The Obamacare Ruling

Here’s the full text of the decision (with all the opinions included). Here’s Ron Paul on the ruling. I’ll be discussing the issue on WSPD NewsTalk 1370 at 3:35pm ET today.

Dither

LOL at all those Republican voting fools who fell for the line about how “their” man would appoint good, conservative judges to the Supreme Court. For how long will people remain so stupid, so naive, so easy to dupe?
Mike

Simple minds will be our downfall. We offered them Ron Paul but they’d rather bend over and be continually sodomized. Too bad they’re forcing me to get the same treatment.
Young Hickory

Crap! I just missed you. If there is an audio / video could you please pos it here, I want to hear your thoughts.
redman

Dither, please remember that if voting really changed anything, it would be made illegal.
http://www.mytimesucker.blogspot.com/ Julie

This is EXACTLY what I was thinking. Anyone who says to vote for Romney so he will appoint good supreme court justices is very naive. These are the same people who voted for Bush, and who was it that nominated Roberts to the Supreme Court?…
Anonymous

That letter on the Remnant pretty much brought a tear to my eye, thanks Tom.. So true

http://lewrockwell.com/woods/woods193.html
Barry

I have long agreed with Ann Coulter on Roberts. When he was nominated for the court, she was one of the few conservatives who refused to get excited. She said: There are so many judges out there whom we know to be stongly conservative and who have strong records of being conservative. Why nominate a guy, then, whose record is ambiguous, whose ideas have not clearly shown themselves, and who wasn’t part of the Federalist Society?

I know Ann Coulter has her enemies on this blog, but on this issue, she was 100% correct.
osiłek

I don’t consider Schiff stupid. Yet he brings up an argument against what you say. It goes somethink like: they don’t care whether you vote or not. Minority of non-voters are there anyways, or is it a minority at all?
What are your numbers, how many of you will support not supporting government by not voting?
I have another one – you do use public roads, or other public things and services. And I know it’s consistent with even hard-core anarchism. Why would you give away chance or possibility of using their own weappon to defeat them. They let you vote because they know it won’t change a thing. Ok – how about prooving them wrong, so that they realize their mistake? Than they would have to bring down this facade and show their true face so that everyone can finally see. Now this might be worth trying.
My point is – given the numbers – this might take a while, and be permanently unseccessfull (your strategy) and they might not even notice your effort of not voting.
Osilek

Anarchist way of approaching this (and correct me if I’m wrong) would be: they use this voting scheme to take away all sort of things from us, that would mean we have every right to take those stolen things back. Absent other possibilities we might just go along with the tools they left us foolishly.
ps. sorry for my English.
Scootus

Romney would not have given us this healthcare bill. Romney won’t permit a gutting of the Second Amendment either, but I think Obama is capable of destroying it. We do better with Romney for reasons such as these and aside from USSC considerations.
john

Non voting will never change anything. If libertarians want to show that they do not consent to the government we should all refuse to pay our taxes, but we would risk personal hardship if we did that. It’s much easier for people to advocate something that has no consequences, like refusing to vote. Everybody wants change but nobody wants to sacrifice their comfort.
Guest

Romney is NOT for the free market. He is a Keynesian like Obama. In spite of his business experience, he remains ignorant about economics, and I will prove that below.

Romney will further destroy the American economy, and because he is THOUGHT OF as pro-free market, when his Keynesian policies fail, the Left will blame the free market just like they did after Bush’s NON-FREE MARKET, Keynesian, interventionist policies.

Please consider the following:

Romney Obama the Same?http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IWDJEc92d38

Rand Paul Is A Horrible Liar & Ron Paul DO NOT Endorse Obamney !http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8g5e1-7fLFs

Romney also would consider a VAT, as well as automatic Minimum Wage increases; The man has no idea what he’s doing!

Regarding Romney’s support of Ben Bernanke, here is Bernanke FAILING to see the housing crash coming:

Ben Bernanke was Wronghttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9QpD64GUoXw

Now compare Bernanke with the Austrian Economists who DID see it coming:

Peter Schiff Was Right 2006 – 2007 (2nd Edition)http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2I0QN-FYkpw

Ron Paul Calls the Housing Collapse in 2003http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9S3lXDOQ7ec

Romney supporters, you’re going to condemn America to either a Left Wing statist or a Right Wing statist; STATISM is the problem.

Romney is INCOMPETENT to serve as President.

Some of the Ron Paul supporters know this, which is why we won’t vote for anyone but Ron Paul.

Vote for Ron Paul, so we can get our country back. If you want to talk about Ron Paul’s foreign policies, I can do that. Give me the opportunity to show you that Ron Paul knows what he’s talking about in this area, as well.
Guest

Let me redo that. There were some bad links.

Romney is NOT for the free market. He is a Keynesian like Obama. In spite of his business experience, he remains ignorant about economics, and I will prove that below.

Romney will further destroy the American economy, and because he is THOUGHT OF as pro-free market, when his Keynesian policies fail, the Left will blame the free market just like they did after Bush’s NON-FREE MARKET, Keynesian, interventionist policies.

Please consider the following:

Romney Obama the Same?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IWDJEc92d38

Rand Paul Is A Horrible Liar & Ron Paul DO NOT Endorse Obamney !
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8g5e1-7fLFs

Romney also would consider a VAT, as well as automatic Minimum Wage increases; The man has no idea what he’s doing!

Regarding Romney’s support of Ben Bernanke, here is Bernanke FAILING to see the housing crash coming:

Ben Bernanke was Wrong
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9QpD64GUoXw

Now compare Bernanke with the Austrian Economists who DID see it coming:

Peter Schiff Was Right 2006 – 2007 (2nd Edition)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2I0QN-FYkpw

Ron Paul Calls the Housing Collapse in 2003
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9S3lXDOQ7ec

Romney supporters, you’re going to condemn America to either a Left Wing statist or a Right Wing statist; STATISM is the problem.

Romney is INCOMPETENT to serve as President.

Some of the Ron Paul supporters know this, which is why we won’t vote for anyone but Ron Paul.

Vote for Ron Paul, so we can get our country back. If you want to talk about Ron Paul’s foreign policies, I can do that. Give me the opportunity to show you that Ron Paul knows what he’s talking about in this area, as well.
Scootus

I would absolutely vote for Ron Paul if there was even the slightest chance of his winning, which even his supporters aknowledge cannot happen. So are Obama and Romney the same? No. There is a difference and it is a meaningful difference.

The speed at which Obama is undoing the freedom sof the Republic is progressing geometrically. i do not believe we can sustain our freedoms if Obama wins another term. It will be like the Russian Revolution or the rise of Nazism. With Romney we buy time. People can entrench, they can prepare or maybe escape – and many can be educated. If you look at the difference in awareness of Ron Paul’s message between the last election cycle and this for example, it’s clear that these themes are repidly taking hold. If they can reach a tipping point then there is a CHANCE we can remain free.

It’s too late for anyone now to prevent the economic quasar that is about to envelope the world, but maybe we can preserve at tleast the freedom to fight.

Now let me ask you to consider something… if Obama wins re-election and this thing goes full-on tyranny. Those who sat out the vote or didn’t vote for Romnety will (rightly) be viewed as having prevented the only chance of precluding that.

Romney is cluless but Obama is treacherous.
Guest

If Obama wins re-election, and this thing goes full-on tyranny, maybe that will cause people to think long and hard about wanting to elect someone like a Romney, who WOULD HAVE, in fact, given us Obamneycare and in fact gutted the 2nd Amendment, as proven in the first of my videos.

Romney said, “I want everyone in Massachusetts and this country to have insurance”.

Romney also said that he didn’t want crazy people to be able to get guns. But the 2nd Amendment doesnt allow govt to decide which citizens to disarm without a warrant. By allowing this exception, you are giving government the power to define “crazy”.

The 2nd Amendment was written as a threat, and the target of that threat is the national government. “Crazy” people need to be able to protect themselves from government, too.

You cannot have freedom with the Fed intact – it’s the SOURCE of our government’s ability to procure the wealth that funds its violations of the Constitution.

Look up “Cantillon Effect”; That’s how government does it. And Romney thinks that the people who allow this to happen are doing a fantastic job.

Further, I mentioned that Romney favors automatic minimum wage hikes to keep up with inflation. How are price controls NOT tyranny?

Romney WILL ACTIVELY destroy our economy further and our liberties, if elected – even if he doesn’t realize it.

Romney is not significantly different than Obama.

By voting for Ron Paul, and if Obama gets the re-election, I absolutely will not have prevented a chance to preclude tyranny.

Rather, I will have helped to place the blame for the coming collapse where it belongs: squarely on government interventions, rather than on the free market.

And maybe it will even cause Conservatives to rethink their desire to give the national government power over things it has no business attempting to regulate, such as Marriage and Abortion;

And maybe it will make them rethink their commitment to putting Conservatism over Constitutionality when it comes to the role of government.

Because the powers you allow government to have can be used against you, later on. Remember: We aren’t a theocracy – those who disagree with us get a say in government, too.
Mike

Well, we did vote and it STILL got us nowhere. We’re still going to get statist candidate A or statist candidate B.
http://twitpic.com/3djg1/full Porkulus

A podcast of Tom’s 20-minute interview with Brian Wilson is available at: http://www.wspd.com/cc-common/podcast/single_page.html?podcast=Brian&selected_podcast=555554071_1340919971_5539.mp3
Zachnap

SCOTUS ruling means nothing. Obamacare was VOID as soon as it passed.
Scootus

Once we reach full tyranny it is too late. It won’t matter what people realize. We may be being starved and pulled out of our beds at night and shot and sent by rail to camps for re-education or extermination and all of the other features of the complete autocracy.
So if your hope and strategy is to speed this and facilitate it by not voting to slow it or mitigate it in any way possible - in order that people may “realize” – I would ask you to re-consider.
Again, there is NO chance for Paul to win in this election cycle.
Healthcare is already done, nothing will change that now but a revolt by the states perhaps.
As far as Romney’s other comments on the Second Amendment made while Governor and running for re-election in liberal Massachussets: What will prevent him from doing these things is that he must now work within the political realities of the Republican party. Maybe we’ll end up with a backgorund check with Romney, but Obama may be sending thugs to your house, having your family ordered to lie on the ground while your house is forcibly searched for weapons. (I think this sort of thing may actually be in our future with an Obama second term.)
This may be the scope of the difference in these two men as President..Meanwhile, EITHER scenario will see more people awakening. What might this Movement be able to do in 4 MORE years? It only needs to reach perhaps 10% of the population to achieve a tipping point. Where do you think we are right now – 5% maybe? Difference is whether there will still be enough freedom to effectively HAVE an active freedom movement. The difference is whether there will be enough freedom to effectively FIGHT tyranny once the People awaken. We need time.
Look, if I am right and there is this kind of difference, voting out Obama could mean the preservation vs the death of the Republic. If you are right, then it won’t make any difference WHAT you do, because Ron Paul is sure as hell not going to win election and no one is going to care if libertarians didn’t vote –except maybe to despise them forever for not opposing Tyrant Obama and sitting out the election when it mattered.
I am not saying we should actively support Romney’s ideas or even endorse him. Of course not. Just that we should vote Obama out at all costs by voting for Romney. In this way people can still say, “maybe those libertarians are right.” I think everyone gets it that Paulites are no fan of establishment Republicans.
Scootus

This may be easier to read:

Once we reach full tyranny it is too late. It won’t matter what people realize. We may be being starved and pulled out of our beds at night and shot and sent by rail to camps for re-education or extermination and all of the other features of the complete autocracy.

So if your hope and strategy is to speed this and facilitate it by not voting to slow it or mitigate it in any way possible - in order that people may “realize” – I would ask you to re-consider.

Again, there is NO chance for Paul to win in this election cycle.

Healthcare is already done, nothing will change that now but a revolt by the states perhaps.

As far as Romney’s other comments on the Second Amendment made while Governor and running for re-election in liberal Massachussets: What will prevent him from doing these things is that he must now work within the political realities of the Republican party.

Maybe we’ll end up with a backgorund check with Romney, but Obama may be sending thugs to your house, having your family ordered to lie on the ground while your house is forcibly searched for weapons. (I think this sort of thing may actually be in our future with an Obama second term.)

This may be the scope of the difference in these two men as President..Meanwhile, EITHER scenario will see more people awakening.

What might this Movement be able to do in 4 MORE years? It only needs to reach perhaps 10% of the population to achieve a tipping point. Where do you think we are right now – 5% maybe?

The difference is whether there will still be enough freedom to effectively HAVE an active freedom movement. The difference is whether there will be enough freedom to effectively FIGHT tyranny once the People awaken. We need time.

Look, if I am right and there is this kind of difference, voting out Obama could mean the preservation vs the death of the Republic. If you are right, then it won’t make any difference WHAT you do, because Ron Paul is sure as hell not going to win election and no one is going to care if libertarians didn’t vote –except maybe to despise them forever for not opposing Tyrant Obama and sitting out the election when it mattered.
I am not saying we should actively support Romney’s ideas or even endorse him. Of course not. Just that we should vote Obama out at all costs by voting for Romney. In this way people can still say, “maybe those libertarians are right.” I think everyone gets it that Paulites are no fan of establishment Republicans.
Guest

First of all, you did NOT read me say that my goal is to allow Obama to win reelection SO THAT people will realize that right wing statism is tyrannical like as left wing statism.

That would be a welcome effect, though.

Second, what is “full tyranny”? BOTH Parties got us here, INCLUDING Ronald Reagan.

It’s the INCREMENTAL tyrannies that should concern you, because people don’t notice it as much.

So, no, I’m not going to vote for more incremental tyranny, ESPECIALLY since the left is able to use Republican economic failures – which ARE KEYNESIAN economic failures – to blame the free market and agitate successfully for more government interventions.

Romney is NOT for the free market. He’s a Keynesian. So was Bush. You’d better know this, and know why it’s so, if you want to be able to counter Obamneynomics.

Don’t you remember what happened when Bush crashed the economy with his interventions in the housing market?

You don’t have time NOW to afford to screw up this country any further with a Romney Presidency;

And your belief that Ron Paul isn’t electable is not just a self-fulfilling belief (simply vote for him, and he’s one more person closer to being elected),

but your basis for having me vote for Romney is that MOST OTHER REPUBLICANS are going to vote for him – but I see no reason why I can’t change that by educating people about why Ron Paul is the only Constitutionalist running.

Besides, the GOP and the MSM have been deliberately hiding Ron Paul fromn public consideration, so I say he is dangerous to the very people responsible for the existence of our tyrannies,

and I have no reason to believe that “most other republicans” know that Romney doesn’t want to follow the Constitution.

The REAL political reality is that the GOP doesn’t understand the Constitution (Neither do the DEMs, but I’m talking about those who should know better).

If you want to explain to me why Romney’s policies are better than Ron Paul’s, I will definitely want to consider such arguments.

But if your appeal to vote for Romney consists of little more than “other people are doing it”, then that shows me that the Romney vote is MUCH more dependent on how pliable is the Paulite vote, than Romney supporters let on.

If you honestly think that Romney is better than Ron Paul, on their own merits, then let’s discuss that.

Otherwise, my vote remains with Ron Paul.