Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
For all those who have this ridiculous notion that there is no difference between the parties, or it would be better for Obama to be reelected than have any of the GOP candidates except for Paul............here ya go, I have said this repeatedly, as bad as W was, he gave us, 2 very good judges, especially in contrast to the pathetic ilk that obama has given us. Court appears split by ideology over health care *| ajc.com (http://www.ajc.com/news/nation-world/court-appears-split-by-1400145.html - broken link) At the end of the day, Bush's Judges, will be the ones who stop the largest expansion of government in our lifetime!!!
the 4 judges from the left and the 4 judges from the right.
are more similar than they would admit to be.
they both serve their own agendas.
They are hired to interpret the constitution while being unbias not put their own ideals into it.
just because they are total opposites do not make them different if they do the same thing, they put their own bias into interpretation of it rather than taking it for what it is to pass your own agendas.
sorry the constitution is not a living breathing evolving document. it says what it means and means what it says.
stop trying to interpret it and just read it.
that goes to both sides.
judges need to repeal eo
ndaa
ban sopa/pipa type acts or eo.
ban ndpa eo
rule unconstitutional hr 347
repeal forcing people into slavery force buying insurance? sorry that is a big insult.
IF taxes went directly to hospitals it would have been a bit better actually, because you can argue it is paying for infrastructure BUT obviously it is not constitutional even then.
hospitals should be left to the states in reality. but if other states want to help fine.
IMO the FEDERAL gov should mediate with states to resolve disputes NOT dictate to them.
the 4 judges from the left and the 4 judges from the right.
are more similar than they would admit to be.
they both serve their own agendas.
They are hired to interpret the constitution while being unbias not put their own ideals into it.
just because they are total opposites do not make them different if they do the same thing, they put their own bias into interpretation of it rather than taking it for what it is to pass your own agendas.
sorry the constitution is not a living breathing evolving document. it says what it means and means what it says.
stop trying to interpret it and just read it.
that goes to both sides.
judges need to repeal eo
ndaa
ban sopa/pipa type acts or eo.
ban ndpa eo
rule unconstitutional hr 347
repeal forcing people into slavery force buying insurance? sorry that is a big insult.
IF taxes went directly to hospitals it would have been a bit better actually, because you can argue it is paying for infrastructure BUT obviously it is not constitutional even then.
hospitals should be left to the states in reality. but if other states want to help fine.
IMO the FEDERAL gov should mediate with states to resolve disputes NOT dictate to them.
? back at ya......I think you accidently responded to thewrong post.
For all those who have this ridiculous notion that there is no difference between the parties, or it would be better for Obama to be reelected than have any of the GOP candidates except for Paul............here ya go, I have said this repeatedly, as bad as W was, he gave us, 2 very good judges, especially in contrast to the pathetic ilk that obama has given us. Court appears split by ideology over health care *| ajc.com (http://www.ajc.com/news/nation-world/court-appears-split-by-1400145.html - broken link) At the end of the day, Bush's Judges, will be the ones who stop the largest expansion of government in our lifetime!!!
The so-called "conservative" judges are opposing Obamacare only because it happened to be signed into law by Obama. The individual mandate was originally a conservative idea proposed by the Heritage Foundation and they had applauded Romney when he implemented it in MA. ("consistent with conservative values" they said.) Now that Obama adopted the idea, suddenly Obamacare became "unconstitutional" to them. The "liberal" judges are siding with the mandate for the exact opposite reason - because it's from Obama. And not because they think it's really constitutional.
This has got less to do with the whether the law is unconstitutional or not, than it has to do with the judges doing the bidding of their respective paymasters.
To clarify my own position, I have been personally opposed to Obamacare from the beginning, because of my ideological opposition to government involvement in healthcare, including Medicare and Medicaid. I, a mere navvy, is more constitutionally consistent than the judges occupying the highest judicial offices in the country. Oh, what a state of affairs!
This has got less to do with the whether the law is unconstitutional or not, than it has to do with the judges doing the bidding of their respective paymasters.
!
You see, this is the kind of stuff that makes people think of Ron Paul supporters as tin foil hat wearing conspiracy theorists. There is absolutely no question .....NONE, that a court full of Scalia's, Thomas's and Alito's would provide for a much more Constitutional Country than, if it were loaded with Stevens, Ginsburg and Kagans!
The judges here is a joke. They suppose to up hold the constitutions, but they have failed.
Every major civil problem we had and current have is because of the judge allowing it.
Everyone talk about Ron Paul hate colors and women. If Ron Paul has his way, we will go back to horse buggy and slavery, yada, yada.
If they have just willing to do a little research, they will see all the problem they talk about is because the federal court allows it. For example: Jim Crows.
You see, this is the kind of stuff that makes people think of Ron Paul supporters as tin foil hat wearing conspiracy theorists. There is absolutely no question .....NONE, that a court full of Scalia's, Thomas's and Alito's would provide for a much more Constitutional Country than, if it were loaded with Stevens, Ginsburg and Kagans!
Let your "constitutional" judges repeal the Patriot Act, NDAA, and a whole slew of Bush's and Obama's EOs and then we can talk about their allegiance to the Constitution. Keeping the obviously unconstitutional laws on the books because it has bipartisan political support, and then haggling over an electoral hot potato is just pandering to the brain-dead bases, and that includes YOU.
Let your "constitutional" judges repeal the Patriot Act, NDAA, and a whole slew of Bush's and Obama's EOs and then we can talk about their allegiance to the Constitution. Keeping the obviously unconstitutional laws on the books because it has bipartisan political support, and then haggling over an electoral hot potato is just pandering to the brain-dead bases, and that includes YOU.
Regarless of the SCOTUS decision, the Congress may overturn Obamacare and lacking their spine the states have the ability to use nullification as the rightfull remedy (hat tip Thomas Jefferson, The Foundation for a Free Societ, and the Xth Amendment Center).
Regarless of the SCOTUS decision, the Congress may overturn Obamacare and lacking their spine the states have the ability to use nullification as the rightfull remedy (hat tip Thomas Jefferson, The Foundation for a Free Societ, and the Xth Amendment Center).
You see, this is the kind of stuff that makes people think of Ron Paul supporters as tin foil hat wearing conspiracy theorists. There is absolutely no question .....NONE, that a court full of Scalia's, Thomas's and Alito's would provide for a much more Constitutional Country than, if it were loaded with Stevens, Ginsburg and Kagans!
bull crap. there might not be any question in your mind, but there are plenty of others, even outside of paul's support groups, that very much question the decisions of the judges. unfortunately for your ungrounded and uneducated theory, there are thousands of us that don't see things your way.
your inability to recognize that fact, and subsequent insultingly dismissive generalization of anyone disagreeing with you merely shows that you can't break away from your neoconservative indoctrination far enough to see just how "tin foil hat" deranged you have become.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
