Photo Finish
So Eric Holder has been found in Contempt of Congress and...and...nobody really seems to care. The odds are that nothing whatsoever will happen to either Holder or Barry "Executive Privilege" Soetoro for continuing to hide the bloody evidence of their involvement in the "Fast & Furious" debacle.
While Obama is campaigning on being Mr. Death From Above in the "War on Terror," maybe it's time some actual journalists demand that he stop hiding his critical role in the "War on Terry."
Frankly, Barry, I Don't Give A Dime
As respectable journalists and thinkers continue to weigh in (and trust us, there aren't many of them), it seems that Supreme Court Chief Justice Roberts didn't actually come up with a double-fake rope-a-dope decision that looked like it was good for Obama, but would actually be disastrous for him.
Nope - the smart money now says that Roberts probably changed his vote at the last moment, making a preposterous argument to save Obamacare (and with it, Obama) largely to keep the "integrity" of the Supreme Court from being attacked by the Whitehouse.
And hey - it worked! Because the Supreme Court now has no integrity to attack.
Meanwhile, the new Obamacare tax is yet another devastating blow to America's middle class and any hopes of an economic recovery in the foreseeable future.
Both of which are exactly what the president wanted.
The new tax is...um..."Abby" something.
-
30 comments:
"War on Terry" - Nice!
What's the best / most polite way to suggest / request that Justice Roberts please cease breathing my air? He's right up there on the list w/ Nancy P and Harry R...
In MY Arrogant Opinion...
I normally hate it when bloggers post their own URLs in other bloggers' comments. But I'm not normal (abby-something?). I agree with you.
http://tucsonoutpost.blogspot.com/2012/07/border-patrol-betrayed-by-napolitano.html
I honestly sort of think Roberts was either bribed, threatened, or both. Maybe I'm just too naive to think he botched this important of a decision on his own, though. On the other hand, I am growing more and more sure that Obama is part of a pretty dangerous "machine" that can threaten or bribe anyone he pleases.
I didn't used to be a conspiracist...but Obama IS a conspiracy.
@Velcro: if your URL is on topic and informative, most rational bloggers encourage you to add them in your comments. Not only does your link add to the conversation, it provide a new perspective and new information - for instance: that "run and hide" directive. Isn't that a peach! So they are to let the armed illegals simply overrun their position and head for ours. Brilliant!
In any case, it's the comments with links that are clear SPAM we hate...
Good cartoons and points, Stilt - and I, too, expect nothing more will come to bear against holder and the jackass. Hopefully we'll all be surprised...
Suzy- Call me a conspiracy nut (or just a nut), but I believe Barry "reached out" to Roberts and did some Chicago-style arm twisting.
Only thing that went wrong is that now Obamascare is a huge tax...and the Dems are running from it like it's plutomium.
Romney has GOT to staple this whole issue to the Bamster's head. Something like 70% of Americans do not want Obamscare-I can only hope they decide to pull the lever for Romney, but I'm still wary of the stupidity of the voting public.
Oops-that should be "Plutonium" (as in radioactive element 239.....)
@Pete(Detroit)- I still have a microscopic scintilla of hope that Roberts handed the GOP a vorpal sword to cut through Obama's jabberwock of a healthcare bill... but I'm increasingly of the mind that it's only wishful thinking on my part.
Oh, he can keep breathing air - but he should be heavily taxed (it's not a penalty!) for the resulting CO2 emissions.
@Velcro- Very, very good piece. Readers, check it out!
@Suzy- I've heard it opined that Roberts caved to protect the court from accusations that it was "activist." But the only way to protect it from the accusations was to really become activist (writing new law instead of interpreting the Constitution) in a way favorable to those posing the threat. It was another victory for appearance over substance.
@Emmentaler- As you say, I welcome links when they lead to something worth reading (like Velcro's piece). Blogger's spam filter actually catches a LOT of fake posts with links to all kinds of trash (I have to empty them out regularly, but very few ever become visible here).
Regarding Holder, if any REAL action is taken against him regarding "Fast and Furious," I won't just be suprised - I'll be shocked to my shoe leather.
@Flyboy- I don't think you need to be any sort of nut to suspect conspiracies from the Chicago machine.
And I don't think that the fact that Obamacare is now funded (allegedly) by taxes is going to hurt the Dems, because they're already in lockstep denial of it. I've already received a fundraising email from Obama's organization in which they brand Romney and the GOP as liars for saying it's a tax...explaining that it's really a "small penalty which will be collected through the IRS." And they say it will only be applied to the 1% of "freeloaders" who could buy insurance but choose not to. Really? Just 1%? What about the millions of other people the Dems claimed didn't have insurance? Oh yeah- they'll be penalized too...but the "Evil Rich" will fund the penalty with tax credits. Welcome to topsy-turvy land.
And when it comes to the stupidity of the voting public, I'm afraid I have very little confidence. BUT, the Romney campaign hasn't started in earnest yet (at least, in terms of a barrage of ads ripping the Bamster a new one). So hope springeth eternal.
By the way, I thought you had spelled Plutonium incorrectly to keep Janet Napolitano's blog spiders from focusing on today's comments.
OK, I'm going to go against the grain with this - I think that Roberts was using the long gun, as one of the commentators on Fox said "while others are playing checkers, Roberts is playing chess". Rational, and it may be Machiavellian, but he pretty much shut down the Commerce Clause use, read deeply and you'll find they can not use this 'tax' gimmick too easily. He got 7 Liberals to join in his opinion on the Medicaid forfeiture of funds allowing the states to opt out more easily (and see how many state governors are already going that way). The forfeiture of funds has been used as a hammer elsewhere by this administration (highway and education funds amongst)so this opinion may shoot that down. Long range (i.e., next years court docket) there are some important cases upcoming such as affirmative action among others, that he has sort of cut the feet out from under the liberals. Remember, that after all this - he still argued that it is the will of the electorate to determine this monstrosity's future - elections has consequences and in November the choice will be Sweden or the Free-Market.
correct to read "Elections have consequences..." - brain fart
@SeaDog- Interesting theory, but the Wall Street Journal editorial today makes a compelling case for the opposite conclusion: Roberts screwed us all badly and gave the government unlimited power.
CBS is also now reporting that Roberts switched his vote at the last minute to protect the court politically to preserve its power for "more important" rulings in the future. You know, more important than life, death, freedom, and the Constitution.
Radio commentator / host is now referring to the AHCA as "ObamaTax" - a prectice I firmly believe should be propagated as far and fast as possible..
nice work
Stilton: another interesting take on this mess:
http://www.jerrypournelle.com/chaosmanor/?p=8259
Sea Dog...I'm with you...this might just work out...kinda a long shot...I'm just so dang confused, I'll grab onto anything!
I find the WSJ article interesting, but I am far from a die-hard believer in the WSJ - used to be it was the conservative alternate to the NY Times (whose only circulation, even then, was it's superiority in training puppies). Bottom line is, that's the opinion, like it or not, there it is, and all the pundits from both sides screaming will not change things. I don't like the idea of a life term for SCOTUS, but I don't really see a better overall solution - those expressed so far may seal one can but only open up another can of worms. I do believe that somewhere down the line this path will be vindicated, a pawn sacrificed to checkmate the queen. But the other bottom line out of his decision was that elections have consequences, and a slick twitter type-bite does not make a good candidate. I also wonder (not that it will happen), but the original senators were appointed by the state legislature/governor, not popularly elected - maybe it's time we re-think that change. Be careful of what you wish for, you may get it.
@SeaDog- One thing we can easily and enthusiastically agree on: it's up to the voters now to make things right!
Thanks very much EL and Stilton. Re: Roberts on Obamacare, a frightening thought I heard this morning was that, given the ok as a tax, the case is now precedent-setting for, let's say, a $5,000 tax if you DON'T buy a Chevy Volt... a real Pandora's box.
I hardly ever watch him speak, but this is a keeper. It gave me an eerie feeling, so well can I hear him actually saying that.
@Velcro: how else would we find each other without the urls? I am going to check out yours right now!:)
@Velcro- The "Volt" example is EXACTLY the sort of abuse Roberts just validated. We can now be fined for being overweight, for not having solar panels, for having the air conditioning turned too high, for being caucasian, for not taking public transit, and on and on. The list is endless.
In the short term, the answer is to make sure we elect politicians who won't abuse this power. But so far, NEITHER PARTY has shown themselves to be able to resist temptation. This is an unConstitutional nightmare, and Roberts has seemingly betrayed the country in truly historic fashion. He should resign immediately or be impeached.
Actually, on its face, Roberts' decision just toppled our republic much, much deeper into socialism: for the first time at the federal level, you are now being taxed simply because you exist - AND that tax is in place in order to make a commodity - somebody else's work - a "right". Bravo, Roberts, you asshole. Bravo. Thanks for winning the cold war for the ghost of the soviet union.
So, with that in mind, who in WDC are you going to find to impeach him? The democrats? By nature of their espoused ideology, they have to love him. The republicans? Those pantywaists apparently don't have the stones for such activities as enforcing the constitution and honoring their oaths - after all, look what that dunham bitch's bastard son has been getting away with these past 1260 days. What about those Amazing Tea Party Conservatives™? Ha! Get real. Their tenure fits within those 1260 days, and I've seen nary a move; nary a reform; nary an attempt to do anything... more... than... talk.
Damn. Now I'm depressed. Guess I'll tie into a bag of oreos and a bottle of milk - might as well make it harder for them to carry me out when the death panels are done with me...
You are correct Stilton; the floodgates are now open for the next time the Progressive tide rises, which will eventually happen. Note that the EPA is now free to regulate CO2, so it's now inevitable that taxes will be imposed upon your politically incorrect behavior, be it driving an improper vehicle or living in a home with more square feet to heat or cool than the environmentalists think you should have.
No matter how they spin this, our basic freedoms took a big hit last week.
@Emmentaler- You're quite right; the government now taxes you for existing. Roberts brushed this off as being the same as charging tax for gasoline, or requiring car insurance - but that's ridiculous. People who choose not to have cars can choose not to pay that tax or buy that insurance. But there IS no opt-out for the new Obama Tax On Life.
Regarding the Tea Party, don't count them out yet. With Obama in office and a Democrat-controlled Senate, there simply IS nothing they could do yet...but it doesn't mean they won't if we send them more troops. I genuinely believe that if we can sweep these elections, we'll see real change.
@John the Econ- As there is no longer a limit on federal power over the citizenry, I'd like to hear Roberts explain what meaning there is to the Constitution anymore and, therefore, the Supreme Court itself.
Stilton, you are correct in that the House charges the impeachment, and the Senate tries - example was Bill Clinton - the House impeached him but the Senate wouldn't try him - same scenario we have now.
Isn't it interesting how differently Watergate unfolded?
The media actually cared and investigated.
The President's own party didn't circle the wagons on purely partisan affiliations.
The President had the shame to resign, instead of being impeached.
And no one died because of Watergate.
Yet we have "My People" Holder and the Post-Racial President covering for each other while Pelosi shrilly screams that old, tired accusation of racism.
I guess it's totally different when it's a Democrat in the White House (see also Clinton, William).
So much for all the journalists wanting to be the next Woodward and Bernstein -- I guess they only care when the party affiliation has an (R) after it ...
So depressed with all this. Obama's transgressions are getting more and more blatant, and no one seems to care.
There are two other aspects of ObamaCare that seem to be riding under the radar - the Administration is trying to get the premiums for TriCare that is for our men/women in the service tripled and (surprising) cut out payment for generic drugs.
The second is that there is no provision/coverage in ObamaCare for Long Term Care Insurance, the elephant in the room for seniors. They tried to include it, but is was such a convoluted mess and would skyrocket the cost, they abandoned it. When I worked the Health Insurance market, we stressed that MediCare and Medicaid would not cover the expenses of LTC, and your typical Alzheimer's patient needs assisted care for 3 - 4 years. Anyone at 60+ years needs to consider a LTC policy - at that age it is reasonable and can be used in any instance where they fail the ADL criteria, i.e., a broken leg in a cast. Not trying to sell policies, I retired a long time ago.
The Tax Man: You just docked?
Popeye: I has.
The Tax Man: Ah ha, let's see here, that'll be 25¢ docking tax.
Popeye: What for?
The Tax Man: Where's your sea craft?
Popeye: It ain't no sea craft, it's me dinghy and it's under the wharf.
The Tax Man: Ah ha. ahh-ha. This your goods?
Popeye: They is.
The Tax Man: Yeah. You're new in town right?
Popeye: If you call this a town, yes.
The Tax Man: Well, first of all, there's 17¢ new-in-town tax, and there's 45¢ rowboat-under-the-wharf tax, and one dollar leaving-your-junk-lying-around-the-wharf tax, so all together, you owe the Commodore $1.87.
Popeye: Uh, who's this Commodore?
The Tax Man: Is that the nature of a question? There's a nickel question tax.
@SeaDog- Sadly, there's no chance of impeachment.
@Earl Allison- Interesting comparisons to Watergate. There was actual morality, decency, and nonpartisanship back then. Now? Not so much. And people aren't going to get angry because Brian Terry doesn't fit the current politically-correct definition of victim. That's why Terry's death doesn't mean a damn to them, while Trayvon Martin is being made into a martyred saint.
@SeaDog- This isn't the first time this administration has tried to lower costs on our service personnel - it's just the first time they've gotten away with it.
And regarding longterm care, you're entirely right: it WAS in Obamacare, but it failed before it even got off the ground and was quietly made to disappear. So what will happen to those many, many people in need of longterm care? Well, first they'll get the mandatory "end of life" counseling to encourage their early deaths, and then they'll be given the means to accomplish it (either through meds which can lead to death, or denial of drugs necessary to life).
@Colby- That's all I can stands! I can't stands no more!
@SeaDog,
The House did impeach Slick Willie and the Senate did, indeed try him. What the Senate didn't do is CONVICT him, partly because there were a couple RINOs in the Senate who felt sorry for the scumbag. And partly because there were too many Demo_Rats in the Senate who wouldn't have convicted a Demo_Rat president even if he had killed their children. Slick Willie committed perjury in front of the whole country and got no real punishment. Anyone else committing perjury like that would have done time in jail. Had Nixon gone to trial, he would have most likely been convicted with the votes of a large number of Republicans. The Demo_Rats don't work like that. Thanks a lot, you Demo_Rats.....
"Read My Lips - No New Taxes" !!!!!!!!
Democrats are running away from this countries biggest tax hike in American history:
1. http://weaselzippers.us/2012/06/29/video-axeldouche-still-wont-call-individual-mandate-a-tax-after-scotus-ruling/
2. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wzs3aoRnl0E
3. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rL7ak__MGyw
4. Barack Obama evoking Jesus to sell us the more taxes while we are "broke": http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OCr7bP5pZ6I
5. 20 New higher taxes that American citizens will "enjoy" now that Obamacare is constitutional:
http://sweetness-light.com/archive/obama-care-contains-20-new-or-higher-taxes
Brilliant
And linked
Reaganite's Sunday Funnies
Post a Comment