Posted on 12/14/2010 1:47:37 AM PST by The Raven
I guess it’s up to History. I can’t wait to read his (Obama) memoirs.
What makes all of this curious...is that there are a hundred ways of designing a health care program without making it mandatory. It was, in my mind, designed to be challenged and tossed out...with the Supreme Court being the “bad guy” in the end. Just the idea of waiting until 2013 for it to become active....ought to make people laugh over the intended failure anticipated.
They also forgot to include the clause that prevents the entire edifice from collapsing if one part is ruled unconstitutional.
Seems there is a "mole" in the enemy camp and 0bambi and the dims are too dumb to notice.
I wonder who’ll write it for him
FACT: Aspects of ObamaCare are clearly unconstitutional, not that that always carries the day in federal court anymore.
FACT: Obama et al. have serially lied about the cost (even to the laughable claim that it would reduce cost while insuring many millions more people), the Death Panel concept, and the ultimate intent (single payer).
FACT: ObamaCare would reduce quality and availability of health services.
FACT: ObamaCare would grow Big Government control at the expense of individual freedom.
FACT: ObamaCare is anti-American.
“It was, in my mind, designed to be challenged and tossed out...”
Obamacare was designed to be challenged and inproperly confirmed using the Commerce clause and other provisions of the U.S. Constitution as a means of obtaining a SCOTUS decision and precedent removing some of the last remaining restraints upon an exercise of power by a U.S. Congress led by the Marxist-socialist faction. Kagan was appointed to SCOTUS in part for this purpose. Once they have succeeded in establishing the power to dictate private commercial transactions, they will be in a position to employ Federal legislation as a means of punishing political enemies and rewarding political friends. This unbridled power will then permit them to further consolidate power and further subvert the electoral system.
“Unfortunately there’s only one court that counts, in this case.”
Only when U.S. Citizens neglect their cumulative authority as co-sovereigns of the United States of America. There is still the power of impeachment, and U.S. Citizens can begin removing legislative, executive, and judicial officers at the local and state levels to secure the political support needed to impeach like officers at the Federal level. Don’t forget, inspector-generals have been unlawfully fired for the performance of their duties. There are many impeachable offenses awaiting investigation and prosecution. Remember, every governmental officer has the sworn duty to protect and defend the Constituion against all enemies, foreign and domestic. Failure to do so can be in some instances an impeachable offense. Any legislator who refuses to vote for conviction in an impeachment proceeding where such a conviction is manifestly justified may also be impeached for the failure to uphold their oath of office. It has happened before in U.S. history, and can very well happen again.
Any bets as to whether Kennedy and the wise latina are discussing this? And, if the wise latina discovers that Kennedy will strike down the law she will find a way to recuse herself leaving it at 4-4. Meaning this abomination will stand.
And I heard Kagan may sit it out - leaving either a 4-4 tie or a win. Not sure what happens with a tie
“The unchecked expansion of congressional power to the limits suggested by the Minimum Essential Coverage Provision [the individual mandate] would invite unbridled exercise of federal police powers,” Judge Hudson writes.
The judge is exactly correct. EVEN IF one was to think OBAMACARE was a good idea, to enact it this way is to give the federal government new broader powers that it shouldn’t have. This country was not set up to have that strong of a federal government. We must seriously examine if this is the direction we want things to move. Centralization has its place, but State and local do as well. There must be balance.
If I were Judge Kennedy I’d steer clear of Fort Marcy Park and Arkansas.
In a tie the law stands.
During an interview someone asked Justice Elena Kagen if under this law, what if the government decides people must eat vegetables? “What a silly law,” she said, but then she said,
“Yes, the government could require you to eat vegetables.”
She scares the heck out of me. This whole regime scares the heck out of me. Every day it’s a new horror with this clown president.
In the case of a tie, the lower court decision would stand, I think.
Sure. It’s a classic example of a “trial balloon.” By floating it up, the left got to see which way the political and social winds were blowing.
I’m quite sure the far left was completely expecting it to fly in a far-leftist-government; I’m just as sure it was completely surprised by the Tea Party movement.
Sounds like common sense to me
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.