Skip to comments.Ted Cruz Is Signing Up for Obamacare
Posted on 03/24/2015 3:43:41 PM PDT by Kevin C
click here to read article
1. A law found to be “constitutional” by our highest court means that has been decided. Congress can repeal it, but it is clearly “constitutional” and is therefore required to be obeyed. The whole “unconstitutional” argument flew out the door some time ago. I know we can think a law “continues” to be unconstitutional, but that fight was also lost by Westley Snipes on a similarly defended argument. You go to jail for not following laws.
2. Buying insurance through 0bamacare is just as legit as buying expensive insurance with better coverages. You have no logical argument here, because everyone can throw their money at expensive private insurance. This just happens to give him the long term right to complain from personal experience.
3. This was covered by 2, above.
4. That may be a benefit of 0care for him, but why does this matter and why don't you think he should be allowed to purchase what he wants? Your argument doesn't make sense. He is choosing to purchase something to meet the law and the version of insurance he is purchasing will give him “street cred” from valuable, first-hand knowledge. I don't have to eat at Ryan's, but if I choose to do so, I can now personally state I think their food tastes bad. I can't say that with any integrity if I have never tasted Ryan's food. Can you understand that, now?
Ted is NOT getting financial assistance for his 0care.
“the President could refuse to enforce it”
This appears to be what the President is doing with regard to the various decriminalizing, legalizing and medical marijuana laws popping up in the several states now. What I wonder is why Republicans in Congress are trying to defy the will of 70% of DC voters who want the same legalization rights as Colorado, Washington, and Alaska. Something does not add up right here.
The reasons are all important. Obama is illegally and unconstitutionally forwarding his socialist agenda by refusing to do what he was sworn to do. That is really the opposite of what I am suggesting.
The right thing to do is “preserve, protect, and defend” the Constitution. If that means a President refuses to enforce an unconstitutional law passed by Congress over his veto because in good faith he believes, can show, and make a case for its unconstitutionality, then I believe the Constitution gives him that option. He should also go to SCOTUS to review the law and get a restraining order in the meantime.
He isn’t acquiescing to anything. He he following current law.
If he does not do it then you must be claiming he take the Senate plan.
Walk that one out if you will.
I’d like to walk it out and nuke it.
What do you call “current law”? Anything Congress manages to poop out regardless of how totally unconstitutional it is? Like this piece of #$(%& that they passed without reading it because people like Nancy Pelosi said they had to pass it before they could know what was in it??? You mean stuff like that? You want to agree that because they label it “law” it is actually valid law?
Better think again. The Supreme Law of the Land is not whatever some Tom, Dick, and Harry, and Curly, Moe, and Larry serve up. The Supreme Law of the Land is the Constitution and any Congressional law made IN PURSUANCE thereof (Supremacy Clause, Art VI, Section 2).
Any federal act that violates the Constitution is illegal and invalid. The Constitution does not give the feds any power to meddle with my health insurance. My health insurance is none of the feds damn business. Obamacare is invalid and illegal because it is an unconstitutional federal act. Therefore Obamacare is NOT valid law and should be rejected and nullified by the states.
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.