Posted on 09/28/2013 5:03:39 AM PDT by rellimpank
"It's the law of the land."
This is rapidly becoming the preferred shorthand argument for why criticism of Obamacare is just so, so wrong. It also serves as the lead sentence of a larger claim that all attempts to overturn the Affordable Care Act are really symptoms of a kind of extremist right-wing lunacy.
For instance, here's Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, who walked out of the painting "American Gothic" to deliver this homespun wisdom: "We're not going to bow to Tea Party anarchists who deny the mere fact that Obamacare is the law. We will not bow to Tea Party anarchists who refuse to accept that the Supreme Court ruled that Obamacare is constitutional."
Where to begin? For starters, I know a great many self-described members of the Tea Party, and I've yet to meet one who would not acknowledge -- admittedly with dismay -- that Obamacare is the law. Nor have I met one unwilling to concede that the Supreme Court ruled that Obamacare is constitutional. Though from my informal polling, I can report that most think the court's reasoning left much to be desired (logic, persuasiveness, consistency, etc.).
(Excerpt) Read more at jsonline.com ...
Abortion is the law. It is a stench in the nostrils of God. This government is an instrument of the ungodly to wield power against God and His people. “We must obey God rather than men.” (Acts 5:29)
“It’s the law of the land.”
So was:
slavery
men only voting
prohibition
segregation
I am sure there are more things that WERE the law of the land, but just those few are examples that laws are not immovable brick walls.
In a country as large as this with so many resources, material and human, it is unfathomable that just a few “wacko birds” have so much power. Obama, Reid, Boehner. Bringing America to it’s knees. But we wil rise and many are waking up finally.
conversely, if there is no law......... there is no law
Obama promotes his own demise
I use that same argument multiple times a day.
If it wouldn’t be a waste of time, someone might point out to Harry that the Constitution is the ultimate, fundamental “law of the land”, and that the founders deliberately put the power of the purse in the hands of House of Representatives as one of many purposeful exercises of separation of power, specifically designed to provide the people’s representatives a means to counter abuses by the other branches.
That sotted s. o. b. certainly doesn’t worry about the “law of the land” every time BO decides to ignore it.
We WILL not give up our right to be King.
The mob has spoken.
at least those were debated and fought over.
they had to pass this to see what was in it.
Yes, well, so was slavery. And it was effectively upheld by the Supreme Court. Just like obamacare...
To be precise (on an existential legal issue such as ObamaCare, one must be precise), the Supreme Court ruled that ObamaCare was not unconstitutional under the objections presented. That in no way means that ObamaCare is constitutional, nor does it obligate the Court to rule in favor of that law if it hears a case based on a different constitutional objection.
Does this mean they’ll STFU about the Second Amendment? Didn’t think so.
Intelligent People have to realize that Harry is not talking to them.
He is talking to the idiots who voted for Obama.
The people who voted for Obama think Harry is right.
In actuality laws mean nothing to the Democrats, Obama makes up his own and decides which to violate. DOMA was the laws, until the queers ignored it and Obama decided to do away with it. Tell harry that and see what he says.
Harry is Obama little weasel, sneaking into the chicken house and killing for the fun of it.
If there is no law....... there is no law
I have started posting conservative stories and viewpoints on Reddit. Must expose these lefties to conservative point of views. Check it out over there.
It is not the law and a SCOTUS case filed by the Pacific Legal Foundation [I believe] is headed their way with the following paraphrased arguments;
In September 17, 2009, Congressman Charlie Rangel introduced H.R. 3590, titled the “Service Members Home Ownership Tax Act of 2009” to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 modifying the first-time homebuyers’ credit for members of the Armed Forces and certain other Federal employees. Nancy Pelosi was Speaker of the House and John Boehner was the minority leader when this bill passed on October 8, 2009 by a 416-0 vote. This bill went to the Senate where Majority Leader Harry Reid gutted H.R. 3590, deleted all the contents after the first sentence, and replaced it with what became the “Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act” of November 19, 2009.
Article I, section 7, which states that “All Bills for raising Revenue shall originate in the House of Representatives; but the Senate may propose or concur with Amendments as on other Bills.” The key idea is that the Supreme Court recently upheld the individual mandate as a tax. But then it is a bill for raising revenue. That means that the Affordable Care Act must have begun in the House of Representatives. And it did not.” Therefore the Senate is in violation of the Constitution by funding something.
If it's the law of the land, then please explain how it changed be changed, delayed, or ignored any time this POS administration decides it needs to do so.
people flooding into the country illegally is against the law... we don’t obey that
possessing or smoking pot is against federal law... it’s not enforced in CA and many other states
hiring illegals to work in your company is against the law.. we do nothing about it
‘selling’ automatic weapons to known drug dealers is against the law... we do it anyhow
laundering money from said drug dealers is against the law... we do it anyhow
killing babies born alive is against the law... we fund those doctors with federal money
i could go on. end result, i won’t be party to the bankruptcy of my country through ‘indentured participation’
also, only property owners could vote in many places. so not even all men could.
today i’d reinstate that one.
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.