Support Politirant Through Amazon
Visit our sister site at the Political Forums

Author Topic: SCOTUS TO TAKE UP OBAMACARE  (Read 4080 times)

Offline Conley

  • V.I.P.
  • Imperial Grand Poobah Ranter
  • *
  • Thank Yous
  • -Given: 288
  • -Received: 190
  • Posts: 7726
  • Karma: 398
  • Are You Not Entertained?!?
Re: SCOTUS TO TAKE UP OBAMACARE
« Reply #20 on: November 15, 2011, 04:12:58 PM »
no love for khan lee  ??? :'( :D
Every gun that is made, every warship launched, every rocket fired signifies, in the final sense, a theft from those who hunger and are not fed, those who are cold and are not clothed. -Eisenhower

Offline Peter1469

  • V.I.P.
  • Full Ranter
  • *
  • Thank Yous
  • -Given: 5
  • -Received: 22
  • Posts: 183
  • Karma: 30

Offline GRUMPY

  • V.I.P.
  • Senior Ranter
  • *
  • Thank Yous
  • -Given: 0
  • -Received: 17
  • Posts: 387
  • Karma: 51
Re: SCOTUS TO TAKE UP OBAMACARE
« Reply #22 on: November 15, 2011, 05:40:07 PM »
Here are two views:

clearly unconstitutional
 
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204323904577038232724779286.html
 
 
clearly constitutional
 
 http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-chermerinsky-healthcare-20111115,0,4312764.story

the argument for this is lame.....inactivity is activity because someday most everyone uses healthcare and some cannot afford it.......okay then suppose the govt were to mandate every citizen carry a gun because everyone is subject to the protections of the police and in this way we could substantial reduce the size of police agencies across the country by reducing to pool of victims.....there is no precedent for this and as i stated before if the commerce clause can be used to compel one to buy ins than there exists no limits to what govt can compel the citizens to do.....

Offline Mister D

  • V.I.P.
  • Imperial Grand Poobah Ranter
  • *
  • Thank Yous
  • -Given: 109
  • -Received: 164
  • Posts: 6114
  • Karma: 359
  • Egalitarianism is simply absurd
Re: SCOTUS TO TAKE UP OBAMACARE
« Reply #23 on: November 15, 2011, 06:18:26 PM »
Here are two views:

clearly unconstitutional
 
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204323904577038232724779286.html
 
 
clearly constitutional
 
 http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-chermerinsky-healthcare-20111115,0,4312764.story

the argument for this is lame.....inactivity is activity because someday most everyone uses healthcare and some cannot afford it.......okay then suppose the govt were to mandate every citizen carry a gun because everyone is subject to the protections of the police and in this way we could substantial reduce the size of police agencies across the country by reducing to pool of victims.....there is no precedent for this and as i stated before if the commerce clause can be used to compel one to buy ins than there exists no limits to what govt can compel the citizens to do.....


Hard to argue with that logic.
"Pushing people forward simply because of their colour, irrespective of merit, would be most unfortunate and would of course lead to disaster. It would mean that Rhodesia would then develop into a kind of banana republic where the country would in no time be bankrupt."


~Ian Smith

Offline Peter1469

  • V.I.P.
  • Full Ranter
  • *
  • Thank Yous
  • -Given: 5
  • -Received: 22
  • Posts: 183
  • Karma: 30
Re: SCOTUS TO TAKE UP OBAMACARE
« Reply #24 on: November 15, 2011, 10:14:49 PM »
Here are two views:

clearly unconstitutional
 
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204323904577038232724779286.html
 
 
clearly constitutional
 
 http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-chermerinsky-healthcare-20111115,0,4312764.story

the argument for this is lame.....inactivity is activity because someday most everyone uses healthcare and some cannot afford it.......okay then suppose the govt were to mandate every citizen carry a gun because everyone is subject to the protections of the police and in this way we could substantial reduce the size of police agencies across the country by reducing to pool of victims.....there is no precedent for this and as i stated before if the commerce clause can be used to compel one to buy ins than there exists no limits to what govt can compel the citizens to do.....



agreed

Offline Peter1469

  • V.I.P.
  • Full Ranter
  • *
  • Thank Yous
  • -Given: 5
  • -Received: 22
  • Posts: 183
  • Karma: 30
Re: SCOTUS TO TAKE UP OBAMACARE
« Reply #25 on: November 15, 2011, 10:17:09 PM »
Here are two views:

clearly unconstitutional
 
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204323904577038232724779286.html
 
 
clearly constitutional
 
 http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-chermerinsky-healthcare-20111115,0,4312764.story

the argument for this is lame.....inactivity is activity because someday most everyone uses healthcare and some cannot afford it.......okay then suppose the govt were to mandate every citizen carry a gun because everyone is subject to the protections of the police and in this way we could substantial reduce the size of police agencies across the country by reducing to pool of victims.....there is no precedent for this and as i stated before if the commerce clause can be used to compel one to buy ins than there exists no limits to what govt can compel the citizens to do.....


Hard to argue with that logic.



The problem is that there is SCOTUS precedent that could be used to rule in favor of this communist piece of legislation. 

Will the Court look to our Founders, or will they look to the FDR socialists who changed our government without our permission?

Offline spunkloaf

  • V.I.P.
  • Senior Ranter
  • *
  • Thank Yous
  • -Given: 31
  • -Received: 32
  • Posts: 601
  • Karma: 92
  • A-Wop-bop-a-loo-lop
Re: SCOTUS TO TAKE UP OBAMACARE
« Reply #26 on: November 15, 2011, 10:27:53 PM »
Here are two views:

clearly unconstitutional
 
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204323904577038232724779286.html
 
 
clearly constitutional
 
 http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-chermerinsky-healthcare-20111115,0,4312764.story

the argument for this is lame.....inactivity is activity because someday most everyone uses healthcare and some cannot afford it.......okay then suppose the govt were to mandate every citizen carry a gun because everyone is subject to the protections of the police and in this way we could substantial reduce the size of police agencies across the country by reducing to pool of victims.....there is no precedent for this and as i stated before if the commerce clause can be used to compel one to buy ins than there exists no limits to what govt can compel the citizens to do.....


Hard to argue with that logic.



The problem is that there is SCOTUS precedent that could be used to rule in favor of this communist piece of legislation. 

Will the Court look to our Founders, or will they look to the FDR socialists who changed our government without our permission?





....who the fuck voted them into office???.....

Offline Peter1469

  • V.I.P.
  • Full Ranter
  • *
  • Thank Yous
  • -Given: 5
  • -Received: 22
  • Posts: 183
  • Karma: 30
Re: SCOTUS TO TAKE UP OBAMACARE
« Reply #27 on: November 15, 2011, 10:48:16 PM »
That is a very good question. 

Offline MMC

  • V.I.P.
  • Imperial Grand Poobah Ranter
  • *
  • Thank Yous
  • -Given: 277
  • -Received: 211
  • Posts: 6181
  • Karma: 423
Re: SCOTUS TO TAKE UP OBAMACARE
« Reply #28 on: November 16, 2011, 12:44:04 AM »
Obama knew that putting the Clinton Crat Kagan in that it with SCOTUS that it would go down to the wire anyways. Funny that a Kennedy will have the decision resting with him.
"To destroy this invisible government, To dissolve this UNHOLY ALLIANCE between Corrupt Buisness and Corrupt Politics is the First task of the Statesmanship of the DAY" ~Theodore Roosevelt~ Steward of The People!

 


Support Politirant Through Amazon