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.
And I reiterate for the cheap obstinate seats: CONSTITUTIONAL POWER IS CLEAR FOR THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT TO PROVIDE OR BE INVOLVED IN HEALTH CARE.
You want to play games of relativism and equivalency, find someone else more gullible, Big Meow.
Did you know that "Gullible" isn't in the dictionary?And I reiterate for the cheap obstinate seats: CONSTITUTIONAL POWER IS CLEAR FOR THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT TO PROVIDE OR BE INVOLVED IN HEALTH CARE.
You want to play games of relativism and equivalency, find someone else more gullible, Big Meow.
So, in your backwards totalitarian mind, forcing people to buy a service provided by a private industry, under threat of fine and imprisonment, is fine because it's for the general welfare of the public. I bet our founding fathers would be really proud.
...and it won't matter cause we control the courts, then we'll disappear your ass for wasting our time and prevent you from spreading your dissent to us.Progressive Fabian interpretation of the Constitution: We'll do what we want and you can sue us if you don't like it.
And I reiterate for the cheap obstinate seats: CONSTITUTIONAL POWER IS CLEAR FOR THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT TO PROVIDE OR BE INVOLVED IN HEALTH CARE.
oh and you attempt to do so with such grace.And I reiterate for the cheap obstinate seats: CONSTITUTIONAL POWER IS CLEAR FOR THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT TO PROVIDE OR BE INVOLVED IN HEALTH CARE.
Since this appears to be roughly the amount of substance needed for an argument to fly in this thread, I'll pass the torch of sparring with Big Fitz to you.
And I reiterate for the cheap obstinate seats: CONSTITUTIONAL POWER IS CLEAR FOR THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT TO PROVIDE OR BE INVOLVED IN HEALTH CARE.
You want to play games of relativism and equivalency, find someone else more gullible, Big Meow.
So, in your backwards totalitarian mind, forcing people to buy a service provided by a private industry, under threat of fine and imprisonment, is fine because it's for the general welfare of the public. I bet our founding fathers would be really proud.
Did you know that "Gullible" isn't in the dictionary?And I reiterate for the cheap obstinate seats: CONSTITUTIONAL POWER IS CLEAR FOR THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT TO PROVIDE OR BE INVOLVED IN HEALTH CARE.
You want to play games of relativism and equivalency, find someone else more gullible, Big Meow.
So, in your backwards totalitarian mind, forcing people to buy a service provided by a private industry, under threat of fine and imprisonment, is fine because it's for the general welfare of the public. I bet our founding fathers would be really proud.
And for the definition of "Redundant" it says "See Redundant".
thanks Jeremy. Good to see I've ignored him still for good reasons. Terminal Stupidity can be contagious if we expose ourselves to it too long.
...and it won't matter cause we control the courts, then we'll disappear your ass for wasting our time and prevent you from spreading your dissent to us.Progressive Fabian interpretation of the Constitution: We'll do what we want and you can sue us if you don't like it.
And I reiterate for the cheap obstinate seats: CONSTITUTIONAL POWER IS CLEAR FOR THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT TO PROVIDE OR BE INVOLVED IN HEALTH CARE.
Since this appears to be roughly the amount of substance needed for an argument to fly in this thread, I'll pass the torch of sparring with Big Fitz to you.
Substance schmubstance.And I reiterate for the cheap obstinate seats: CONSTITUTIONAL POWER IS CLEAR FOR THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT TO PROVIDE OR BE INVOLVED IN HEALTH CARE.
Since this appears to be roughly the amount of substance needed for an argument to fly in this thread, I'll pass the torch of sparring with Big Fitz to you.
And I reiterate for the cheap obstinate seats: CONSTITUTIONAL POWER IS CLEAR FOR THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT TO PROVIDE OR BE INVOLVED IN HEALTH CARE.
Since this appears to be roughly the amount of substance needed for an argument to fly in this thread, I'll pass the torch of sparring with Big Fitz to you.
Not too worry. Big Fitz is as wrongheaded as yurt or daveman or that crew of libertarian neanderthals. Not too worry. They won't be back.
Why? Because it would take a 2/3 approval vote of the house and senate which is impossible with the polarization in congress. Then it would have to go before all the state legislatures which would take about 5 years. Then if it was approved, a healthcare bill would have to be passed. By the time anything got into law most of the country would be without healthcare....then why doesn't the government go through the process to amend the constitution to state that "The government shall make no law prohibiting the protection and providing thereof of health and care services for the American people." or something to that extent. I do not support UHC simply because the founding documents do not claim it to be legal, it demands an amendment itself for it to be legal. until then the government, especially the congress that is pushing for this, are violating their oath and are damn near treasonous in my humble opinion. Thank you.
The wisdom of our founders in action. Slow STUPID law to a crawl. Too bad the fabian progressives have figured this out and are playing long game too to radically transform us into a fascist police state with them on top.Why? Because it would take a 2/3 approval vote of the house and senate which is impossible with the polarization in congress. Then it would have to go before all the state legislatures which would take about 5 years. Then if it was approved, a healthcare bill would have to be passed. By the time anything got into law most of the country would be without healthcare....then why doesn't the government go through the process to amend the constitution to state that "The government shall make no law prohibiting the protection and providing thereof of health and care services for the American people." or something to that extent. I do not support UHC simply because the founding documents do not claim it to be legal, it demands an amendment itself for it to be legal. until then the government, especially the congress that is pushing for this, are violating their oath and are damn near treasonous in my humble opinion. Thank you.
The Constitution is absolutely clear on this matter, and has been ever since it was written. You far right reactionaries and libertarians cry boo hoo because knowlegable people laugh at you when you start stuttering. You simply can't carry the argument.
And then the 2nd Amendment case is carried through incorporation by a 'conservative' court.
Every moderate and centrist Republican American is laughing at you fools.
