Obamacare: And the Answer Is? Upheld With Caveats (Open Thread)

© Miri WTPOTUS June 28, 2012 

About 10 a.m. today, June 28, 2012, the Supreme Court will hand down a decision for which We the People have been waiting.  Today we learn if Obamacare stands or falls. 

More important, we learn whether or not this Congress and every future Congress will be given the power to simply ORDER every individual to buy something, so long as the government thinks it’s good for all of us collectively.

Folks, if that’s how the Supreme Court decides, then we have become a communist dictatorship.   Our Republic will be dead. Stick a fork in it. 

We simply cannot TRUST this Congress or any future Congress to “do the right thing,” especially given that they passed Obamacare in the first place, against the will of the People.

With such power at their disposal, they will be tempted to use it, again and again, which is exactly why the Founders designed a system of checks and balances. 

To prevent the use of unbridled power, the Founders created a country that is NOT a democracy.  We are a Constitutional Republic designed to protect INDIVIDUAL rights, against mob rule.  Against the collective, if you will.  Against communism.

This is a Republic led by a federal government with LIMITED, carefully delineated powers.   The Founders never imagined handing dictatorial powers to Congress or, especially, to any IMPERIAL president.  

Dictatorial power is what Obamacare represents, with its mandate; its unelected panels of “deciders” (bureaucrats who answer to no one, especially not to the People); and its rationing so that the welfare of the many WILL outweigh the needs of any few, such as the elderly.  

We’ll find out soon whether THIS Supreme Court is faithful to their oaths to preserve and defend the Constitution and this Republic. 

What will the decision be? 

######

Update:  06/28/12, 10:13 a.m. eastern:  According to Drudge, Judge Roberts joined the lefties and they allowed the mandate to “stand AS A TAX. The Medicaid provision is limited but not invalidated.”    This sounds outrageous, but details pending. 

10:20:  Bulk of Obamacare upheld, including the mandate (or face a “tax penalty”); Roberts wrote the opinion, saying the mandate is legal if it’s a tax; Roberts says under the Commerce clause, Congress doesn’t have the power, but if it’s a tax, as he sees it, then it’s okay;  he says it can be sustained not under the Commerce clause but under the “necessary and proper clause”; ruling 5-4. According to Fox radio news.  The Medicaid mandate to states is struck down. 

10:24 An AP story.  There’s a dissent by Scalia, Thomas, Alito, and Kennedy, according to Fox radio news.  So that’s a correction to the Drudge report of a 6-3 decision.  Roberts sided with the progressives but Kennedy with the conservatives.  A betrayal, imho.  From the AP story:

The court found problems with the law’s expansion of Medicaid, but even there said the expansion could proceed as long as the federal government does not threaten to withhold states’ entire Medicaid allotment if they don’t take part in the law’s extension.

Full text of the decision here.

Open Thread.

Advertisements

182 responses to “Obamacare: And the Answer Is? Upheld With Caveats (Open Thread)

  1. “Every liberal citation to Wickard will be countered by a conservative citing to Chief Justice Roberts’s opinion: “If no enumerated power authorizes Congress to pass a certain law, that law may not be enacted, even if it would not violate any of the express prohibitions in the Bill of Rights or elsewhere in the Constitution. . . . The Court today holds that our Constitution protects us from federal regulation under the Commerce Clause so long as we abstain from the regulated activity. The Federal Government does not have the power to order people to buy health insurance. . . . The Federal Government does have the power to impose a tax on those without health insurance.” (National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius, Slip op. at 3, 41-42, 44)

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

    Does it follow then that the government doesn’t have the power to force a church to BUY for its employees health insurance benefits that go against its religious beliefs? Like contraception for Catholic Church employees? Did Roberts already settle those many Catholic lawsuits? http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/06/the_chief_justice_done_good.html

    • I haven’t had time to read the opinion but from the bits I have seen, I am inclined to think John Roberts did something shrewdly politically brilliant:
      1. He has curtailed the monstrosity that the Commerce Clause has become ever since the Court came up with the negative commerce clause and said the gov’t could regulate the wheat a farmer grows for his family’s own consumption.
      2. it takes away Obama’s meme: a group of 5 partisan republican justices has taken away your healthcare, they won’t let me help you, just like congress keeps blocking all these wonderful things i want to do to save our economy, it’s bush’s fault, blah blah blah.
      3. It is now a TAX and he has to defend it. and nobody likes a tax.
      4. a tax only needs 51 senators to repeal. it would be 60 otherwise. of course if it ever gets to a vote in senate, BO will just veto.
      5. the election is now about Obamacare/Obamatax and nobody likes it. the polls are 60-70% oppose it. if it had been totally shot down, the fact that people don’t like it would not be part of the election and now it’s the whole thing. the covnersation is back to taxes and the economy, instead of the meanie Republicans

      not saying that the court should make decisions based on short term political calculations instead of actual rule of law and setting good precedent, but even long term, saying it’s okay under taxing power may not be that harmful long term because nobody likes taxes and politicians get voted out on tax hikes. they will hesitate to wield that power if its the only way they can do something.

      I think he may have ensured that the fraud-in-chief loses in November.

      glass half full 🙂

      • Hayden, others are speaking of his brilliance too.

      • Hayden, after reading much of what’s out there on the Web and the synopsis (not the whole ruling), I’m leaning towards agreeing with you. Maybe Roberts isn’t as bad as everybody thought at first. I knew immediately that it was a huge win that they stopped that expansion of the Commerce Clause and that they stopped Barry in his tracks from blackmailing the states by withholding all funds. That won’t stop him from trying to find some other way to pummel the uncooperative states. He’ll freeze the amount they get or start gutting the Medicaid system as it stands now. The one that the states signed onto. He’ll find a way.

        Look how he issues “waivers” to just about EVERY state, so they don’t have to obey No Child Left Behind. The list of LAWS he simply ignores, runs roughshod over, or refuses to enforce is getting very long. Of what use IS the law and of what use IS Congress if they allow the potus to simply act AS IF he’s a dictator with no constraints upon him? They should have fought ever step of the way from the beginning. He’s like a spoiled, willful child that someone NOW has to try to retrain.

        Easiest way is vote them ALL out. ALL of them. (Meaning the DemoncRATS, and any Independent or RINO who’s been complicit with Barry from 2009.) I don’t care if suddenly they’re voting against Holder because they fear losing NRA approval and money. It’s too late if they’ve been complicit. For example, if they voted for Obamacare, which ALL the DemoncRATS did, didn’t they?

        I’ll bet that if they try to repeal it, Harry Reid will say it’s NOT a tax and so they need more than 51 votes to repeal. Wait for it. This is why Axelrod put out the talking points that it’s a “penalty” and not a “tax”, even after the ruling. They’re already LYING in the lamestream media, saying only 37% are opposed to Obamacare. I’m sure the poll plays with words just like Barry does.

        I understand Roberts’s reasoning now and he made a good ruling and a good political one, too. As I suggested yesterday, I almost think he might have set the precedent so they rule in favor of the Catholic Church in all those lawsuits recently filed by the bishops. That Sandra-Fluke policy is an attempt to FORCE an entity to BUY something. Trying to tell the Catholic Church they MUST buy contraceptive insurance coverage for their employees. States have historically handled insurance regulation, too. So what business is it of the federal government to regulate health insurance?

  2. Here’s a good article that introduces Dreams From My Father as a RACIST BOOK. TY for saying that and documenting how! http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2012/06/botched_reporting.html http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/06/powered_by_hate_racist_content_from_dreams_from_my_father.html

    The writer gives page numbers and example after example. You come away realizing that Obama is a black nationalist racist. Or at least he pretended to be at one point because it was an effective means to an end: Power.

  3. I meant to link this yesterday but ran out of time: The reaction by the adolescents that apparently run the DemoncRAT party, “bitches”:
    http://twitchy.com/2012/06/28/classy-dnc-director-new-media-outreach-director-react-to-obamacare-decision-constitutional-bitches-take-that-mothers/

  4. miri … Powered by hate ?…that one? … do I know the feeling…
    Yes, I read the Globe… no clues yet…. just 2 dudes…. no gals…
    no faces just front page shot only… jacket & jeans bit chubby…

  5. I fetched it 4 U… (miri 3:36pm)
    Powered by Hate: Racist Content from ….Dreams from My Father….
    http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/06/powered_by_hate_racist_content_from_dreams_from_my_father.html

    • TY. I’ll fix my comment so as not to aggravate anybody. I must have got mixed up on my copying and pasting. 🙂

  6. h/t Gateway Pundit

  7. http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2012/06/ouch-sarah-palin-slaps-down-bob-beckel-on-death-panels-video/

    “Bob Beckel: Governor, that deception, does that go for the death panels that were never real, that you said were in there?

    Sarah Palin: Oh, it’s in there. There’s a faceless bureaucratic panel, and the acronym is the IPAB, and it will be a board that will tell you Bob, whether your level of productivity in society is worthy of receiving the rationed care that will be a result of Obamacare. Consider this Bob, it defies all common sense to ever consider that health care won’t be rationed, when, obviously with more and more enrollees in the program and fewer and fewer services being provided because it will be so inefficient and expensive and bureaucratic, of course, healthcare in a socialized system which this will become, it will be rationed.

    Greg Gutfeld: Governor, way to put Bob in his place. Nicely done. He’s speechless.

    I think she just called him stupid.

    A Congressional committee voted to remove the IPAB death panels in March.
    (The death panels that aren’t in Obamacare)”

    A committee is not the House, Senate, and a signature of a potus. So death panels REMAIN in the bill. Video at the link.

  8. the……. GLOBE …..
    Robert F. Bauer..? (Anita Dunn’s HUBBY) who really forged the BC ?
    http://lamecherry.blogspot.com/2012/06/globe-busts-obama.html

    • Looks like him to me, unless that’s a younger Abercommie; but it does look like Bauer on the cover of the Globe. Hmmm. Interesting.

      • WAIT! That’s a photoshopped cover of the Globe by LC. I get it now. Sorry. So who does the Globe say did it? I think Zenway says they don’t say. Just say two men.

  9. http://www.wnd.com/2012/06/unexpected-turn-in-eligibility-case-put-it-on-record/

    “The attorney in a publicized challenge to Barack Obama’s eligibility to be president told WND the Florida case took an unexpected turn in court yesterday, one he says “pulled the rug out” from Obama’s lawyers and should force a quick answer from the judge. … Florida law permits filing for “declaratory relief” at any time, Klayman said, a move that would force a judge to rule on the facts of the case even before a decision on whether to compel some legal action. In other words, in the Voeltz case, instead of waiting until the nominating convention – which Klayman called a “shell game” Obama attorneys are playing to put off the issue –Lewis would be pushed to make a declaration on Obama’s eligibility “whether nominated or not.”

    Lewis would have to reach a decision; he would have to put it on record,” Klayman said. “By amending for declaratory relief, we’re pulling the rug right out from Obama and the Florida secretary of state.”

    Klayman told WND Obama’s lawyers immediately went into a tailspin and filed to have the amendment for declaratory relief stricken, which the judge granted, arguing he wanted to wait to issue a formal decision in the case.

    But Klayman said his team is willing to file a stand-alone complaint for declaratory relief with Lewis as soon as next week and “pull the rug out from under him, too.”

    “This judge can’t get out from under his legal requirement,” Klayman said. “If he screws around, he’s violating law.” … Klayman, however, told WND, “It doesn’t matter how Lewis rules, the losing side will appeal, and this case is going up, maybe all the way to the Supreme Court.”

    Still, he said, “I want Lewis to address the issue of eligibility and create a record, so we can take it up before the election. I’m still confident, hopeful that will happen.””

    btw, Klayman also said he’s going to empanel a Citizen’s Grand Jury and call for them to charge Justice Roberts and Justice Kagan for breaking their oaths by not recusing themselves from deciding the Obamacare case.

  10. http://www.azfamily.com/video/featured-videos/Several-thousand-protest-Arpaios-Tent-City-160152175.html

    “Several thousand critics [people who know said it was more like 500] of Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio gathered for a rally on Saturday night to call for the closure of the sheriff’s complex of canvas jail tents and to protest what they say are civil rights violations in Arizona.

    Organizers say conditions in Arpaio’s “Tent City” complex are inhumane because inmates are kept outside in triple-digit heat.

    The sheriff told critics Tent City works and has been a successful operation since he opened the facility in 1993. He pointed out that some members of the U.S. military live in tents and said parents of inmates have called him to thank him for teaching their children a lesson.

    Arpaio invited several of the leaders of the demonstration to join a tour of Tent City Saturday evening. Several members of the Unitarian Universalist Association, which is holding its annual convention in Phoenix this weekend, joined.

    Arpaio allowed the visitors to interact with the prisoners and let them taste the food the inmates are fed. …

    I’m elected by the people, and I don’t need Amnesty International coming in from out of state trying to tell this Sheriff how to run my operation,” Arpaio said.

    The county’s jails were closed to visitors on Saturday in anticipation of the rally.

    The rally was being held by the immigrant rights group Puente Arizona and the Unitarian Universalist Association.”

    There are those Unitarians again!

  11. I …smell demoRATs ? Roberts 2 adopted children may be the key?
    open at red… NYTimes…
    http://lamecherry.blogspot.com/2012/07/better-roberts-head-than-dead.html

  12. “Sheriff Joe set to release more Obama ‘shockers'”

    “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.”

    http://www.wnd.com/2012/07/sheriff-joe-set-to-release-more-obama-shockers/

    • Mark your calendars! July 17th.

    • Why is this taking so long and why is he announcing a date so far in advance like this? The last time the good sheriff did this, Brightbart ended up dead. Please God watch over all those involved in this investigation and keep them safe.

  13. http://spectator.org/archives/2012/07/02/undoing-obamacare#
    Suddenly, everyone wants out.

    You would have thought that Chief Justice John Roberts had shouted “fire” in a crowded theater. In upholding Obamacare, he set off a headlong race for the exits by the same lobbying groups — believe it or not — that had cut deals with the administration to create the legislation. Back then, the lobbyists were telling each other: If you’re not at the table, you’re on the menu. Now the bodies are piling up in the doorway as those who pandered to the president trample over each other in their haste to get out of the blazing or crumbling structure that is Obamacare. To paraphrase Oscar Wilde on the death of Little Nell, no one without a heart of stone can witness this deadly scene without wanting to laugh out loud.

    As reported on the front page of this weekend’s Wall Street Journal, every one of the health-care industry groups that signed on to Obamacare in 2009 is looking for a way out.

    Hospital groups now say they want Congress to peel back $155 billion in payment cuts that they agreed to in 2009. Representatives of Blue Cross Blue Shield Association, Aetna, Inc., and Humana Inc. say they need greater freedom to adjust premiums to reflect risk. Medical-device companies are making a new push to roll back their 2.3% tax. Hotels, retailers, and restaurant chains are clamoring for a two-year delay in enforcement of a requirement that they cover full-time workers or pay a penalty, giving them until 2016 to comply.

    Implement-and-improve, the Democrats are now saying in indicating a new willingness to make election-year concessions in revising the hated law. Or as the president put it on Thursday: “The highest court in the land has now spoken. We will continue to implement this law. And we’ll work together to improve on it where we can.”

    But the race to the exits by doctors, hospitals, drug makers, insurers and others is evidence that the law is already beyond repair. To put that another way, the series of deals between the government and health-industry groups that gave rise to Obamacare is falling apart.

    “The bargain that was struck seems to be out the window,” Bruce Siegal, chief executive of the National Association of Public Hospitals and Health Systems, was quoted as saying.

    • Roberts apparently did change his vote, originally being for striking down Obamacare. People suggest that he was threatened. One must wonder. The conservatives are outraged, which is why they didn’t reference his ruling at all in their dissent. Kennedy, of all people, was point man trying to get Roberts to stay on board with conservatives. The nicest explanation found, offered by lamestream pundits, is that Roberts saw the many news articles that excoriated the Court, in advance, and feared for the reputation of the institution. Well, since his ruling, the approval rating for the SCOTUS has gone down 3%, with only 33% saying they’re doing an excellent job and 28% saying they’re doing a poor job, UP 11% since the ruling! The number of people who say the court is too liberal has risen to 37% from 32%. The number saying the court is too conservative DROPPED to 22% from 25%. That’s interesting, isn’t it? The way the lamestream talks, most people disagree with the SCOTUS, which is too conservative. But even before this ruling, more people thought the court was too LIBERAL than thought it was too conservative. Republicans believe that if Romney is elected and they get any majority in the Senate and hold on to the House, they can repeal Obamacare the same way that it was rammed down our throats via “reconciliation“. Over 75% of the COST of Obamacare will fall on people making less than $120,000 (less than half that magic cutoff Obama promised when he said that nobody who makes less than $250,000 will see their taxes go up. Liar, liar, pants on fire!) And cost is synonymous with TAX, even if only 4 million will pay that TAX penalty. The rest of us will still see our taxes RISE to pay for all those billions he promises to “match” when states knuckle under to his Medicaid expansion scheme.

      Just for kicks, a story about a reprieve (for maneating) and a happy ending for the largest crocodile in the world. Living large (more than a ton of him) in a zoo in the Philippines.

    • Good history in that story. I like this part:

      “David Catron wrote in this space (“The American Association for Retiree Plunder,” 3-30-11), AARP is really an insurance company fronting as an advocacy group. Most of its revenues come from sales of “Medigap” policies that fill in for gaps in standard Medicare. As Catron explained, “AARP endorsed a law that does real financial harm to seniors in order to reap a crop of new customers when Obamacare guts Medicare Advantage.” That impression was partly confirmed later in a trove of emails made public by House Republicans. “We really need to talk,” an AARP lobbyist wrote in an email to the White House, noting that calls from seniors were running 14 to one against Obamacare.”

      Can you believe that? 14 to 1 AGAINST Obamacare, and they rammed it through anyway, with AARP support.

      Who knows better than seniors that Obamacare means rationing, death panels, and $500 BILLION stolen from Medicare? For whom? Why, for Dreamers and other illegal aliens, for the “poor” (now called FREELOADERS by DemoncRAT operatives), and “young people,” who are seen by Sunstein and his ilk to be worth more to society than unproductive, expensive-to-keep-alive old people. Isn’t that interesting, though, how suddenly those who resist the MANDATE are called “freeloaders” by the DemoncRATS? When did they ever call anyone freeloaders? When will they stick that label on, say, the DREAMERS? ALL the ILLEGAL ALIENS? What else are they if not FREELOADERS? How about the HALF THE POPULATION THAT PAYS NO INCOME TAX? AREN’T THEY SIMILARLY “FREELOADERS”? What a bunch of hypocrites.

      Which freeloaders most irritate you?

      (1) Those projected 4 million who won’t BUY health insurance OR

      (2) the ILLEGAL ALIEN FREELOADERS OR

      (3) the 49% WHO PAY NO INCOME TAXES?

      I’m going with 2 and 3. How about you?

    • Another quote: “But Chief Justice Roberts said no such thing in rendering his judgment. To the contrary, he looked and sounded like Pontius Pilate publicly washing his hands. [Ouch! But so apt.] He was at pains to absolve himself and the court of further responsibility in having to deal with a very flawed and messy law. Here are two quotes from the chief justice:

      “We do not consider whether the Act embodies sound policies. That judgment is entrusted to the Nation’s elected leaders.”

      “Members of this Court are vested with the authority to interpret the law; we possess neither the expertise nor the prerogative to make policy judgments. Those decisions are entrusted to our Nation’s elected leaders, who can be thrown out of office if people disagree with them [emphasis added]. It is not our job to protect people from the consequences of their political choices.”

      … Let us hope that no one advocating repeal is beguiled into thinking that any part of Obamacare should be considered salvageable. The whole thing (all 2,700 pages) should be dumped in the nearest recycling bin.”

      However, ominously, given our experience with how Obama runs roughshod over laws and the Constitution, daring anyone to try to stop his thuggish disrespect for the rule of law, comes this:

      “Assistant Senate Majority Leader Dick Durbin, D-Ill., a leading Obama supporter, predicted the president would never yield to pressure to scale back the health care law.

      He’s not going to let that happen,” Durbin said. “As far as he is concerned, and I happen to agree with him, it’s hands off. Let this thing go into effect. He’s invested too much, and we’ve invested too much, to get to this point and turn around.”

      And so it goes: by any FREAKING means necessary. We MUST defeat them all. A Republican House, Senate, and President.

    • Brit Hume said on fox news sunday “John Roberts is playing chess while everybody else is playing checkers.” I agree.

      • This is a good article that may have been posted here before, but I want to quote something from it:

        “This leaves us with a puzzling technical scenario that I’ll try to simplify with a little Council of Elrond drama: Roberts mostly agreed with his fellow conservatives on the Court, but while they were poised to take out this omnibus ring of power now (“What are we waiting for?”), he decided, much to many Americans’ chagrin, that its taxing nature is beyond the Court’s authority (“cannot be destroyed by any craft that we here possess“) and can only truly be unmade in the chambers where it was wrought (Congress and the White House).

        The quest to do so is the citizens’ prerogative to accept or abandon.

        Years ago Nancy Pelosi beamed that the PPACA had to be passed in order for us to see what is in it. That Trojan Horse was then rolled through Congress, through the White House, and finally up the steps of the Supreme Court.

        Chief Justice Roberts returned the favor.

        But since the PPACA advocates scarcely read their own piece of legislation, they probably didn’t read Roberts’ opinion either. In mob-mentality fashion, they see that four of their own kind appeared in the majority vote plus the word “upheld” and rejoice that the highest court in the land has put conservative opposition to flames.

        They fail to realize that the sparks and flickering they see is Roberts trapping them in a ring of fire.

        The PPACA was not ruled completely constitutional, and the Individual Mandate was not ruled constitutional in the way the Obama administration had planned. The law of the land now publicly exposes President Obama as having orchestrated the largest tax hike in American history during a recession when the nation is trillions of dollars in debt – after promising he wouldn’t do so.

        The energized opposition to Obamacare reminiscent of the 2010 midterm elections has been reignited. The Tea Party movement’s key rallying cry is “Taxed Enough Already,” and now the Supreme Court has warned that there is a giant tax hydra on the loose. Within 24 hours of the ruling, Mitt Romney’s presidential campaign raised over $4 million.

        But while disabling socialism and wounding Obamacare, why didn’t Roberts go for the glory and slay the Leviathan while it was in his hands to do so?

        Chief Justice stepped aside to let We the People do the honors.”

        I ALWAYS like anybody who cites The Lord of the Rings. We the People are ready to join the Fellowship of the Obamacare Tax Ring. Let’s unmake it. ASAP. While Romney is an unlikely hero, so was Frodo. 🙂

  14. Re: Justice Roberts’ statement………
    “we possess neither the expertise nor the prerogative to make policy judgments.”

    Was it not the POLICY of the Administration to never, not ever call their
    PEANLTY a TAX?
    Did not Roberts judge that it is not a PENALTY but indeed a TAX?
    EXPERTISE? PREROGATIVE? My assssssss!!
    Methinks lame cherry has it right.
    Someone got to Roberts with threats.

    THREATENISTAS from Chicago commies and progs.

  15. Do you think my NOT being exempt from NOT buying insurance because I have an income from a non-exempt company IS discrimination?

    • Yes. It’s discrimination. That’s why there will be more lawsuits filed. Isn’t it said that Congress will have to pass new legislation to modify the bill to make it work as a tax? Whatever happens, it will be chaos, which serves Obama’s plan just as well.

    • Isn’t this discrimination, like Social Profiling or something? Couldn’t the wealthy individual bring a lawsuit for being singled out for having to show their income and if found to be too wealthy to fit the profile for a handout, are then penalized? And then if they have their own health insurance and are penalized, can they be penalized every year, just like the IRS does us for not filing quarterly every year. I doubt they will be penalized (or taxed) just one time. I figure they could claim cruel treatment for being targeted every year, picked up and shaken till any extra change they’ve got jingling in their pockets or bank account. Isn’t this Social Profiling?

      • Seriously here…The ones that can sve the country the quickest is BUSINESS. If they “orgaanize” in the manner of the unions and reach 50%(not number of companies butgross sales or something (not in finnce here) they simply withdraw, cease being collection gents for the government. They cease, say, “No” to reporting who they are paying wages to and how much and who they are covering for insurance. This takes it back to individual reporting of income, without cross-referencing to the employer. Just think if business, led by Big Business said, “No more w-2’s issued from us. BB’s would become Folk heros for sticking it to the IRS. Timing and planning could chaange things. Coincide this with support from States who vote to not participte in Federal Income Tax for their residents and instead will send “collectively” (to use progs owns vervbiage) which the State collected to send to the Fed. States send no more money for Education in the hopes it will all come back; sme with roads. States take care of themselves. But back to BB….We The People need to start letting the BB know we stand behind them.

        Observation, off topic… McDonald’s has been taken over by the government. It happened right in front of our noses…..at least it sure looks like it.

        • I heard this morning that Barry is meeting with corporate guys in the hope that they will find common ground and give him donations, too. But, the lamestream says, Romney has more corporate support. Well, yeah.

          It’s not good news to hear that they meet with Obama because this is the same M.O. as last time: Get them into the secret meetings to threaten, intimidate, and twist arms. Chicago thuggery as usual.

          Funny you should mention McDonald’s. I listen to a radio show some mornings. Jamie Allman’s. He recently came back from a road trip to Florida with his kids. He talked about Happy Meals and how awful they are. How now most parents buy EXTRA fries because pressure from Mooch and the government has shamed McDonald’s into downsizing the kids’ share of fries and including apple slices that he says taste like they were dipped in pesticides. I’ve never tried them, but I imagine that they must put something on them to keep the apples from browning after being sliced. So, is that good for kids? What is it? Fruit Fresh? As if drug abusers haven’t increased sales of that stuff already (they use it to cut drugs and also believe that it will help them pass urinalysis screenings for drug use).

          But think about it: Mooch pressures the fast food guys to replace fries with fruit, so what do FREEDOM loving parents do? They buy more and larger portions of fries for their kids. So, will this effort by Mooch keep kids skinny? Will it MAKE them eat those nasty-tasting apples instead of fries? Will it actually help McDonald’s in the long run because it will increase sales of fries? Of course, it will also increase sales of apples so illegal immigrants have more jobs picking them. Apples that will go into the trash to feed the parking lot rats and starlings. They can lead the horse to water but they can’t make it drink. They can force McDonald’s to give apple slices, but they can’t make the kids eat them and they can’t stop their parents from buying fries to feed the kids. I love America. GOD BLESS AMERICA!

          Here’s a funny video from Allman’s website. He played part of it on radio today. Play the first video where a bus driver instructs riders about cell phone use on the bus. We can all relate to his frustration. Cooped up in a bus for hours with gum-smacking, cell-phone bloviators! http://www.971talk.com/blog/electricstove/home.aspx?BlogID=1000153

          • “….cell-phone bloviators” That, My Dear, is an exquisite phrase!

            The reason I think Macs is “owned” by the government is: 1) they are exempt from the new health tax plan for their employees. 2) I think they “bought” this by “creating short term jobs” through the remodeling/redesigning the restaurants even those that were done within the last two years. 3) In spite of the new stremlined double lanes, service has gotten very slow and moving to the special “drive-thru” holding parking spots is preparation for waiting in ration lines. After all, if we are willing to pay to wait in line, we will be willing to do it for free. A real bargain, huh? 4) The jobs created, I suspect were paid for, somehow, by government stimulus and 5) McD’s sold themselves in spirit to the Government and is now a part of the Regime’s money-laundering schemes.

            Michelle has not pressured them; that is the cover for the other things; the imaging in our minds. The Anti-Americans have studied us well — very well — and buying more fries is just what they figured we would do. They write our scripts, we read them, and they line their elite pockets with our monies from taxes to spending emotionally at their businesses.

            That is my two-cents worth; my tinnie moment for the day. Bet I prove right. Government-owned cars, Government-owned resaurants, government-owned health care. Government-owned churches, government-owned education, government-owned energy, BUT OUR PATRIOTISM WILL NEVER BE GOVERNMENT OWNED. EVEN IN CHAINS, WE WILL BE FREE BECAUSE WE BELIEVE IN INDIVIDUAL FREEDOM.

            (now on to the video. getting a afternoon cup of coffee for it…….)

            • Wow. Now those are some things that I didn’t know and implications that I didn’t think about. I suspect that the list of companies and people who WON’T have to comply with the rules gets longer and longer every day. Just like freaking CORRUPTOCRACIES LIKE NIGERIA.

              Drudge is reporting even as I write that Government Motors is costing the US taxpayer far more than previously reported (and lied about. This is probably still another lie and we will never know the true cost of these debacles. That business with Chrysler–that was the canary in the coal mine.) Those fabulous (exploding) Volts are a total bust. Like Solyndra and all the other “green energy” initiatives designed only to drain the treasury.

              • Miri, keep in mind when I rant that I DO think TOO much……way too much. The privately owned McDonald’s in our neck of the woods (there are still a few left in the country) go to ‘cash only’ sales toward the end of the month. They also have conveniently broken icecream machines when corporate runs give-aways or lowers the prices so low on the cones the joint loses money on the sale. McDonald’s has become the biggest government jobs program, I am convinced and has engaged in extreme thuggary to get the long-held family franchises to go under. Only support non-corporate stores. No need to ask if a corporate store,…there are tell-tale signs……very obvious…….start observing and you will pick up on it also. In fact, I can tell when a store is ‘bought’ by corporate and no longer a family franchise………

                • I’ll have to start paying attention. I’ve never seen a McDonald’s with two drive-throughs. And hey! I’ve never seen give-aways or very low priced ice cream cones, either!

                  • Oh man, remember Elkhart, Indiana where Obama made bunch of visits because their unemployment rate was so high and he started energy businesses? Total hype. Ever see the size of the City of Elkhart? Did not equal the attention. In fall 2009 or 2010, can’t recaall off hand, the head of the Apollo Group spoke in Elkhart — Elkhart, Indiana? It is, by all indications, a sleeper cell for the usurpers. And every McD’s in the area of Northern Indiana has been overhauled. The ice cream cones go on sale for 50-59 cents, which is give-away at cost practically. Not to mention most of the sales are for cones only so owner does not make money on other items….There is a BIG story to be found in the area. Just don’t know yet what it is. Also, big RV manufacturing, all privately held prior, and Warren Buffet now owns one of the biggest ones. None of these things separately means anything, but it strts to smell fishy when all the strangeness is put next to each other.

                    • You know what else is fishy and I keep forgetting to mention it? Have you heard how Buffett is going around the country buying up small newspapers? http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702304441404577482833557743286.html Is this a companion tactic to the Soros Secretary of State program? Soros controls all local elections via the Secretaries of State in every state and then Buffett controls the LOCAL newspapers (since the national lamestream is ALREADY under their control)? He wants local papers with monopolies, although he claims that he won’t interfere with how they cover news. I bet. Wall Street Journal talks about it being risky, but only if Buffett’s goal is to make money. He can afford to lose money in the same way that Air America lost money. If the goal is something else, then that’s another type of investment for Buffett. Helping to control what people in small towns across the country KNOW and what they don’t know. Already, the lamestream censors like Pravda. But the flies in the ointment are local newspapers and the Internet.

                      “In the end, the newspaper deals represent a tiny and somewhat strange bet for Berkshire, leading some to question whether Mr. Buffett is emotionally motivated. But even if that plays a part, it is hard to believe he has let a pure sentimental attachment overshadow real value.”

                      IT’S NOT SENTIMENT. It’s a plan. By the progressives. By Barry and company, using moneybags like Soros and Buffett (or vice versa).

                    • What A Hoot

                      Well, we need to do what the original Patriots did and one of the things that led to the Bill of Rights and Constitution–That is start writing and printing our own newspapers and dispersing locally. There are enough of us to have LOTS of small-time papers with BIGtime news!

        • you’re right Hoot.

  16. vic… as always… more food 4 thought… LC reverses my brain cells
    like beatin’ dirt from a Pazyryk carpet. It refreshes ME… so…
    http://lamecherry.blogspot.com/2012/07/john-roberts-3pm-crawl.html
    4-all to see…. is it justice… or did we just get robbed … I don’t get IT!
    Is it a clever twist of fate … It could be payback time!
    All bets are …GO 4 IT! …. swim with the fishes….

    • Lame Cherry gets a little ridiculous. First, upon what evidence does anyone even suggest that there was anything untoward about Roberts’s adoption of those children? Because they look white? There are MANY whites in South America, just as there are many in North America. Second, who could possibly believe that Mooch, who doesn’t even have a law license anymore, would be given a seat on the SCOTUS? Even the DemoncRATS wouldn’t be THAT corrupt. Notice how they voted Holder in contempt of Congress, out of fear of losing their own jobs. The SCOTUS decision in Bush v. Gore was the CORRECT and Constitutional decision. Would LC have preferred Gore for 8 years instead?

  17. Klayman gets his answer: http://www.wnd.com/2012/07/judge-issues-ruling-in-obama-eligibility-case/

    “The judge in a Florida lawsuit challenging Barack Obama’s eligibility to be president has dismissed the case “with prejudice.”

    In his issued ruling Circuit Judge Terry Lewis agreed with White House attorneys that Obama’s eligibility could not be challenged under Florida election law because, technically, Obama hasn’t been nominated yet and furthermore, the judge said, Obama’s birth in the U.S. meets the Constitution’s requirements for being a “natural born citizen.”

    The attorney challenging Obama’s eligibility, however, told WND the judge’s ruling is “intellectually dishonest” and so poorly written it makes an appeal “relatively easy.”” Rest at the link. Here’s the link to the ruling: http://www.scribd.com/doc/98872379/Voeltz-v-Obama-Order-of-Dismissal-Florida-Obama-Ballot-Challenge-6-29-2012

    • Is it just me, (and I admit I don’t pay very close attention to these eligibility hearings…I don’t really understand the complexities and figure I’ll hear the result with everyone else) but is this the general pattern?
      1) Judge finally found who is willing to take lawsuit seriously
      2) Judge wants to punt ruling for one reason or another
      3) Attorneys for “our side” force the issue, things look hopeful
      4) Judge makes unfavorable rulling

      • Looks that way to me. You could insert: 3.a) Judge told how to rule by Chicago thugs, and 3.b) Judge handed “his” ruling as written by obot lawyers and based upon Barry’s “reasoning”.

  18. The lamestream is hyping global warming again. No doubt from a Journolist meme sent in talking points. It’s bull. http://apnews.myway.com/article/20120703/D9VP9J681.html

    Well, they can’t really say it’s from global warming, but like Al Gore, they’ll just make it up if it suits. What’s the truth is this:

    We’re at the end of the 11-year sunspot cycle. http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/07/120703134102.htm There’s a magnetic storm even now. It’s expected to cause outages and possibly auroras right about fireworks time tomorrow night. MOST OF THE EFFECTS WE SEE ARE FROM, GUESS WHAT? THE SUN. BECAUSE THE SUN IS WHAT WARMS THE EARTH. Duh. Most meteorologists do NOT believe in global warming. In fact, I read recently that the biggest one-time promoter of the theory has now changed his mind. But that’s not going to stop the progressive commies from USING IT to CUT THE USA DOWN TO WHAT THEY BELIEVE IS OUR “SIZE”.

  19. Isn’t DC showing now how really prepared they are for a disaster, nearly 11 years after? They can’t handle a thunderstorm or a heat wave. I’m impressed. Well, what can we expect when DHS is too busy finding ways to punish domestic terrorists like the Tea Party and focusing on how to protect Muslims from non-existent discrimination and illegal aliens from harassment?

  20. http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Journalism/2012/07/02/Wapo-backs-off-romney-outsource-claim?utm_source=e_breitbart_com&utm_medium=email&utm_content=Breitbart+News+Roundup%2C+July+2%2C+2012&utm_campaign=Breitbart+News+Roundup%2C+July+2%2C+2012&utm_term=More
    Washington Post runs a lying story saying Romney outsourced jobs to foreign countries when he was at Bain. It’s not true. Romney, in a method reminiscent of Obama Truth Squads, meets with them (or has his stooges do so) in order to lodge a complaint about the false story. WaPo refuses to retract. In what appears to be coordination, the day BEFORE the story ran, Obama ran an ad saying exactly what the WaPo story alleged. This article points out that such stories take days to write so obviously, there is a whiff of coordination of “narrative”. http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Journalism/2012/06/23/Wapo-Obama-Coordinate-outsourcing-attack
    Now the WaPo does a backtrack on the story without admitting that it was false. Parsing words like real dedicated obots. And to boot, they claim that they don’t factcheck their own stories and aren’t going to criticize Obama (give him Pinocchios) for saying falsely what they themselves said falsely. Got that? I’m not sure I do, but you have to read the top story to follow it. No surprise to us: For how long have the media printed stories just so DemoncRATS can use their false headlines in campaign ads or on speeches on the floor of Congress?

    “Kessler refuses to award Pinnocchios.

    Which means that under the imprimatur of the Washington Post, the Obama campaign is free to continue lying about Romney being an outsourcer-in-chief — which further means that the conspiracy hatched between the Post and the Obama campaign to flat-out lie about Romney is free to continue unabated.

    TEN DAYS LATER, after its story completely falls apart under the pressing weight of what you and I call facts, in so many Clintonesque words, the corrupt Post finally admits Romney is not responsible for outsourcing… but only does so by burying that fact in a piece published long after Team Obama has been allowed to use the Post’s dishonest reporting to lie about Romney in a massive ad campaign.

    And as far as the Post is concerned, it is okey-doke by them if the Obama campaign continues to lie, using them as cover.

    It’s as if Politico and the Washington Post entered a contest to see which failing news outlet could disgrace themselves more before the year was out.”

    I’m loving on this John Nolte guy.

  21. http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/01/stanley_ann_dunham_and_the_lef.html FMD…. etc.
    http://www.robinofberkeley.com
    http://www.com/robin_of_berkeley/
    Robin is leaving AT …. archived articles & categories you may want to read… thumbs up…

  22. You go girl…. just do IT! Why not write ONE for AT? I always wondered.
    Since ~ May 2009 ~ till her last one below ~ June 2012.
    Open her (blue name) on the Left of the page… & start from the
    bottom up.. see how she evolved… & many of us along with her! She notes at the bottom of “HELL” ~ for the foreseeable future she is departing…
    so here you go … have fun on the 4TH & great reading… by ROBIN!!!!
    http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/06/the_road_to_hell.html

  23. Here’s … HER list …. from above… error.
    http://www.americanthinker.com/robin_of_berkeley/

  24. No excuses…. zilch nada …. American Thinker…. needs US…
    We need the push the rush the power to make BIG waves…
    http://www.americanthinker.com/static/contact_information.html

    • July 20. That’s the date I read for when the stars say that Barry will be out of the WH. Do you believe in astrology? I don’t but I’m willing to start if this comes true!

    • We’ll have to read Corsi’s book to find out. Sounds like he’s saying it’s a massive jobs program to support their economy. Bizarre, though. Isn’t it? Maybe they intend to move the masses from the countryside into these planned cities. Don’t the progressives want to do a similar thing here, too? Force everyone off the land and into densely populated cities to reduce the carbon footprint and keep us from driving all over creation in our SUVs? They want us to be like worker bees, so they will create those massive, dense colonies for us all.

    • I’ve read about those. it’s for fake jobs for a fake booming economy

  25. started skimming the actual opinion. THIS IS REALLY FREAKIN’ IMPORTANT!!! one of the worst decisions by SCOTUS ever was Wickard – the wheat farmer. It has long been held up as the pinnacle case for justifying regulation by liberals. It created something called the “negative commerce clause” – just sounds dumb, right? but lefties love it because it means that not participating (buying or selling) effects commerce and therefore congress may regulate it. Roberts (and scalia alito thomas kennedy) completely shut that theory down. forever. it doesn’t exist anymore:

    “Applying the Government’s logic to the familiar case of Wickard v. Filburn shows how far that logic would carryus from the notion of a government of limited powers. In Wickard, the Court famously upheld a federal penalty imposed on a farmer for growing wheat for consumption on his own farm. 317 U. S., at 114–115, 128–129. That amount of wheat caused the farmer to exceed his quota under a program designed to support the price of wheat by limiting supply. The Court rejected the farmer’s argumentthat growing wheat for home consumption was beyond the reach of the commerce power. It did so on the ground thatthe farmer’s decision to grow wheat for his own use allowed him to avoid purchasing wheat in the market. That decision, when considered in the aggregate along with similar decisions of others, would have had a substantial effect on the interstate market for wheat. Id., at 127–129.
    Wickard has long been regarded as “perhaps the most far reaching example of Commerce Clause authority over intrastate activity,” Lopez, 514 U. S., at 560, but the Government’s theory in this case would go much further.Under Wickard it is within Congress’s power to regulate the market for wheat by supporting its price. But price can be supported by increasing demand as well as bydecreasing supply. The aggregated decisions of someconsumers not to purchase wheat have a substantial effect on the price of wheat, just as decisions not to purchasehealth insurance have on the price of insurance. Congresscan therefore command that those not buying wheat do so,just as it argues here that it may command that those notbuying health insurance do so. The farmer in Wickard was at least actively engaged in the production of wheat, and the Government could regulate that activity because of its effect on commerce. The Government’s theory herewould effectively override that limitation, by establishing that individuals may be regulated under the CommerceClause whenever enough of them are not doing something the Government would have them do.”

    • I can’t even explain how important this decision was with respect to the commerce Clause. Although it may not seem like it, it is a HUGE win. They undid decades of expansion of the commerce clause.

      “The Government’s theory would erode those limits, permitting Congress to reach beyond the natural extent of its authority, “everywhere extending the sphere of its activity anddrawing all power into its impetuous vortex.” The Federalist No. 48, at 309 (J. Madison). Congress already enjoysvast power to regulate much of what we do. Accepting the Government’s theory would give Congress the samelicense to regulate what we do not do, fundamentally changing the relation between the citizen and the Federal government
      * * *
      The proposition that Congress may dictate the conductof an individual today because of prophesied future activity finds no support in our precedent. We have said that Congress can anticipate the effects on commerce of an economic activity. See, e.g., Consolidated Edison Co. v. NLRB, 305 U. S. 197 (1938) (regulating the labor practices of utility companies); Heart of Atlanta Motel, Inc. v. United States, 379 U. S. 241 (1964) (prohibiting discrimination byhotel operators); Katzenbach v. McClung, 379 U. S. 294 (1964) (prohibiting discrimination by restaurant owners). But we have never permitted Congress to anticipate that activity itself in order to regulate individuals not currentlyengaged in commerce. Each one of our cases, including those cited by JUSTICE GINSBURG, post, at 20–21, involved preexisting economic activity. See, e.g., Wickard, 317
      U. S., at 127–129 (producing wheat); Raich, supra, at 25 (growing marijuana).
      Everyone will likely participate in the markets for food, clothing, transportation, shelter, or energy; that does not authorize Congress to direct them to purchase particular products in those or other markets today. The Commerce Clause is not a general license to regulate an individualfrom cradle to grave, simply because he will predictably engage in particular transactions. Any police power toregulate individuals as such, as opposed to their activities, remains vested in the States.”

      will try to get to the tax portion next time. did anybody join Roberts on the taxing power? did the 4 libs only join in the judgment or did they actually join in roberts’ part of his opinion that upholds it as a tax. i’m too tired to look now but it would be significant if they did not join in that reasoning and only joined in judgment and upheld it themselves under commerce. if roberts was a lone wolf there, then there really isn’t strong precedent on that issue and it’s really not that dangerous of an expansion on the tax power (also it’s the power that congress can use least covertly and pays the most for at the polls – which tends to keep it in check). if that’s the case it’s not really a 5-4 majority upholding it, it’s a 4-4-1 plurality and future courts will not be unduly bound by the tax analysis.

    • oh yeah, they also solidified that the necessary and proper clause is predicated on an enumerated power, rather than a freestanding grant of power. that’s really good too – libs try to separate it out.

    • Thanks for that. I would feel better about Roberts if some of the brilliant other minds out there hadn’t criticized it. Like Krauthammer. Not to mention Alito and Scalia. I just don’t know. I’m really coming down on the side of Roberts, although I hate to feel like maybe we’re being set up as dolts. Yet, the progressives don’t defend Roberts for the reasons we might, and they seem to miss the GOOD NEWS in this ruling for conservatives and the VERY BAD NEWS for the likes of Pelosi and Obama.

      As for wheat, that’s a good analogy with so many people AVOIDING wheat now, on account of this “I have celiac disease” craze. I even heard O’Reilly on one of his radio “talking points memos” telling people to stop eating wheat. So ridiculous. Humans owe civilization TO WHEAT. We’ve been eating it and thriving for over 10 thousand years. By now, for certain, most of us have adapted to eating it, just as some have adapted to eating dairy products (but not all).

  26. Lawyers Have Already Drafted 13,000 Pages of Regulations for New ObamaTax Law
    Posted by Jim Hoft on Thursday, July 5, 2012, 12:37 AM
    http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2012/07/lawyers-have-already-drafted-13000-pages-of-regulations-for-new-obamatax-law/

    Quick! Ask Sheryl Crow: Should we now split the single square in half or pull the two ply apart? To save the rain forest, especially the baby trees and all, you know.

    Can you imagine being so uninformed that you believe the rain forests are being mowed down to produce toilet paper, yet, still, your opinions and advice are so valued and important that you’re provided an international platform from which to spew your idiotic notions? All with an insufficiently wiped bottom, at that? And to top it all off, those listening actually believe your nonsense and take your imagined “cause(s)” to heart as their own? Only in America. Crow et al are going to miss her..

    • She can’t spare a square.

      • She’s only conservative when it comes to sparing the squares.

        Okay, no more making Crow the butt of my jokes. The woman was recently diagnosed with a brain tumor. Who knows how that may have affected her reasoning skills and even her opinions and for how long? I hope they remove it, she recovers well, and discovers that the tumor was the liberal part of her brain of which she is now cured.

  27. Promoting unanimity will not be an easy task, Roberts acknowledged, after years of “the personalization of judicial politics.” He said that he had to emphasize the benefits of unanimity for individual justices, in order to influence what he called the “team dynamic.” “You do have to [help people] appreciate, from their own point of view, having the Court acquire more legitimacy, credibility; [show them] that they will benefit, from the shared commitment to unanimity, in a way that they wouldn’t otherwise,” he said. Roberts added that in some ways he considered his situation—overseeing a Court that is evenly divided on important issues—to be ideal. “You do need some fluidity in the middle, [if you are going] to develop a commitment to a different way of deciding things.” In other words, on a divided Court where neither camp can be confident that it will win in the most controversial cases, both sides have an incentive to work toward unanimity, to achieve a kind of bilateral disarmament.
    http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2007/01/roberts-apos-s-rules/5559/?single_page=true

    The Atlantic article (link above) is long but go read it, anyway. It’s worth the time. Roberts is all about consensus among SC justices, reputation (his own and that of the SC), appearing non-partisan, appearing non-political, being liked, being remembered favorably by history…he’s all about appearances and not so much about law as per the US Constitution. He’s another ******* narcissist with skewed principles and a misdirected sense of purpose.
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    Also:
    Why Didn’t John Roberts “Stretch” to Find Arizona’s Law Enforcing Federal Immigration Statutes Constitutional?
    http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2012/06/29/why_didn_t_john_roberts_stretch_to_find_arizona_s_law_enforcing_federal_immigration_statutes_constitutiona

  28. http://www.orlytaitzesq.com/?p=150083
    WOW!!! Within hours of filing my Taitz v Sebelius et al challenge of Judeo-Christian ObamaTax, it became one of the top topics on USA Today, one of 5 top US publications!

  29. Congressmen to Obama: See you in court!
    Charge mandate ‘an issue negatively impacting employers of all faiths’
    August 25, 2012

    If you’re a business owner fretting about the moral implications of the looming Obamacare mandate, take heart — 79 members of Congress have stepped up to the plate to assist a challenge to the law that will require you to choose between your livelihood and your God.
    ***
    Dozens of members of Congress have signed up to back a challenge to Obamacare’s mandate that employers provide contraceptive services – including abortifacients – to employees under their health care programs. That requirement has been imposed even on employers whose religious faith forbids their participation in the deaths of unborn infants.

    A number of lawsuits have been filed over the issue, one federal judge already has halted enforcement against a Denver company, and the government voluntarily has waived enforcement for now in a case brought on behalf of a Michigan company.

    Now the American Center for Law and Justice is representing 79 members of Congress with amicus briefs filed in 12 separate lawsuits brought by more than 40 Catholic organizations suing over the requirement.

    The plaintiffs in the cases include the Archdiocese of New York, Notre Dame, the Catholic Charities of the Archdiocese of Chicago and others.

    The briefs explain the mandate runs counter to America’s long and proud tradition of accommodating the religious beliefs and practices of all its citizens. The briefs contend that the mandate imposes an unconstitutional burden on individuals and organizations, who firmly oppose having to subsidize, provide, and/or facilitate activities and services that are contrary to their religious
    beliefs.

    Cont. – See List of Congressmen who are involved in this lawsuit.

    http://www.wnd.com/2012/08/congressmen-challenge-obama-attack-on-faith/

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

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

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s