• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

PoliGAF 2012 Community Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
F

Flying_Phoenix

Banned
Clevinger said:
Look at the Elizabeth Warren thread. Yeah, it's that bad. If those people had their way Democrats would never, ever get anything done because they demand a Kucinich or Nader or nothing. Thankfully the whole forum isn't that way, but it's a loud minority with lots of time on its hands.
Click to expand...

You do realize that half of Something Awful's D&D are Communists. Like legitimate Marxists.
 
G

GhaleonEB

Member
PhoenixDark said:
If it's not a tax, doesn't that open the door to an unconstitutional ruling?
Click to expand...

The administration was not arguing in favor of this position, and neither was the prosecutor. The SCOTUS wanted to explore it, so they appointed an outside attorney to make the argument. In other words, on this issue the SCOTUS agreed with the administration.

The only thing to take from today's hearing is the court is unlikely to punt on their ruling; agreeing it was a tax would open the door to not ruling until that tax had taken effect in 2014. None of them bought it - and Obama's team wasn't arguing it - so they are liketly to rule on the issues argued Tuesday and Wednesday.

Lawyers for the Obama Justice Department and for the 26 Republican-led states challenging the law agreed that an old statute called the Anti-Injunction Act — which forbids people from challenging taxes in court unless they’ve already been assessed by the government — does not apply in this case. The Supreme Court enlisted outside counsel to make the opposite case.
Click to expand...
http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2012/03/justices-skeptical-that-health-care-mandate-is-a-tax.php
 
F

Flying_Phoenix

Banned
empty vessel said:
He said good artists.
Click to expand...

sims1_wideweb__470x365,0.jpg


MV5BNTUzOTMwNTM0OV5BMl5BanBnXkFtZTcwNDQwMTUxMw@@._V1._SY314_CR7,0,214,314_.jpg


800px-DaveMustaine2010.jpg


220px-AlexJonesBB2007.jpg


Or how about some in this website.
 
A

Aaron Strife

Banned
Pretty sure the SCOTUS will not only rule ObamaCare unconstitutional, but they'll also uncover Obama's Kenyan birth certificate and retroactively make John McCain president.
 
I

Invisible_Insane

Member
Flying_Phoenix said:
Right click and click on view image.

Also:
Mel_Gibson_2011_cropped.jpg


Will Wright, Mel Gibson, Dave Mustaine, Alex Jones.
Click to expand...
I don't have a problem finding the names, I just wish you'd not dump giant images into the thread for people trying to browse at work.

in before: you can turn off images, you know--I have as a result.
 
P

PhoenixDark

Banned
GhaleonEB said:
The administration was not arguing in favor of this position, and neither was the prosecutor. The SCOTUS wanted to explore it, so they appointed an outside attorney to make the argument. In other words, on this issue the SCOTUS agreed with the administration.

The only thing to take from today's hearing is the court is unlikely to punt on their ruling; agreeing it was a tax would open the door to not ruling until that tax had taken effect in 2014. None of them bought it - and Obama's team wasn't arguing it - so they are liketly to rule on the issues argued Tuesday and Wednesday.


http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2012/03/justices-skeptical-that-health-care-mandate-is-a-tax.php
Click to expand...

I'm saying if it's not a tax, it's hard to see it being ruled constitutional.
 
R

RustyNails

Member
R

RDreamer

Member
So I'm in McDonald's and they have fox news on and yep Fox is spinning so hard with Obama's comment. They seem to think its proof that in his 2nd term he will release a torrent of "extremist, radical bills that reflect his inner self." lol

Hahaha and now they're bringing up gun control and environmental regulations as possible extremes he will for sure totally do.
 
A

Aaron Strife

Banned
PhoenixDark said:
I'm saying if it's not a tax, it's hard to see it being ruled constitutional.
Click to expand...
What the hell are you talking about?

1) the administration agrees that it's not a tax.

2) the constitutionality argument isn't related to whether it's a tax or a fee, but whether the government can mandate people to buy health insurance.
 
C

cartoon_soldier

Member
Aaron Strife said:
What the hell are you talking about?

1) the administration agrees that it's not a tax.

2) the constitutionality argument isn't related to whether it's a tax or a fee, but whether the government can mandate people to buy health insurance.
Click to expand...

He is referring to the argument that if it is a tax then the federal government has the authority to tax people.
 
J

Jackson50

Member
jamesinclair said:
You forgot Missouri, where the results are in space or something. Who knows.


MD - Who cares, democrat land
DC - Who cares, democrat land. Guam is more important in the general than DC.
WI - Romney
CT - Who cares, democrat land
DE - Who cares, democrat land
NY - Who cares, democrat land
PA - Santorum (because, well, if he doesn't win here, that is pretty damn sad)
RI - Who cares, democrat land
LA - Santorum retains this one, unless Romney actually decides to contend it if it becomes clear that his other states on the same day are already a lock)


So basically....

Romney can and will win, but it wont mean anything. Those states arent up for grabs in the general.

1 real Romney win vs 2 Ricky wins.
Click to expand...
Real Win? Won't mean anything? Does the RNC discount delegates from the other states? If it's not already apparent, it will be clear after Romney dominates April that he'll win the nomination. He's already amassed the preponderance of delegates, and his lead will only increase. And if Santorum, Gingrich, or any other analyst proffers the tossup argument as a sophomoric rebuttal, Romney also retains the advantage. With the exception of Colorado and I suppose Iowa, Romney's won every tossup or soft Republican/Democratic state. He won AZ, MI, OH, VA, NV, and FL.

Speaking of Santorum, the media and Team Romney have pounced on his recent "major meltdown." I think he's starting to crack.
FRANKSVILLE, Wis. (AP) — An agitated Rick Santorum on Sunday called Mitt Romney "the worst Republican in the country to put up against Barack Obama" even as it appears the former Massachusetts governor is on pace to clinch the party's nomination in June.

Santorum later lashed out at reporters, using a profane word as he accused them of "distorting" his speech.

Santorum told voters that Romney is "uniquely disqualified" to be the GOP's presidential pick and urged his supporters to stand with him even as he faces an increasingly improbable pathway to the nomination. Santorum said "the race isn't over until the people of Wisconsin sing," and urged them to give his underfunded, underdog campaign a chance to derail Romney.

"Pick any other Republican in the country. He is the worst Republican in the country to put up against Barack Obama," Santorum said at an evening rally near Racine.

Santorum later tried to clarify that he was talking only about Romney's ability to campaign against the national health care law championed by Obama and the Democrats. But the candidate's temper flared when he was pushed by reporters.

"On the issue of health care. That's what I was talking about, and I was very clear about talking about that. OK?" Santorum told reporters who asked him about the scathing criticism. "Come on, guys, don't do this. I mean, you guys are incredible. I was talking about Obamacare, and he is the worst because he was the author of Romneycare."

Pressed by a reporter from The New York Times, Santorum said: "Quit distorting my words. It's bulls---."

Romney spokesman Ryan Williams, who attended the event, said Santorum was "panicking in the final stages of his campaign."

"Rick Santorum is becoming more desperate and angry and unhinged every day," Williams said. "He sees conservatives coalescing around Mitt Romney and he's rattled by the backlash caused by his suggestion that keeping Barack Obama would be better than electing a Republican."

http://news.yahoo.com/santorum-romney-worst-republican-face-obama-235654943.html
Click to expand...
 
C

cartoon_soldier

Member
Greg Sargent on the SCOTUS. This gives a very short and good primer on what the arguments will be tomorrow. And depending on justice reactions we will know most probably how the ruling will go.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...-to-watch-for/2012/03/26/gIQAfjPIcS_blog.html

* At some point, Paul Clement, the lawyer arguing the case against the law, will argue that the individual mandate represents unprecedented intrusion into the private decisions of Americans. If it is allowed to stand, he’ll say, there will be no limit on what Congress can force you to do.

This is the argument against Obamacare that has been accorded merit by lower courts. “To the extent that judges have been sympathetic to this case, this is what they’ve been receptive to,” Ian Millhiser, senior constitutional policy analyst at the Center for American Progress, tells me.

Obamacare’s defender will closely monitor the reaction to this argument from justices Roberts, Kennedy, and Scalia. If one or more of them greet it with skepticism and subject it to sharp questioning — for instance, by pointing out that the health care market is unique, because everyone must ultimately partake of health care — that’s good news for Obamacare proponents.

* This leads to the next, and perhaps more significant, clue to watch for. At some point, the lawyers defending the law will be asked by the justices what the federal government cannot force Americans to do if the individual mandate is deemed constitutional. This question — a challenge that the Obama administration state unequivocally what the proper limits on federal power are — could decide the court's ruling.

The law’s defenders will respond that the individual mandate does not inevitably imply a federal government that, under the commerce clause, can usurp the power of the states in regulating or compelling individual behavior. The legal brief filed by the Obama administration defending the law justifies this by pointing out that the commerce clause does not empower the federal government to regulate areas such as family law, general criminal law, or education.

Defenders will point this out again in court tomorrow. Their argument will be that health reform is addressing a problem that’s fundamentally national in nature; that the federal government already plays a large role in regulating health care matters; and that the individual mandate would not imply a federal government that can trample on areas where states have historically held sway.
Click to expand...

How Roberts and Kennedy reaction to these arguments will pretty much tell us how the ruling will go.
 
S

sc0la

Unconfirmed Member
Santorum's "meltdown" seemed more like a completely calculated stab at the "librul media" a la Gingrich. May also be an attempt to be more Everyman than Romney who most people could never imagine cursing.

No one does feigned indignation like Gingrich though do not surprised if this backfires.

I mean his spokesperson and he used literally the same phrase of "distorting my words"
 
S

SouthernDragon

Member
Puddles said:
Why does the Department of Education charge 6.8% interest on Direct Federal Loans and 7.9% on Direct Graduate PLUS Loans?

You should pay the rate of inflation, but they shouldn't be profiting on those.

Also, having interest accrue from disbursement instead of graduation is a pretty bad idea.
Click to expand...

Tell me about it.

I'm about to go to grad school, and financing is tough. I'm going to beg beg beg for an RA. :(

PhoenixDark said:
No one believes it's a tax? Game over then, Obama loses
Click to expand...

They win the decision then. :p
 
K

KtSlime

Member
RDreamer said:
So I'm in McDonald's and they have fox news on and yep Fox is spinning so hard with Obama's comment. They seem to think its proof that in his 2nd term he will release a torrent of "extremist, radical bills that reflect his inner self." lol

Hahaha and now they're bringing up gun control and environmental regulations as possible extremes he will for sure totally do.
Click to expand...

I hope this is true. Nothing would make me happier than Obama coming out of his shell in his second term and actually fixing things. But alas, it will not happen.
 
C

cartoon_soldier

Member
If nothing else, wording might cause the mandate to be declared unconstitutional

http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/...ng-mandate-both-a-penalty-and-tax.php?ref=fpa

U.S. Solicitor General Donald Verrilli used the phrase “tax penalty” multiple times to describe the individual mandate’s backstop. He portrayed the fee as a penalty by design, but one that functions as a tax because it’s collected through the tax code.

“General Verrilli, today you are arguing that the penalty is not a tax. Tomorrow you are going to be back and you will be arguing that the penalty is a tax,” said Justice Samuel Alito, in one of the few laugh lines throughout the 90 minutes of argument Monday.
Click to expand...
 
J

Jackson50

Member
sc0la said:
Santorum's "meltdown" seemed more like a completely calculated stab at the "librul media" a la Gingrich. May also be an attempt to be more Everyman than Romney who most people could never imagine cursing.

No one does feigned indignation like Gingrich though do not surprised if this backfires.

I mean his spokesperson and he used literally the same phrase of "distorting my words"
Click to expand...
That did not strike me as calculated. It seemed impetuous. If it were calculated, the delivery was terrible. And after his diatribe on Romney, he appeared intemperate. He's an angry loon. And I imagine he takes his loss to Romney personal.
planar1280 said:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/...arack-obama-medvedev_n_1379422.html?ref=world

CONFIDENCE!
Click to expand...
This is great for multiple reasons. Aside from displaying a rather cordial working relationship with Moscow and the expectation of progress, it inflames conservative paranoia about Obama being furtive and pusillanimous. Not only is he going to sell us out to our enemies, he's going to unleash his true liberal agenda on an unsuspecting public.
 
mckmas8808

mckmas8808

Mckmaster uses MasterCard to buy Slave drives
ivedoneyourmom said:
I hope this is true. Nothing would make me happier than Obama coming out of his shell in his second term and actually fixing things. But alas, it will not happen.
Click to expand...

It's honestly not possible to "fix" things in America or any country. There will always be problems in life. That's the way things are and will always be. There's never a perfect law or country.
 
mckmas8808

mckmas8808

Mckmaster uses MasterCard to buy Slave drives
RustyNails said:
Even if the justices found merit in the suit, they won't rule on it until end of June.

In Hollywood!
Click to expand...



June? I thought CNN said tomorrow was the Super Bowl for political nerds when it comes to this ruling. So what did he mean?
 
R

RustyNails

Member
Romney: "Russia is #1 foe"
what what what what what

edit: CNN comments are gold
"I thought Mittens said Iran was our number 1 political enemy."

He later corrected himself to replace "Iran" with "rational thought."
Click to expand...
Dude thinks he has a brand new bandwagon every day depending on whatever the issue of the moment is. Today it's Russia because of an innoccuous statement made by Obama to Medvedev...tomorrow it'll be something else, like maybe NK and Iran wanting nukes and how we should send some poor peoples' children to die in an unwinnable land war over there. Someone needs to tell him that he's not dealing in badwagons...those are clown cars.
Click to expand...
"The White House hopeful also opened up about how he spent some recent time-off from the campaign trail, saying he went to watch "The Hunger Games" with his grandchildren over the weekend. "

He no doubt got off on it, considering it's sort of a vision of what a GOP/Teatroll utopia would eventually lead to. "Poor, minority, immigrant or female? Fight to the death for your food and our amusement!!!!"
Click to expand...
 
E

ErasureAcer

Banned
I went to college with Myron Medcalf, ESPN College basketball writer, where he was editor in chief of the school newspaper. He'd write an article every week bitching about things called B.A.M.M. or Black Angry Myron Medcalf. A pretty funny article with his 'alter ego persona'. Rick Santorum is now heated so it'd be right if anytime he whines it's called W.A.R.S. or White Angry Rick Santorum. Which is quite a funny annogram because with his temper if he's ever President he'll be starting lots of them.

I'm almost compelled to write the Star Tribune, which Medcalf wrote for, in a letter to the editor with the info above.
 
C

cartoon_soldier

Member
Interesting part from Justice Roberts:

CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS: It's a command. A mandate is a command. If there is nothing behind the command. It's sort of well what happens if you don't file the mandate? And the answer is nothing. It seems very artificial to separate the punishment from the crime.

GREGORY KATSAS, ATTORNEY FOR THE CHALLENGERS: I'm not sure the answer is nothing, but even assuming it were nothing, it seems to me there is a difference between what the law requires and what enforcement consequences happen to you. This statute was very deliberately written to separate mandate from penalty in several different ways. They are put in separate sections. The mandate is described as a "legal requirement" no fewer than 20 times, three times in the operative text and times in the findings. It's imposed through use of a mandatory verb "shall." The requirement is very well defined in the statute, so it can't be sloughed off as a general exhortation, and it's backed up by a penalty….

CHIEF JUSTICE ROBERTS: Why would you have a requirement that is completely toothless? You know, buy insurance or else. Or else what? Or else nothing.
Click to expand...

This basically leads me to believe that if Roberts rule against the mandate, he will find that it is not severable from the law. That gives me hope that he sees the mandate penalty as necessary for tackling a national problem.

And Holy Shit, i went to TPM and they saw the same thing as I did:
http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/...-major-argument-against-obamacare.php?ref=fpa

ha, nice. We shall see though.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT6| Made this thread during Harvey because the ratings would be higher
338 339 340 341 342
17K
2M
UselessNapkin replied
  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT5| The Man In the High Chair
395 396 397 398 399
20K
2M
RDreamer replied
  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT4| The leaks are coming from inside the white house
396 397 398 399 400
20K
2M
ShironRedshift replied
  • Locked
PoliGAF 2017 |OT3| 13 Treasons Why
393 394 395 396 397
20K
2M
Zaraki_Kenpachi replied
  • Locked
Poligaf 2017 |OT| It Almost Isn't Fair
9
4K
Bonen no Max'd replied
Top Bottom