The Public Trial of Justice Roberts

[Sallow]

Bullshit. Provide a single justification in the Constitution that allows the Government to order citizens to BUY anything.

Section 8 - Powers of Congress

To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;

Any more questions?

what color is the sky on your home planet?

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1EPP3gkh_00]B52's - Planet claire - YouTube[/ame]

Any more questions?

 

[Dick Tuck]

beats me, but if that's what you're hanging your argument upon, i'd say you're fucked

good luck

It should be a no brainer. We have precedent to force citizens to pay for stuff, going back to our founding. The clear constitutional case is based on Article 1, section 8.

The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises, to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States; but all duties, imposts and excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

Clearly, the unfunded mandate of 1792 is authorized for "common defense." Just as clear, Obamacare (I'm really starting to love that word), is granted power under "general welfare".

It's certainly to the common good (or general welfare) that the American citizens not have to bear the brunt of high healthcare costs, because law forces emergency rooms to not turn away crazy old bag ladies who were hit by drunk drivers.

What my argument does do, is show the morons where the power of congress can be found in the constitution. It does show they have their heads up there asses claiming that Obamacare is unconstitutional, because it forced people to buy something. That issue was settled in 1792, by our founders.

Still..when you have a court chock full of Judges asking about broccoli..

It don't look good.

Nothing in the constitution about diluting the moronic side. FDR certainly used that tactic to get them to stop Coolidge and Hoover hacks from being idiots.

Too bad the stupid Scalia question wasn't anticipated, because forcing American citizens to own a musket, 20 rounds of shot, and a knapsack, is pretty compelling for the right of the Congress to create mandates.

Wow, is there a knapsack brand that our founders mandate that we have? Will I have to go to REI to get it?

 

[Truthmatters]

the Roberts court will go down in history as one really shitty court

 

[Dick Tuck]

the Roberts court will go down in history as one really shitty court

Perhaps second to the stupid Tarney court who decided Dred Scott.

 

[Seawytch]

beats me, but if that's what you're hanging your argument upon, i'd say you're fucked

good luck

It should be a no brainer. We have precedent to force citizens to pay for stuff, going back to our founding. The clear constitutional case is based on Article 1, section 8.

The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises, to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States; but all duties, imposts and excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

Clearly, the unfunded mandate of 1792 is authorized for "common defense." Just as clear, Obamacare (I'm really starting to love that word), is granted power under "general welfare".

It's certainly to the common good (or general welfare) that the American citizens not have to bear the brunt of high healthcare costs, because law forces emergency rooms to not turn away crazy old bag ladies who were hit by drunk drivers.

What my argument does do, is show the morons where the power of congress can be found in the constitution. It does show they have their heads up there asses claiming that Obamacare is unconstitutional, because it forced people to buy something. That issue was settled in 1792, by our founders.

Still..when you have a court chock full of Judges asking about broccoli..

It don't look good.

You mean when you have a court full of judges that are regurgitating right wing talking points and not points of law.

It's interesting to watch, especially when you look at how Scalia ruled in Raich when he said:

"Congress 'may regulate even noneconomic local activity if that regulation is necessary part of a more general regulation of interstate commerce.'"

 

[theDoctorisIn]

He's black!!! You liberals must be racists!!! "According to your own rules!!!!".

Chief Justice Roberts is not black. Not sure what you're talking about.

 

[del]

beats me, but if that's what you're hanging your argument upon, i'd say you're fucked

good luck

It should be a no brainer. We have precedent to force citizens to pay for stuff, going back to our founding. The clear constitutional case is based on Article 1, section 8.

The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises, to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States; but all duties, imposts and excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

Clearly, the unfunded mandate of 1792 is authorized for "common defense." Just as clear, Obamacare (I'm really starting to love that word), is granted power under "general welfare".

It's certainly to the common good (or general welfare) that the American citizens not have to bear the brunt of high healthcare costs, because law forces emergency rooms to not turn away crazy old bag ladies who were hit by drunk drivers.

What my argument does do, is show the morons where the power of congress can be found in the constitution. It does show they have their heads up there asses claiming that Obamacare is unconstitutional, because it forced people to buy something. That issue was settled in 1792, by our founders.

not really, but you can keep telling yourself that if you want to.

 

[francoHFW]

It shouldn't be just RWers putting pressure on them, saying it's all iver because of oral arguments, claiming victory- dismal lying a-holes and silly dupes...

and the worst, most partisan Supremes ever, lying about their ideas when chosen, etc etc....

 

[MuadDib]

Obama is shamelessly trying to intimidate Justice Roberts into upholding Obamacare. This is the second time Obama has shown disdain for SCOTUS. I hope the judges stick to the constitution and refuse to cowtow to the bullies in Washington who only care about their own power and careers.

Nonsense.

For the right the ACA is about politics, not the law or Constitution.

Bullshit! It IS about the law and the Constitution.

 

[blackhawk]

What sort of power do you think that Obama has over the court, that he can "bully" them?

This is the most baffling sort of nonsense that you guys come up with. You guys talk about how much you hate political correctness, but flip a shit any time Obama says something mean about someone you like.

There's nothing unprecedented about Obama stating he disagrees with the Court. It's not "bullying", it's rhetoric.

He has the power of the office of the President and the bully pulpit that comes with it with which he can and my opinion has tried to use to sway public opinion to put public pressure on the court to rule in the administrations favor on Obamacare. For the record I don't think that will influence the court but that has not stopped him from trying.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

What sort of power do you think that Obama has over the court, that he can "bully" them?

This is the most baffling sort of nonsense that you guys come up with. You guys talk about how much you hate political correctness, but flip a shit any time Obama says something mean about someone you like.

There's nothing unprecedented about Obama stating he disagrees with the Court. It's not "bullying", it's rhetoric.

He has the power of the office of the President and the bully pulpit that comes with it with which he can and my opinion has tried to use to sway public opinion to put public pressure on the court to rule in the administrations favor on Obamacare. For the record I don't think that will influence the court but that has not stopped him from trying.

Of course he's trying to "sway public opinion". That's what politics is.

It doesn't magically become "bullying" just because you don't like the guy. Every President has disagreed with the Court at one point or another.

 

[Contumacious]

Obama is shamelessly trying to intimidate Justice Roberts into upholding Obamacare. This is the second time Obama has shown disdain for SCOTUS. I hope the judges stick to the constitution and refuse to cowtow to the bullies in Washington who only care about their own power and careers.

Well, indeed he is.

The precedent was established by his socialist mentor Franklin Del_Anus Roosevelt

The scumbag threatened to abolish the SCOTUS if his socialist measures were not approved.

.

 

[blackhawk]

What sort of power do you think that Obama has over the court, that he can "bully" them?

This is the most baffling sort of nonsense that you guys come up with. You guys talk about how much you hate political correctness, but flip a shit any time Obama says something mean about someone you like.

There's nothing unprecedented about Obama stating he disagrees with the Court. It's not "bullying", it's rhetoric.

He has the power of the office of the President and the bully pulpit that comes with it with which he can and my opinion has tried to use to sway public opinion to put public pressure on the court to rule in the administrations favor on Obamacare. For the record I don't think that will influence the court but that has not stopped him from trying.

Of course he's trying to "sway public opinion". That's what politics is.

It doesn't magically become "bullying" just because you don't like the guy. Every President has disagreed with the Court at one point or another.

Yes it is politics but I don't recall seeing another President challenge the Court as directly as Obama has done. I sure don't recall another President calling out the Supreme Court in their State of the Union address with the justices sitting right there that was pretty disrespectful in my opinion.

 

[Londoner]

Kathleen Parker comes from a rightwing think tank/media complex which has been calling Leftwing justices activists forever.

Finally, someone on the Left gives it back.

Sadly for the right I don't think this makes Obama Stalin (despite their attempts to make him seem like an all powerful dictator. They make him seem way more powerful than he is. They give him too much credit)

He's not Stalin. He doesn't own the courts. He doesn't command respect. He is not feared. He's Jimmy Carter, despite this rare display of courage.

Funny thing.

Even the Reagan lawyers think the Roberts court is overturning too many laws - and using too many cases to create laws never intended by the legislature, like in Citizens United where they turned the ruling into something much broader than warranted.
Signs of Supreme Court activism worry Reagan administration lawyers - Los Angeles Times

The Roberts court has overturned more laws than any court in history. They are subverting the power of elected lawmakers. People don't get it. The Reagan Revolution is not Conservative. They are not building consensus in the vein of Burkean Conservatism; they are radically imposing the will of a small group. They have a deeply activist judicial philosophy and their goal is to impose Conservatism not through the will of the people but through the courts. (Like most movements, they believe they are in fighting a moral war for the soul of the country. This sentiment has fueled activism since the beginning of time. Any time a group thinks that it is fighting evil, they stop at nothing to fight it. When the Rehnquist court overturned the Florida Supreme Court by using an artificial Safe Harbor Date combined with an ironic Civil Rights era law, there was nothing left to the imagination: the Right believed they were saving the soul of the country - and they were prepared to subvert the rule of law to save us. This is what makes movements scary. There is nothing they won't justify)

As it stands, Obama's delicate reprimand of the Roberts court is more a sign a weakness than anything else. If he had real courage, he would stop mincing words and stand up to the most activist court in history. Obama must learn how to fight

 

[BreezeWood]

Obama is shamelessly trying to intimidate Justice Roberts into upholding Obamacare. This is the second time Obama has shown disdain for SCOTUS. I hope the judges stick to the constitution and refuse to cowtow to the bullies in Washington who only care about their own power and careers.

Barack Obama - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

He (Obama) then taught at the University of Chicago Law School for twelve years—as a Lecturer from 1992 to 1996, and as a Senior Lecturer from 1996 to 2004—teaching constitutional law.

Obama is shamelessly trying to intimidate Justice Roberts ...

Having taught constitutional law for twelve years at the University of Chicago Law School there should be no doubt Obama has the credentials to express his opinion on the subject and at the same level of respect and professionalism as that of the Justices presently residing on the Court.

 

[Listening]

beats me, but if that's what you're hanging your argument upon, i'd say you're fucked

good luck

It should be a no brainer. We have precedent to force citizens to pay for stuff, going back to our founding. The clear constitutional case is based on Article 1, section 8.

The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises, to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States; but all duties, imposts and excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

Clearly, the unfunded mandate of 1792 is authorized for "common defense." Just as clear, Obamacare (I'm really starting to love that word), is granted power under "general welfare".

It's certainly to the common good (or general welfare) that the American citizens not have to bear the brunt of high healthcare costs, because law forces emergency rooms to not turn away crazy old bag ladies who were hit by drunk drivers.

What my argument does do, is show the morons where the power of congress can be found in the constitution. It does show they have their heads up there asses claiming that Obamacare is unconstitutional, because it forced people to buy something. That issue was settled in 1792, by our founders.

Boooooolllllllllllccccccrrrrrrraaaaaappppppppp

Leave it to Dicklick Tuck to misrepresent the general welfare clause.

The arguments against this have filled volumes and we have not historically acted this way.

Try again dicklick.

Or do you come here just to type your electronic wet dreams ?

 

[Listening]

He has the power of the office of the President and the bully pulpit that comes with it with which he can and my opinion has tried to use to sway public opinion to put public pressure on the court to rule in the administrations favor on Obamacare. For the record I don't think that will influence the court but that has not stopped him from trying.

Of course he's trying to "sway public opinion". That's what politics is.

It doesn't magically become "bullying" just because you don't like the guy. Every President has disagreed with the Court at one point or another.

Yes it is politics but I don't recall seeing another President challenge the Court as directly as Obama has done. I sure don't recall another President calling out the Supreme Court in their State of the Union address with the justices sitting right there that was pretty disrespectful in my opinion.

Let me point out one very visible example.

FDR's court packing scheme which was a blatant attempt to push his New Deal legistlation through when the SCOTUS kept telling him to piss off.

Look up the "switch in time that saved nine".

It will make you vomit.

Only the left......

 

[Listening]

the Roberts court will go down in history as one really shitty court

Oooops.....I forgot about you.

I guess Franco is not the most stupid poster on this board after all.

That would be you.

If Roberts shoves ACA up David Axelrod's ass....we will build statues in his honor.

And you will have to get a job.

 

[MuadDib]

If Obama taught Constitutional Law for 12 years, you'd think he would know something about it by now. Sadly, he seems to see the Constitution as an obstacle to be surmounted, rather than a framework for government to be followed.

 

[Darkwind]

Obama is shamelessly trying to intimidate Justice Roberts into upholding Obamacare. This is the second time Obama has shown disdain for SCOTUS. I hope the judges stick to the constitution and refuse to cowtow to the bullies in Washington who only care about their own power and careers.

Nonsense.

For the right the ACA is about politics, not the law or Constitution.

Wow, are you a dumb ****. I usually don't got to that extreme, however. Its all about the Constitution. Obmamacare violates it. Plain and simple.