Posted on 08/02/2010 10:43:53 AM PDT by Dubya-M-DeesWent2SyriaStupid!
Health and Human Services Secretary (HHS) Kathleen Sebelius on Monday downplayed a federal judge's decision allowing Virginia's challenge to healthcare reform to continue, arguing it was merely a procedural move that has no bearing on the underlying issues.
"We remain confident that the case is solid," Sebelius told reporters during a phone call on the reform law's effects on Medicare spending.
Ron Pollack, executive director of Families USA, a liberal consumer group, echoed that message Monday, saying the ruling "has no effect on the validity of the health reform law."
(Excerpt) Read more at thehill.com ...
Bad, misleading headline in a case about a lawsuit. She’s not the judge, she can’t dismiss.
The Imperial Federal Government...
I do not believe the Secretary of Health CAN dismiss this.
Is she speaking for Obama? We all know the decision does not PLEASE her but she cannot dismiss it.
It is very significant. In this instance the same reasoning used to dismiss this Motion to Dismiss would apply to any Motion for Summary Judgment. Bottom line: This case goes to trial.
“We remain confident that the case is solid,”
yeah, Sebelius - solid like your block-head.
“We remain confident that the case is solid,”
Me too, a solid POS.
She claims it has no bearing. She speaks for Obama. Obama needs to ask her to resign after he resigns.
what a maroon
“Ron Pollack, executive director of Families USA, a liberal consumer group, echoed that message Monday, saying the ruling “has no effect on the validity of the health reform law.”
Yes it does. It means its days are numbered.
Her qualifications include:
Sebelius served as executive director and chief lobbyist for the Kansas Trial Lawyers Association from 1977–1986.
AND she was a CLOSE friend of Tiller the Baby Killer.
Sebelius cannot make that ruling..
This woman's career is drenched in the blood of the innocent, and that's about the best that can be said of her.
Whistling past the grave yard.
The word “dismiss” in article’s headline is a very poor choice of words. It sounds like it means “dismiss” in the legal sense of “to put a claim or action out of court without further hearing” when it actually just means “dismiss” in the sense of diminishing or discounting its importance.
Agreed but on second thought she may think she can dismiss 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.