Posted on 04/23/2017 3:10:08 PM PDT by ForYourChildren
You’re saying it’s being repealed on constitutional grounds. It’s other reasons besides the Constitution.
You can’t handle reality.Get back to me, one-note Johnny, when you want to talk reality.
Yes, that’s exactly what I’m saying. If Obamacare is repealed, it will NOT be on “constitutional” grounds, but purely on pragmatic grounds.
“You’re [LS] saying it’s being repealed on constitutional grounds. It’s other reasons besides the Constitution.”
LS says this because for some reason he runs from the Constitutional part of this discussion. Like it doesn’t exist. He wants to create his own reality for some reason.
Earlier, (post #4) he said the only reason to repeal would be because of a “free market” discussion - not a constitutional discussion.
LS is afraid of the constitutional discussion. So he wants to create a reality around:
“free market”
“how to compromise”
“practicality”
“We did see Prohibition repealed on PRACTICAL grounds, which is what I’ve been arguing all along).”
You are almost there LS.
How did Prohibition get repealed, can you point to the amendment that made repealed it?
Yes, there was an amendment that repealed it-—but there was NOT an amendment that repealed the other two disastrous laws-—Jefferson’s Embargo or the Sherman Silver Purchase Act. Those were both undone by Congress (practical, neither was ever addressed on constitutional grounds).
And, to be accurate, Prohibition was never a “constitutional” issue. It was always a practical pragmatic issue.
Having studied this pretty extensively, I cannot recall one major constitutional argument against prohibition-—or it’s repeal.
Nope. I don’t “create” anything. Reality creates everything. Reality is that there is not a Constitutional argument about Obamacare now, and there has NOT been a Constitutional debate about Social Security since 1964 (and it lost badly then).
“And, to be accurate, Prohibition was never a “constitutional” issue. It was always a practical pragmatic issue.
Having studied this pretty extensively, I cannot recall one major constitutional argument against prohibition-—or it’s repeal.”
Thanks for the detail. And the reasoned discourse.
Here is my take on this.
” It was always a practical pragmatic issue.”
I agree with this statement.
And when they wanted to implement it (Prohibition), they did it in the Constitutionally legal manner. Since it wasn’t in the Constitution the only way to give the federal government authority and control over “Prohibition” was to change the constitution, amend the constitution to give the federal government legal authority.
So the process was:
- discussion on the practical pragmatic issue regarding “X”
- agreement that the Federal government should have legal authority and control over “X”
- pass an amendment giving the Federal government legal authority and control over “X”
For alchohol, change the “X” to alcohol.
For healthcare, change the “X” to healthcare.
They used the legal process above regarding “alcohol” they need to do it with “healthcare.”
Correct, but they didn’t with the Embargo, with Slavery, with Sherman Silver Purchase Act (YUGE), with Social Security. None of those things involved an Amendment, nor did the Federal Reserve Act.
“Correct, but they didn’t with the Embargo, with Slavery, with Sherman Silver Purchase Act (YUGE), with Social Security. None of those things involved an Amendment, nor did the Federal Reserve Act.”
Yes, I agree.
And this is the problem that we find ourselves in today. The Federal Government has usurped its authority over and over and over again.
Usurped authority is not legal authority. It is TYRANNY!
““A Law repugnant to the Constitution is void.” With these words written by Chief Justice Marshall, the Supreme Court for the first time declared unconstitutional a law passed by Congress and signed by the President.”
Marbury v. Madison (1803)
I understand the mess that we are in today. The Administrative State is largely illegal, usurped authority, illegal control taken over by the federal government.
People need to know this.
The people in this country have completely lost their understanding of proper authority. What is my role with the Federal Government? What is my role with the State Government? What is the role of the Federal Government with the State Government? What is my role with my Church? What is my role with Christ? What is my role with my parents?
What about the UN? What happens when the UN decides to tax us? Who gave them that authority?
We have to have a proper understanding or we allow anyone to take authority over us?
“Can I search your car” asks the policeman. You respond, “No.” The policeman says “You must be hiding something then, so you are under arrest.”
The Federal Government says if you don’t purchase a product that we demand that you purchase, you could wind up in jail. So how did the Federal Government take this authority?
We agree on all this. Where we disagree us on the tactics to combat it.
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.