Skip to comments.Word for the Day, Monday, April 2, 2012-- licit
Posted on 04/02/2012 4:25:29 AM PDT by xsmommy
Word For The Day, Monday, 4/2/12
In order that we might all raise the level of discourse and expand our language abilities, here is the daily post of "Word for the Day".
legal; lawful; legitimate; permissible.
Etymology:147585; < Latin licitus permitted (past participle of licēre ); replacing earlier licite < Middle French; see -ite
Rules: Everyone must leave a post using the Word for the Day in a sentence.
The sentence must, in some way, relate to the news of the day.
The Review threads are linked for your edification. ;-)
Practice makes perfect.....post on....
Here is my example with WFTD.
Will the country deem licit, Obama's war on coal. Review Threads:
Review Thread One: Word For The Day, Thursday 11/14/02: Raffish (Be SURE to check out posts #92 and #111 on this thread!)
Review Thread Two: Word For The Day, Tuesday 1/14/03: Roister
Review Thread Three: Word For The Day, Tuesday 1/28/03: Obdurate
No pushing at the door please!
Let’s get going here.
The biggest question of the past half decade: is Obama licit?
Barack Obama Foreign Student
The Supreme Court, in deciding whether or not the Individual Mandate is licit, may, hopefully, end up causing the repeal of obamacare.
literally was screaming with laughter in the kitchen,xsteen came in to see what i was roaring about.
A+++ licit or illicit, it will never come to light or Soros will plunge the world into disarray. i read that on another thread and need to go out at lunch time to buy more tinfoil, bc i believe it.
There are ways around the lack of severability clause, it’s not unprecedented to uphold parts of it. But without the individual mandate, the guts of Obamacare are pulled out. A+++ There are truly extraneous amendments contained in the obamacare statute that have zero relation to it, i would be truly surprised if they struck all of those down.
A+++ we only have a few months before we find out!
Bill Clinton never cared what was licit
Showed Paula Little Willie, said, “Kiss it”
All those Whitewater years
Real corruption, fake tears
I never thought, ‘til Obama, that I’d miss it
oh truer words were never spoken, Truthy! A+++++ LOL!!
From your lips to God’s ears.
Hartnell is passionate and hilarious and he is having a great season. There are a lot of people who miss him here but I’m not one of them because he always managed to take stupid penalties at the worst time. Kind of a hot head sometimes.
ok thieves are bad, but wishing maiming, death and hellfire on them is a bit much. A+++
It’s playoff hockey time again, where licit contact by your average stiff will get flagged, while questionable hits by the “favored few” will be ignored...
Schenn’s hit on Crosby was totally IL-licit, but hilarious nonetheless, and SOOOOO something i would have seen in xsboy’s Mite games back in the day. xsboy was a HUGE trash talker, xshub reminded me this past weekend of the time when he was playing U18 [RECENTLY] he was “chirping” in the faceoff circle and the ref said, calling him by name, “xsboy, SHUT UP”— no penalty, just “SHUT UP”. LMAO!
hiya : )
Surprised you didn’t post a pic of your heartthrob Blysma standing on the edge of the bench yelling at the Flyers’ coach.
That’s why they have that little DMZ inbetween the benches.
This guy's argument is hardly licit. Elections? Really? How about it's the JOB of the SCOTUS to determine constitutionality of a new law, not elections.
Because it was Granato doing the yelling, Danny was cool as a cube, while LaViolette and Granato were tossed : )
Well, you know white men in suits all look alike. ;-)
That yinzer behind the bench looks like Jesse the Body Ventura. Love the shades.
Haha - I’ve said before but worth repeating: My husband and I argued with our son during 2008 (he was 17 then) that hillary would be worse than barry because she could hit the ground running once in office. We felt she knew how things worked and there would not be any transition period for her, where barry would be like a baby in wonderland. He argued that barry was much more evil than she was. Hard to imagine a 17 year old was so much more aware than we were.
It’s a question of kind. Hilary would be competent, but not as radical. Obama is incompetent, radical and much more politically tone deaf.
Hilary would approve of Keystone pipeline and drilling, to help economy and keep herself in power. One thing Bill Clinton knew how to do was to keep himself on the right side of the public opinion.
60 Minutes featured Brevard County Florida and the end of the Space program last night. I wonder how many votes we might gain from those unemployed folks?
many props to him for seeing that.
Ya know, they don’t call ‘em the “Broad Street Boy Scouts.”
i had to watch the video of Claude and his dad, thinking ok, if claude is that hot, perhaps his dad is a hotter older version of that. NOT! xshub is far better looking than the elder Giroux!
I just had an awesome workout. My inversion table has helped my back so much I am back to full 40min workouts on the elliptical. I feel great afterwards, too.
Anyone watching those firemen on the roof of that building? I did fire rehab over the weekend. That video reminds me how important it is to be there for our guys. Breathtaking video.
You should know by now that Frenchies don’t age well.
I love it when you say that ;)
They are not reading 2400 pages.
My take is this.
the 5 that will vote to overrule, will take into account that there was a period of unified government, and hence NO political discussion on the merits.
They will strike it down and return it as a Political question to be addressed.
That wont be in the language, but should be the reasoning.
have no idea what you are saying here.. what is a period of unified government? return it as a political question? what’s that and to whom are they returning it?
several of them mentioned a few discrete amendments which are totally unrelated to obamacare, during the argument. I think Roberts and Ginsberg both did. Yes, Nino doesn’t want them slogging through the mess or worse yet, consigning it to their clerks to do. I just am not sure that his view will win the day.
HE means it was passed by one party ruling both Congress and WH.
SCOTUS has 2 choices:
a) Reject the entire bill and allow politics to settle what comes next.
b)Custom design a solution to the problem and install it as the law of the land. Then spend the rest of our lives running to the Supreme Court to decide every aspect of health care.
I’d rather be ruled by elected Democrats than unelected judges.
The Justices will take into account that as a political question, OBAMACARE was rammed through before 2010, when the Libs held by virtue of a single election, unified control of the government, which was repudiated at the ballot box in 2010.
As a legal concept, clearly this is a perversion of the Commerce Clause that the Court itself has allowed to mutate to this point. Sotomayor has given them an out, however unwillingly.
Sotomayor’s question about a ‘limiting principle’ should be (IMO) the new standard in these types of cases, and Obamacare has none.
When she asked that question, she inadvertently (I think) introduced the corollary to Marshall’s Right of Judicial Review.
At what point, (the forward going question should be) without explicitly detailing the limit on Congressional power to enact and enforce said statute...can we uphold it?
(Now clearly that is not what she said, but that is what the conservative argument should be going forward. Marbury is an abomination that makes the 9 Supreme, no?)
See above. Sonia Sotomayor should be very conservatives best girlfriend.
It’s time to bury John Marshall.
Sunshine and 76, but rain is supposed to be on the way-
Obama’s minions are running
From the legal issue so hot-
When it comes to health care
What is licit and what is not
They mimic the Clinton tactic
When they’re not looking great-
Talking up the Florida shooting
As the newest way to obfuscate
Hey, everyone-look over here-
Racism is their favorite tool-
Don’t give a thought to the Emperor
Without clothes, looking like a fool
What I don’t like is the blithe assumption, even by our counsel at the Supreme Court, that a single-payer gov’t run health care system financed under the general power to tax is constitutional.
We need a ruling that states that Medicare and Medicaid are charity and that is the limiting principle on their expansion. In no way should we be able to consider every person living in the country as a charity case, and forbid the private practice of medicine.
(Of course, all of that charity should be returned to the states where it belongs, but we aren’t going to get there in one step, so it’s not worth talking about. Let’s change “entitlement” to “charity,” which is what it is.)
I hope so, but just cause the gov’t solicitor and all the liberals in the world couldn’t articulate a limiting principle doesn’t mean Sotomayor or some other justice won’t invent one out of whole cloth.
That’s what I fear most.
Exactly. And that’s why NO ONE can predict how they will rule in this.
I might buy some champagne and fireworks. Just in case.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.