SHH!

If we're all very quiet, you can hear the synchronized pant-shitting of the entire Tea Party.

Be Sociable, Share!

26 Responses to “SHH!”

  1. LIt3Bolt Says:

    Time to get drunk on Schadenfreude!

    Of course, Obama will be branded as an evil-Dark As Africa-stealth-tax increaser in 3…2…

  2. Dookie Says:

    Here ya go…this is the biggest tax increase in history…levied almost exclusively on those who already can't afford to by health insurance. F**KING BRILLIANT!

  3. tybee Says:

    red state beat all of us to that particular tax turd.

  4. Number Three Says:

    Was outside the Court this a.m. When the CNN story broke, the Teatards started waving their "Don't Tread on Me" signs and cheering. Then, a couple minutes later, SCOTUSblog broke that the individual mandate had been upheld. The cheering abated. And there was the stink of failure.

    I see from several places that it's now "Obamatax". Of course, it's only a tax if you (1) aren't on Medicare; (2) aren't insured through your job; (3) aren't on Medicaid (the expanded version); and (4) aren't insured through the (subsidized for low-income) exchanges on a self-bought policy. Since most Americans now fall into categories (1)-(3), and more will fall into (4) when the law is implemented, this is hardly "the largest tax increase in American history." (I saw the /snark^)

    The GOP spin machine spins everything as a loss for Obama. But having his most significant policy achievement upheld by a surprise Roberts vote has to be the biggest win he could've hoped for. "Even Chief Justice Roberts says the law is constitutional." That line goes in every speech from now on.

    In the end, Obamatax is no different from Social Security–which is probably the most popular policy enacted under the Taxing Power (in combination with the Spending Power). That's another point I would hit hard. It's just like Social Security and Medicare!

  5. mel in oregon Says:

    would be nice if tea partiers did shit in unison. however aint gonna happen. they are winning too much. obamacare isn't universally liked by all progressives. the linking to insurance cos, & the forced nature is the reason. there are very good things about the bill is why many support it. however america didn't wake up today with poverty issues solved. unemployment & underemployment continues. outsourcing is moving full speed ahead. many homeowners are still underwater. students still owe over a $trillion on student loans. credit card holders still owe over a $trillion at usurious interest rates. the tax system is still unfair & undemocratic. maybe progressives should still be shitting their pants.

  6. Sarah Says:

    I wonder if Dubya is pant-shitting over his appointee Chief Roberts taking the position he did. Schadenfreude indeed.

  7. Jonathan Says:

    Seriously. Why is the Democratic Party so pumped about upholding government penalties, er, taxes for failing to buy services from the 1% whose open secret is that they are faulty by design?

    The D party and its apparatchiks have just joined the R party in giving a loud, proud two-fingers to the concept of economic justice. I'm not impressed.

  8. bb in GA Says:

    I think the Pres got robbed of an important issue for his campaign that would divert attention away from the sorry state of the economy.

    "Four old White men and and an Uncle Tom took away your health care while still having their own remain 100% intact. blsh blah & blah"

    I find our Pres is much more comfortable in the Chicago gut cuttin' pol mode than being Joe Cool. When he's a cutter he has more passion which I think the Left wants more of from him.

    //bb

  9. Mild Mannered Secretary Says:

    Best tweet I've seen all day: Roberts is the Severus Snape of the Supreme Court.

  10. Ubu Imperator Says:

    More important than the political repercussions are the actual real-world repercussions. Recently graduating college students-—who face a shitty job market, perhaps you've heard about it-—can continue to stay on their parents' plan for a few more years. Medicaid expansion continues apace (for now, anyway). People with pre-existing conditions can still get coverage. Poor people wind up slightly less screwed. All of which would have vanished faster than you could say "Get the gubmit outta my Medicare" had the decision gone the other way.

    Is it a perfect plan as it stands? Of course not. Is it, quite literally, better than nothing? Of course it is. Frankly, I'm much happier giving the Obama administration the chance to do-over now and better explain to the public what benefits the ACA provides than seeing it struck down and watching millions go back to the status quo ante; namely, sweet fuck-all.

  11. Haydnseek Says:

    It doesn't matter. When the teatards perceive a win, their hubris knows no bounds. When they perceive a loss, they go into full martyr mode, and the anger, resentment, and outright hatred ratchets up exponentially. We will be hearing "Obamatax" five million times a minute from now until election day. These morons can't be reasoned with, as they reject reason whenever it conflicts with their dogma. It's like trying to convince a vampire that drinking human blood is a bad idea. It's simply inconceivable. Know one thing: IT DOESN'T FUCKING MATTER WHAT OBAMA SAYS OR DOES. THEY HATE HIS FUCKING KENYAN SOCIALIST MUSLIM NIGGER GUTS WITH EVERY FIBER OF THEIR BEING. All else is commentary.

  12. c u n d gulag Says:

    Oh, you can hear them ok, not only are their heads exploding – they're also suffering from explosive verbal diaherrea.

    But this decision may be trickier than people think.

    There are taxes, and then there are taxes.
    And, as I've just recently heard, the SC has some limits on what it can do with laws where the tax has yet to be collected.

    And, by NOT allowing "The Commerce Clause," Roberts is NO stooge, and may very well NOT be a good guy who saw the light.

    There are MANY social safety net programs based ON "The Commerce Clause" – like SS, Medicare, Medicaid, S-CHIP, etc.

    See any problems there in future decisions regarding SS and the other programs?

    I'm not any Constitutional expert by any means.
    But Roberts is.
    And, while we're all cheering, I can't help wondering if he hasn't opened-up a huge, new, can of worms.

    I can't help it.
    I used to be an optimist – but the last 30+ years have whipped that out of it.

  13. xynzee Says:

    There's a lot of devil in Roberts' decision. Has he pulled the teeth and claws out of the law to get Skeletor n Co to do what's right or will people be at the mercy of ideological governors and legislatures? Not to mention the impacts on how this could be used to hamstring other Federal power.

    Does rule regarding legal precedent hinge on the bulk of similar cases, or on the most recent one in how decisions are made?

  14. terraformer Says:

    Quite amazing, really. I was waiting at the eye doctor's office, and one of the staff came out and announced to the receptionists "well, the SC upheld Obamacare. We really are a socialist country now, it's too far gone to bring back now. I guess we are no longer a free country."

    Several years ago, it became clear to me that when people say certain things, the conversation is over. Comments like the above are now part of that list of things, along with "if you haven't done anything wrong, you have nothing to worry about" (i.e., warrantless wiretapping); "we have to fight them over there so we don't have to fight them over here"; "freedom isn't free", etc.

    There is no point, no advance that can be made, in engaging with conversation with people like this. If after all this time, and all of the availability of demonstrable fact and objective truth, there is no point. I hate to say it, but I honestly, truthfully wish these people would just move to the South (born and bred; I just think this is the part of the country where like-minded folks live), and go ahead and secede and institute their chosen laws. I'm tired of their misanthropy; just fucking leave.

  15. PWL Says:

    Well, terrraformer, I guess the thing that always cracks me up about these right wing loonies is that they wouldn't know what real "facism" or what real "socialism" is if it came up and bit them on the ass.

  16. Amused Says:

    Actually, I don't think we need to be quiet to hear them. They are shitting those bricks quite thunderously.

    terraformer and PWL: I grew up in the Soviet Union, so when I hear that kind of language from right-wingers, it really makes me cringe. Old-guard communists and Tea-Party conservatives are so amazingly similar in their beliefs, temperaments and attitudes to individual rights as to be virtually identical.

  17. Southern Beale Says:

    Rand Paul today:

    "Just because a couple people on the Supreme Court declare something to be ‘constitutional’ does not make it so. The whole thing remains unconstitutional. "

    Umm …. Aquabuddha must have been home-schooled or something.

  18. Chicagojon Says:

    @ c u n d gulag:
    And, by NOT allowing "The Commerce Clause," Roberts is NO stooge, and may very well NOT be a good guy who saw the light.
    –There's no way in hell that Roberts saw the light. IMO this is a case where the Chief Justice knows that he likely has another 35 years on the bench and the he would lose a ton of power if he became that guy that overturned a presidents landmark legislation after 2 years (something that hasn't been done in 75 years per talking heads). Having taken this case he had to let it through but as you say smartly took a chance to bash the commerce clause as an implied further restriction against other social policies.

    I'm not any Constitutional expert by any means. But Roberts is.
    –See, this is like saying "but Scalia is smart" to me. Roberts has overturned established law and things that were decided and reinforced during the recent Reinquist court. F$$k his constitutional expertise. He's a judicial activist asshat.

    And, while we're all cheering, I can't help wondering if he hasn't opened-up a huge, new, can of worms.
    –I'm not cheering. Definitely surprised and happy that congress is allowed to pass laws occasionally without having judges overturn them on bullshit fake-law, but the Chief Justice is 57 fucking years old and in a position for life. There's a long way to go.

  19. Robert Says:

    Well, if they don't like it, they can threaten to move to Canada.

  20. Scotius Says:

    Robert,

    Some people are threatening to do just that.

    http://www.buzzfeed.com/daves4/people-moving-to-canada-because-of-obamacare

    They're in for a big surprise when they get there, and I don't mean the Canadian winters.

  21. HoosierPoli Says:

    "Seriously. Why is the Democratic Party so pumped about upholding government penalties, er, taxes for failing to buy services from the 1% whose open secret is that they are faulty by design?"

    Because they have to sell the product under strict regulation and with a defined and modest profit margin, and leaves them vulnerable to being completely abolished by individual states?

  22. Good News for People Who Like Bad News Says:

    Good chats… I don't know if I have seen number 3's comment anywhere else:
    "I see from several places that it's now "Obamatax". Of course, it's only a tax if you (1) aren't on Medicare; (2) aren't insured through your job; (3) aren't on Medicaid (the expanded version); and (4) aren't insured through the (subsidized for low-income) exchanges on a self-bought policy. Since most Americans now fall into categories (1)-(3), and more will fall into (4) when the law is implemented, this is hardly "the largest tax increase in American history." (I saw the /snark^)"

    Isn't it striking that even though I'm a moderately informed and intelligent human being, I really can't remember how frequently I've really seen the specifics of what "obama care" does? I've certainty never seen it put so concisely… It just goes to show how frequently the tv news people talk about the "political" consequences of something and not its "actual" consequences in peoples lives. That would require actual detailed reporting, they just want to look at polls or some such nonsense.

  23. Xynzee Says:

    @Chicago: Roberts is smart, and obviously knows his Constitution. There are probably far more legal mines and booby traps laced through his ruling than we realise. Does this ruling still make it subject to the Anti-Injunction laws? How can Congress enforce the law amongst the States? How will this limit Fed powers etc.

    If it had been Kennedy we could probably take the ruling at face value. I have a suspicion that we've been gamed, it's unclear how badly.

  24. wetcasements Says:

    Roberts is a Republican in "impartial" clothing but hey, he cares about his legacy. Even he doesn't want to go down as a judge as partisan and hacky as Scalia or Thomas.

    Self-interest ftw.

  25. Andrew Laurence Says:

    While I applaud (cautiously) today's decision, I kind of agree with Rand Paul: The Supreme Court has the authority to rule things Constitutional or not, but that doesn't mean those things actually are (or not). I support a woman's right to choose, but I don't see privacy in the Constitution, and I don't see a right to an abortion in the right to privacy. Roe v. Wade is terrible constitutional law, though it produced a result I like. Most of the time it breaks the other way for me.

    The Supremes, like other humans, are fallible.

  26. Bernard Says:

    yes, never underestimate the Right wing, their planning has been in effect since Nixon and Reagan, especially. there is no way this can't won't be used as PR bs.

    the Insurance/Health Cos. have a big stake in this. which may explain the decision. the Supremes can't bit the hand that feeds them/Republicans/Business. this is a good show of fucking up the "mix." which is very effective for the "BS of the Right" to rant and rave as we see now.

    it is so effective as a rallying point for the Right wing loonies, while real issues are ignored. the regular way of keeping and amassing control. Smart enough to keep everyone guessing, just what the Fuck is Roberts up to. Destroying the ability of the Government to tax for things the Right doesn't believe in, a pretext for wholesale "acitivist" judges/right wingers to "correct" jurisprudence down the line.

    anyone who thinks the Republicans are stupid and Roberts "made" a mistake by focusing on the Commerce Clause is whistling Dixie. these Rightwingers know how to get what they want. to think the Left is anything but a herd of wild "cats" to quote Will Rogers about what the Left/Democrats are. herding cats anyone? lol

    it is sad to see the continued zombies from the Right and Left, yes, the Left, too, lol, to see the continued stupidity of playing into the Right's manipulation, but hey, the Right is much more smarter and soulless, with the Right's goal being control, by any means necessary. sounds like Malcom X's party.

    the more thing change, lol