Obama Lied... Again; Individual Mandate ruled a Tax; Chief Justice 'Judas' betrays Constitution

Barack Obama lied... again, this time about the Individual Mandate not being a tax. Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, John Roberts, who sided with the four professed liberals on the court, has gone to absurdly extreme lengths to make sure the law was upheld. The Individual Mandate was ruled unconstitutional as a penalty or mandate but Roberts decided to rule it constitutional as a tax, something Obama insisted it was not.

Here is Obama with George Stephanopolous on September 20, 2009 telling America that the Individual Mandate was NOT a tax.



That all changed when the legal argument from the Obama administration in front of the Supreme Court was that the mandate should be upheld because it is a tax. Translation: Obama lied... again.



As for Justice John 'Judas' Roberts...

The issue of severability was at the heart of the decision of U.S. District Judge Roger Vinson last year. Quite simply, the severability clause allows a law to stand if parts of it are thrown out. Obamacare did NOT have a severability clause. Vinson found the Individual Mandate unconstitutional and consequently ruled that the entire law had to be thrown out.

Roberts twisted himself into a pretzel to arrive at his decision today. Instead of ruling the Individual Mandate unconstitutional, which would require the law to be thrown out because it has no severability clause, Roberts ruled the Mandate unconstitutional under the commerce clause but found it constitutional as a tax, which the Obama administration argued it was not.

Chief Justice Roberts has just betrayed his nation.

**UPDATE** As Weasel Zippers points out, the White House website still has a post on the site, authored by Jason Furman, Assistant to the President for Economic Policy and Principal Deputy Director of the National Economic Council. Note the screen shot, taken today. The White House position is that the Individual Mandate is NOT a tax, though Obama still gets what he wants despite Roberts' disagreeing with him on what the Mandate is: