Greatest Hits: Will The Government Steal Your Savings? It’s More Likely Than You Think?

Share

Your ads will be inserted here by

Easy Plugin for AdSense.

Please go to the plugin admin page to
Paste your ad code OR
Suppress this ad slot.

Will The Government Steal Your Savings? It’s More Likely Than You Think? I also ran across the planned thievery of the Spendulous Maximus…

This has been a recurrent theme for several years.  It’s been simmering on the back burner, so to speak, but it continues to get some attention from time to time.  The issue is savings.  Whether it be your 401k, or your IRA, or even a savings account; the democrats has been eying them like a crackhead views their pipe.  Big government has wasted trillions on making more poor people, creating dependency, paying off contributors, punishing enemies, arming those that kill Christians, and trying to prop up their union buddies.  Now, after building up an unsustainable debt, they need another fix, and your savings is becoming mighty attractive to them.  Remember the old cartoons where two characters are starving?  remember how one character would look at another, and see a sandwich?  It’s kinda like that.  Doug Ross has the latest developments…

This didn’t just happen over night. The move to make this reality has been going on for quite some time. The first time it was mentioned publicly in any official capacity was at a 2010 Congressional hearing:

Democrats in the Senate on Thursday held a recess hearing covering a taxpayer bailout of union pensions and a plan to seize private 401(k) plans to more “fairly” distribute taxpayer-funded pensions to everyone.

Sen. Tom Harkin (D-Iowa), Chairman of the Health, Education, Labor and Pensions (HELP) Committee heard from hand-picked witnesses advocating the infamous “Guaranteed Retirement Account” (GRA) authored by Theresa Guilarducci.

In a nutshell, under the GRA system government would seize private 401(k) accounts, setting up an additional 5% mandatory payroll tax to dole out a “fair” pension to everyone using that confiscated money coupled with the mandated contributions. This would, of course, be a sister government ponzi scheme working in tandem with Social Security, the primary purpose being to give big government politicians additional taxpayer funds to raid to pay for their out-of-control spending.

You’d think that such an idea would be immediately dismissed by the American public, but it has only gained steam since, as evidenced by a 2012 hearing held at the U.S. Labor Department:

The hearing, held in the Labor Department’s main auditorium, was monitored by NSC staff and featured a line up of left-wing activists including one representative of the AFL-CIO who advocated for more government regulation over private retirement accounts and even the establishment of government-sponsored annuities that would take the place of 401k plans.

“This hearing was set up to explore why Americans are not saving as much for their retirement as they could,” explains National Seniors Council National Director Robert Crone, “However, it is clear that this is the first step towards a government takeover. It feels just like the beginning of the debate over health care and we all know how that ended up.

Your ads will be inserted here by

Easy Plugin for AdSense.

Please go to the plugin admin page to
Paste your ad code OR
Suppress this ad slot.

Such “reforms” would effectively end private retirement accounts in America, Crone warns.

A few years ago the government of the United States of America nationalized nearly 1/6th of our economy when they took over the health care system with forced mandates. In the process they essentially took control of $1.6 trillion in yearly industry revenues.

But that’s nothing compared to private savings. The total amount of retirement assets in America, including 401k, IRA and savings accounts is around $21 trillion. With our national debt coincidentally approaching the same, the government sees big money and potentially a way out of our country’s fiscal disaster.

This will start voluntarily with the MyRA and other state-sponsored programs. But when not enough Americans are making it their patriotic duty to turn over their funds to their government, they’ll mandate compliance with the stroke of a pen just as they did with the Patient Affordable Care Act.

This is spot on.  And, by the way, the excerpt is a small part of a much larger post.  I’d advise you to go over there to read the rest.

As you look at the MyRA scam.  Think of these…

1.  The Income Tax was only going to be on the rich, and at a small percentage.  Look at your next pay-stub, and see how true that is.

2.  Social Security funds were going to be kept separate from all other government funds?  Just remember that what you pay in to SS goes right out to fund the government, and interest on the debt.  As for the “lock box?”  It’s full of worthless government IOU’s.

Anything the government offers now will be changed in order to rip you off.  They’ll say some thing to get you to buy in, like, “if you like your plan…”  Then, once they have the power, and your savings, they’ll do whatever they want with it, and you’ll be left will a meaningless IOU.  Then, when you retire, you’ll find that you get nothing, because some democrat constituent group needed your hard earned savings more than you do.

And, then, you’ll regret your votes for democrats.

Share

Obama Is Eying Your Savings!

Share

Your ads will be inserted here by

Easy Plugin for AdSense.

Please go to the plugin admin page to
Paste your ad code OR
Suppress this ad slot.

Obama Is Eying Your Savings!: Our Contributor Jim, living in a communist dictatorship, knows all to well how this pans out…

Remember when President Obama said “there comes a point when a person has earned enough”? Well, it should be a surprise that he also feels that people have saved more than they need for retirement. Mr. Obama has given new meaning to the word “arrogance”.

With this scandal a day administration, it is no wonder some of their plans to get their hands on more of your money slip under the radar.

On Aril 12, 2013, the Wall Street Journal wrote:

How many times have you read financial-advice stories lecturing you to max-out on your IRA, save as much as you can in your 401(k), and even pay taxes now to change your regular IRA into a Roth IRA that will be tax-free until you die?

Well, be careful how much you save.

Assistant OpinionJournal.com editor Allysia Finley on President Obama’s attack on tax deferred retirement accounts.

A lot of job-switchers are ignoring what may be one of the best options to get the most out of their retirement: Moving their savings into their new employer’s 401(k). MarketWatch’s Jim Jelter explains the benefits.

That’s the message in President Obama’s budget for fiscal 2014, which for the first time proposes to cap the amount Americans can save in these tax-sheltered investment vehicles. The White House explanation is that some people have accumulated “substantially more than is needed to fund reasonable levels of retirement saving.” So Mr. Obama proposes to “limit an individual’s total balance across tax-preferred accounts to an amount sufficient to finance an annuity of not more than $205,000 per year in retirement, or about $3 million for someone retiring in 2013.”

On April 14, 2013, the Independent Sentinel wrote:

THEY ARE COMING FOR YOU NEXT, make no mistake about that!. They already proposed it back in 2008. The government is on the hunt for more money to support its spending problem. President Obama wants more “revenue” – “taxes” – so he can make more “investments” as he spreads the wealth around.

You need to be afraid, very afraid!

Americans have $17.5 trillion in savings with 25% of it in IRA’s. It is a future source of revenue for the government if they can get their hands on it.

President Barack Obama’s Fiscal Year 2013 budget plan estimated that retirement tax deductions taken by employers and individuals over the next five years add up to $429 billion in “lost” tax revenue. The government believes your savings is their lost revenue.

See how that works? Because you take a legal tax deduction, the government is getting screwed. Never mind that the original idea was to give citizens an incentive to save. Further along in the Independent Sentinel article we find this:

Share

Six Million Taxpayers To Owe IRS For ObamaCare Tax…Wait, It’s Not A Tax, So, Penalty Or Fine Or Oh Alright, It’s A Tax

Share

ObamaCareIRS

Hat/Tip to Newsmax.

In 2009, President Obama and George Stephanopoulos got into a feisty discussion on whether ObamaCare was a tax or a penalty or a fine or a…*sigh*

not a tax is a taxAnyway, it went something like this:

GS: “Under this mandate, the government is forcing people to spend money, fining you if you don’t. How is that not a tax?”

To which, Obama offered his standard, rambling response…

BO: “Well, hold on a second, George. Here’s what’s happening. You and I are both paying $900, on average—our families—in higher premiums because of uncompensated care. Now what I’ve said is that if you can’t afford health insurance, you certainly shouldn’t be punished for that. That’s just piling on. If, on the other hand, we’re giving tax credits, we’ve set up an exchange, you are now part of a big pool, we’ve driven down the costs, we’ve done everything we can and you actually can afford health insurance, but you’ve just decided, you know what, I want to take my chances.  And then you get hit by a bus and you and I have to pay for the emergency room care, that’s . . .”

GS: “That may be, but it’s still a tax increase.”

BO: “No. That’s not true, George. The—for us to say that you’ve got to take a responsibility to get health insurance is absolutely not a tax increase. What it’s saying is, is that we’re not going to have other people carrying your burdens for you anymore . . .”

GS: “But it may be fair, it may be good public policy—”

BO: “No, but—but, George, you—you can’t just make up that language and decide that that’s called a tax increase.”

At this point in a bold move, especially by someone from the left side of the spectrum, Stephanopoulos turned to the Merriam-Webster Dictionary for clarification and to challenge Obama on what a tax is…

GS: “I-I don’t think I’m making it up, Merriam-Webster’s dictionary: ‘Tax, a charge, usually of money, imposed by authority on persons or property for public purposes.'”

And then, obviously not pleased with Stephanopoulos pushing him on this, he attacked, Alinsky-style, with ridicule.

BO: “George, the fact that you looked up Merriam’s dictionary, that the definition of a tax increase indicates to me that you’re stretching a little bit right now. Otherwise you wouldn’t have gone to the dictionary to check the definition. What we, if what you’re saying is…”

So Stephanopoulos defended himself…

GS: “I wanted to check for myself. But your critics say it is a tax increase.”

Again, Obama went with Alinsky in then applying ridicule to ALL who oppose him.

BO: “My critics say everything is a tax increase. My critics say that I’m taking over every sector of the economy. You know that. Look, we can have a legitimate debate about whether or not we’re going to have an individual mandate or not, but . . .”

GS: “But you reject that it’s a tax increase?”

BO: “I absolutely reject that notion.”

That was then, and this is now….

Well, as we all know, the Supreme Court, namely Chief Justice John Roberts, stabbed all of America in the back by twisting statutes to call this albatross a tax.

its not a tax it is a tax

As many as 6 million U.S. taxpayers will have to paypenalty tax of as much as 1 percent of income because they went without health insurance in part or all of 2014, the Treasury Department said.

The penalty tax, part of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, is designed to force people to sign up for health insurance using the expanded options and financial assistance available under Obamacare. The penalty tax would apply to about 2 percent to 4 percent of all taxpayers for 2014.

Tax filing for 2014 opened Jan. 20, and the Internal Revenue Service’s Form 1040 — for federal income tax — includes a new Line 61 asking if the taxpayer has health insurance. Three-quarters of taxpayers won’t have to do anything more than check that box, said Mark Mazur, the department’s assistant secretary for tax policy. The remainder will have to to take additional steps, though most won’t pay a penalty, he said on a conference call with reporters.

I guess the only thing left to ask is that if it “absolutely” isn’t a tax, why is the IRS doing the collecting?

.

.

.

 

Share

Story Update: Woman’s Tax Refund Stolen By Government for Something She Did Not Owe

Share

In what appears to be the next IRS scandal, the government is stealing tax refunds from people-even if they do not know if the targeted person actually did anything wrong.  Greta covered that recently.


 


We know that government, and especially the left, believes that all wealth and income belongs to them-not you. The honestly believe that government, as “god,” determines what, if any, of your income that you GET to keep. Given that belief, it should be no surprise that this is happening.  And, if they have to tax you into poverty, they’ll do it.  If they have to steal your tax refund to do it, that’s OK too.  And if you end up being poor, so be it.  If’s fairness and social justice!

Share

Just as Predicted, Insurance Premiums Continue to Skyrocket-Because of ObamaCare

Share

obamacare

ObamaCare was supposed to decrease heath insurance premiums.  In fact, we were promised a $2500 DECREASE in ObamaCare Premiums.  Instead, however, we are seeing vast INCREASES in premiums.  I guess, just like the “If you like your plan” lie, and just like the “If you like your doctor” lie, the “premiums are going to go down” claim is every bit the lie as the first two.  Wyblog has more…

Now, in a Superfecta of Obamacare #fail, if you were expecting to save $2,500 per year, well, the joke’s on you.

Do you remember when Barack Obama told you the average family would save $2,500 a year under Obamacare?

Yeah, that was a lie, too.

Everything Obama says is a lie. Including “and” and “the.”

The United States has seen the sharpest increase in health insurance premiums in the last year than possibly ever, a new survey has found, and analysts have concluded the “increases are largely due to changes under the Affordable Care Act.”

According to Forbes Magazine, a quarterly survey by investment bank Morgan Stanley of 148 brokers who sell insurance showed that premiums accelerated in the last quarter more than of any of the 12 prior quarterly periods, a peak which has coincided with the run-up to the Obamacare deadline.

The average premium increases for insurance renewals in the most recent quarter were over 11 percent in the small group market and 12 percent in the individual market where consumers buy coverage directly from health plans. By comparison, the September survey showed that increases in the small group market averaged 3 percent, and 2 percent in the individual market.

In some states, increases have been 10 to 50 times those averages, according to Forbes. For the individual insurance market, premiums have increased an average of 100 percent in Delaware, 90 percent in New Hampshire, 54 percent in Indiana, 53 percent in California, 45 percent in Connecticut, and 37 percent in Florida.

For the small group market, Washington had an average increase of 588 percent, followed by Pennsylvania at 66 percent, California at 37 percent, and Indiana at 34 percent.

If you voted for Obama, you voted for this.  You were warned, but you chose to listen to idiots (MSNBC) and liars. (democrats).  Millions have lost their plans, or doctors.  And now, most of the rest are going to pay, and pay, and pay.  Then, if they can’t afford to pay, they still will pay the tax.  In liberal land, even if you don’t pay, you still pay.  That’s life under ObamaCare, and it’s just the beginning.

Share

Just in Case You Needed a Reminder; The ObamaCare is a TAX!

Share

The Hobby Lobby Care was being heard before the Supreme Court today, and while liberal justices were dismissive of religious rights, as predicted, they also reminded us of another lie told by democrats.

There are no taxes in ObamaCare!

Just like, “if you like your plan,” or, “if you like your doctor,” lies, the no taxes claim will go down as one of the many blatant lies told by democrats in order to gain support for ObamaCare.  Wyblog has the details…

Kagan, Sotomayor to Hobby Lobby: Pay the Obamacare Jizya, you Christofascist women-haters

It’s no surprise that Obamabot Justices Elena Kagan and Sonia Sotomayor would be skeptical of any challenge to Holy Obamacare. But their arrogant dismissal of Hobby Lobby’s religious objections is one for the books.

During oral arguments in the U.S. Supreme Court on Tuesday which focused on whether the contraceptive mandate in the Affordable Care Act violates the free exercise of religion, Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan suggested employers who have moral objections to birth control should not provide health care coverage for their employees. “But isn’t there another choice nobody talks about, which is paying the tax, which is a lot less than a penalty and a lot less than — than the cost of health insurance at all?”

Sotomayor said during the presentation by attorney Paul Clement, who represents Hobby Lobby Stores and Conestoga Wood Specialties, two companies that sued the federal government over the requirement that businesses provide health insurance plans that cover contraceptives, including abortion-inducing drugs.

“Those employers could choose not to give health insurance and pay not that high a penalty — not that high a tax,” Sotomayor said.

Clement said Hobby Lobby would pay more than $500 million per year in penalties, but Kagan disagreed.

“No, I don’t think that that’s the same thing, Mr. Clement,” Kagan said. “There’s one penalty that is if the employer continues to provide health insurance without this part of the coverage, but Hobby Lobby would choose not to provide health insurance at all.”

“And in that case Hobby Lobby would pay $2,000 per employee, which is less that Hobby Lobby probably pays to provide insurance to its employees,” Kagan said. “So there is a choice here. It’s not even a penalty by — in the language of the statute. It’s a payment or a tax. There’s a choice.” (emphasis mine)

Kindly remember that not only did democrats say that there were no taxes for in ObamaCare, they maintained that there were no taxes after the law was passed.

 

Share

Will The Government Steal Your Savings? It’s More Likely Than You Think?

Share

This has been a recurrent theme for several years.  It’s been simmering on the back burner, so to speak, but it continues to get some attention from time to time.  The issue is savings.  Whether it be your 401k, or your IRA, or even a savings account; the democrats has been eying them like a crackhead views their pipe.  Big government has wasted trillions on making more poor people, creating dependency, paying off contributors, punishing enemies, arming those that kill Christians, and trying to prop up their union buddies.  Now, after building up an unsustainable debt, they need another fix, and your savings is becoming mighty attractive to them.  Remember the old cartoons where two characters are starving?  remember how one character would look at another, and see a sandwich?  It’s kinda like that.  Doug Ross has the latest developments…

This didn’t just happen over night. The move to make this reality has been going on for quite some time. The first time it was mentioned publicly in any official capacity was at a 2010 Congressional hearing:

Democrats in the Senate on Thursday held a recess hearing covering a taxpayer bailout of union pensions and a plan to seize private 401(k) plans to more “fairly” distribute taxpayer-funded pensions to everyone.

Sen. Tom Harkin (D-Iowa), Chairman of the Health, Education, Labor and Pensions (HELP) Committee heard from hand-picked witnesses advocating the infamous “Guaranteed Retirement Account” (GRA) authored by Theresa Guilarducci.

In a nutshell, under the GRA system government would seize private 401(k) accounts, setting up an additional 5% mandatory payroll tax to dole out a “fair” pension to everyone using that confiscated money coupled with the mandated contributions. This would, of course, be a sister government ponzi scheme working in tandem with Social Security, the primary purpose being to give big government politicians additional taxpayer funds to raid to pay for their out-of-control spending.

You’d think that such an idea would be immediately dismissed by the American public, but it has only gained steam since, as evidenced by a 2012 hearing held at the U.S. Labor Department:

The hearing, held in the Labor Department’s main auditorium, was monitored by NSC staff and featured a line up of left-wing activists including one representative of the AFL-CIO who advocated for more government regulation over private retirement accounts and even the establishment of government-sponsored annuities that would take the place of 401k plans.

“This hearing was set up to explore why Americans are not saving as much for their retirement as they could,” explains National Seniors Council National Director Robert Crone, “However, it is clear that this is the first step towards a government takeover. It feels just like the beginning of the debate over health care and we all know how that ended up.

Such “reforms” would effectively end private retirement accounts in America, Crone warns.

A few years ago the government of the United States of America nationalized nearly 1/6th of our economy when they took over the health care system with forced mandates. In the process they essentially took control of $1.6 trillion in yearly industry revenues.

But that’s nothing compared to private savings. The total amount of retirement assets in America, including 401k, IRA and savings accounts is around $21 trillion. With our national debt coincidentally approaching the same, the government sees big money and potentially a way out of our country’s fiscal disaster.

This will start voluntarily with the MyRA and other state-sponsored programs. But when not enough Americans are making it their patriotic duty to turn over their funds to their government, they’ll mandate compliance with the stroke of a pen just as they did with the Patient Affordable Care Act.

This is spot on.  And, by the way, the excerpt is a small part of a much larger post.  I’d advise you to go over there to read the rest.

As you look at the MyRA scam.  Think of these…

1.  The Income Tax was only going to be on the rich, and at a small percentage.  Look at your next pay-stub, and see how true that is.

2.  Social Security funds were going to be kept separate from all other government funds?  Just remember that what you pay in to SS goes right out to fund the government, and interest on the debt.  As for the “lock box?”  It’s full of worthless government IOU’s.

Anything the government offers now will be changed in order to rip you off.  They’ll say some thing to get you to buy in, like, “if you like your plan…”  Then, once they have the power, and your savings, they’ll do whatever they want with it, and you’ll be left will a meaningless IOU.  Then, when you retire, you’ll find that you get nothing, because some democrat constituent group needed your hard earned savings more than you do.

And, then, you’ll regret your votes for democrats.

Share

Ignorance Is Not Bliss. Ignorance Is The Tool Of Those Who Would Rule Over Us

Share

Something has been bothering me since Boehner and McConnell and the Republicans caved-in to raising the debt level….again. America and most of the rest of the developed world, for that matter, has been building a mountain of debt that will bury us all one day in the not to distant future. We conservative/libertarians are the only ones who seem to be worried about the debt. The people we elect to our federal government see themselves as some kind of Robin Hood. They steal money from those that earned it and give it to people who did not earn it. The Robin Hood programs established by Congress have come to be called “entitlements”. Walter Williams wrote about the “entitlements” that some Americas have to what other Americans produced.

Merriam-Webster defines entitlement as “the condition of having a right to have, do, or get something.” For example, I am entitled to walk into the house that I own. I am entitled to drive the car that I own. The challenging question is whether I am also entitled to what you or some other American owns.

Let’s look at a few of these entitlements. More than 40 percent of federal spending is for entitlements for the elderly in the forms of Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, housing and other assistance programs. The Office of Management and Budget calculates that total entitlement spending comes to about 62 percent of federal spending. Military spending totals 19 percent of federal spending. By the way, putting those two figures into historical perspective demonstrates the success we’ve had becoming a handout nation. In 1962, military expenditures were almost 50 percent of the federal budget, and entitlement spending was a mere 31 percent. The Congressional Budget Office estimates that entitlement spending will consume all federal tax revenue by 2048. _ (Bold added)

But, Dr. Williams points out that entitlements are not the only form of legalized theft by our government:

Entitlement spending is not the only form of legalized theft. The Department of Agriculture gives billions of dollars to farmers. The departments of Energy and Commerce give billions of dollars and subsidized loans to corporations. In fact, every Cabinet-level department in Washington is in charge of handing out at least one kind of subsidy or special privilege. Most federal non-defense “discretionary spending” by Congress is for handouts.

What is disturbing is that Dr. Williams goes on to say:

Despite the fact that today’s increasing levels of federal government spending are unsustainable, there is little evidence that Americans have the willingness to do anything about it.

Poor Richards’ News reports that federal unfunded liabilities now total $1.1 million PER TAXPAYER in the United States. Let that sink in for a moment.

But, what provoked me to take most of last week off from blogging was something John Stossel wrote at Human Events recently.

Yet when Congress and President Obama agreed on a deal last week to raise the debt ceiling and resume government spending, people reacted as if a disaster was averted — instead of reacting as if a disaster had resumed.

He is absolutely right, isn’t he? I found myself reading and rereading Stossel’s words. I thought about all the politicians of both stripes and all of the ABC, CBS, and MSNBC talking heads celebrating that the country was going back to government as usual: spend…spend…spend! And then I thought of the Federal Reserve and their going on five years of “Quantitative Easing” where they buy $85 billion per month of mortgaged backed loans and Treasury bonds with money they create out of thin air. And, most of America is celebrating? There is something seriously wrong with this picture. That one sentence of John Stossel’s exposes a level of ignorance that is hard to comprehend. But, Jim Quinn of The Burning Platform does show an uncommon understanding of the ignorance level in America in his recent article: Culture Of Ignorance _ Part One. (Hat Tip to Monty Pelerin’s World) In The Culture Of Ignorance. Quinn holds nothing back as he describes with disgust the rampant ignorance in our country.

The kabuki theater that passes for governance in Washington D.C. reveals the profound level of ignorance shrouding this Empire of Debt in its prolonged death throes. Ignorance of facts; ignorance of math; ignorance of history; ignorance of reality; and ignorance of how ignorant we’ve become as a nation, have set us up for an epic fall. It’s almost as if we relish wallowing in our ignorance like a fat lazy sow in a mud hole. The lords of the manor are able to retain their power, control and huge ill-gotten riches because the government educated serfs are too ignorant to recognize the self-evident contradictions in the propaganda they are inundated with by state controlled media on a daily basis.

{…}

The levels of ignorance are multi-dimensional and diverse, crossing all educational, income, and professional ranks. The stench of ignorance has settled like Chinese toxic smog over our country, as various constituents have chosen comforting ignorance over disconcerting knowledge. The highly educated members, who constitute the ruling class in this country, purposefully ignore facts and truth because the retention and enhancement of their wealth and power are dependent upon them not understanding what they clearly have the knowledge to understand. The underclass wallow in their ignorance as their life choices, absence of concern for marriage or parenting, lack of interest in educating themselves, and hiding behind the cross of victimhood and blaming others for their own failings. Everyone is born ignorant and the path to awareness and knowledge is found in reading books. Rich and poor alike are free to read and educate themselves. The government, union teachers, and a village are not necessary to attain knowledge. It requires hard work and  {not} clinging to your willful ignorance to remain stupid.

Here is just a taste of what Quinn’s opinion is of today’s youth:

The youth of the country consume themselves in techno-narcissistic triviality, barely looking up from their iGadgets long enough to make eye contact with other human beings. The toxic combination of government delivered public education, dumbed down socially engineered curriculum, taught by uninspired intellectually average union controlled teachers, to distracted, unmotivated, latchkey kids, has produced a generation of young people ignorant about history, basic mathematical concepts, and the ability or interest to read and write. They have been taught to feel rather than think critically….

The Baby Boomers and Generation X do not escape Quinn’s wrath either:

The ignorance of youth can be chalked up to inexperience, lack of wisdom, and immaturity. There is no excuse for the epic level of ignorance displayed by older generations over the last thirty years. Boomers and Generation X have charted the course of this ship of state for decades. Ship of fools is a more fitting description, as they have stimulated the entitlement mentality that has overwhelmed the fiscal resources of the country. Our welfare/warfare empire, built upon a Himalayan mountain of debt, enabled by a central bank owned by Wall Street, and perpetuated by swarms of corrupt bought off spineless politicians, is the ultimate testament to the seemingly limitless level of ignorance engulfing our civilization. The entitlement mindset permeates our culture from the richest to the poorest. Mega-corporations use their undue influence (bribes disguised as campaign contributions) to elect pliable candidates to office, hire lobbyists to write the laws and tax regulations governing their industries, and collude with the bankers and other titans of industry to harvest maximum profits from the increasingly barren fields of a formerly thriving land of milk and honey. By unleashing a torrent of unbridled greed, ransacking the countryside, and burning down the villages, the ruling class has planted the seeds of their own destruction.

There is much more in Culture Of Ignorance that is worth reading. This post is getting long, but there is a little more of Quinn’s words I want to share with you and then I’ll wrap this up.

When you consider the facts in a rational manner, without vitriolic denials, bitter accusations, acrimonious blame, and rejection of the entire premise, you come to the conclusion that we’ve passed the point of no return. Decades of bad choices, bad leadership, bad men in important positions, bad education, bad governance, and bad citizenship have led to bad times. But very few people, across all socio-economic classes, have any interest in understanding the facts or making the tough choices required to save future generations from a life of squalor. We willfully choose to ignore the facts.

“Most ignorance is vincible ignorance. We don’t know because we don’t want to know.” – Aldous Huxley

Our degraded and ignorant society is incapable of comprehending their dire circumstances or acting for the common good of the country. We are a nation on the take. Greed really is good. Everyone needs to play the game. From the top floor corporate CEO suite to the decaying urban wastelands, we have chosen comforting ignorance to uncomfortable knowledge. Our warped form of democracy enriches the few at the top, while dispensing enough subsistence payments to the lower classes to keep them from revolting, while enslaving the middle class in debt and convincing them it’s really wealth. Mencken understood the pathetic impulses of the American populace decades before we reached our point of no return.

“Democracy is a pathetic belief in the collective wisdom of individual ignorance.” – H.L. Mencken

Jim Quinn is planning a Part Two of The Culture Of Ignorance, in which he will discuss the roles of technology and family breakdown and other factors that contribute to the “culture of ignorance”. He tells his readers that if they are looking for a happy ending, they need to look elsewhere. I can not help but agree with Mr. Quinn’s assessment.  Ignorance is not bliss. Ignorance is the tool used by powerful people to manipulate the world in their favor. We are talking about America in this post but ignorance knows no borders. Ignorance is an infliction of mankind throughout the world. The fiat debt driven monetary system foisted on the world during the Nixon administration has about run its course. It will not end well for those who are not at the very top of the food chain. In the socialist “paradise” where I live, we have a refrain that is heard more and more as we march down the road to becoming the next Zimbabwe:

¡Salvese Quien Pueda!

There are two translations. One is: Every Man for Himself!  The other translation isThose That Can, Save Yourselves!

It is time, dear friends, to decide which of those two scenarios you and your loved ones will be in, when the time comes.

Well, that’s what I’m thinking. What are your thoughts?

Original Post: Asylum Watch

Share

The #ObamaCare Draft Card Might be Flammable: Yahoo News Reporting That IRS Can Only Collect ObamaCare Tax if You Get A Refund

Share

obamacaretaxBack in August, I covered the claims that the ObamaCare “penalty,” or tax, can only be collected if one is owed a tax return.  No tax return, according to the claim, no tax collected.  Yahoo News has more…

As it stands now, the individuals who don’t obtain health coverage in a given year (and are not exempt from the mandate) are subject to a fine of $95 for an individual or 1% of family income, whichever is greater. In 2015, the penalty increases to $325 per adult, or 2% of family income, whichever is greater.

How exactly will the penalty be assessed? If you don’t have sufficient health coverage by the deadline, the “IRS will hold back the amount of the fee from any future tax refunds,” according to HealthCare.gov, the government’s marketplace website.

But what if you don’t get a tax refund? Conservative radio talk show host Rush Limbaugh picked up on this subject on his show this week, telling listeners: “The only way that they can collect the penalty or the fine is by taking money from your refund. If you are not owed a refund, they cannot get money from you.”

We asked Mark Luscombe, principal analyst at CCH Tax & Accounting North America, about that. Turns out Limbaugh is essentially right. If you don’t get a refund next year, the “IRS could carry over the sum due and apply it against any refunds in future years. On a joint return, the penalty of one joint filer could be applied against the refund due to the other joint filer,” Luscombe says.

“If you don’t pay it, all they can do is wait until they owe you some money and take that. Or probably just send you a letter every now and then reminding you that you owe money to the IRS,” says Timothy Jost, a professor at the Washington and Lee University School of Law and coauthor of the casebook “Health Law.”

And by the way, once the IRS assesses the penalty, they’ve got 10 years to collect, says Bryan Camp, law professor at Texas Tech University.

The law also prohibits the IRS from using liens or levies to collect any “payment you owe related to the law, if you, your spouse or a dependent included on your tax return does not have minimum essential coverage,” according to the IRS. That means the IRS cannot go into someone’s “checking accounts anyway and just take the money,” as one of Limbaugh’s callers suggested the Obama administration might just do.

I really don’t see myself being able to afford insurance any time soon, unless I wanted to give something else up, like eating.  With the escalating costs , it will be a miracle if I’m ever able to afford it again.  Of course, that’s the intent anyway, but in the meantime, I have no intention of impoverishing myself to pay good, hard-earned money for a stupid fine.  And, since I have a perfectly legal means to not pay it, I’ll likely go along without insurance.

Share

Obama Is Eyeing Your Savings!

Share

Remember when President Obama said “there comes a point when a person has earned enough”? Well, it should be a surprise that he also feels that people have saved more than they need for retirement. Mr. Obama has given new meaning to the word “arrogance”.

With this scandal a day administration, it is no wonder some of their plans to get their hands on more of your money slip under the radar.

On Aril 12, 2013, the Wall Street Journal wrote:

How many times have you read financial-advice stories lecturing you to max-out on your IRA, save as much as you can in your 401(k), and even pay taxes now to change your regular IRA into a Roth IRA that will be tax-free until you die?

Well, be careful how much you save.

Assistant OpinionJournal.com editor Allysia Finley on President Obama’s attack on tax deferred retirement accounts.

A lot of job-switchers are ignoring what may be one of the best options to get the most out of their retirement: Moving their savings into their new employer’s 401(k). MarketWatch’s Jim Jelter explains the benefits.

That’s the message in President Obama’s budget for fiscal 2014, which for the first time proposes to cap the amount Americans can save in these tax-sheltered investment vehicles. The White House explanation is that some people have accumulated “substantially more than is needed to fund reasonable levels of retirement saving.” So Mr. Obama proposes to “limit an individual’s total balance across tax-preferred accounts to an amount sufficient to finance an annuity of not more than $205,000 per year in retirement, or about $3 million for someone retiring in 2013.”

On April 14, 2013, the Independent Sentinel wrote:

THEY ARE COMING FOR YOU NEXT, make no mistake about that!. They already proposed it back in 2008. The government is on the hunt for more money to support its spending problem. President Obama wants more “revenue” – “taxes” – so he can make more “investments” as he spreads the wealth around.

You need to be afraid, very afraid!

Americans have $17.5 trillion in savings with 25% of it in IRA’s. It is a future source of revenue for the government if they can get their hands on it.

President Barack Obama’s Fiscal Year 2013 budget plan estimated that retirement tax deductions taken by employers and individuals over the next five years add up to $429 billion in “lost” tax revenue. The government believes your savings is their lost revenue.

See how that works? Because you take a legal tax deduction, the government is getting screwed. Never mind that the original idea was to give citizens an incentive to save. Further along in the Independent Sentinel article we find this:

Share

Idaho Tax Commission Demands “Tribute” From 12 Year-Old

Share

taxes

A 12 year-old in Idaho dared to sell fruit by the road.  The state of Idaho seeks to punish him for it.

News of a 12-year-old boy being investigated by the Idaho State Tax Commission has sparked a swift response from some members of the state Legislature. One senator is asserting that the staff at the state’s tax commission is too large, while a member of the House of Representatives is suggesting that it is time to reform the state’s tax laws.

“I read with interest the requirement of a 12-year-old boy to collect sales tax,” wrote Sen. Steven Thayn, R-Emmett, in a letter addressed to the commissioners, a copy of which was obtained by IdahoReporter.com. “I find this offensive.”

Thayn’s concerns center on an incident that reportedly happened in the Pocatello area involving a 12-year-old boy who operated a roadside fruit stand during the summer months. According to reports from the Associated Press and the Idaho State Journal, located in Pocatello, the son of Jason Weeks wanted to purchase a motorcycle, so Weeks encouraged his son to earn money to pay for it.

According to the Idaho State Journal, that’s when Weeks’ son began selling raspberries from a stand on Yellowstone Avenue in Pocatello, near a Red Wing shoe store location. The boy’s entrepreneurial ambition eventually led to a confrontation from an official with the Idaho State Tax Commission demanding 6 percent of the sales revenues. Idaho’s current sales tax rate is 6 percent.

“We should be encouraging young people to become productive,” Thayn said in his letter to the commission. While noting his suspicion that there must be “something missing” from the story that would justify employees of the commission spending time investigating the child, Thayn added that “what it tells me, is that there are too many employees at the tax commission. I would certainly like to know some solution to this situation so that it does not happen again.”

(Emphasis added)

Note the bold section.  Yes, in our traditional society, industriousness should be celebrated and promoted.  People should be encouraged to produce and sell their products.  This 12 year-old was a great example of that. However, that does not match the new, “Fundamentally Transformed” America that Obama wants.  In that Amerika, initiative is to be punished and blotted out.  And, success is to be punished to the point of eradication.  After all, it is unfair that this boy makes money when other boys that play video games all day do not!  And that fruit he was selling?  He didn’t make that, someone else did that for him.  In addition, how is this kid going to be a good Amerikan drone if he learns to make his own money?  Doesn’t he realize that he’s destined for the government plantation?  Don’t worry, they’ll tax him out of business, and put those productive ideas right out of his little head.

Am I engaging in hyperbole?  Maybe, but this story from Idaho is  microcosm of the larger ideological conflict that we are fighting.  Are we going to be free to create, buy, and sell, or will that be punished to make life suck equally for everyone?

Share

It’s called the “Marketplace Fairness Act” and it’s Anything but Fair

Share

Well Congress is at it again.  They’re trying to ram through a bill called the “Marketplace Fairness Act” and it’s anything but fair.  It’s a bill that would fundamentally change interstate commerce by imposing tax burdens on Internet-based businesses while not applying the same burdens to brick-and-mortar companies.  It’s extremely discriminatory by its very nature.  Representative Mike Enzi (R, Wyo) tried to introduce this flawed bill back in February, but it met stiff opposition in committee so Enzi was forced to shelve it.  Two months later it has been restructured so that it qualifies for a Senate rule that allows Harry Reid to bypass committee debate and bring it straight to the floor.  This is how Congress rams through unpopular/controversial bills it doesn’t want examined or debated with a critical eye.  Representative Enzi should be ashamed of himself for advancing it in this manner.  Didn’t he learn anything from the passage of ObamaCare and all the procedural chicanery that took place to ram it through?  It just goes to show you there really isn’t much difference in the two parties anymore.  They both support the growth of government and will use the system to achieve this goal.  In the end it’s American people who continue to get screwed by these hacks.

If ever there was an example of “Crony Capitalism” this is it.  Investopedia defines Crony Capitalism as;

A description of capitalist society as being based on the close relationships between businessmen and the state. Instead of success being determined by a free market and the rule of law, the success of a business is dependent on the favoritism that is shown to it by the ruling government in the form of tax breaks, government grants and other incentives.

Try and guess who the bill’s biggest supporters are.  If you guessed big retail chains like Wal-Mart and state and local governments then you are correct.  Most big retailers support this bill being rushed through the senate because they know it adds an extensive layer of bureaucracy on the backs of their internet competitors.  This will achieve their goals of putting their competitors at an unfair disadvantage because the tax reporting burdens don’t apply to them. State and local governments see it as a way to squeeze more revenue out of the tax payer without looking like they’re raising taxes.  And finally Amazon supports this bill.  Why does Amazon support this bill you ask?  Well Amazon just happens to have a tax compliance service that they are ready to sell to other companies and with the passage of this bill it opens up a whole new market for them. It’s eerily similar to the reason why AARP threw its support behind ObamaCare.  When ObamaCare cut $400 billion from Medicare, AARP had the inside track on the Medi-gap insurance needed to make up for the shortfalls that people would feel because of the Medicare cuts.  Like Amazon they saw a new market opening up for them with the passage of ObamaCare.  This is the game being played in Washington these days and it sucks for us.

So as you can see this comes down to dirty politicians on both the federal and state level in bed with big retailers and Amazon to advance a bill that is mutually beneficial to both and one that screws the little guy.  There are a few politicians that see this for what it is and they’re trying to slow it down.

Some of our conservative friends are backing this Internet tax raid as a way to raise revenue to avoid more state income-tax increases. More likely the new revenues will merely fund larger government. Republicans who are realists about government would be wiser to join Senators Ron Wyden (D., Ore.) and Kelly Ayotte (R., N.H.), who are leading the opposition.

You can read the entire article here.

I encourage you to contact your elected official and let them know you don’t support this bill.  It’s a bad bill that smells of “Crony Capitalism” and that’s why  they’re trying to ram it through in the name of fairness.  This bill is anything but fair and I’m personally tired of these phony politicians always giving the little guy the shaft.

Liberty forever, freedom for all!

Original Post: Sentry Journal


Share

The Fiscal Cliff, and Why We’ve Already Lost, and will Continue to Lose

Share

OK, we’re facing the infamous “fiscal cliff.”  What doe that mean?  It means that a crisis has been manufactured in order for Obama to triumph, and the Republicans to be scapegoated.  Here’s how it will happen.

1.  If both Houses and the POTUS fail to reach an agreement (read, if he Republicans fail to capitulate) there will be a rather unpleasant set of tax increases and budget cuts.

2.It doesn’t matter how many proposals the Republicans make.  It won’t matter how many times the Democrats change the rules or break their word-it will ALWAYS be the Republican’s fault.

3.  Reality doesn’t matter, and the MSM will spin all developments in favor of the POTUS.

4.  Tax increases will be demanded in exchange for future spending decreases.

5.  The tax increases will be immediate, if not retroactive.

6.  The spending cuts will never happen.

7.  Did I mention that it’s all the Republican’s fault?

Oh, and by the way, when the revenues fail to come in, or they even lose money on it, don’t expect to hear it from the MSM.  Unless, that is, the MSM spins it to be someone else’s fault.

And there you have it.

Elections have consequences, my friends.

Share

Elections Have Consequences: Layoff Roundup

Share

As we have been focusing, the layoffs seem to be piling up.  Here is a list published last night by The Blaze…

A layoff is tough enough for employees to deal with, imagine hearing the crushing news that your office is shutting down just before Thanksgiving and Christmas…  Here are some of the business closings that were announced in just the past two days:

To see even more companies that announced layoffs since the election, visit the Daily Job Cuts page.

Obviously, employers were waiting until the election to make their choices in terms of staffing.  The people made their choice, and now the businesses have to make choices to stay in business.  As always, we’ll be covering the growing list of layoffs due to the election, and at each stage of the process, I will be reminding people that elections have consequences.

Share

Kroger to Slash Hours of Workers to Avoid ObamaCare Penalites

Share

If you are an hourly worker at Kroger, there is a good chance that your hours will either cut, or your chances of becoming a full time worker are nil.  And the cause for this?

ObamaCare!

Dung Ross (no relation), has more…

To give you a sense of Kroger’s size and importance, its sales last year were $90 billion and it employs nearly 350,000 people. Most of its jobs are hourly and the vast majority of workers are neither millionaires or billionaires.

Faith is a mid-level manager at Kroger and reports the dire news:

Last week we found out that, beginning in January, any employee who is not full-time at that point,will be limited to 28 hours per week and all new hires will be subject to the same policy.

Currently, part-time employees can work as many hours as needed.

Many Kroger employees, I believe, will be shocked to find out about this new policy.

What this means is that Obamacare will stop tens of thousands of Kroger employees — most of whom depend on and need the money — from working more than 28 hours!

Kroger is doing this to avoid paying for full-time healthcare for employees who currently only receive part-time benefits. And they will not get hit with the $3000 penalty.

My own area is a good example. I work with four people who currently get about 36 to 40 hours a week, but they are considered part-time by Kroger and receive limited benefits. Now, they will either have to find another part-time job or they will quit and find a full-time job.

Doug, you need to get this out before Tuesday. People need to understand.

So, ObamaCare will cause more damage to more people.

If you are an hourly worker, you might want to consider how you will vote.  ObamaCare will not guarantee you insurance, but it might guarantee that you have less hours, and less income.

H/T: Flopping Aces

Share

List of Ways Government Can Now Control You After Obamatax Decisions

Share

The real tragedy of the recent decision on Obamatax is not that it was upheld on the grounds that the government has the right to regulate commercial activity and thus can make people engage in commercial activity (a line of reasoning that I disagreed with but would see how the backwards folk out there would come to), but that it was upheld because the anything that might be considered a tax is always legal (or some such grounds- like clear thinking really matters any more in this political world). The door has been opened- to both Republicans and Democrats and Fascists and Socialists and Libertarians- for the government to now require you to buy any product or you pay a penalty and then the Supreme Court will find this legal by changing it into a tax.

HotAir has a good list of some of the actions that now are legal for our government to perform:

…The list is literally endless, because of the endless number of things ideologues can come up with. But these are some of the top tunes.

  1. Congress can force you to buy an electric car.
  2. Congress can force you to buy solar panels.
  3. Congress can force you to buy and install a remote-control thermostat for your home.
  4. Congress can force you to buy internet service.
  5. Congress can force you to buy particular kinds of food.
  6. Congress can force you to buy contraceptives for yourself.
  7. Congress can force you to buy biofuels, even if you don’t have any use for them.
  8. Congress can force you to donate to political causes and “charities.”
  9. Congress can force you to pay union dues.
  10. Congress can force you to buy the New York Times.
  11. Congress can force you to buy “green travel” packages.
  12. Congress can force you to buy a 3-bedroom, 2-bath townhome with a 1-car parking spot for your electric car.
  13. Congress can force you to pay for soccer, gymnastics, and ballet lessons for your children.
  14. Congress can force you to pay for a gym membership.
  15. Congress can force you to rent a 2-bedroom apartment with no parking space.Congress can force you to borrow money.
  16. Congress can force you to pay for a state-college education for your children, regardless of where or whether they actually attend college.
  17. Congress can force you to buy a goat.
  18. Congress can force you to hire people.
  19. Congress can force you to buy mass transit passes, whether you use mass transit or not.

The list could go on and on. After all, if fining people for not buying health insurance is the same thing as a “tax,” then fining them for not spending on other things is also a tax….

The only purpose of a tax is to raise revenue for the government so that it can perform its limited functions. A tax is not a means to coerce people into engaging in business or not engaging in business, nor is a tax a vehicle by which the government can force a free man to perform an action (buy a product) that he does not which to perform. The Supreme Court’s decision is bad because it gives legitimacy to the idea that we are not free men and women any more, merely slaves to the masters who run the state, and that the masters now have the power to make us do whatever they want to do.

The Obamatax decision killed liberty.

Original Post:  A Conservative Teacher

Share

John Roberts: Missing the Mark or Right on Target?

Share

When I first heard that Obamacare along with the individual mandate was found to be constitutional I was shocked.  When I learned that one of our own, Justice John Roberts crossed over to the dark side in a 5-4 ruling I was appalled.  The end of liberty was at hand.  The great experiment had finally unraveled and the republic our founders gave us we could not keep.  I couldn’t believe Justice Roberts ruled that the individual mandate was constitutional because he interpreted that the penalty imposed was actually a tax and within the constitutional authority of the congress to levy on the people.  I needed to know how a conservative Justice who many consider to be an extremely brilliant man could veer so far off the conservative course.  This is a man who is no friend of Obama.  This is a man who has championed individual rights again and again in his rulings.  It just wasn’t passing the smell test.

As I sat at my desk I was trying to sort this ruling out in my mind I had an epiphany.  What is the greatest threat to our individual liberties?  Is it Obamacare or is it President Obama winning a second term?  In my opinion it’s Obama winning a second term.  A second term of President Obama will turn the republic on its head and cause irreparable damage to America.  Think about all the unconstitutional actions this man has done in the first term with the knowledge that he has to run for reelection.  Think of the President’s total disregard for the rule of law in the last three years.  He ignored the orders and was actually held in contempt by a federal judge when he failed to lift the moratorium on deep-sea drilling in February 2011.  Let’s not forget his recess appointments during a pro forma session of congress this past January, his unwillingness to defend DOMA, his signing of NDAA authorizing the indefinite detainment of America citizens, his kill list, his amnesty for 800,000 illegal aliens, his unwillingness to enforce immigration laws, his EPA imposing cap and trade around the congress, his use of executive privilege to protect Eric Holder in the fast and furious scandal, and so on.  He has shredded the constitution during his first term.  What would he do with a second term?  My guess is it will be much worse.  Like he whispered in the ear of the Russian President…he will have more flexibility after the elections.  What will he do with that flexibility?  Well more than likely he will appoint two or three Supreme Court Justices during a second term and that is something that cannot happen.  And the only way can make sure he doesn’t have an opportunity to appoint these Justices is to make sure he’s a one term President.  Justice Roberts helped with that this past Thursday.

So how exactly did Roberts help the cause?  Let me start off by saying the opinions I’m about to express are my opinions and I realize that many may disagree, but hear me out.  As I was reading through Justice Roberts’s opinion of the court, very early I read the following. “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 the people disagree with them. It is not our job to protect the people from the consequences of their political choices.

Justice Roberts tells us from the get go, we get the government we deserve and if we don’t like the consequences of it then elect people who will repeal the actions of it.  That’s all on us folks.  We have a responsibility as citizens to change out the people who infringe upon our liberties.

Below are five reason why I think this ruling empowered the states, shackled the government, will not only bring an end to Obamacare, but will ensure Obama is a one term President.

  1. President Obama promised not to raise taxes on the American people making under $250,000.  Democratic leaders promised that the individual mandate was not a tax.  Well because of Justice Roberts and the court’s decision that’s exactly what the individual mandate is…a tax.  Congratulation President Obama, your lawyers made their case!  It’s a tax.  Not only is it a tax, it’s the largest tax in American history.  And for those who are worried this opens up a whole new way for the government to control our behavior through a “penalty” well it’s nothing new.  They’ve been doing it for years with “sin taxes” on tobacco and other undesirable products.   The only difference now, the SCOTUS has clarified that anything congress attaches as a penalty to can be viewed as a tax and it’s much more difficult to push bills through congress as a tax increase than bills that hide behind the commerce clause.  Additionally because the individual mandate has now been ruled a tax Republicans can use the budget reconciliation process to repeal the mandate with a simple majority.
  2. Judge Roberts’s argument against using the commerce clause not only brought more clarity to it, he greatly reduced the ability of congress to use this line of reasoning again to force us to engage in any activity they may view as commerce.  His opinion reflected the following:  “People, for reasons of their own, often fail to do things that would be good for them or good for society. Those failures—joined with the similar failures of others—can readily have a substantial effect on interstate commerce. Under the Government’s logic, that authorizes Congress to use its commerce power to compel citizens to act as the Government would have them act.  That is not the country the Framers of our Constitution envisioned. James Madison explained that the Commerce Clause was “an addition which few oppose and from which no apprehensions are entertained.” The Federalist No. 45, at 293. While Congress’s authority under the Commerce Clause has of course expanded with the growth of the national economy, our cases have “always recognized that the power to regulate commerce, though broad indeed, has limits.” Maryland v. Wirtz, 392 U. S. 183, 196 (1968). 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 and drawing all power into its impetuous vortex.” The Feder­alist No. 48, at 309 (J. Madison). Congress already enjoys vast power to regulate much of what we do.  Accepting the Government’s theory would give Congress the same license to regulate what we do not do, fundamentally changing the relation between the citizen and the Federal Government.”  This line of reasoning in essence shackles congress and expands liberty.
  3. Justice Roberts, Justice Kagan, and Justice Breyer all agreed that it was unconstitutional for thegovernment to deprive a state of all of its Medicaid funding for refusing to agree to the new expansion.  Roberts wrote the following.  “As for the Medicaid expansion, that portion of the Af­fordable Care Act violates the Constitution by threatening existing Medicaid funding. Congress has no authority to order the States to regulate according to its instructions. Congress may offer the States grants and require the States to comply with accompanying conditions, but the States must have a genuine choice whether to accept the offer. The States are given no such choice in this case: They must either accept a basic change in the nature of Medicaid, or risk losing all Medicaid funding. The remedy for that constitutional violation is to preclude the Federal Government from imposing such a sanction. That remedy does not require striking down other portions of the Af­fordable Care Act.”   So as you can see the states now have a choice.  This conclusion blazes the trail to limit the expansion of other federal programs imposed by the government on the states.  This was clearly a win for the states and states’ rights.
  4. Obamacare still remains a very unpopular law.  In fact those who oppose it still hover over the 50 percentile mark.  Mitt Romney raised more than $4 million within 24 hours of the Supreme Court’s decision to uphold Obamacare and we have Justice Roberts to thank for this.  While the Kool-Aid drinking liberals celebrate the Tea Party movement is charging up.  Once again average Americans are waking up and they are rallying around the battle cry to repeal Obamacare.  I personally received 10 emails from Tea Party Patriots; welcome back to the summers of 2009 and 2010.  This is the last thing President Obama and Democrats wanted to see four months out from a major election.  They wanted Obamacare to quietly fade into obscurity and be a nonfactor in 2012.  John Roberts threw a wrench into that machine and now once again it’s hanging around their necks going into November.  And you can’t tell me that Justice Roberts doesn’t read the polls.
  5. The last thing to mention is that the left is so caught up in the moment they didn’t even see this coming.  They didn’t even see how masterfully Justice Roberts played them.  And by the time they do Obama will be a one term President, Republicans will control the Senate and House, and 2016 will seem like a million years away.  Bub bye Obamacare and President Obama.

 

Mr. President…you’ve been punk’d and you don’t even realize it yet.  If Obamacare would have been found unconstitutional my guess is that the left would have been charged up and the right would be celebrating its demise and feeling they no longer had to vote for a candidate they’re already lukewarm towards…well not so much now.  I feel that Justice Roberts was right on target and it’s the left and conservative talking heads who are missing the mark. Let me know what you think.

Liberty forever, freedom for all!

Original Post:  The Sentry Journal

Share