Michele Bachmann, still full o'shit

Repealing a tax doesn't involve the opinion of SCOTUS, so I am lost on what you believe. It looks like the SCOTUS is giving Congress an option on a law that only 30% of the people like and 70% think it is wrong, changing it into a tax will make it more vague and more unpopular. It might be best to repeal it and start over.

And start over with what?

With all the babbling and clamoring the Republicans have done, I have not seen a better option.

And I don't even like "Obamacare" but until the Republicans can find a better option that is plausible, realistic with a guaranteed way to fund it, I'm all for "Obamacare" aka the best we can get.

The before Obama system worked, I'm not seeing the Obama system controlling, keeping costs down or improving a thing.
 
If Supreme Court doesn't strike down 'ObamaCare,' it's repeal or bust for GOP - Interviews - On the Record - Fox News

BACHMANN: What I would be saying to you tomorrow night is this. That's why elections matter and that's why all of our chips are on November and why we have to replace the president, the Senate, and make sure that we have a House that will fully repeal "ObamaCare." That hasn't changed for us. We are fully committed to the repeal of "ObamaCare."
VAN SUSTEREN: Is there any chance in your mind that the Supreme Court would simply declare the mandate unconstitutional and leave the rest of the law standing? Because frankly, I don't know how they do that in the absence of what's called a severability clause in the statute, which is not there.
BACHMANN: Well, and the thing is, the severability clause was in the original "ObamaCare" legislation. That was removed. That's a clear indication of legislative intent, that Congress, this body, decided that if one part of the bill was declared unconstitutional, the individual mandate, the whole bill would fall.
And so it's pretty clear. It's pretty black and white. If the Supreme Court finds the individual mandate is unconstitutional, then no part of the bill should survive.

So, there ya have it. Regardless of the opinion of the SCOTUS, if they let any part stand, the GOP will do everything they can to take it all away.

Why even have a SCOTUS, really?

I would never say I was fully in agreement with Michele Whackmann on anything but in this case, I'm close.
If the people of the USA don't like a law, they have the ability and the right to try to repeal it. It doesn't matter if it's been held up by the USSC. I'm not sure if DOMA was ruled on but if it had been, would you want there to be no chance for it ever to be repealed, Betty? I doubt that would be the case.
 
So they don't need a basis. Well, I guess that's wonderful for a bunch of knee-jerk reactionaries, but there should probably be a basis for said repeal unless they want to known as the 112th Herp-a-Derp Congress.

What ya going to say if the new Republican POTUS in 2013 decides not enforce the new Obamatax law?

What if Romney decides to treat it like DOMA, or existing imigration laws, or the state of Arizona....

I would love to see your response if Romney's response to the new healthcare law were to be like this.... "We are not going to answer the phone when you call about it"
 
I admit that I snickered at BD calling anyone 'full of shit'. Bachman is, indeed, full of said shit... but so is BD.
 
If Supreme Court doesn't strike down 'ObamaCare,' it's repeal or bust for GOP - Interviews - On the Record - Fox News

BACHMANN: What I would be saying to you tomorrow night is this. That's why elections matter and that's why all of our chips are on November and why we have to replace the president, the Senate, and make sure that we have a House that will fully repeal "ObamaCare." That hasn't changed for us. We are fully committed to the repeal of "ObamaCare."
VAN SUSTEREN: Is there any chance in your mind that the Supreme Court would simply declare the mandate unconstitutional and leave the rest of the law standing? Because frankly, I don't know how they do that in the absence of what's called a severability clause in the statute, which is not there.
BACHMANN: Well, and the thing is, the severability clause was in the original "ObamaCare" legislation. That was removed. That's a clear indication of legislative intent, that Congress, this body, decided that if one part of the bill was declared unconstitutional, the individual mandate, the whole bill would fall.
And so it's pretty clear. It's pretty black and white. If the Supreme Court finds the individual mandate is unconstitutional, then no part of the bill should survive.

So, there ya have it. Regardless of the opinion of the SCOTUS, if they let any part stand, the GOP will do everything they can to take it all away.

Why even have a SCOTUS, really?

From what I have seen, you haven't shown (specifically) why you believe Bachmann is wrong. Disagreeing with her does not equate to her being "full of ..."

Contrary to popular misguided belief, the SCOTUS is not the final arbiter, "We The People" are. The SCOTUS does not write law. They write opinions.
 
If Supreme Court doesn't strike down 'ObamaCare,' it's repeal or bust for GOP - Interviews - On the Record - Fox News

BACHMANN: What I would be saying to you tomorrow night is this. That's why elections matter and that's why all of our chips are on November and why we have to replace the president, the Senate, and make sure that we have a House that will fully repeal "ObamaCare." That hasn't changed for us. We are fully committed to the repeal of "ObamaCare."
VAN SUSTEREN: Is there any chance in your mind that the Supreme Court would simply declare the mandate unconstitutional and leave the rest of the law standing? Because frankly, I don't know how they do that in the absence of what's called a severability clause in the statute, which is not there.
BACHMANN: Well, and the thing is, the severability clause was in the original "ObamaCare" legislation. That was removed. That's a clear indication of legislative intent, that Congress, this body, decided that if one part of the bill was declared unconstitutional, the individual mandate, the whole bill would fall.
And so it's pretty clear. It's pretty black and white. If the Supreme Court finds the individual mandate is unconstitutional, then no part of the bill should survive.

So, there ya have it. Regardless of the opinion of the SCOTUS, if they let any part stand, the GOP will do everything they can to take it all away.

Why even have a SCOTUS, really?

news flash- there are 3 branches of government.

here, during your call breaks, bone up-

Federal government of the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
It is hysterical that the left went nuts after Citizens United and said what ?

Let's overturn it.....legislatively.

But Poop can't see that ?

No wonder this country is in such trouble.
 
If Supreme Court doesn't strike down 'ObamaCare,' it's repeal or bust for GOP - Interviews - On the Record - Fox News

BACHMANN: What I would be saying to you tomorrow night is this. That's why elections matter and that's why all of our chips are on November and why we have to replace the president, the Senate, and make sure that we have a House that will fully repeal "ObamaCare." That hasn't changed for us. We are fully committed to the repeal of "ObamaCare."
VAN SUSTEREN: Is there any chance in your mind that the Supreme Court would simply declare the mandate unconstitutional and leave the rest of the law standing? Because frankly, I don't know how they do that in the absence of what's called a severability clause in the statute, which is not there.
BACHMANN: Well, and the thing is, the severability clause was in the original "ObamaCare" legislation. That was removed. That's a clear indication of legislative intent, that Congress, this body, decided that if one part of the bill was declared unconstitutional, the individual mandate, the whole bill would fall.
And so it's pretty clear. It's pretty black and white. If the Supreme Court finds the individual mandate is unconstitutional, then no part of the bill should survive.

So, there ya have it. Regardless of the opinion of the SCOTUS, if they let any part stand, the GOP will do everything they can to take it all away.

Why even have a SCOTUS, really?

news flash- there are 3 branches of government.

here, during your call breaks, bone up-

Federal government of the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You're gonna need to dumb that down significantly for BrainDead. She really only gets little 'postcard' talking points. Intellect is not something she values.
 
On what basis?
On the basis that they're the congress and can repeal any law that the damned well want to.

They can try. Do you really want this fight all over again? Don't you think they should be working to get the country working again instead of getting paid a lot of money to sit on their hands?

Of course you don't, you prefer no government but since we are paying them anyway, they could come up with some ideas.
 
If Supreme Court doesn't strike down 'ObamaCare,' it's repeal or bust for GOP - Interviews - On the Record - Fox News

BACHMANN: What I would be saying to you tomorrow night is this. That's why elections matter and that's why all of our chips are on November and why we have to replace the president, the Senate, and make sure that we have a House that will fully repeal "ObamaCare." That hasn't changed for us. We are fully committed to the repeal of "ObamaCare."
VAN SUSTEREN: Is there any chance in your mind that the Supreme Court would simply declare the mandate unconstitutional and leave the rest of the law standing? Because frankly, I don't know how they do that in the absence of what's called a severability clause in the statute, which is not there.
BACHMANN: Well, and the thing is, the severability clause was in the original "ObamaCare" legislation. That was removed. That's a clear indication of legislative intent, that Congress, this body, decided that if one part of the bill was declared unconstitutional, the individual mandate, the whole bill would fall.
And so it's pretty clear. It's pretty black and white. If the Supreme Court finds the individual mandate is unconstitutional, then no part of the bill should survive.

So, there ya have it. Regardless of the opinion of the SCOTUS, if they let any part stand, the GOP will do everything they can to take it all away.

Why even have a SCOTUS, really?

Repealing a tax doesn't involve the opinion of SCOTUS, so I am lost on what you believe. It looks like the SCOTUS is giving Congress an option on a law that only 30% of the people like and 70% think it is wrong, changing it into a tax will make it more vague and more unpopular. It might be best to repeal it and start over.

Your percentages are wrong..its more like 60/40 split now..and some of the people (Probably half) in the 60 wanted single payer. Gosh you guys make it sound like people didn't want this in the first place..they did. Only they wanted the Democratic version. What they got was the Republican version. But if you give them the components of the ACA..without calling it ObamaCare..it seems percentages change further..toward liking it.

But heck..when did you folks ever care about majorities?

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mh8E0QPGARw]2/3 of the U.S. people are against the war,cheney says "so?" - YouTube[/ame]
 
If Supreme Court doesn't strike down 'ObamaCare,' it's repeal or bust for GOP - Interviews - On the Record - Fox News



So, there ya have it. Regardless of the opinion of the SCOTUS, if they let any part stand, the GOP will do everything they can to take it all away.

Why even have a SCOTUS, really?

Repealing a tax doesn't involve the opinion of SCOTUS, so I am lost on what you believe. It looks like the SCOTUS is giving Congress an option on a law that only 30% of the people like and 70% think it is wrong, changing it into a tax will make it more vague and more unpopular. It might be best to repeal it and start over.

Your percentages are wrong..its more like 60/40 split now..and some of the people (Probably half) in the 60 wanted single payer. Gosh you guys make it sound like people didn't want this in the first place..they did. Only they wanted the Democratic version. What they got was the Republican version. But if you give them the components of the ACA..without calling it ObamaCare..it seems percentages change further..toward liking it.

But heck..when did you folks ever care about majorities?

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mh8E0QPGARw]2/3 of the U.S. people are against the war,cheney says "so?" - YouTube[/ame]

If that is your belief, go with it. I encourage it.
 
On what basis?
On the basis that they're the congress and can repeal any law that the damned well want to.

They can try. Do you really want this fight all over again? Don't you think they should be working to get the country working again instead of getting paid a lot of money to sit on their hands?

Of course you don't, you prefer no government but since we are paying them anyway, they could come up with some ideas.

The insurance companies are among the most highly regulated in the country and that was before ObamaCare. So the idea of no government is plain silly. If the complexion of Congress changes then we could see many new laws and some repealed. What fight, it is not a fight, it is not needed, it is not helpful, it is not making it affordable, it is hindering the economy. I want some ideas, like cutting budgets, cutting spending, putting accountability into government agency. Those are ideas that will help move America forward. Looking into the burdensome healthcare, would be on the table.
 
On what basis?
On the basis that they're the congress and can repeal any law that the damned well want to.

They can try. Do you really want this fight all over again? Don't you think they should be working to get the country working again instead of getting paid a lot of money to sit on their hands?

Of course you don't, you prefer no government but since we are paying them anyway, they could come up with some ideas.
You call Medicare/Medicaid, the FDA and the incomprehensible patchwork of in-state insurance monopolies, that have driven up the costs of everything related to the medical field, "no government"?

Really?
 

Forum List

Back
Top