penalty.” Neither sentence is true. On Friday, the Obama re-election “truth team” was even less subtle in a memo titled “They’re lying about ObamaCare” that made the same claim. Chief Justice Roberts has created a creature that is not a tax for political purposes but is a tax for constitutional purposes.

    Chief Justice Roberts’s ruling is careless about these bedrock tax questions, and they are barely addressed by either the Court’s liberal or conservative wings. His ruling, with its multiple contradictions and inconsistencies, reads if it were written by someone affronted by the government’s core constitutional claims but who wanted to uphold the law anyway to avoid political blowback and thus found a pretext for doing so in the taxing power.

    If this understanding is correct, then Chief Justice Roberts behaved like a politician, which is more corrosive to the rule of law and the Court’s legitimacy than any abuse it would have taken from a ruling that President Obama disliked. The irony is that the Chief Justice’s cheering section is praising his political skills, not his reasoning. Judges are not supposed to invent political compromises.

    “It is not our job,” the Chief Justice writes, “to protect the people from the consequences of their political choices.” But the Court’s most important role is to protect liberty when the political branches exceed the Constitution’s bounds, not to bless their excesses in the interests of political or personal expediency or both. On one of the most consequential cases he will ever hear, Chief Justice Roberts failed this most basic responsibility.

  122. The Obama campaign has seized on remarks made by Romney adviser Eric “Etch-A-Sketch” Fehrnstrom this morning on MSNBC, to the effect that the individual mandate in Obamacare (and Romneycare) is not a tax.

    Fehrnstrom allowed Chuck Todd to push him off message–and re-ignited the fears that conservatives have long had about Romney’s will and ability to fight. In response, conservatives–who had just coalesced around opposition to what many now call “Obamatax”–exhort: Mitt, start fighting, or give up and let someone else do it.

    Fehrnstrom’s point–in defense of Romneycare–was that the Supreme Court was wrong to uphold Obamacare under the taxing power. The individual mandate was never intended to be a tax, Congress never called it a tax, and it wasn’t a tax in Massachusetts, either. Fine–but now that Obama’s lawyers went to court and called it a tax, and Chief Justice John Roberts called it a tax (and spare us the non-distinction between “tax” and the “taxing power”) Obamacare is, undeniably, a massive tax on the middle class. Obama lied. It’s that simple.

    The GOP primary is over, and this is not a mistake that Fehrnstrom can merely shake away. It’s going to be used–and already is being used–by the Obama campaign to save itself from the tax argument, and to label Romney as a liar (when that label belongs squarely on Obama, who campaigned against Hillary Clinton’s individual mandate in 2008). Perhaps this is why Rupert Murdoch has been calling openly for Romney to “drop…old friends from [his] team and hire…some real pros,” as he did on Twitter yesterday.

    The Tea Party has been ready to rally to Romney’s side over the Obamacare decision, overlooking his past in order to use him as the vehicle for repealing Obamacare and toppling Obama. But if Romney won’t fight for conservative principles, the Tea Party is going to start looking elsewhere–fast. No one wants to live through the frustration of October 2008 all over again. No one wants to watch another conservative capitulate to Obama.

    This ain’t Etch-A-Sketch, Mitt. Go hard or go home.

  123. Shadowfax
    July 2nd, 2012 at 7:24 pm
    I wonder how many of these people worked on the Twin Towers cleanup, Katrina toxic cleanup and other such hazardous work?
    ***************

    A drop in the bucket. Unfortunately it has become an easy pass on life for alcoholics, drug addicts and bipolar dx. I have 20 year olds as patients getting disability and all they do is live at home, do drugs, piss off the parents, come into the hospital because life is “hard”, and do it all over again. It’s disgusting and the lawyers and doctors responsible for signing those affidavits should be hung.

  124. Leagl Insurrection

    ****
    “What if the Supreme Court had called a dog a cat, would we then be required to call a dog a cat, particularly if it were better for us?”

    Just so.

    •What if we have to destroy the village in order to save it?
    •What if we have to check the box that says “Native-American” in order to get that job at Harvard?
    •What if we have to accuse gay-friendly Israel of “pink washing” in order to keep our left-wing bona fides in order?
    •What if we have to make sure that the first African-American president is reelected even though he’s been a disaster for African Americans?
    •What if we have to triple the deficit to bring down the debt?
    •What happens if we have to blame summer on man?
    •What happens if we deny oil-drilling permits and then insist we can do nothing to bring down the price of oil?
    •What happens if the unemployment rate comes down only because millions have dropped out of the job hunt?
    •What happens when there’s too much absurdity to remember it all?
    •What happens if Orwell wasn’t kidding?

    We’re finding out.

  125. MARC THIESSEN: Why Are Republicans So Awful At Picking Supreme Court Justices? Because they listen to the media, and because they’re intellectually insecure. Thiessen:

    Just compare the records over the last three decades. Democrats have appointed four justices — Ruth Bader Ginsberg, Stephen G. Breyer, Elena Kagan and Sonia Sotomayor. All have been consistent liberals on the bench. Republicans, by contrast, have picked seven justices. Of Ronald Reagan’s three appointees (Sandra Day O’Connor, Antonin Scalia and Anthony M. Kennedy) only Scalia has been a consistent conservative. George H.W. Bush appointed one solid conservative (Clarence Thomas) and one disastrous liberal (David Souter). With George W. Bush’s appointments of Samuel A. Alito Jr. and Roberts, conservatives thought finally they had broken the mold and put two rock-ribbed conservatives on the bench — until last week, that is, when Roberts broke with the conservatives and cast the deciding vote to uphold the largest expansion of federal power in decades.

    So Democrats are four-for-four — a perfect record. Republicans are not even batting .500.

    Why is the Democratic record so consistent while the Republican record is so mixed? For one thing, the whole legal and political culture pushes the court to the left. Conservatives are pariahs if they vote against the left on certain issues. But if they cross over vote with the left, they are hailed as statesmen. Just look the pre-emptive attacks on the Roberts Court when everyone thought it was about to strike down Obamacare — and contrast that with all the accolades Roberts is now receiving from his erstwhile critics.

    Indeed. But generally speaking, Establishment Republicans care more about remaining part of the Establishment than they do about being Republicans.

    Posted at 10:12 pm by Glenn Reynolds

  126. Here comes the race card, again…when all else fails, pull out the race card…

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/eric-holder-says-republicans-have-made-him-a-proxy-to-attack-president-obama/2012/07/02/gJQAKDxMJW_story.html?wpisrc=al_politics

    “The attorney general has long been a lightning rod for Republican lawmakers’ anger toward the Obama administration. But Holder said the debate over documents related to the gun operation, known as “Fast and Furious” — along with the National Rifle Association’s attempts to make it an electoral issue — have made matters worse.

    “I’ve become a symbol of what they don’t like about the positions this Justice Department has taken,” he said. “I am also a proxy for the president in an election year. You have to be exceedingly naive to think that vote was about . . . documents.”

  127. What happens if we have to blame summer on man?

    =======================

    Summer has happened for centuries: this kind of summer has not.

  128. It’s going to be used–and already is being used–by the Obama campaign to save itself from the tax argument, and to label Romney as a liar (when that label belongs squarely on Obama, who campaigned against Hillary Clinton’s individual mandate in 2008).

    ===============================

    Both Romney and Obama are liars. (And would Hillary’s mandate have been a mandate or a tax?)

  129. Romney better tell this etch-a-stetch idiot to either shut the hell up or get a new spokeman. We don’t need this wishy-washy idiot giving prime ad material to OTurd.
    And stop going on MSDNC!!!!!! are these republicans this stupid??? Chuckie Toad is nothing but an extension of OTurd’s camp. I don’t ever see AxelHole going on Fox News! OMG, these repubs are stupid, I thought they were pretty smart, but get that evil Turd Blossom Rove in there or someone like him, this Eric Feldtorm of Romney’s camp sounds a pushover.

    This is a tax, it was a tax in MA, its a tax in Oturd-care. The only difference and main one is the 10th amendment, someone doesn’t like the policy in MA? they can leave MA and go to any of the other 49 states, now a US citizen is taxed for NOT buying a private product no matter where in the 50 states he goes. Conservatives already know what Romney did in MA, they oppose it, they are willing to overlook it because Romney is willing to repeal it for the states and millions of Americans who don’t want to be forced to buy something by coersion.

    “Romney, Obama Agree on Part of Health Care Law ”
    http://www.cnbc.com/id/48054807

  130. Everyone of us is likely concerned about the headline tim provided @ 6:45. but I think Romney should deal with it by quickly issuing a gentle correction. Let’s face it; no one is perfect and no one but Obama Team gets the press passes. This stuff is going to happen from now until the GE. Romney does have the strength and civility to set most matter straight. I personally do not care to see the man do a perp walk. Now. Staying off MSNBC? That’s probably an excellent strategy.

  131. Eric Holder says Republicans have made him a ‘proxy’ to attack President Obama

    errrr no gobshite, its because you are sticking 2 fingers up at the peoples representatives who are wanting answers and you work for the people. He is so full of himself.

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/eric-holder-says-republicans-have-made-him-a-proxy-to-attack-president-obama/2012/07/02/gJQAKDxMJW_story.html?hpid=z1

    Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. sharply criticized lawmakers Monday for voting to hold him in contempt of Congress last week, saying Republicans have made him a “proxy” to attack President Obama in an election year.

    In his first interview since Thursday’s vote, Holder said lawmakers have used an investigation of a botched gun-tracking operation as a way to seek retribution against the Justice Department for its policies on a host of issues, including immigration, voting rights and gay marriage. He said the chairman of the committee leading the inquiry, Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.), is engaging in political theater as the Justice Department tries to focus on public safety.

  132. “the left will eventually bemoan the Obama health scam ruling and conservatives will see it as a Thurgoodian pool game that set the table up for them. We stated well before the decision came down that Obama was in a lose/lose situation. The Obama health scam was not struck down but Obama is still in a lose scenario. Right now though Coral Sea conservatives are determined to stomp their feet and be angry that Mitt Romney is not the right messenger, that their guy (or Bachmann) would be better against Barack Obama on health care. ”

    Wish I could agree with this, but what we have now is a openly political “supreme” court with corruptable justices like Roberts who can bullied into voting a certain way. It happened now, it will happen again in the future, anyone who is coward like John Roberts has shown himself to be a blatant politician in a black robe and a coward.
    I listened to Mark Levin on Fox yesterday, I would agree with him on his point, the Supreme Ct does not deserve the reverence it has, I know just as one american citizen, I had tremendous respect for the Ct previously, I find myself saying I no longer do, especially when this was blatant showcasing of Roberts –reading the NYT, getting bullied by OTurd, etc, and then changing a vote.

    If John Roberts cowardly changed his vote to “preserve” the Supreme Ct’s reputation, I don’t think he has a damn clue, his cowardly appeasement of being bullied will have the opposite effect, the instition, the one institution other than the US military, was the subject of millions of Americans’s faith being one of a very instiutions that took its oath to uphold the Constitution seriously. But now its exposed itself as nothing but a bunch of political hustlers more concerned about their future legacies than the future preservation of liberty that so many died for, for the American citizenry.
    Roberts and the other 4 should hang their heads in shame, but they’re probably too busy patting themselves on the back while reading and listening to ivory tower elitist leftist pundits.

  133. and good for Gov Scott and Gov Jindal for refusing to implement this crap of a law. It will hurt so many people, tax those who can’t afford it, and make the very entities they wanted to have more competition, the insurance industry, to get more powerful and centralized.

    I wonder how the dems would react if the repubs had passed a law that would have forced americans to buy a private product like a gun or then be taxed by the federal govt?

  134. A few days behind admin, but here it is at FoxNews:

    Romney accuses Obama of ‘vicious lies’ on Bain Capital
    By James Rosen Published July 03, 2012
    “So shame on you, Barack Obama!” cries out the voice in the latest TV ad from the Romney campaign, airing only in Ohio. Yet the voice belongs not to presumptive GOP nominee Mitt Romney, but to an unlikely figure to appear in any Romney commercial: Hillary Clinton….
    http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/07/02/romney-accuses-obama-vicious-lies-on-bain-capital/

  135. This was a political move by Roberts. By ignoring the ACA as written and passed and rewriting it so it would be constitutional he deprived the people of their proper congressional representation because many congress critters would NOT have signed on to the bill had it been couched in language indicating it was a tax.

    The congress was LIED to, deliberately, by BO, Pelosi, Reid and others. In 2010 they called the funding mechanism a penalty. They did everything possible not to call it a tax because they wanted to avoid political fallout. The definitions of penalty and tax are different. Congress agreed to the bill with, no republicans signing on to it, plenty of backroom deals like the Cornhusker Kickback and a Christmas Eve vote during which the dims were assured by the congressional leadership and BO that it was a penalty.

    THEN, two years later, when it seemed the penalty was not constitutional, the administration argued that never mind, the penalty was really a tax.

    This is pure unadulterated BS. It is lies, obfuscation and approaches the level of the WH security leaks – a deliberate withholding of info to solidify power. It is contemptible. And the SCOTUS enabled this horrible tactic.

    I don’t doubt many dems will now be on the ropes if they’re up for reelection but it’s too late for the people to have a real say in the decision.

    Had the court ruled the (former) mandate unconstitutional as written and thrown it back to congress for reconsideration that would have been one thing.

    But to simply gut the law’s original foundation to transform it (to BO’s advantage) into something that was then constitutionally palatable is another.

    It is judicial activism on steroids and it is a horrible blow to the constitution..
    Semantics matters

  136. Public Schedule: Public Schedule for July 3, 2012
    07/03/2012 08:01 AM EDT

    Public Schedule for July 3, 2012

    Public Schedule
    Washington, DC

    July 3, 2012

    SECRETARY HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON

    Secretary Clinton has no public events.

  137. CNN poll: President +3 over Romney nationwide. But in key swing states where election will be decided, it says Romney +8

    POLL: In 15 swing states, Romney leads Obama 51% to 43%…

    http://news.yahoo.com/poll-romney-claims-slight-edge-15-battleground-states-164545408.html;_ylt=A2KLOzGP5vJPnRUA.Q3QtDMD

    President Obama remains marginally ahead of Mitt Romney in a new national CNN/ORC International poll released on Monday, although Romney leads Obama in the 15 states identified by the network as battleground states.

    Obama leads Romney nationally, 49 percent to 46 percent, with 4 percent of those surveyed saying they would vote for another candidate or neither candidate. That is inside the poll’s margin of error, and it is identical to the 49 percent to 46 percent lead Obama had in the previous poll, conducted in late May. It is also similar to the latest Gallup tracking poll, which shows Obama leading Romney by 5 percentage points, the president’s high-water mark from a survey house that has been less favorable to him thus far during the campaign. That lead among registered voters is Obama’s largest in Gallup since April.

    However, in the 15 states CNN calls its battleground states — Arizona, Colorado, Florida, Indiana, Iowa, Michigan, Missouri, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Mexico, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Virginia, and Wisconsin — Romney leads Obama, 51 percent to 43 percent. Notably, though, the CNN/ORC International group includes three states thought to be comfortably in the Romney column this cycle: Arizona, Indiana, and Missouri.

  138. Mitt edging upwards again.

    The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Tuesday shows Mitt Romney attracting 47% of the vote, while President Obama earns 44%. Four percent (4%) prefer some other candidate, and five percent (5%)

  139. BASIL99
    July 3rd, 2012 at 8:59 am
    *******

    You give them too much credit, they knew it was a tax, we all knew, they just didn’t want the word in black and white

  140. I’ve been thinking: The People fought O’Care every step of the way, yet it made it through to reality.
    Now we hear “it cannot be undone.”
    Me? I’ve no idea what it would take, but here’s an optimistic look:

    The Roadmap for Obamacare Repeal
    by Keith Koffler on July 3, 2012, 10:24 am
    Writing in the Wall Street Journal Former Bush National Economic Council Director Keith Hennessey provides a How-To Guide for the upcoming Eradicate & Replace campaign that Republicans will wage against Obamacare. Hennessey, who blogs at keithhennessey.com, writes that a win by Mitt Romney and a simple majority of Republican senators – as well as a GOP House – will suffice for the repeal, something I’ve also written here at WHD. But Hennessey, who was also a top policy aide to former Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott (R-Miss.) and knows Capitol Hill procedures well, is specific about how this can be done. Hennessey writes that most of the law can be repealed through the reconciliation process – which avoids a filibuster and requires only 50 votes for passage, instead of the usual 60 – and that the rest will then fall on its own:….
    http://www.whitehousedossier.com/2012/07/03/roadmap-obamacare-repeal/

    Maybe legal eagles here will enjoy the read; it’s probably beyond me. However, I’m very happy; the headline is an upper!

  141. Watch Krauthammer here. He is right, and O’Reilly is his normal opinionated seldom right but never in doubt self. The key point is O’Reilly asserts that the reason Roberts did the wrong thing was because he does not want the court to be put in a position where it has to decide constitutional issues which can be thrown back to the electorate. Krauthammer tells him then why have a Supreme Court at all. He tells him that Roberts motive was to insulate the court from political criticism and he ended up doing the exact opposite.

    http://video.foxnews.com/v/1717423448001/krauthammer-justice-roberts-was-intimidated-by-the-left/?playlist_id=87937

    With big media reduced to a mouthpiece for the administration, with the Supreme Court precluded from doing its job, and twisting itself into a prezel to justfy its advication by fear of recriminations in the press, I see echoes of Nazi Germany. The ultimate goal is not elections but plebecites. Liberty is a forgotten memory.

  142. ABM90

    Public Schedule: Public Schedule for July 3, 2012

    July 3, 2012

    SECRETARY HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON

    Secretary Clinton has no public events.

    ——-
    I hope Hillary really has a day off today and doesn’t have to meet with anyone but her family.

    Take a rest Dear Hillary.

  143. GOP governors stand ground against ObamaCare despite ruling

    June 27, 2012: Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal speaks in West Monroe, La. (AP)

    Far from being discouraged by the Supreme Court decision upholding the federal health care overhaul, Republican governors are cranking up opposition to the law’s implementation — refusing to carry out two key provisions in the hope November’s election will give the party enough votes to repeal it.

    The list of GOP governors who have announced they will not move forward on the law has grown significantly since the high court ruling last Thursday.

    At least 18 governors now say they are at least considering not expanding Medicaid — effectively exploiting the one part of the ruling that came down in Republicans’ favor. Previously, the law called on states to expand their Medicaid rolls and threatened to withhold money to those states that did not agree. The Supreme Court nixed that prescribed punishment, taking away the federal government’s stick.

    Aside from resisting the Medicaid expansion, several GOP governors have also said they will not move forward on creating so-called insurance exchanges. Those exchanges, set to go into effect in 2014, are meant to be the state-based marketplaces where strictly regulated insurance plans will be available for purchase.

    States, though, have made little progress toward that call. According to a detailed list maintained by the Kaiser Family Foundation, just 15 states are in the process of setting them up.

    In the wake of last Thursday’s ruling, GOP-led states in particular are digging in their heels on both fronts.

    Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal told Fox News on Tuesday that he wants governors to “stand up and say no.”

    “It makes no sense. This is a bad law,” he said. Jindal is among the governors who have vowed to block the Medicaid expansion and the set-up of exchanges.

    “We’re not expanding Medicaid. We’re not implementing the health exchange. Instead we’re going to do everything we can to elect Mitt Romney to repeal this bad law and replace it,” he told Fox News.

    http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/07/03/gop-governors-stand-ground-against-obamacare-despite-ruling/

    The unraveling of the HellCare Law begins.

  144. Dozens of law enforcement officers picked over a miles-long crime scene bisecting a rural South Texas town Tuesday, collecting evidence after a U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agent was shot while conducting surveillance.

    The agent with ICE’s Homeland Security Investigations was shot early Tuesday near Hargill, about 25 miles northeast of McAllen. The agent was conducting surveillance related to an ongoing criminal investigation, ICE spokeswoman Nina Pruneda said. The agent was taken to a local hospital and was undergoing surgery, she said.

    There was no immediate word on the agent’s condition.

    Texas state troopers blocked several miles of the main road through Hargill. At one end investigators with metal detectors walked through tall grass around a small white house. Officers from local, state and federal agencies scoured the road for several miles to the north of the house, looking for discarded shell casings and other evidence. At the north end of the crime scene, an SUV with its rear window broken out sat about 50 yards off the road behind a row of squat trees. Border Patrol agents and other investigators picked their way through grass nearby.

    FBI spokesman Erik Vasys said his agency is leading the investigation into the assault on a federal officer, but that any details regarding the incident would likely come from ICE.

    Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/us/2012/07/03/ice-agent-shot-in-south-texas/#ixzz1zZz16HtQ

    …………………………………………………………..

    Don’t worry, Obama will soon have him blamed for it being the agent’s own fault for tackling immigrants rights.

  145. I see echoes of Nazi Germany

    Me too, wbboei.

    Rush had some choice words about Roberts today and reaffirmed my sense that those who are still trying to find a silver lining in this scandal are delusional. It will not help to pretend the ruling was a good thing. It was not. It makes it exponentially more difficult for the ACA to be repealed. We have to take the presidency, the senate and maintain the house in order for that to happen. I never have been a betting person. The few times I visited Atlantic City I headed for the few nickel slots left. Roberts has put the country up against the proverbial eight ball and forced us to wage a battle on three fronts instead of on one.

    He should be impeached if that is possible on the Supreme Court or he should resign. I won’t go into the other things I’d like to see him suffer.

  146. If Roberts wanted to prove he was apolitical he should not have bowed to political pressure.

    Ace.

    I said the same thing but not nearly so succinctly.

  147. Thank you Andy Griffith for your well-lived life. Cannot begin to estimate how much time I’ve spend watching Matlock.
    ——————–
    This from GretaWire and I’m glad she has taken it up:

    …I always thought Attorney General Eric Holder was a great judge…and I always thought him fair and strong — never petty. But now? What’s up? I am suspicious (and I don’t want to be.) I just read an article in the Washington Post where he claims the reason the House Republicans want the subpoenaed documents is because 1/ they are seeking retribution against the Justice Department for some of its policies and 2/ as a means of attacking President Obama. Really? this is all about him and the President? and not a dead border agent? or a co-equal branch of government doing its oversight job? When I read the article, my first thought is, what’s with the “woe is me” by the Attorney General? This is not all about him and his reputation — this IS about finding out what happened to a murdered border patrol agent and who came up with the terrible idea to create this flawed operation? It is petty to the Attorney General to think this is all about him and about President Obama. Man up! He needs to step back and take a long look at this. Did it ever occur to either one of them that it is about a oversight investigation to answer questions for a grieving family of a law enforcement officer and about a flawed operation? and that they are the ones trying to stop the investigation? It is politically convenient – and certainly not professional – for the Attorney General to cast it in political terms. He could make this go away in seconds by complying with the subpoena. Whether the Attorney General likes it or not, Congress has oversight authority and Congress is a co-equal branch of government — not a lesser one.
    http://gretawire.foxnewsinsider.com/2012/07/03/i-am-surprised-at-attorney-general-eric-holder-he-needs-to-stop-the-woe-is-me-stuff

  148. Some more about the horrific repercussions of OC.

    “The IRS now gets to know about a small business’s entire payroll, the level of their insurance coverage — and it gets to know the income of not just the primary breadwinner in your house, but your entire family’s income, in order to assess/collect the mandated tax,” reports Fox News.

    Earlier this year, the IRS said it would need at least 4,000 new agents to enforce the Affordable Care Act along with $300 million dollars extra in funding to manage the infrastructure needed to compel Americans to comply with Obamacare.

    However, that could only mark the beginning of a massive expansion of the IRS as a result of Obamacare. Back in 2010 it was reported that as many as 16,500 extra armed IRS agents were being hired to harass Americans into complying with the new mandates.

  149. ABM90
    Public Schedule: Public Schedule for July 3, 2012
    July 3, 2012
    SECRETARY HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON
    Secretary Clinton has no public events.
    Shadowfax: “I hope Hillary really has a day off today and doesn’t have to meet with anyone but her family.
    Take a rest Dear Hillary.”
    =====

    Don’t bet on it. “No public events” does not mean “no work”. It just means “no public events”, that’s all. There’s plenty of work to do at Foggy Bottom away from the cameras, lights, journalists and everything that goes into making a “public event.”

    Hillary is doubtless spending the day on the phone, reading reports, ordering new reports, meeting with staff, planning future trips, and maybe even sitting back and thinking a little.

  150. Et tu Brutus…..

    http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/07/03/North-Carolina-Democrat-Will-Vote-To-Repeal-Obamacare-Will-Not-Endorse-Obama?

    North Carolina Democrat Will Vote To Repeal Obamacare, Will Not Endorse Obama

    North Carolina Democrat Larry Kissell represents the state’s 8th Congressional district, one of the more closely-watched swing districts. He was one of 17 Democrats who voted to hold Attorney General Eric Holder in criminal contempt of Congress. And now, according to the Charlotte Observer, Kissell will join Republicans in voting to repeal Obamacare.

    “I’ve heard from hundreds and hundreds of people from my district about their opposition to the health care law,” Kissell told the newpaper. “I voted against it originally and I will vote to repeal it.”

    According to the Observer, Kissell “also said he doesn’t plan to endorse Obama for re-election and isn’t sure he’ll attend his party’s national convention in Charlotte.”

    Kissell will have to work very hard to miss the convention that his almost literally being held in his backyard. As RNC Deputy Communications Director Tim Miller tweeted, Kissell’s district ends about a mile away from where the Democratic National Convention will be held.

    This is yet another sign of how unpopular Obamacare is and how much trouble Obama is in in the Tar Heel State, which he won in 2008.

  151. Back in 2010 it was reported that as many as 16,500 extra armed IRS agents were being hired to harass Americans into complying with the new mandates.

    ========================

    LOL! Reported by whom? Maybe they can employ some of those Nazis living on the back of the moon.

  152. one of the best pieces I have seen written on Otax, the big ripoff

    *****************************************************

    Obamacare, the Great Swindle

    Monday, July 02, 2012
    by Mike Adams, the Health Ranger

    (NaturalNews) Now that Obamacare has been ruled a tax by the U.S. Supreme Court, reality is starting to sink in for all those who emotionally supported it. Promoted as a way to provide either free health care or low-cost health care to the masses, the sobering reality is that under Obamacare, health insurance prices keep rising, not falling. That’s no surprise, of course, since the Obamacare legislation was practically written by the health insurance companies, and they sure didn’t put their weight behind a sweeping new law that would earn them less profit.

    In an era when the so-called “99%” are sick and tired of being exploited by the one percent who control everything, they just handed their medical futures over to precisely the one percent who skillfully monopolize the conventional health care system!

    Obamacare is, at every level, a huge victory for the one percent.

    A costly new tax on the middle class
    By the year 2016, the Obamacare “penalty” tax will reach roughly $2,000 per year for a two-person household. According to Stephen Moore of the Wall Street Journal, 75% of the financial burden of Obamacare’s new taxes will fall onto Americans making less than $120,000 a year (http://www.humanevents.com/2012/06/30/wsj-chief-economist-75-of-obama…). The great Middle Class, in other words, will bear this new tax more than anyone else.

    In effect, what has really happened here is a great swindle: Obama got the middle class to support his legislation by promising it was NOT a tax, and by promising it would LOWER health insurance costs. In reality, however, it RAISES health insurance costs, it IS a tax, and the majority of that tax burden falls squarely on the very same middle-class voters who put Obama into office under false pretenses. That’s a swindle, by any definition.

    Not surprisingly, this realization doesn’t sit well with many middle class taxpayers. While the original emotional appeal of Obamacare was nicely packaged and seductively marketed to the masses, the sobering, post-honeymoon reality slaps us all in the face like a wet fish: Smack! This thing is another huge tax increase on the working class! And on top of that, it gives the IRS scary new powers to pry into our private finances. How did you all think compliance with Obamacare was going to be enforced, anyway? It’s going to empower the IRS with even more agents!

    Government monopoly for Big Pharma
    Even worse than the trillions in new taxes and the IRS spy grid that’s now being set up to monitor compliance with Obamacare, there’s also the sobering fact that Obamacare never even attempted to give consumers a free choice in their health care providers. There’s no coverage of naturopathic medicine, herbal medicine, acupuncture or nutritional therapies. The entire law is written around — and for — Big Pharma and the conventional “sick care” industry that’s best described as a “medical racket.”

    Thanks to the U.S. Supreme Court, we don’t even have a chance to opt out of this corrupt, failed system of patented chemical medications and overpriced surgical procedures. Now, we are forced to hand over our hard-earned money to the very same medical system that we already know is responsible for killing over 750,000 Americans a year. It’s called “iatrogenic death,” and it means death by health care.

    So not only are we being chemically abused and medically enslaved in America, we are now financially forced to pay for the privilege of being raked over the coals by the medical establishment. It makes you wonder… where is the “care” in Obamacare?

    But wait, there’s more! From this position of being coerced by the government to pay for a system of medicine you don’t even want, it’s not much of a leap to being coerced to undergo medical procedures you don’t want, either.

    How Obamacare will lead to mandatory vaccinations for everyone
    Forced vaccinations — for adults! — are on the way, friends. And here’s why: Once everybody is “in the system” of mandatory health care, we will begin to hear arguments like this:

    “Anyone who refuses to get vaccinated against influenza is thereby at risk of being an influenza carrier and infecting other people, thus increasing health care costs for us all. To save money, government must force everyone to get vaccinated!”

    It’s a false argument, of course, but it will be used to literally line people up at courthouses (with the threat of arrest and jail time) and force them all to be vaccinated against their will.

    The same false logic can be used to force people to undergo chemotherapy, take AIDS drugs, undergo coronary bypass surgery or be subjected to almost any medical procedure deemed “necessary” by the government. In the realm of mental health and psychiatry, this opens up a Pandora’s Box of exploitation of patients for the purpose of raking in record profits for the criminally-operated psychiatric drug industry.

    Such is the inevitable abuse of monopolistic market practices enforced by a corrupt government that serves the interests of its corporate masters: Once the sick care industry has this monopoly and can force everyone to participate, they will exploit that advantage to its fullest profiteering capacity.

    Remember: It is the dream of every corporation to dominate the world. Obamacare just gave Big Pharma and the other sick care giants huge monopolistic cheats to pursue precisely that goal.

    Sober up, America
    In a time when consumers are increasingly demanding transparency, free choice and the ability to shop around for competitive bargains, Obamacare codifies secrecy, mandatory compliance and monopolistic practices.

    Maybe it’s time to sober up and take an honest look at what Obamacare really is instead of what Obama promised it would be. People bought into the dream, but what they actually received was a monumental swindle.

  153. “The IRS now gets to know about a small business’s entire payroll, the level of their insurance coverage — and it gets to know the income of not just the primary breadwinner in your house, but your entire family’s income, in order to assess/collect the mandated tax,” reports Fox News.

    =========================

    When has the IRS NOT known all these things?

  154. Soon after the Supreme Court’s ruling upholding Obamacare the emails from Democratic groups started flowing. “So this is what victory feels like” crowed Daily Kos. MoveOn sent out their usual petition this one thanking Obama for what I don’t know, and asking for money to support Democratic candidates in support of the health care law.

    Nancy Pelosi crowed in a tweet that it was a victory for the American people and some nonsense about it being Ted Kennedy who influenced the outcome from beyond ( had Kennedy been alive he would have scalded Obama for dropping the public option).

    The problem is this isn’t what any real Democrat or progressive or liberal or doctor or anyone with any grasp of the issue of healthcare reform was saying back in March of 2010 after Obama committed what was probably the grossest most flagrant sell out of a promise by a president in American history when he capitulated and caved in to health insurance lobbyists and dropped the public option behind everyone’s back even though the Democrats had the votes in congress to pass the public option.

    The reason it was behind everyone’s back is that in true Obama style, he never publicly told anyone what he did. He never said he changed his mind. He never tried to make a case for dropping the public option and trying to convince people that his bill was better. He didn’t of course because it wasn’t better it was a giant step backwards and a gutless capitulation and that cant be justified. But the next time Obama held a town hall meeting on health care, without explanation or acknowledgement by Obama, the banner hanging in the hall was changed from “HEALTHCARE REFORM” to ” HEALTH INSURANCE REFORM”. As soon as I saw that change and saw that Obama wasn’t addressing it I knew he had sold out to someone, was pulling a fast one and was hoping no one would notice. No one did,especially the blind mice known as the press.

    At the time of the vote on what is now called Obamacare, Democratic senators like Tom Harkin and Bernie Sanders who votes with the Democrats, when asked what they thought of the health care law they just voted for were clearly angry and disappointed. All Harkin could say, was “it’s better than nothing”. Sanders said the same but was a bit more critical.

    Howard Dean, a physician, former governor of Vermont,Democratic presidential candidate and former Chair of the DNC, said only days ago before the court ruling that he hoped the court struck down the individual mandate and the reason is that’s its a poor substitute for a public option or medicare for everyone either of which could have been passed when Democrats controlled congress.

    In fact before the original vote on Obama’s health care bill was cast, Dean said publicly the bill should be junked because it was in fact, a piece of junk.

    Pelosi herself during the healthcare debate when Obama floated the idea of dropping the public option said the public option was “the centerpiece of healthcare reform”. Democrats in the House said they might not vote for a healthcare bill that did not contain a public option.

    This is the junk that Democrats and Democratic support groups are now pretending to celebrate. A bill that, in 2010 wiped the Democrats out of the House because they didn’t deliver the public option that was promised and that every poll showed an overwhelming number of people wanted.

    To be clear, had the public option been passed, not only would its constitutionality never have been in question, but it simplified healthcare, reduced healthcare costs ( Obama’s law will increase costs from 5% of gross national product to 9%) reduced the deficit by $160 billion, and would have allowed the government to establish any parameters it wanted for a government health program. Which means that private insurers had two choices which would have eliminated the need for 2700 pages of legal mumbo jumbo — they could follow the provisions in the public option like dropping pre-existing conditions or annual caps in order to compete and keep customers, or lose them to the public option.

    Instead what Obama’s mandate does, contrary to the “Polly wanna cracker” parroting of Obama’s spin by Daily Kos and others, is not get insurance for 32 million uninsured. What it does is get 32 million new customers for the health insurance industry instead of the way to real healthcare reform — the public option or some kind of single payer system.

    But according to Daily Kos in their email, “this is what victory feels like”. Which is why Democrats and support groups like DailyKos and MoveOn never get what they want.

    This is victory only if you think like a perpetual loser, are willing to accept crumbs because you let your leaders walk all over you and have seen Republicans walk all over them, are in deep denial about Obama and his presidency, and really have no idea what it takes to be a leader and achieve real accomplishments.

    For those people who think this is what victory feels like, this is what it really is: whistling in the dark.

    http://tominpaine.blogspot.com/

  155. Great find, Shadowfax.

    It’s a SWINDLE!

    “In effect, what has really happened here is a great swindle: Obama got the middle class to support his legislation by promising it was NOT a tax, and by promising it would LOWER health insurance costs. In reality, however, it RAISES health insurance costs, it IS a tax, and the majority of that tax burden falls squarely on the very same middle-class voters who put Obama into office under false pretenses. That’s a swindle, by any definition.”

  156. “ELIZABETHTOWN, Ky. — It’s on his to-do list, but U.S. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell says the odds are against repealing the health care law championed by President Barack Obama.

    The Kentucky Republican said Monday it’s hard to unravel something of the magnitude of the 2,700-page health care law……”

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/02/mitch-mcconnell-health-care-law_n_1644466.html

    Didn’t take long for PHarma, Hospital Asso., Insurance Industry, et al to get Repubs back in line. Beginning in 2014, Obamacare is a multi-trillion dollar pay out to “Big Health”….they didn’t give big dollars to the Obama campaign and then $150+ million to get the law passed to have it repealed in 2013.

  157. Basil

    It’s a SWINDLE!


    Yup, shuck and jive. My guess is the truth can be found by following the money trail. Selling out to Big Pharma and the insurance companies get money for what, to who? Money to this election? Money as paybacks to Chicago gang members? Kickbacks to who?

    Obama doesn’t care about Heath Care, he and his family get the best health care in the world for the rest of their lives. We all know he doesn’t care about the 99% either, so what is the benefit to HIM?

  158. He’ssssssssssssssssss Backkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkk

    http://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/washington-whispers/2012/07/02/jeremiah-wright-to-deliver-sermon-in-dc-sunday

    D.C.’s historic Florida Avenue Baptist Church is marking its centennial with a special sermon on Sunday, delivered by President Barack Obama’s former pastor, the controversial Jeremiah Wright.

    During the 2008 Obama campaign, the media dissected and lambasted Wright’s former sermons, which included remarks that the Sept. 11 attacks were proof “America’s chickens are coming home to roost,” and another comment: “…not ‘God Bless America.’ God damn America.”

    When reached by phone, the church said it did not know what Wright’s sermon would be about.

    Since its founding 100 years ago, the Florida Avenue Baptist Church has only had four pastors, but welcomed numerous guest pastors to speak.

    Wright is pastor emeritus of the Trinity United Church of Christ in Chicago, having retired in early 2008.

    Update, 2:26 p.m.:

    Florida Avenue Baptist Church Reverend Doctor Earl D. Trent Jr. tells Whispers that Wright was chosen because the church has a longstanding relationship with the Chicago pastor.

    “We’ve always been at the cutting edge here,” Reverend Trent said. “And the more special the occasion, the more special the guest.”

  159. This story is also posted on HuffNPuff………

    Sheriff Joe set to release more Obama ‘shockers’

    Sheriff Joe Arpaio and his Cold Case Posse investigating Barack Obama’s presidential eligibility have been promising more major revelations since their March 1 press conference, and now another event has been scheduled to unveil new information.

    Arpaio told WND a press conference will be held July 17 at 2:30 p.m. local time at the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office in Phoenix, Ariz.

    WND will once again provide live Web streaming of the event.

    The evidence will include information gathered in the posse’s recent investigative trip to Hawaii as well as an update on the ongoing investigation.

    At the March 1 conference, as WND reported March 1, Arpaio and his Cold Case Posse announced there is probable cause that the document released by the White House in April 2011 purporting to be Obama’s original, long-form birth certificate is a forgery. The posse said it also found probable cause that Obama’s Selective Service registration form is fraudulent.

    http://www.wnd.com/2012/07/sheriff-joe-set-to-release-more-obama-shockers/

  160. I read that Christie is now open to VP. If I was Romney I would be flying to New Jersey now. Christie could make a huge difference imo.

  161. Not a bumper sticker, I know, but an interesting campaign sign I came across in East Randolph, NY, while out for a Sunday drive. I don’t know if this is a stock phrase being used around the region or country but it’s the first time I’d seen it. The sign is sponsored by the Cattaraugus County Tea Party.

    Note the upside down flag coming out of the sign, a symbol of distress.

  162. SCOTUS Ruling Means Bigger, More Intrusive IRS

    By Elizabeth MacDonald

    Emac’s Bottom Line

    Published June 29, 2012

    FOXBusiness

    IRS logo tax 1040 form

    IRS officials on background tell FOX Business the U.S. Supreme Court ruling on health reform gives the IRS even more powers than previously understood.

    The IRS now gets to know about a small business’s entire payroll, the level of their insurance coverage — and it gets to know the income of not just the primary breadwinner in your house, but your entire family’s income, in order to assess/collect the mandated tax.

    Plus, it gets to share your personal info with all sorts of government agencies, insurance companies and employers.

    And that’s just the tip of the iceberg. “We expect even more lien and levy powers,” an IRS official says. Even the Taxpayer Advocate is deeply concerned.

    The IRS army will inexorably increase in size, too. The IRS will now add new agents to hunt down tax cheats, as it has been budgeted to spend $303.5 million building a new system, erected on the back of its old system, to oversee the effects of the health law, including making sure people get the new tax credits they deserve under the law.

    As for the new IRS workers, the Government Accountability Office said the total will be about 4,500, with nearly 4,000 slated for enforcement.

    On the $303.5 million for health care, the GAO said the IRS will “continue the development of new systems and modifications of existing systems as well as other IRS enforcement systems for health reform.”

    Throughout, the IRS will be the agency enforcing the law, collecting these mandate penalties, as well as determining whether individuals buy “adequate” health coverage, and whether small businesses provide “affordable” coverage to workers under the new law.

    However, Nina E. Olson, who runs the Taxpayer Advocate Office [TAO], a federal IRS overseer, has warned the new health law may require more IRS intrusions on taxpayer privacy, to determine whether individuals got appropriate health coverage, and whether small businesses provide “affordable” coverage, all of which is defined by the government.

    That’s because the health-reform law’s individual mandate requires almost all legal residents of the United States to have “adequate” health-care coverage, as determined by the federal government. And it requires businesses of all sizes must provide “affordable” coverage as defined by the federal government.

    Health reform’s insurance mandate says if you do not have “adequate” insurance, you’ll have to pay a fine as part of your tax return. If your business doesn’t provide “affordable” coverage, that business may have to pay a fine to the IRS, too, as part of its tax return filings.

    The TAO has noted Americans must now tell the IRS under the new law:

    *Insurance plan information, including who is covered under the plan and the dates of coverage;
    *The costs of your family’s health insurance plans;
    *Whether a taxpayer had an offer of employer-sponsored health insurance;
    *The cost of employer-sponsored insurance;
    *Whether a taxpayer received a premium tax credit; and
    *Whether a taxpayer has an exemption from the individual responsibility requirement.

    More at link

    http://www.foxbusiness.com/government/2012/06/29/scotus-ruling-means-bigger-more-intrusive-irs/#ixzz1zakq3jbN

  163. 😳 Meant to add this.

    The TAO has warned: “This is different from the type of information the IRS typically deals with, and some taxpayers may feel uncomfortable about sharing it with the IRS.”
    Olson has said the new law could even ramp up tax evasion: “As a result, some taxpayers could be tempted to not file a tax return or file a return with incorrect or incomplete information, creating problems for both the taxpayer and the IRS.”
    The TAO has also reported that “obtaining this new information will require the IRS to communicate with entities and government agencies that it may not deal with now,” including:
    *New state-run insurance exchanges;
    *Employers;
    *Insurance companies; and
    *Government insurance programs.

    *******************************************************
    And it’s the intrusiveness of the health reform law that has raised eyebrows. What does the IRS base your mandate penalty on? This is where it gets nutty.

    The TAO says that the “IRS will need to determine a taxpayer’s compliance with the individual [insurance] mandate and assess a penalty if coverage is inadequate.”
    However, the penalty isn’t based on just your personal net income. The penalty will be based on an entirely different number that is more than just your paycheck earnings — your ‘household income.’

    “This determination is based on a concept of ‘household income,’” TAO has said, adding, “this may differ from the income reported on the taxpayer’s return, because it is a composite of all of the income reported by members of a taxpayer’s household — information that may not be readily accessible to the IRS.”

    If the IRS finds you have fallen short of the law, it would hit you with a penalty tied to your household income (which may be that of an individual or several family members).

    Under the new health law, the IRS penalty would be based on “modified adjusted gross income,” not adjusted gross income that you normally report at the bottom of the first page of your tax form 1040, before you take deductions or personal exemptions.
    The modifications add back in things like non-taxable interest and excluded foreign income to this number.

    Next, to assess the fine, the IRS would take the total household income divided by the number of household members who must have insurance under the law.

    Got that?

    This raises questions of your responsibility for your other household members to abide by the new health reform law. All of this could mean a heavier enforcement hand at the IRS.

  164. “This determination is based on a concept of ‘household income,’” TAO has said, adding, “this may differ from the income reported on the taxpayer’s return, because it is a composite of all of the income reported by members of a taxpayer’s household — information that may not be readily accessible to the IRS.”

    ==========================

    If they limit this to income REPORTED, then all the numbers are in the IRS computers somewhere, including the address of everyone who reported any.

    Search the records by address, add up the reported incomes of everyone at that address.

    I don’t like it, nor the mandate, etc, nor the IRS having this information. But the IRS having this information is nothing new.

  165. moononpluto,

    Agreed it looks like a cover-up but at this point do you think the case will go anywhere?

  166. 2 more flee the good ship POS

    Another North Carolina Democrat is refusing to support President Obama’s reelection effort. This time it’s Rep. Larry Kissell.

    “[H]e doesn’t plan to endorse Obama for re-election and isn’t sure he’ll attend his party’s national convention in Charlotte,” McClatchy reports. “Kissell represents the 8th District, which runs from Mecklenburg County to Robeson County. Last year’s redistricting added heavily Republican areas of Rowan, Davidson and Randolph counties while removing thousands of Democratic voters in Charlotte and Fayetteville.”

    ****************************************************
    And now, there’s word that Rep. Hayden Rogers won’t be endorsing Obama or even attending the convention.

    The Asheville Citizen-Times reports:

    Hayden Rogers will join two other North Carolina congressional candidates in skipping the Democratic National Convention in Charlotte and not endorsing President Obama.

    http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/another-nc-dem-refuses-endorse-obama_648076.html

  167. Yes i do, at least its going to be a huge thorn in the side of Obama, he cannot concentrate and if as i think , Issa and Grassley know exactly what went on and are going to do death by a thousand cuts then it will be hell.

  168. h/t Katz porch.
    Pink slip
    We The People of the United States of America: Employer from the Proud State of (circle one)

    PRESIDENTIAL PINK SLIP

    Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, California,Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Vermont,Virginia, Washington, West Virginia, Wisconsin, Wyoming

    July 5, 2012

    President Barack Obama

    1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW

    Washington D.C., U.S.A. 20006

    Dear Employee,

    We regret to inform you that your employment with the United States government is being terminated, effective November 6, 2012. Your employment termination is the result of poor performance as outlined below:

    Budget Competence: 10 percent of all unemployed Americans had been out of work for 52 weeks or longer. Today, that number is above 30 percent. The amount of money that the federal government gives directly to Americans has increased by 32 percent since you took over the position, with assurances that you had the required experience to reduce government expenditures. U.S. housing prices are now down a total of 35 percent from the peak of the housing bubble. The official U.S. unemployment rate has been above 8 percent for 40 months in a row. The inability to work with the Congress to produce a budget confirms that your performance does not meet our minimal standard.

    Refusing to Comply Policies of the Republic: Article II of the U.S. Constitution vests the executive power of the United States in the president and charges him with the execution of federal law, alongside the responsibility of appointing federal executive, diplomatic, regulatory, and judicial officers, and concluding treaties with foreign powers, with the advice and consent of the Senate. Upon your Oath of office, you swore and made contract with the People of the United States (Employer) to uphold the Constitution. You have not complied with this agreement, with specific infractions of execution of federal law in the compliance required to find solutions to various investigations.

    Confidentiality & Security: We view your inability in communication and cooperation with different states of the Republic to be demonstrative of immaturity and inexperience. Particular instances reflect a disdain and unwillingness to serve all states and all people’s, equally. Nepotism has been observed and is not conducive to the clearly defined Bill of Rights, of this Republic, you agreed to uphold.

    You were issued verbal and written concerns of these performance problems. Your written and recorded responses on each issue indicate that you discussed it with your staff, including steps you could take to improve performance. As stated in your final warning, you needed to take steps to correct your performance immediately. Your failure to do so has resulted in your employment termination.

    Sincerely,

    We the People of the United States of America

  169. @ Foxy

    I’d like to leave a few of those with the bots from OFA at voting time. Unfortunately, they most have no idea what a pink slip is or means.
    😀

Comments are closed.