Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
It doesn't seem that way at all.
Lying about the possible overturning of a law as being *unprecedented* and about how well supported it was...then claiming people are just too stupid (including the fifth district appellate judge, apparently) to understand what he was REALLY talking about, and hinting that overturning an unconstitutional law is "activist"...while the court is still deliberating, is not the same as complaining about a ruling after it has taken place.
I'm sorry you don't have basic reasoning skills. I'm sure it interferes with your daily life.
Translated: "It's only bad when President Obama does it". Thanks for clearing that up for us. Didn't watch the Bush video did you?
Must keep up "Obama is evil" meme at ALL costs.
It doesn't seem that way at all.
Lying about the possible overturning of a law as being *unprecedented* and about how well supported it was...then claiming people are just too stupid (including the fifth district appellate judge, apparently) to understand what he was REALLY talking about, and hinting that overturning an unconstitutional law is "activist"...while the court is still deliberating, is not the same as complaining about a ruling after it has taken place.
I'm sorry you don't have basic reasoning skills. I'm sure it interferes with your daily life.
It's been done by the Court for over 200 years...Statists as Obama wish to bolster the uneducated that it's unprecidented.
It doesn't seem that way at all.
Lying about the possible overturning of a law as being *unprecedented* and about how well supported it was...then claiming people are just too stupid (including the fifth district appellate judge, apparently) to understand what he was REALLY talking about, and hinting that overturning an unconstitutional law is "activist"...while the court is still deliberating, is not the same as complaining about a ruling after it has taken place.
I'm sorry you don't have basic reasoning skills. I'm sure it interferes with your daily life.
It's been done by the Court for over 200 years...Statists as Obama wish to bolster the uneducated that it's unprecidented.
It would be unprecedented for the SCOTUS to overturn Congress on an economic issue. Nobody is denying that the SCOTUS has the right to judicial review.
If the Supreme Court accepts the White Houses case that not purchasing insurance counts as economic activity, then it would indeed be unprecedented not to allow this type of regulation. If the SCOTUS finds that there is no economic issue involved, then there is much more precedence.
It doesn't seem that way at all.
Lying about the possible overturning of a law as being *unprecedented* and about how well supported it was...then claiming people are just too stupid (including the fifth district appellate judge, apparently) to understand what he was REALLY talking about, and hinting that overturning an unconstitutional law is "activist"...while the court is still deliberating, is not the same as complaining about a ruling after it has taken place.
I'm sorry you don't have basic reasoning skills. I'm sure it interferes with your daily life.
Translated: "It's only bad when President Obama does it". Thanks for clearing that up for us. Didn't watch the Bush video did you?
Must keep up "Obama is evil" meme at ALL costs.
Did Bush make his comments before or after the ruling?
Did he lie?
It doesn't seem that way at all.
Lying about the possible overturning of a law as being *unprecedented* and about how well supported it was...then claiming people are just too stupid (including the fifth district appellate judge, apparently) to understand what he was REALLY talking about, and hinting that overturning an unconstitutional law is "activist"...while the court is still deliberating, is not the same as complaining about a ruling after it has taken place.
I'm sorry you don't have basic reasoning skills. I'm sure it interferes with your daily life.
It's been done by the Court for over 200 years...Statists as Obama wish to bolster the uneducated that it's unprecidented.
It would be unprecedented for the SCOTUS to overturn Congress on an economic issue. Nobody is denying that the SCOTUS has the right to judicial review.
If the Supreme Court accepts the White Houses case that not purchasing insurance counts as economic activity, then it would indeed be unprecedented not to allow this type of regulation. If the SCOTUS finds that there is no economic issue involved, then there is much more precedence.
It's been done by the Court for over 200 years...Statists as Obama wish to bolster the uneducated that it's unprecidented.
It would be unprecedented for the SCOTUS to overturn Congress on an economic issue. Nobody is denying that the SCOTUS has the right to judicial review.
If the Supreme Court accepts the White Houses case that not purchasing insurance counts as economic activity, then it would indeed be unprecedented not to allow this type of regulation. If the SCOTUS finds that there is no economic issue involved, then there is much more precedence.
It is not "unprecedented". No threat, one error.
It would be unprecedented for the SCOTUS to overturn Congress on an economic issue. Nobody is denying that the SCOTUS has the right to judicial review.
If the Supreme Court accepts the White Houses case that not purchasing insurance counts as economic activity, then it would indeed be unprecedented not to allow this type of regulation. If the SCOTUS finds that there is no economic issue involved, then there is much more precedence.
It is not "unprecedented". No threat, one error.
Overturning Congress on an economic issue would be unprecedented. The key is ECONOMIC.
It is not "unprecedented". No threat, one error.
Overturning Congress on an economic issue would be unprecedented. The key is ECONOMIC.
I see...as the Obama lawyers argued Taxing authority or The Commerce clause...which is it for the mandate?
IS IT Constitutional to force commerce by writ of law for either?
Overturning Congress on an economic issue would be unprecedented. The key is ECONOMIC.
I see...as the Obama lawyers argued Taxing authority or The Commerce clause...which is it for the mandate?
IS IT Constitutional to force commerce by writ of law for either?
Reagan forced hospitals to accept patients who need medical attention regardless of their ability to pay. This is costing the rest of us an extra $1000 a year. These people can't avoid healthcare. Eventually they are going to go to the hospital. So they can't choose to not have healthcare. Its a necessity and should be a right. But you got to pay for that right. I say we should just go single payer. Actually, I believe the Exchanges coming down the road is a backdoor way to Single Payer. Good Job Obama.
I see...as the Obama lawyers argued Taxing authority or The Commerce clause...which is it for the mandate?
IS IT Constitutional to force commerce by writ of law for either?
Reagan forced hospitals to accept patients who need medical attention regardless of their ability to pay. This is costing the rest of us an extra $1000 a year. These people can't avoid healthcare. Eventually they are going to go to the hospital. So they can't choose to not have healthcare. Its a necessity and should be a right. But you got to pay for that right. I say we should just go single payer. Actually, I believe the Exchanges coming down the road is a backdoor way to Single Payer. Good Job Obama.
And you Statists tag along and applaud it...
COBRA...a law written by whom?
Overturning Congress on an economic issue would be unprecedented. The key is ECONOMIC.
I see...as the Obama lawyers argued Taxing authority or The Commerce clause...which is it for the mandate?
IS IT Constitutional to force commerce by writ of law for either?
Reagan forced hospitals to accept patients who need medical attention regardless of their ability to pay. This is costing the rest of us an extra $1000 a year. These people can't avoid healthcare. Eventually they are going to go to the hospital. So they can't choose to not have healthcare. Its a necessity and should be a right. But you got to pay for that right. I say we should just go single payer. Actually, I believe the Exchanges coming down the road is a backdoor way to Single Payer. Good Job Obama.
yep.uh, democrats controlled congress when reagan was in the white house, so nice lie.
Reagan was probably forced to go along with that bullshit to get tax laws or military spending through congress. That is how you scumbags work, you blackmail republican presidents into signing bills with democrat goodies in them so we can get other things done.
i see...as the obama lawyers argued taxing authority or the commerce clause...which is it for the mandate?
Is it constitutional to force commerce by writ of law for either?
reagan forced hospitals to accept patients who need medical attention regardless of their ability to pay. This is costing the rest of us an extra $1000 a year. These people can't avoid healthcare. Eventually they are going to go to the hospital. So they can't choose to not have healthcare. Its a necessity and should be a right. But you got to pay for that right. I say we should just go single payer. Actually, i believe the exchanges coming down the road is a backdoor way to single payer. Good job obama.
Translated: "It's only bad when President Obama does it". Thanks for clearing that up for us. Didn't watch the Bush video did you?
Must keep up "Obama is evil" meme at ALL costs.
Did Bush make his comments before or after the ruling?
Did he lie?
President Obama didn't lie so why should it matter if Bush lied or not? President Obama was called a "thug" for his statements. Is Bush a thug or isn't he? The RW has constantly attacked the judicial branch on their rulings and yet when President Obama does it, he's called a "thug". Is Bush a thug too, yes or no?
President Obama answered a direct question. He wasn't making a prepared statement or speech, just answering a question.
So much for change. This is nothing, but another fine example how the Obama administration emulates the Bush administration.
So much for change. This is nothing, but another fine example how the Obama administration emulates the Bush administration.
Yes they're exactly the same. Bushcare was a horrible health care bill. And Obama should be ashamed for the way he mishandled Katrina.
The same one they tried to lay at Bushs' feet to boot.So much for change. This is nothing, but another fine example how the Obama administration emulates the Bush administration.
Yes they're exactly the same. Bushcare was a horrible health care bill. And Obama should be ashamed for the way he mishandled Katrina.
NO legislation is absolutely a better option than passing shit like ObamaCare.
And ALL Dims ought to be ashamed forever that the witless Democrat Mayor of New Orleans and the pathetic Democrat Governor of Louisiana so badly fucked up the handling of the Katrina disaster.
So much for change. This is nothing, but another fine example how the Obama administration emulates the Bush administration.
Yes they're exactly the same. Bushcare was a horrible health care bill. And Obama should be ashamed for the way he mishandled Katrina.
So much for change. This is nothing, but another fine example how the Obama administration emulates the Bush administration.
Yes they're exactly the same. Bushcare was a horrible health care bill. And Obama should be ashamed for the way he mishandled Katrina.
What WAS "BushCare"
Care to eleaborate? Or are YOU being obteuse and inventive?
So much for change. This is nothing, but another fine example how the Obama administration emulates the Bush administration.
Yes they're exactly the same. Bushcare was a horrible health care bill. And Obama should be ashamed for the way he mishandled Katrina.
NO legislation is absolutely a better option than passing shit like ObamaCare.
And ALL Dims ought to be ashamed forever that the witless Democrat Mayor of New Orleans and the pathetic Democrat Governor of Louisiana so badly fucked up the handling of the Katrina disaster.
Yes they're exactly the same. Bushcare was a horrible health care bill. And Obama should be ashamed for the way he mishandled Katrina.
What WAS "BushCare"
Care to eleaborate? Or are YOU being obteuse and inventive?
OmpaDufus is being sarcastic. President Obama proposed legislation which eventually became "ObamaCare." President Bush got no legislation covering the health care "system [sic]" passed. Oomphy is pretending that there is something in that which serves as a rebuke to President Bush. Of cours,e Oomphy is just plain wrong -- again.
Further, he is alluding to the liberal fraud that the Federal government was "responsible" for the failed Katrina disaster reaction. Of course, he's wrong there, too, since like many libs he cannot accept the fact that it was PRIMARILY a state and local matter.
To the extent the Federal Government was involved (or should have been), I fully agree that FEMA sucked. Brownie did a terrible job. But even so, the job done by Nagin and Blanco was such a massive FAIL it makes the FEMA efforts shine by comparison.
Lying libs like OmmphyDufus cannot accept that fact.
