+ Reply to Thread
+ Post New Thread
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 21

Thread: Some Justices Question Health Law’s Constitutionality

  1. Default Some Justices Question Health Law’s Constitutionality

    'U.S. Supreme Court justices hinted they might strike down President Barack Obama’s health-care law as the court’s Republican appointees suggested Congress went too far by requiring Americans to obtain insurance.

    On the second of three days of arguments in the historic case, justices’ questions indicated they might split 5-to-4, with the court’s five Republican appointees banding together to topple the law.'

    http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-0...tionality.html

  2. Default

    Good.

    Unlike most on here it seems, I don't give a rodent's buttocks which party proposed this law. I am completely un-partisan - I KNOW both parties suck at this time in history.

    And quite beside whatever else the law contains - the part about forcing American's to purchase insurance is/was asinine and obviously unconstitutional.

    My only regret is it is defeated in the Supreme Court along party lines is that the Democratic judges are so politically blind as to not see how obviously unconstitutional that part of the law is.

  3. Default

    I heard that the lawyer for the Obama Administration did so poorly that he was getting laughed at. At one point the lib judges were trying to help him out once they figured out he was out of his league.

    If Kennedy is the swing vote he is known to decide on the side of liberty.

    Will liberty win out?
    Omitting the ‘doubts, the caveats, the ifs, ands and buts’ is not a morally neutral act; it is a subtle deception that calls scientific practice into disrepute.

    Climate scientists face an ethical choice: do they conform to established ethical standards of scientific practice or do they sacrifice those standards in favour of actions and statements that will be more likely to shape public opinion and climate policy in their preferred direction?

    Peter Lee

  4. Default

    I can almost guarantee this won't get struck down. In fact I am so sure I will place a bet. If this law is struck down I will allow The Quorum (Conservative social group on this forum) to choose my avatar and signature of the rest of my time on this forum.
    "Life is a series of natural and spontaneous changes.
    Don't resist them - that only creates sorrow. Let reality be reality.
    Let things flow naturally forward in whatever way they like." -Lao Tzu

  5. Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TheTaoOfBill View Post
    I can almost guarantee this won't get struck down. In fact I am so sure I will place a bet. If this law is struck down I will allow The Quorum (Conservative social group on this forum) to choose my avatar and signature of the rest of my time on this forum.
    Will IlovePalin and her pic do? I will start picking one out.

    No, I really don't know which way this will go. The government got some very tough questioning and has argued the mandate as a tax one day and a penalty the next then call it a tax penalty. This will go lib/cons with Kennedy the swing vote.
    Omitting the ‘doubts, the caveats, the ifs, ands and buts’ is not a morally neutral act; it is a subtle deception that calls scientific practice into disrepute.

    Climate scientists face an ethical choice: do they conform to established ethical standards of scientific practice or do they sacrifice those standards in favour of actions and statements that will be more likely to shape public opinion and climate policy in their preferred direction?

    Peter Lee

  6. Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Hoosier8 View Post
    Will IlovePalin and her pic do? I will start picking one out.

    No, I really don't know which way this will go. The government got some very tough questioning and has argued the mandate as a tax one day and a penalty the next then call it a tax penalty. This will go lib/cons with Kennedy the swing vote.
    But a bet isn't a bet unless someone wins and loses. Any conservatives want to step up and allow the liberal progressive group to pick their avatar?
    "Life is a series of natural and spontaneous changes.
    Don't resist them - that only creates sorrow. Let reality be reality.
    Let things flow naturally forward in whatever way they like." -Lao Tzu

  7. Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TheTaoOfBill View Post
    But a bet isn't a bet unless someone wins and loses. Any conservatives want to step up and allow the liberal progressive group to pick their avatar?
    I don't bet, nor do I answer what-ifs so I will not take you up on it.
    Omitting the ‘doubts, the caveats, the ifs, ands and buts’ is not a morally neutral act; it is a subtle deception that calls scientific practice into disrepute.

    Climate scientists face an ethical choice: do they conform to established ethical standards of scientific practice or do they sacrifice those standards in favour of actions and statements that will be more likely to shape public opinion and climate policy in their preferred direction?

    Peter Lee

  8. Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TheTaoOfBill View Post
    I can almost guarantee this won't get struck down. In fact I am so sure I will place a bet. If this law is struck down I will allow The Quorum (Conservative social group on this forum) to choose my avatar and signature of the rest of my time on this forum.
    I know the Supreme Court is supposed to argue on facts but they do not like Obama which may play a factor.

    Do you remember when Obama called them out to their face in his first State of the Union address and had them mouthing, "he's wrong?"

    I guarantee you that Obama is wishing he hadn't criticized them on national television while they were sitting 20 feet away.

  9. Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kenrichaed View Post
    I know the Supreme Court is supposed to argue on facts but they do not like Obama which may play a factor.

    Do you remember when Obama called them out to their face in his first State of the Union address and had them mouthing, "he's wrong?"

    I guarantee you that Obama is wishing he hadn't criticized them on national television while they were sitting 20 feet away.
    He was absolutely right to criticize them. That was the worst judicial ruling in decades.
    "Life is a series of natural and spontaneous changes.
    Don't resist them - that only creates sorrow. Let reality be reality.
    Let things flow naturally forward in whatever way they like." -Lao Tzu

  10. Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TheTaoOfBill View Post
    He was absolutely right to criticize them. That was the worst judicial ruling in decades.
    That is not the point. Feel free to criticize them in private but you DO NOT do it on national television to their face. That is management 101 and Obama was wrong for doing it that way.

    He probably will pay for treating them like that.

+ Reply to Thread
+ Post New Thread
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Justices Questioning Briskly In Health Care Case
    By Agent_286 in forum Current Events
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: Mar 26 2012, 11:32 AM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Bookmarks