Supreme Court. Individual mandate

[Procrustes Stretched]

Lovebears' thread title was reworded by who?


"Individual Mandate Unconstitutional."

and why?

right wingers saving face for each other?

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Guy Pinestra and his trash like simply can't comprehend the issue.

I comprehend the issue just fine, Fake Malarkey. It seems that you're accusing me of your own shortcomings.

What part of 'unsustainable' don't you get?

You offer plenty of assertion, no proof. Until then, your argument is unsustainable.

WTF? When are you going to stop making assertions without proof?

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Lovebears' thread title was reworded by who?


"Individual Mandate Unconstitutional."

and why?

right wingers saving face for each other?

Is that anything like saying polls mean nothing too one poster but the post above the post you are bitching about is a poll and you say nothing about it?

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Dante changed 6-3 to 5-4 but conman posted Dante was wrong. Obamacare was Unconstitutional because FOX News said it was.

 

[ScreamingEagle]

Screaming Eagle certainly has a right to his opinions but not to his own facts and definitions.

His argument is fail.

and you have the facts to back up that claim.............?

 

[JakeStarkey]

You have to provide the facts within the political and historical definitions.

When you take on the affirmation you made with solid, credible evidence, then I can deal with your points, but I don't have to deal with a fantasy land.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Dante changed 6-3 to 5-4 but conman posted Dante was wrong. Obamacare was Unconstitutional because FOX News said it was.

dante isTalking about dante in that third person again. Dante needs to get laid.

 

[ScreamingEagle]

You have to provide the facts within the political and historical definitions.

When you take on the affirmation you made with solid, credible evidence, then I can deal with your points, but I don't have to deal with a fantasy land.

Please provide the "political and historical definitions" pertinent to this discussion.....

facts about ss/medcare-caid have already been provided by GuyPinestra.....url=http://www.forbes.com/2009/05/14/taxes-social-security-opinions-columnists-medicare.html/]The 81% Tax Increase - Forbes.com[/url]

if you really want more proof that the social programs of ss/medcare-caid are failing and going bankrupt let me know....however you can find plenty of proof by just googling yourself.....

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Dante changed 6-3 to 5-4 but conman posted Dante was wrong. Obamacare was Unconstitutional because FOX News said it was.

dante isTalking about dante in that third person again. Dante needs to get laid.

thanks but no thanks

 

[Liability]

Dante changed 6-3 to 5-4 but conman posted Dante was wrong. Obamacare was Unconstitutional because FOX News said it was.

dante isTalking about dante in that third person again. Dante needs to get laid.

thanks but no thanks

Tha's right.

Dainty is celibate.

For good reason.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

dante isTalking about dante in that third person again. Dante needs to get laid.

thanks but no thanks

Tha's right.

Dainty is celibate.

For good reason.

now that is DANTE GAY!!!!!

 

[Liability]

thanks but no thanks

Tha's right.

Dainty is celibate.

For good reason.

now that is DANTE GAY!!!!!

Nah. That's just Dainty being Dainty.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Dante changed 6-3 to 5-4 but conman posted Dante was wrong. Obamacare was Unconstitutional because FOX News said it was.

dante isTalking about dante in that third person again. Dante needs to get laid.

thanks but no thanks

That wasn't an invite bub

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Tha's right.

Dainty is celibate.

For good reason.

now that is DANTE GAY!!!!!

Nah. That's just Dainty being Dainty.

A good piece of pussy would do him some good.

 

[JakeStarkey]

One, you are the one responsible for appropriate facts, and coat tailing Guy is a a cop pout. You can post them with your own thesis if you wish; that would be professional.

Two, you have to offer proof, kiddo, not make links.

You have to make a cogent argument with evidence, kiddo. Go for it or fail.

You have to provide the facts within the political and historical definitions.

When you take on the affirmation you made with solid, credible evidence, then I can deal with your points, but I don't have to deal with a fantasy land.

Please provide the "political and historical definitions" pertinent to this discussion.....facts about ss/medcare-caid have already been provided by GuyPinestra.....url=http://www.forbes.com/2009/05/14/taxes-social-security-opinions-columnists-medicare.html/]The 81% Tax Increase - Forbes.com[/url] if you really want more proof that the social programs of ss/medcare-caid are failing and going bankrupt let me know....however you can find plenty of proof by just googling yourself.....

 

[ScreamingEagle]

One, you are the one responsible for appropriate facts, and coat tailing Guy is a a cop pout. You can post them with your own thesis if you wish; that would be professional.

Two, you have to offer proof, kiddo, not make links.

You have to make a cogent argument with evidence, kiddo. Go for it or fail.

You have to provide the facts within the political and historical definitions.

When you take on the affirmation you made with solid, credible evidence, then I can deal with your points, but I don't have to deal with a fantasy land.

Please provide the "political and historical definitions" pertinent to this discussion.....facts about ss/medcare-caid have already been provided by GuyPinestra.....url=http://www.forbes.com/2009/05/14/taxes-social-security-opinions-columnists-medicare.html/]The 81% Tax Increase - Forbes.com[/url] if you really want more proof that the social programs of ss/medcare-caid are failing and going bankrupt let me know....however you can find plenty of proof by just googling yourself.....

LOL

i'm still waiting for your "the political and historical definitions"..............

 

[JakeStarkey]

One, you are the one responsible for appropriate facts, and coat tailing Guy is a a cop pout. You can post them with your own thesis if you wish; that would be professional.

Two, you have to offer proof, kiddo, not make links.

You have to make a cogent argument with evidence, kiddo. Go for it or fail.

Please provide the "political and historical definitions" pertinent to this discussion.....facts about ss/medcare-caid have already been provided by GuyPinestra.....url=http://www.forbes.com/2009/05/14/taxes-social-security-opinions-columnists-medicare.html/]The 81% Tax Increase - Forbes.com[/url] if you really want more proof that the social programs of ss/medcare-caid are failing and going bankrupt let me know....however you can find plenty of proof by just googling yourself.....

LOL

i'm still waiting for your "the political and historical definitions"..............

You know what they are. You don't get to make them up.

We are waiting.

 

[ScreamingEagle]

One, you are the one responsible for appropriate facts, and coat tailing Guy is a a cop pout. You can post them with your own thesis if you wish; that would be professional.

Two, you have to offer proof, kiddo, not make links.

You have to make a cogent argument with evidence, kiddo. Go for it or fail.

LOL

i'm still waiting for your "the political and historical definitions"..............

You know what they are. You don't get to make them up.

We are waiting.

now we all know you are full of hot air Flakey Jakey......you can't even back up your own definition 'requirements'.......

 

[JakeStarkey]

I don't make up the definitions, SE. They are fixed. But if you use made up or extremist definitions or "facts", then you don't have a case.

We are waiting.

 

[ScreamingEagle]

I don't make up the definitions, SE. They are fixed. But if you use made up or extremist definitions or "facts", then you don't have a case.

We are waiting.

guess you'll have to wait then......your so-called 'requirements' are either ridiculous or non-forthcoming.....

got any other bright ideas to pretend you're not losing debates......?