IRS.FBI.NSA.CIA.EPA.ObamaCare.gov   
   XPost: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh, alt.law-enforcement, alt.prisons   
   XPost: alt.revisionism, alt.atheism, alt.conspiracy   
   XPost: alt.politics.immigration, alt.true-crime, alt.politics.guns   
   XPost: misc.survivalism, soc.culture.usa, alt.survival   
   From: I-WAS-JUST-GANG-PROBED-BY-THE-ObamaRegime-SPY-NETWORK@IRS.   
   BI.NSA.CIA.EPA.ObamaCare.gov   
      
   Congress already possesses expansive power to regulate what people do.   
   Upholding the Affordable Care Act under the Commerce Clause would give   
   Congress the same license to regulate what people do not do   
      
      
   [""""""""The business about "new and potentially vast" authority is a   
   fig leaf. This is a substantial rollback of Congress' regulatory powers,   
   and the chief justice knows it. It is what Roberts has been pursuing   
   ever since he signed up with the Federalist Society. In 2005, Sen.   
   Barack Obama spoke in opposition to Roberts' nomination, saying he did   
   not trust his political philosophy on tough questions such as "whether   
   the Commerce Clause empowers Congress to speak on those issues of broad   
   national concern that may be only tangentially related to what is easily   
   defined as interstate commerce." Today, Roberts did what Obama predicted   
   he would do.   
      
   Roberts' genius was in pushing this health care decision through without   
   attaching it to the coattails of an ugly, narrow partisan victory. Obama   
   wins on policy, this time. And Roberts rewrites Congress' power to   
   regulate, opening the door for countless future challenges. In the long   
   term, supporters of curtailing the federal government should be glad to   
   have made that trade."""""""""]   
      
      
   When there is NO commerce the government also can't regulate   
   race or gender or any other aspects of people that are NOT your customer   
   and NOT actually buying anything.  Window shopping is NOT commerce.   
      
   That destroys the 1964 civil rights based laws that regulate who is able   
   to shop or join a golf resort or any other aspect of NON commerce of   
   people NOT invited to do business(that's non commerce)and that would   
   include people NOT invited to work for you that are no longer protected   
   by quotas set by the government under the commerce clause.....   
      
      
    In short the government can't order you to allow people into your store   
   or business to shop or work and then presume to regulate their gender or   
   race because it's suddenly commerce.  The government had no power to   
   order you by law to allow anyone entry to begin with under the commerce law.   
      
   *The ObamaCare ruling changed/upheld the commerce laws* so that NOW no   
   law under commerce can regulate lack of commerce or NON commerce.  That   
   ended the governments mistaken ability to regulate anyone NOT invited by   
   you to actually engage in commerce. Fair housing act for instance? Or   
   the Community Reinvestment Act?   
      
   It was always true but no one challenged it until ObamaCare. Now with   
   ObamaCare and Judge Roberts decision...   
      
      
   -Justice Roberts-   
   [""""""Construing the Commerce Clause to permit Congress to regulate   
   individuals precisely because they are doing nothing would open a new   
   and potentially vast domain to congressional authority. Congress already   
   possesses expansive power to regulate what people do. Upholding the   
   Affordable Care Act under the Commerce Clause would give Congress the   
   same *license to regulate what people do not do* . The Framers knew the   
   difference between doing something and doing nothing. They gave Congress   
   the power to regulate commerce, *not to compel it* . Ignoring that   
   distinction would undermine the principle that *the* *Federal*   
   *Government* *is a government of limited and enumerated powers* . The   
   individual mandate thus cannot be sustained under Congress’s power to   
   “regulate Commerce.”"""""""]   
    -Justice Roberts-   
      
      
   The ObamaCare ruling says that the government can't force you to enter   
   into commerce, which means you can't be force to engage into commerce   
   with anyone no matter their race or gender or whether they are gay or   
   not and so you need not hire them or allow them into your business since   
   the government has no teeth in any law that supported such interference   
   into your private sector business.   
      
   On the other hand the government is still required to treat all people   
   equally under the laws.  So it doesn't change that government is forced   
   to allow all people to enter government operated institutions and   
   services.  It makes our nation more dynamic and will create greater   
   opportunity without so much government intrusion.   
      
   The Democrats should have tried to get ObamaCare and that ruling tossed   
   out while they could, in order to save their favorite power of   
   regulating you doing NOTHING because under the commerce clause that's   
   what Democrats did.  Now Democrats gained an ObamaCare tax that will   
   soon fail and be trimmed but they LOST the power to regulate what people   
   didn't do. It looks like just another Obama fuck-up that makes Democrats   
   less powerful.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)