Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Mark Levin Eviscerates the Obamacare Ruling
The Mark Levin show ^ | June 27,2012 | Mark Levin

Posted on 06/28/2012 4:57:08 PM PDT by Hojczyk

“This decision I would go as far to say is lawless. Absolutely lawless!” Listen to his First Segment from June 28’s Show


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: abortion; deathpanels; levin; marklevin; obamacare; zerocare

1 posted on 06/28/2012 4:57:10 PM PDT by Hojczyk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Hojczyk

I pity anyone that called in approving of the decision.


2 posted on 06/28/2012 4:58:53 PM PDT by SandRat (Duty - Honor - Country! What else needs said?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Hojczyk

The Dred Scott/Plessy vs. Ferguson/Roe v. Wade ruling of the 21st Century.


3 posted on 06/28/2012 4:59:10 PM PDT by MuttTheHoople (Obama doesnÂ’t have the work ethic to be Anti-Christ.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Hojczyk

Last night he said he was “scsred to death.” Levin never predicted that 0bamacare would be overturned.


4 posted on 06/28/2012 5:05:34 PM PDT by forgotten man (forgotten man)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Hojczyk

>> Mark Levin Eviscerates the Obamacare Ruling

In his ego-dreams, maybe.

No, that’s the problem with SCOTUS decisions. They leave a MARK. For a long time, sometimes. What pundits like Levin think doesn’t mean squat.

Ref: Roe vs Wade

This hurts more than Barky’s win in ‘08.

I’m praying hard. Don’t know what else to do. Prayer is always good.


5 posted on 06/28/2012 5:06:03 PM PDT by Nervous Tick (Trust in God, but row away from the rocks!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Hojczyk

Mark also dismisses those who claim that Roberts did good with regard to the commerce clause....listen to what he has to say about that, he makes much sense!


6 posted on 06/28/2012 5:06:32 PM PDT by Bigtigermike
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Hojczyk

He is ABSOLUTELY right!


7 posted on 06/28/2012 5:06:36 PM PDT by Bigun ("The most fearsome words in the English language are I'm from the government and I'm here to help!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Hojczyk

Welcome to socialism America! It’s been 80 years in the making. The feds now have the power to pretty much do whatever suits their fancy.


8 posted on 06/28/2012 5:06:54 PM PDT by factoryrat (We are the producers, the creators. Grow it, mine it, build it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nervous Tick; All

I’m praying hard. Don’t know what else to do.
______________________________________________________________

Keep praying but “faith without works is dead”. We need to work our butts off to, on Nov. 6, 2012, elect a GOP President, House and Senate and then, come January, repeal JudgeRobertsCare.


9 posted on 06/28/2012 5:09:37 PM PDT by pistolpackinpapa (Why is it that you never see any Obama bumper stickers on cars going to work in the mornings?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Bigtigermike

How much weight will that carry? He stretched to find it constitutional as a tax in a clear judicial overreach.


10 posted on 06/28/2012 5:10:35 PM PDT by bjcoop
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: pistolpackinpapa

>> Keep praying but “faith without works is dead”. We need to work our butts off to, on Nov. 6, 2012, elect a GOP President, House and Senate and then, come January, repeal JudgeRobertsCare.

Excellent point, Papa.

I pray that this (R) party is up to the task, if we succeed in choosing them.

FRegards


11 posted on 06/28/2012 5:13:25 PM PDT by Nervous Tick (Trust in God, but row away from the rocks!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Hojczyk

God bless Mark Levin.


12 posted on 06/28/2012 5:23:56 PM PDT by dragonblustar (Allah Ain't So Akbar!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Hojczyk

The only way I can reconcile this decision is that Roberts did this so that it would be an issue against Obama in November.


13 posted on 06/28/2012 5:24:01 PM PDT by MarkeyD (Obama is a victim of Affirmative Action)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Hojczyk

Does anyone else remember that Roberts flubbed Obama’s swearing-in and then held a private swearing-in for him. I was suspicious then and I’m suspicious now.


14 posted on 06/28/2012 5:25:43 PM PDT by ryderann
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MarkeyD

There’s a clip going around with Roberts saying he would find a way to make every piece that comes to him work. He changed it from a mandate to a tax.


15 posted on 06/28/2012 5:26:30 PM PDT by dragonblustar (Allah Ain't So Akbar!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Nervous Tick
What pundits like Levin think doesn’t mean squat.

You do understand Levin's legal foundation, Landmark Legal, submitted briefs on ObamaCare which helped persuade an Appeals Court to strike it down? He helped do the heavily lifting that got the case before SCOTUS.

What squat did you do about it?

16 posted on 06/28/2012 5:27:33 PM PDT by newzjunkey
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: dragonblustar

I increasingly think that today’s awful decision was leaked to Obama, etc. and that’s why he so boldly asserted immunity in the gun running investigation. He knew today’s ruling would overshadow his ploy.


17 posted on 06/28/2012 5:29:28 PM PDT by varina davis (A real American patriot -- Gov. Rick Perry)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Hojczyk

Clicking on the link to the show gets you a playback icon that when clicked says “file not found” No file there. And won’t be until tonight’s shows are all archived.


18 posted on 06/28/2012 5:32:39 PM PDT by John S Mosby (Sic Semper Tyrannis)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: newzjunkey

> He helped do the heavily lifting that got the case before SCOTUS. He helped do the heavily lifting that got the case before SCOTUS.

And his RESULTS were ... ???

(Incidentally, what did YOU do?)


19 posted on 06/28/2012 5:33:05 PM PDT by Nervous Tick (T)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: ryderann

I think it was Obama who flubbed the swearing-in.

All the skids have been greased for this guy from the word “go”.


20 posted on 06/28/2012 5:36:39 PM PDT by Twinkie (Isaiah 53)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Nervous Tick
And his RESULTS were ... ???

He pretty much did whatever was humanly possible. Both your remarks were rather mindless.

21 posted on 06/28/2012 5:37:59 PM PDT by BufordP ("Drink me if you can't take a joke." --Kool-Aid)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: BufordP

>> Both your remarks were rather mindless.

You’re going to have to do better than that to convince me.

Pundits are a dime a dozen. Just more news as entertainment. Levin lines his own pockets very nicely. That’s his reward. Not results.


22 posted on 06/28/2012 5:40:45 PM PDT by Nervous Tick (T)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Hojczyk

Not that I disagree with anything Mark has said on this matter (I don’t), MY problem with this ruling is MUCH more fundamental and I would be quite thankful for any legal scholar who can point me to the grant of authority in the constitution which would allow any judge anywhere to re-write a law as the Roberts majority did in this case.

I have been reading that document for many years now but seem to have missed that part. Perhaps that to is in the penumbra! I admit to have a great deal of difficulty in reading those!


23 posted on 06/28/2012 5:46:34 PM PDT by Bigun ("The most fearsome words in the English language are I'm from the government and I'm here to help!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nervous Tick

http://www.landmarklegal.org/DesktopDefault.aspx

There are quite a few briefs Mark’s foundation submitted. But in much the same way his group was unable to convince the five knuckleheads on the SCOTUS I doubt I’ll convince you.


24 posted on 06/28/2012 5:52:04 PM PDT by BufordP ("Drink me if you can't take a joke." --Kool-Aid)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: MarkeyD

“”The only way I can reconcile this decision is that Roberts did this so that it would be an issue against Obama in November””

I too, would like to believe that he was sending us a message to get busy and throw all the bums out in November. Wishful thinking?


25 posted on 06/28/2012 5:55:50 PM PDT by Thank You Rush
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: ryderann
I agree and have posted similar on a few occasions.
26 posted on 06/28/2012 5:56:42 PM PDT by mcshot (God bless the USA! OMG PLEASE vote ABO or OWW and our Country dies.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Hojczyk

Levin’s entire rant today was brilliant.


27 posted on 06/28/2012 5:58:22 PM PDT by Gator113 (***YOU GAVE it to Obama. I would have voted for NEWT.~Just livin' life, my way~)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nervous Tick

“In his ego-dreams, maybe.”

Mark Levin is no egomaniac, and if you ever listened to his show you would know that.

Mark Levin DID eviscerate the ruling. Look up the word and learn something.


28 posted on 06/28/2012 6:05:45 PM PDT by Do Not Make Fun Of His Ears (Anyone who thinks we can sit home, then survive four more years of Obama, is a damned fool.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Hojczyk
Ah! The so-called “Constitutional Expert” ...the man who is completely comfortable with a resident in the White House who fails e-verify, and posted forged birth documents.

Another in a long list ..COWARDs! ( yawn!)

29 posted on 06/28/2012 6:06:29 PM PDT by wintertime
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MarkeyD

I’ve read that a lot today but I feel that’s just wishful thinking. It will be a larger issue in November but that’s not his job. His job is to judge constitutionality, which they did but they re-wrote it after they deemed it unconstitutional..

I’ve been a court watcher since the Thomas hearings and this is the most disjointed decision I can remember. Krauthammer described a mental patient mumbling in an incoherent fashion as speaking in “word salad”. Roberts’ written opinion was “word salad” ..


30 posted on 06/28/2012 6:07:45 PM PDT by newnhdad (Where will you be during the Election Riots of 2012/2013?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: MarkeyD
The only way I can reconcile this decision is that Roberts did this so that it would be an issue against Obama in November.

That's what my husband predicted. I on the other hand am devastated.

31 posted on 06/28/2012 6:09:03 PM PDT by angcat (GO YANKS!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: ryderann

Thank you Jorge Bush for giving us Roberts, which gave us to Obamacare, and for pretty much destroying the Republican party and leading us to America’s demise with your idiotic “compassionate conservatism.”


32 posted on 06/28/2012 6:10:31 PM PDT by Do Not Make Fun Of His Ears (Anyone who thinks we can sit home, then survive four more years of Obama, is a damned fool.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: wintertime

Another in a long list ..COWARDs!


If you think Mark Levin is anything less than a courageous and patriotic defender of liberty, you are truly a delusional idiot.


33 posted on 06/28/2012 6:12:44 PM PDT by Do Not Make Fun Of His Ears (Anyone who thinks we can sit home, then survive four more years of Obama, is a damned fool.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Hojczyk

I knew Levin would be frothing at the mouth. I know I am.


34 posted on 06/28/2012 6:18:42 PM PDT by Georgia Girl 2 (The only purpose of a pistol is to fight your way back to the rifle you should never have dropped.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Hojczyk

Great ...but let’s give kudos to Michael Savage who predicted on Tuesday that Roberts would sell us out and side with the left .


35 posted on 06/28/2012 6:20:54 PM PDT by sushiman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Do Not Make Fun Of His Ears; BufordP

>> Mark Levin DID eviscerate the ruling.

Well, no, he did not.

>> Look up the word and learn something.

Oh, I know what the word “eviscerate” means. I have eviscerated plenty of animals.

Mark Levin most certainly did not eviscerate the court of last resort’s ruling in his punditry.

Look up the meaning of the word SUPREME, and learn something.

Here, let me help you by using the word SUPREME in a sentence: “The SUPREME court today upheld Obamacare, eviscerating conservative Mark Levin’s impotent fantasy of overturning the law.”

Clear?

I’m not happy about it, but it’s time you fanbois stop uulating up Levin’s ass and face simple fact.


36 posted on 06/28/2012 6:37:41 PM PDT by Nervous Tick (T)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Do Not Make Fun Of His Ears

Levin has zero credibility due to his inaction on the usurper issue. This is a fact.


37 posted on 06/28/2012 6:54:38 PM PDT by Uncle Sham
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Nervous Tick

If you’d listen to Mark’s monologue you’d know that he agrees with you. He played no fantasies about overturning the law. But if you’d rather quibble about a dictionary definition concerning Mark pointing out the obvious stupidity of Robert’s majority opinion then quibble away, quibbler. But it’s only juvenile quibbling.


38 posted on 06/28/2012 6:54:38 PM PDT by BufordP ("Drink me if you can't take a joke." --Kool-Aid)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Do Not Make Fun Of His Ears

“Thank you Jorge Bush for giving us Roberts, which gave us to Obamacare, and for pretty much destroying the Republican party and leading us to America’s demise with your idiotic “compassionate conservatism.”

It really is Bush’s fault this time.


39 posted on 06/28/2012 7:07:42 PM PDT by FR_addict
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: sushiman

Savage does have a way of seeing through things....I remember some soldiers who were accused, the LaCrosse players....among others and now this.

Hmmm. Did he say why he thought Roberts would do this? I used to listen to Savage but sometimes the screaming got to be too much.


40 posted on 06/28/2012 8:45:55 PM PDT by Aria ( 2008 wasn't an election - it was a coup d'etat.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Uncle Sham

“Levin has zero credibility due to his inaction on the usurper issue. This is a fact.”

While Mark Levin hasn’t beat the issue to death, he did proffer the opinion that at the point Obama was sworn in by a Supreme Court Justice, the ONLY constitutional means for removal is impeachment, trial and removal, (paraphrasing).

Who runs the senate?


41 posted on 06/28/2012 9:59:42 PM PDT by Bshaw (A nefarious deceit is upon us all!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Nervous Tick
"I’m praying hard. Don’t know what else to do. Prayer is always good."
Prayer is always good but if you have some time on your hands let's work to get the Senate back.

The House will be fine and the presidency will depend on lots of things; gaffes, debates, F&F, etc. but with 50% of the US getting a check from Uncle Sam I think a landslide is unlikely for Romney despite Obama's weaknesses.

Lots of other reasons of course, like one side's well-practiced and widespread vote stealing efforts, politics of destruction, LSM support etc., etc.

To summarize, I think our best efforts would be praying for all but focusing on taking back the Senate.

Here in Florida we need to back Connie Mack the younger over Dim extraordinaire Bill Nelson. We could end up with two pubbie senators.

That's my plan anyway. Anyone else? Nite! ;-)

42 posted on 06/28/2012 10:51:57 PM PDT by Tunehead54 (Nothing funny here ;-)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Bshaw
"While Mark Levin hasn’t beat the issue to death, he did proffer the opinion that at the point Obama was sworn in by a Supreme Court Justice, the ONLY constitutional means for removal is impeachment, trial and removal, (paraphrasing)."

Levin is ignoring the Twentieth Amendment, Section 3, as well as the first two words of the eligibility requirements in Article two.

The Twentieth Amendment Section Three:

"3. If, at the time fixed for the beginning of the term of the President, the President elect shall have died, the Vice President elect shall become President. If a President shall not have been chosen before the time fixed for the beginning of his term, or if the President elect shall have failed to qualify, then the Vice President elect shall act as President until a President shall have qualified; and the Congress may by law provide for the case wherein neither a President elect nor a Vice President elect shall have qualified, declaring who shall then act as President, or the manner in which one who is to act shall be selected, and such person shall act accordingly until a President or Vice President shall have qualified."

A few notes. 1. There is no such position as a "President elect", legally, until such a time as Congress has accepted the results of the electoral college votes and a person is actually named as the "President elect". This means that the term "shall have qualified" refers to something other than the results of winning an election. There is only one place left in the Constitution having to do with "qualifications" for the office of President, that being the eligibility requirements from Article two.

"No person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty-five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States."

2. Since it is the duty of Congress to name an interim President in the event of a President elect's "failure to qualify", they, Congress, must know whether or not to do so. This means that they, Congress, must be aware of whether or not a President elect meets the eligibility requirements from Article two. It is the burden of the President elect to "qualify" or "fail to qualify", thus NOT proving one is eligible under Article Two to Congress is the same thing as "failing to qualify." Congress avoiding its duty to uphold Section 3 results in the same "failure to qualify", something they may have done on purpose in this instance depending upon the reasons why. National security? Who knows at this point.

3. How was Obama's eligibility proven to Congress without a valid long form birth certificate? He apparently does not possess such a thing or we would have seen it a million times by now.

4. The eligibility requirements start out with two simple words which forever preclude anyone who "fails to qualify" from serving as a legal president, "No person". Someone who sneaks in because Congress failed to uphold it's responsibility to enforce the Twentieth Amendment, section 3 doesn't legally exist. The Constitution cannot be fooled just because Congress didn't act when it was supposed to. A President elect either qualifies or he cannot ever be President, period.

Thus it is that we have protection from someone who is ineligible to serve as President already written into the Constitution. Unfortunately, we also have a Congress that did not uphold it's oath to support the Constitution and a usurpation of the office of President is the result. We know he is illegal strictly on the basis that we don't know if he is eligible. If he "qualified", there would be no debating the subject. The fact that nobody in Congress is able to say whether or not he is eligible means that he never proved to them that he was and thus has "failed to qualify".

Levin is WRONG about the ability to remove a USURPER. Someone who cannot legally hold the office of President can NEVER be President. They can be apprehended and arrested. My case rest entirely within the Constitution that Levin supposedly is an expert on. He is a coward by ignoring it.

43 posted on 06/29/2012 5:15:21 AM PDT by Uncle Sham
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson