1. Attention: We have put together a thread with tips and a tutorial video to help with using the new software. Please take a moment to check out the thread here: Trapshooters.com Tutorial & Help Video.
    Dismiss Notice

taxing liberals for not...

Discussion in 'Politics, Elections & Legislation' started by Bisi, Jul 2, 2012.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Bisi

    Bisi TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    3,399
    Since the Supreme Court has ruled it constituently to tax somebody for not doing something, in this case - not buying health insurance. I was wondering what we could tax liberals for not doing?

    Tax em for not being a member of the NRA? Everybody needs to support the 2nd amendment. When they file their taxes if their name doesn't come up on the membership list, slap em with a tax.

    Tax em for not going to church? Tax em if they don't purchase an approved Bible from the government printing office?

    Tax em for not being a member of "Rush 24/7"? Tax em for not subscribing to the "Limbaugh Letter"?

    Tax em for not having a min. of 1000 rounds each of Rem .223 and 45acp?

    Tax em for not attending the Grand? Or would that be a state of IL. tax that they could impose on their citizens? IL needs to have the World Shooting Center pay for itself, so why not?

    Under this ruling - I can't imagine anything that the government can't require you to purchase. Can you?

    Hey, why not tax liberals for not working? We can deduct the tax from their EBT cards
     
  2. Recoil Sissy

    Recoil Sissy Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    2,642
    Bisi:

    Roberts along with the SCOTUS libs have just created an unlimited power of federal taxation. Any Congress with a majority of liberals or conservatives in both houses are now free to tax anyone for anything without limit.

    All of your conservative examples now meet Constitutional muster. On the flip side a liberal majority can now tax YOU for attending church or tax ammunition and firearms out of existence.

    Mash the link and you'll see Judge Napolitano agrees.

    sissy

    edited addition...

    "I can't imagine anything that the government can't require you to purchase."

    Thru federal taxation we can now be taxed into buying anything, not buying anything, doing anything, or failing to do anything Congress mandates.

    Happy Independence Day!
     
  3. John Galt

    John Galt TS Member

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2011
    Messages:
    2,788
    We would have been better off with a continuation of the commerce clause than the new unlimited right of taxation. Thanks a bunch John Roberts, you idiot.
     
  4. Brian in Oregon

    Brian in Oregon Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    25,238
    Location:
    Deplorable Bitter Clinger in Liberal La La Land
    <i>"Roberts along with the SCOTUS libs have just created an unlimited power of federal taxation."</i>

    Not quite. They AFFIRMED the UNLIMITED power of the government to tax.

    Many gunowners already knew this power existed, back when Metzenbaum and his cohorts were trying to pass a 5000% to 10,000% tax on handgun ammunition.

    Heck, it even goes back further than than, when there was a $200 tax on items that fell under the 1934 National Firearms Act. In 1934, a $200 tax was the equivalent of ten months rent on a home.
     
  5. crusha

    crusha TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    5,762
    "The power to tax is the power to destroy."
     
  6. 2500 HD

    2500 HD Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2011
    Messages:
    689
    Why Chief Justice Roberts Made the Right Long-Term Decision With ObamaCare



    This article, written by I.M. Citizen, gives a much different perspective of Justice Robert’s decision. Comment below and let us know what you think. Also check out I.M. Citizen’s blog – quite interesting.
    I.M. Citizen:
    Before you look to do harm to Chief Justice Roberts or his family, it’s important that you think carefully about the meaning – the true nature — of his ruling on Obama-care. The Left will shout that they won, that Obama-care was upheld and all the rest. Let them.
    It will be a short-lived celebration.
    Here’s what really occurred — payback. Yes, payback for Obama’s numerous, ill-advised and childish insults directed toward SCOTUS.
    Chief Justice Roberts actually ruled the mandate, relative to the commerce clause, was unconstitutional. That’s how the Democrats got Obama-care going in the first place. This is critical. His ruling means Congress can’t compel American citizens to purchase anything. Ever. The notion is now officially and forever, unconstitutional. As it should be.
    Next, he stated that, because Congress doesn’t have the ability to mandate, it must, to fund Obama-care, rely on its power to tax. Therefore, the mechanism that funds Obama-care is a tax. This is also critical. Recall back during the initial Obama-care battles, the Democrats called it a penalty, Republicans called it a tax. Democrats consistently soft sold it as a penalty. It went to vote as a penalty. Obama declared endlessly, that it was not a tax, it was a penalty. But when the Democrats argued in front of the Supreme Court, they said ‘hey, a penalty or a tax, either way’. So, Roberts gave them a tax. It is now the official law of the land — beyond word-play and silly shenanigans. Obama-care is funded by tax dollars. Democrats now must defend a tax increase to justify the Obama-care law.
    Finally, he struck down as unconstitutional, the Obama-care idea that the federal government can bully states into complying by yanking their existing medicaid funding. Liberals, through Obama-care, basically said to the states — ‘comply with Obama-care or we will stop existing funding.’ Roberts ruled that is a no-no. If a state takes the money, fine, the Feds can tell the state how to run a program, but if the state refuses money, the federal government can’t penalize the state by yanking other funding. Therefore, a state can decline to participate in Obama-care without penalty. This is obviously a serious problem. Are we going to have 10, 12, 25 states not participating in “national” health-care? Suddenly, it’s not national, is it?
    Ultimately, Roberts supported states rights by limiting the federal government’s coercive abilities. He ruled that the government can not force the people to purchase products or services under the commerce clause and he forced liberals to have to come clean and admit that Obama-care is funded by tax increases.
    Although he didn’t guarantee Romney a win, he certainly did more than his part and should be applauded.
    And he did this without creating a civil war or having bricks thrown threw his windshield. Oh, and he’ll be home in time for dinner.
    Brilliant.
     
  7. RobertT

    RobertT Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2006
    Messages:
    1,353
    Stay home and don't go to the polls, or go to the polls and vote for more taxation. Or, perhaps a better idea is to go to the polls and vote the tax and spend bastards out of office.

    Robert
     
  8. crusha

    crusha TS Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    5,762
    By November, the Average American Idiot is not even going to remember this.
     
  9. Catpower

    Catpower Molon Labe TS Supporters

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    10,230
    Location:
    In the Cabana
    Buzzy unfortunately you are right
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.