Posted on 07/05/2012 7:14:59 PM PDT by Salvation
I’ve never believed them to begin with. So, why do you have such a burr under your saddle with what I posted?
The Democrats sold this as a mandate, not as a tax. The fact that you can find a couple of passages in the Congressional Record where they say it is authorized as a tax doesn’t negate what they argued publicly for weeks.
THe Republicans weren’t SELLING, they were trying to “DERAIL” the legislation. I said “sold”. Those arguing FOR the ACA.
Go find me some people trying to get the ACA passed and touting it as a tax increase.
Do it. Go find them. Please post the results when you find them.
The cost of being a conservative will necessarily skyrocket.
You managed to track down a small snippet, maybe .01% of the actual debate on the bill, where they argued that it WAS a tax.
Or have you forgotten so quickly?
You found 1 guy making a point in the Congressional Record. Was that on the floor or was ‘revised and extended’ remarks that no one ever heard?
Find me some more. One person does not make a majority argument.
You’re the guy that came jumpin all over me. You found 1 Senator that had some remarks in the Congressional Record. That doesn’t negate my original point. If YOU want to negate it, find a lot of people arguing it was a tax.
Screw you Ken Connor.
How would it be right for a Supreme Court justice to base his decision on the argument the lawyers make vs. the actual content of the law? By that logic, Obama could argue to the court that DOMA should be upheld because a purple polka-dotted dinosaur came to him and told him so. What the lawyers say doesn't determine what is or isn't constitutional, only what's in the content of the law.
...find a lot of people arguing it was a tax.
How about you finding a lot of people to support your original claim?
@The intent of the law was for it to not be a tax. That was argued in the House, in the Senate, and by the President.
That is you making that claim, isn't it?
But didn't they lie to you?
Have a nice day.
“John Roberts did not take an oath to advance the cause of conservatism or the agenda of the Republican Party. He did not agree to become a judicial activist for the Right. He took an oath to uphold the Constitution.”
To uphold the Constitution is to advance the cause of conservatism.
Not no but HELL NO!!!
You mean you don't know that you have to go to law school to begin to even understand the sublime wisdom of our philosopher-kings, who allow us to call them Judges.
I must have missed that section in the brochure.
” I guess they never envisioned that a succession of Supreme Court justices would simply alter the meaning of words to get around those limits. “
Which is precisely what that fool Roberts did!
” We haven’t even begun.
This is the most despicable bench-legislation since the genocidal Roe v. Wade.”
Roberts gave SCOTUS carte blanche to do anything they want in the future. He is a malevolent SOB.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.