Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Fears of Chaos Mount Over Obamacare Case
Roll Call ^ | February 25, 2015 | Melissa Attias, CQ staff

Posted on 02/26/2015 12:16:15 AM PST by Cincinatus' Wife

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-40 next last

1 posted on 02/26/2015 12:16:15 AM PST by Cincinatus' Wife
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife

There would be some executive action creating a new law that should bring about impeachment, but since the Republicans have a majority that is castrated there will be no action.


2 posted on 02/26/2015 12:21:15 AM PST by A CA Guy ( God Bless America, God Bless and keep safe our fighting men and women.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife

I checked into an el paso,tx hospital yesterday, since being here one day, I have heard large families of illegals in my shared room telling the patient from their family, dont tell the hospital you have any money. No one has to pay for service anymore..the hospital is run over..I also heard a hospital administrator say they could not afford this onslaught of patients.. OUr country is gone..


3 posted on 02/26/2015 12:32:11 AM PST by aces (Jesus Saves not Society)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife

Be aware of the campaign of manipulation being waged.

Watch for references to Obama’s “signature health law”. This is to personalize it, to make it about Obama. This is preparation to leveling charges of “hating Obama” and of course “racism”. Whether or not it is any person’s “signature” law is utterly irrelevant. Irrelevant except for those who wish to set the stage for attacking the motives of the plaintiffs.

Another tactic is claiming that a ruling for the plaintiffs would “could cost states billions and billions of dollars”. The subsidies are not a cost to the state or to the recipients of the subsidy. The cost is to federal taxpayers who are funding the illegal subsidy. A ruling for the plaintiffs would save taxpayers billions and billions of dollars.

These are both to generate a political climate, to intimidate the court.


4 posted on 02/26/2015 12:38:04 AM PST by Ray76 (Obama says, "Unlike my mum, Ruth has all the documents needed to prove who Mark's father was.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife

This case is the most black and white case to hit the Supremes in the last decade.

Does the law mean what the words of the law say? Or, does the law have to be re-interpreted by the SC to say what it does not say?

I have long felt that we are past the turning point, and that from here there is no recovery of our nation - and daily the new news on what O and his mind-numbed robots are doing only confirm this, drop-by-drop-by-drop.

But if the SC re-writes this law as our Chief Justice did the last one, it is indeed over.

The only question left is to leave the land. Or something I dare not say..........


5 posted on 02/26/2015 12:39:45 AM PST by Arlis (A "Sacred Cow-Tipping" Christian)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife

Obama will ignore any court ruling. Who’s going to stop him?


6 posted on 02/26/2015 12:41:10 AM PST by Organic Panic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife

The question is whether or not Roberts is bought and paid for again like he was in the one defining the penalty as a tax when they kept saying it was not a tax until it went to court.

I’m afraid the corruption is on par with Mexico’s corruption now. This president and his administration has brought the country to its knees.

I guess we will soon find out what we are made of nowadays.


7 posted on 02/26/2015 12:42:02 AM PST by Boomer (Politically Incorrect and proud of it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Arlis

If they do not find for the plaintiffs, if words have no meaning, it will be the destruction of the Supreme Court.


8 posted on 02/26/2015 12:46:02 AM PST by Ray76 (Obama says, "Unlike my mum, Ruth has all the documents needed to prove who Mark's father was.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Arlis

Well I am not effing leaving. Others are gonna leave.


9 posted on 02/26/2015 1:42:55 AM PST by Secret Agent Man (Gone Galt; Not averse to Going Bronson.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife

The root cause is popular election of senator rather than each states representative s.


10 posted on 02/26/2015 1:43:31 AM PST by Raycpa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife

The SC will not focus on what the law says, it will look at how the country would be harmed financially if they don’t rule in favor of O-Ahole. They won’t care about how the country will be harmed Constitutionally. They have already proven that with their first ruling on Obamacare.

That will be their primary concern and hence, they will rule to change the law. It’s a given.


11 posted on 02/26/2015 1:44:16 AM PST by CapnJack
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife
There was no "problem" BEFORE ObamaCare

But if were to get rid of ObamaCare, and go back to the way it was...

It will be a disaster for our country!

Can someone please explain this logic???

12 posted on 02/26/2015 1:48:37 AM PST by Cowboy Bob (Isn't it funny that Socialists never want to share their own money?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cowboy Bob

‘Cause as in so many corners of American life and economy this administration has thrown in a wrench (or a poison pill), crippling the nation’s economy, laws and freedoms, and undermined the trust of our allies.


13 posted on 02/26/2015 2:03:26 AM PST by Cincinatus' Wife
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: aces

Yet Obama wants the hospitals to give even more away. He’ll be after doctors next if he isn’t already.


14 posted on 02/26/2015 2:41:10 AM PST by b4its2late (A Liberal is a person who will give away everything he doesn't own.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: CapnJack

Think of the consequences if they rule that words have no meaning. There can no longer be any censorship. You can testify falsely. You can yell “Fire” in a theater. You can call out “Hi Jack” in an airport. In other words, anarchy.


15 posted on 02/26/2015 2:55:01 AM PST by NTHockey (Rules of engagement #1: Take no prisoners. And to the NSA trolls, FU)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife

Now we’re “finding out what is in it”, thanks to the Fools on the Hill who passed it. We are also finding out how many holes it takes to fill the U.S. Congress and Senate. I hope that one day there will be a day of reckoning for those who are turning this country into a banana republic.


16 posted on 02/26/2015 3:22:48 AM PST by windsorknot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NTHockey

It would set us on a course having dreadful consequences, there would be no law. No certainty. Destruction.


17 posted on 02/26/2015 3:38:08 AM PST by Ray76 (Obama says, "Unlike my mum, Ruth has all the documents needed to prove who Mark's father was.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife

Well we know all the illegals will be getting refund checks from the IRS to the tune of tens of thousands of dollars so the hospitals should do some collecting


18 posted on 02/26/2015 4:17:22 AM PST by ballplayer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife

The soap box failed to stop Obamacare. The ballot box failed to stop Obamacare. The Supreme Court represents the jury box, and I pray it will stop Obamacare. I’ve heard there is a fourth option. I hope the Supremes will rule in accordance with the law and we will not have to find out how that final option goes.


19 posted on 02/26/2015 4:26:45 AM PST by Pollster1 ("Shall not be infringed" is unambiguous.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

What happened to equal treatment under the law. Is it okay to now pick favorites and punish the unwashed?


20 posted on 02/26/2015 5:10:42 AM PST by USCG SimTech (Honored to serve since '71)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-40 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson