President Obama Is A Liar

It’s telling that the only way Obama’s signature piece  of legislation could pass constitutional muster is to have the Supreme Court call him a liar.

He lied.  Straight up.

He didn’t change his mind, he didn’t adjust to new realities.

The bastard lied straight to your face.

And if you don’t like the way in which I reference the President:

 

8 responses to “President Obama Is A Liar

  1. A little dramatic, aren’t we? Just trying to fill in the temporary silence left by Limbaugh and Hannity’s depressions?

    The Supreme Court held that the mandate is valid under the taxing power of the Constitution. If you’re going to insist that the mandate is a tax, then I expect you to also admit that it is a Constitutional act and is valid law.

    If you, however, are going to hold to the belief, as the conservative branch of the Court does, then you lose the luxury of calling it a tax.

    So, which will it be?

    (For the record, I think it’s pretty silly to say the President is a liar for saying it’s not a tax hike simply because the Court eventually decided it was. As you’ll remember, the tax theory was a last-ditch argument by the government, which tried very very hard not to depend on that. The reason the court went with it is a mystery to all, but I’m in the camp that says it was a decision to preserve the court’s political legitimacy. Either way, the Court’s decisionmaking doesn’t make the president a liar, but you’re writing in the tone of someone who is just angry about the decision.)

    • If you’re going to insist that the mandate is a tax, then I expect you to also admit that it is a Constitutional act and is valid law.

      I think that Congress can tax. I think that if they said this was a tax it would have been valid from the jump. They didn’t. They didn’t until they tried to defend it. THEN they called it a tax and the court agreed with them.

      He lied.

      Now, if you’re trying to get me on if I think that this law “ought” remain law…..The fact that they can tax behavior in the way that they have here is depressing. However, to be fair, Social Security is really the same thing.

      It’s depressing in a manner that I can’t yet describe that while congress cannot legislate just any old thing they want but they CAN tax you for NOT doing what it is they want you to do.

      For the record, I think it’s pretty silly to say the President is a liar for saying it’s not a tax hike simply because the Court eventually decided it was.

      Then our constitutional law professor was wrong? He was wrong to think he could legislate under the commerce clause AND was wrong that his bill is really a tax?

      • I think that if they said this was a tax it would have been valid from the jump.

        It WAS valid from the jump, just not for the reason we thought it was.

        He was wrong to think he could legislate under the commerce clause AND was wrong that his bill is really a tax?

        This is really hard to explain to non-lawyers, but the Court has not actually ruled that the law was invalid under the Commerce Clause. Five justices made statements along those lines, but it’s all non-binding dicta. Quite frankly, if there had been no tax argument raised, Roberts may have still swallowed the decision under the commerce clause. That’s how desperate he was to find the law constitutional.

        Besides, almost all Constitutional scholars thought it was valid under CC. You expect Obama to be a better mind-reader of the Supreme Court than the entire field of scholars? Or maybe you just want to call him a liar and a bastard because you’re mad?

        • Roberts may have still swallowed the decision under the commerce clause. That’s how desperate he was to find the law constitutional.

          I get the feeling that he really didn’t wanna undo this legislation. I certainly can’t know for sure, and maybe I’m speaking from what I wanna have happened instead of what did, but yeah, I think he was trying to weigh:

          A: The fact that there is something very “not right” about this.
          B: Having the court thrust into a partisan body.

          Or maybe you just want to call him a liar and a bastard because you’re mad?

          I’D be a liar if I didn’t allow some of that to be true 😉

  2. I don’t see how you can say Obama lied. The Court said the power to impose the individual mandate comes from the fact that Congress has the power to tax. Obama believes it comes from the Commerce Clause. Obama and the Court disagree. A lie is when one knowingly tells a falsehood. When has Obama done that? The lie comes when people say that buying insurance is the same as taxation. If that were true, then suddenly my insurance premium is a tax! Suddenly insurance companies are tax collectors and tax spenders (with no money going to the government?)! But when did Obama lie? Never.

    • I don’t see how you can say Obama lied. The Court said the power to impose the individual mandate comes from the fact that Congress has the power to tax. Obama believes it comes from the Commerce Clause. Obama and the Court disagree.

      It comes from Obama saying this wasn’t a tax. And the fact that this is a tax. His administration argued it was a tax.

      • We’ll use a Pino-style analogy to argue this one.

        I go to Jack in the box to get a late night burger for my girlfriend. I come back, and she says “What did you get me,” and I respond “A spicy chicken sandwich,” because that’s what she likes and that’s what I ordered.

        Turns out, though, that the window guy put a burger in the bag instead, but my girlfriend says “Eh, I was just hungry, this is fine.”

        Did I lie when I said I got her a chicken sandwich? Or was I just operating under certain assumptions that were reasonable but eventually turned out to be incorrect?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *