by Nicole Flatow
Following widespread media coverage of Bill O’Reilly’s promise to American Constitution Society President Caroline Fredrickson that he would “apologize for being an idiot” if the Supreme Court upheld the Affordable Care Act as Fredrickson predicted, O’Reilly delivered a begrudging apology on his show Monday night.
“I’m not really sorry,” he said, “but I am a man of my word, so I apologize for not factoring in the John Roberts situation. Truthfully, I never in a million years would thought the chief justice would go beyond the scope of the commerce clause to date and into taxation. I may be an idiot for not considering that.”
This is a curious answer from O’Reilly, since he did consider the tax argument when Fredrickson explained during that same March 26 segment that the Affordable Care Act could be justified under the Constitution’s power to tax.
In response, O’Reilly told Fredrickson she would “lose and your arguments are specious” and predicted the Supreme Court would strike down the individual coverage provision by a vote of 5-4.
The following night, O’Reilly raised Fredrickson’s tax argument yet again, saying:
This tax thing is completely bogus. It’s a penalty. And that means the government is punishing us if we don’t conform to the federal demand to purchase what they want us to purchase. That ladies and gentlemen, is flat out unconstitutional.
O’Reilly also tried to delegitimize the calls for an apology by dismissing Media Matters, which publicized the Fredrickson/O’Reilly exchange, as “far-left kooks" and MSNBC’s Howard Kurtz as “doing their bidding."
But when O'Reilly turned to Fox News Contributor Bernie Goldberg for support, Goldberg told O’Reilly he “should have seen this coming” when he made a “big, loud prediction" that the Affordable Care Act would be struck down.
Watch the full segment below.
OUTstanding article
this post is really enticing, salutary, handy, and fruitful.... it is really mindblowing.. overall i rate this post as best and perfect..
Regards - Lorinda Leachman
“I’m not really sorry,” he
“I’m not really sorry,” he said, “but I am a man of my word, so I apologize for not factoring in the John Roberts situation. Truthfully, http://www.hermesluxurydream.com/ I never in a million years would thought the chief justice would go beyond the scope of the commerce clause to date and into taxation. I may be an idiot for not considering that.”
Cool comment
That is criminal and will hurt the people Obama is supposed to help.
The supreme court is filled with poor appointees from left and right, but fortunately that was not the whole truth of top listed market leader Galaxy S3 case which was shown in the lecture and magazine. I also dont know how this company have strong portfolio for last ten years as shown in the real market.
This was an excellent
This was an excellent article. It has some valuable content on this topic. Thank you for compiling it into an easy to read and well written post.
foreclosure attorneys
Finding a cheap hotel is
Finding a cheap hotel is important to budget travelers, whether for an Hawaiian honeymoon, adventure travel in the mountains, or for business in Europe. www.travelandhoteling.com
It may be his tenth year
It may be his tenth year working with the brand, but Mario Testino fails to disappoint Michael Kors this season with his latest ads for the label. This round, the fashion photographer shot Kors's vibrant wares on models Karmen Pedaru and Simon Nessman in a jet-set scene in L.A. day of fashion
This tax thing is completely
This tax thing is completely bogus. It’s a penalty. And that means the government is punishing us if we don’t conform to the federal demand to purchase what they want us to purchase. That ladies and gentlemen, is flat out unconstitutional.learn more
I found this post very
I found this post very exciting. I think you will have any other post on this topic? I am also sending it to my friend to enjoy your working style. Cheers!
Phoenix Social Security Disability attorney
And that means the government
And that means the government is punishing us if we don’t conform to the federal demand to purchase what they want us to purchasenorth face outlet
I am researching this topic
I am researching this topic for use in a future business I am thinking about starting. Thank you for this information, it has been educational and helpful to me.
Jeff
Silly
The only way of repealing this, which will happen, is nullification by states and juries. As seen in recent elections, both parties are identical - they all have and continue wars -Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Pakistan (drones count coz they murder too!). Both endorse torture and both supported the NDAA, proving the hypocrisy of the left in this case.
Romney has his Mass healthcare law written by insurance companies, increasing the price. Obama has had his law also written by insurance companies, gaining them an extra 20 plus million customers and giving exemptions to many large businesses. That is criminal and will hurt the people Obama is supposed to help.
The supreme court is filled with poor appointees from left and right, but fortunately, they do NOT have the final say. The States can stop this, as can the most powerful arbiters, the juries.
All I ask is the hypocrisy to stop and the english language to be used when reading the clearly written constitution. You can't interpret new meanings into it (ie the words 'reasonable' and 'sensible' don't appear in the second amendment).
the Roberts Strategy?
I have not yet read enough, but saw someone suggest that the ACA decision restricts future Commerce interpretations. IOW, that would be the "hidden IED" in ACA decision.
"Roberts ruled in favor of Obamacare ruling to defeat Obama in November election," seems overly conspiratorial. Roberts works regularly with ideologically differing justices, so I think they'd smell a real conspiracy.
I also don't see a strong election campaigning advantage to Romney in the overall decision . The RomneyCareTax is more politically detrimental to Romney than the ObamneyCareTax is to Obama, because
1. RomneyTax aggravates only Romney 's Norquisling voter base and
2. RomneyTax additionally burdens Romney with the flipflopflip (or flipflopflipflop? or flipflopflipflipflop?) whirlwind of 'hypocrisy'.
In state or congressional elections that were already repug vs teapug, the ACA decision might favor the teapug.
Obamacare ruling of Supreme Court
I believe that Roberts ruled in favor of Obamacare ruling to defeat Obama in November election. Basically, he challenged the US Citizens if you don't like it do ther dirty job yourself. Defeat him, elect Romney and have the Obamacare law declare as null void. This is the bottomline. John Roberts is not an idiot, he is a smart man.
Post new comment