What's Next for Health Care Law After Federal Court Ruling?

[froggy]

What Next for Health Care Law After Federal Court Ruling?

What your view?

 

[editec]

2014 is a long time away, politically speaking.

 

[goldcatt]

Next is the appeal. /shrug

Then the next appeal, then a shot at SCOTUS. It's the way these things operate.

 

[Claudette]

Yep.

Unless they get it on the fast track to the SC it will probably take years.

One Federal Judge has said parts are unconstitutional but two others have said it is.

I'm waiting to see what happens down here in Florida. Twenty States are sueing the Fed over this.

Time will tell.

 

[Mr. Shaman]

What Next for Health Care Law After Federal Court Ruling?

What your view?

Not a prob.​

"Two other federal court judges -- in Virginia and Michigan -- have recently upheld the health insurance mandate."

Check & Mate!​

 

[LilOlLady]

It happens that the judge is conservative and should have reclused himself.
Let the ruling ride and see how many run to Obamacare.

 

[Mr. Shaman]

2014 is a long time away, politically speaking.

.....But, Recuse is NOW!!!!

(Incompetency; Requirement 1 for Bush-appointees.)​

 

[DiamondDave]

Take every level possible to fight this in the courts... and if the goddamn SC does not strike this bullshit down, work every harder to have conservative control of all of congress and defund the piece of shit... if not ensuring veto override power to get rid of it entirely

 

[Mr. Shaman]

Take every level possible to fight this in the courts... and if the goddamn SC does not strike this bullshit down, work every harder to have conservative control of all of congress and defund the piece of shit... if not ensuring veto override power to get rid of it entirely

.....And, when ALL ELSE fails.....

*
[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ir1UABBe1v4[/ame]

*

Yeah, BONER!!!!!

Show us how you Republicants STAND-UP!!!!!!

​

 

[DiamondDave]

Wow... a dailyshow comedy link and a pic as your support... typical... you little asshole troll...

Go back and finish living up to your oedipal fantasies

 

[Two Thumbs]

It happens that the judge is conservative and should have reclused himself.
Let the ruling ride and see how many run to Obamacare.

That's one of the dumbest things I've read on this board.

That means every liberal judge should do the same.

 

[Two Thumbs]

eventually it will go to the Supreme court. And there it will split between those that understand the meaning behind freedom and those that support government enslavement.

 

[Mr. Shaman]

Wow... a dailyshow comedy link and a pic as your support... typical... you little asshole troll...

Go back and finish living up to your oedipal fantasies

Sorry....that's a "conservative"-affliction.

​

 

[Truthmatters]

He owns part of a right wing think tank and is a partisan activist judge.

The right likes those kinds of judges.

 

[Bern80]

He owns part of a right wing think tank and is a partisan activist judge.

The right likes those kinds of judges.

Either the constitution grants the fed the authority to make people purchase things, or it doesn't. That should be fairly easy to find. The fact that no such authority exists is fairly cut and dried. I don't really see how this is a partisan issue.

 

[DiamondDave]

Wow... a dailyshow comedy link and a pic as your support... typical... you little asshole troll...

Go back and finish living up to your oedipal fantasies

Sorry....that's a "conservative"-affliction.

​

Oooohhh.. a fancy brit 'doctor' bashing a REP president in the past... ooooohhhhh ahhhhh ahhhhhhh....

Almost as meaningful as a brit dentist commenting on quality smiles

See... I can post a funny pic too....

idiot

 

[Mr. Shaman]

eventually it will go to the Supreme court. And there it will split between those that understand the meaning behind freedom and those that support government enslavement.

Yeah.....that's who we need to rely-on......

....the same clowns who opened-up our last-election to WORLD-WIDE participation!!

"In a landmark decision, the Supreme Court rules corporations can spend unlimited amounts of money to elect and defeat candidates. One lawmaker describes it as the worst Supreme Court decision since the Dred Scott case justifying slaveryhttp://www.democracynow.org/2010/1/22/in_landmark_campaign_finance_ruling_supreme."

​

 

[Bern80]

eventually it will go to the Supreme court. And there it will split between those that understand the meaning behind freedom and those that support government enslavement.

Yeah.....that's who we need to rely-on......

....the same clowns who opened-up our last-election to WORLD-WIDE participation!!

"In a landmark decision, the Supreme Court rules corporations can spend unlimited amounts of money to elect and defeat candidates. One lawmaker describes it as the worst Supreme Court decision since the Dred Scott case justifying slaveryhttp://www.democracynow.org/2010/1/22/in_landmark_campaign_finance_ruling_supreme."

​

Haven't you heard the old saying Shaman? The right to free speech is there to defend speech you DON'T like. Not what you do like.

 

[Two Thumbs]

He owns part of a right wing think tank and is a partisan activist judge.

The right likes those kinds of judges.

Either the constitution grants the fed the authority to make people purchase things, or it doesn't. That should be fairly easy to find. The fact that no such authority exists is fairly cut and dried. I don't really see how this is a partisan issue.

Many liberals just want what they want when they want it, and to hell with the consequences. That's why they read the Constitution and interprit the way they want, not how it was intended.

The Founders knew that power corrupts, so they new that is was important to keep power out of the governments hands.

Many liberals can't grasp this idea and read "provide for the comon welfare". They truly believe the government should be taking care of them.