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


1 posted on 03/05/2015 11:20:39 AM PST by E. Pluribus Unum
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-31 next last
To: E. Pluribus Unum

The fix has been in. They aren’t going to rule against bambi.


2 posted on 03/05/2015 11:22:23 AM PST by b4its2late (A Liberal is a person who will give away everything he doesn't own.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

That is NOT a mixture of good and bad, just bad!


3 posted on 03/05/2015 11:22:26 AM PST by stephenjohnbanker (My Batting Average( 1,000) (GOPe is that easy to read))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

I need a breath mint from the bile that just rised in my gullet. What a frickin coward. And by the way the voters never had a say in Obamacare. It had been sitting in a desk since the 40s and just waiting for the right group of marxist progressives to ram it through.


6 posted on 03/05/2015 11:25:14 AM PST by Organic Panic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

Toobin is an idiot, and people read questions from the bench too directly. A question is not an argument. A judge can even ask a question to prompt the counter-argument he wants to hear.


7 posted on 03/05/2015 11:25:24 AM PST by mlo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

All branches of our government are devoted to inflicting the maximum harm upon the American people. “In declining states the leadership intuitively inflicts the maximum harm.”


8 posted on 03/05/2015 11:26:04 AM PST by AEMILIUS PAULUS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

I think everyone misses the point here. The full effects of Obamacare have not been felt by Americans. I say let the full force come down on all of us...then we’ll vote to make changes, and throw the bums out.


10 posted on 03/05/2015 11:26:25 AM PST by nikos1121
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

This is gobbledegook.


13 posted on 03/05/2015 11:27:56 AM PST by Ray76 (Obama says, "Unlike my mum, Ruth has all the documents needed to prove who Mark's father was.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

"Let John Jay and Brandeis be damned.
These Laws, fines and taxes are for all others
.... but not us.
And not our staff, or our families.
and of course not for Moslems who began this country."

"At the foundation of our civil liberties lies
the principle that denies to government officials
an exceptional position before the law and which
subjects them to the same rules of conduct
that are commands to the citizen."

Justice Louis D. Brandeis


14 posted on 03/05/2015 11:27:59 AM PST by Diogenesis ("When a crime is unpunished, the world is unbalanced.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

Same cowardice trait as Boehner; always looking to abet Obama while searching for an alibi.


15 posted on 03/05/2015 11:28:23 AM PST by Hostage (ARTICLE V)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

*if* he uses that logic that would be completely asinine. Bascially he’d be saying the President is a king and can do what they want regardless of what laws say because the President can just interpret them however he sees fit.

Want higher taxes...I read that 30% as 60%. Want to cut taxes...I read that only the income made that isn’t taxed by the local state gov’t as being available to be taxed by the feds.

We are truly a banana republic when this type of logic can pass as acceptable.


17 posted on 03/05/2015 11:29:41 AM PST by for-q-clinton (If at first you don't succeed keep on sucking until you do succeed)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: E. Pluribus Unum
The suggested approach by Roberts is nothing more than the standard operating practice today of kicking the can down the road. They will do so until the beast known as 0bummercare is too big to kill or too big to fail. It is the perfect example of a runaway, leaderless government.
19 posted on 03/05/2015 11:30:50 AM PST by iontheball (q)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

I think all he is doing is asking a question and wanting a response. The problem, I think deals with the meaning of the words “established by the state”. It can’t mean one thing in one part of the statute and something different in another part of the statute. As long as that holds true, then the supremes should rule in favour of the individuals from Virgina who were harmed by this section in the law.


20 posted on 03/05/2015 11:31:11 AM PST by hawkaw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

After my previous rant...here’s my take on it.

The question is more likely setting the stage to say laws can’t be interpreted differently at will. If they can be read that way then the law isn’t clear and must be reworked. Either it’s unconstitutional or they stay the ruling pending congress fixing it within 6 months. This allows subsidies to stay in place this year but then come 1 Jan 2016...Obamacare is gone.

Well it’s gone until Boehner and McConnell pass a fix to it. They could use this as an opportunity to get rid of it, but instead they will tweak it to pay off their cronies and give away more freebies.


22 posted on 03/05/2015 11:33:09 AM PST by for-q-clinton (If at first you don't succeed keep on sucking until you do succeed)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

It kind of looks like the SCOTUS wants to avoid it’s responsibility, and force Congress to deal with obamacare.


27 posted on 03/05/2015 11:36:35 AM PST by brownsfan (Behold, the power of government cheese.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: E. Pluribus Unum
Roberts knows better. Once virtually any law is passed, it is almost impossible to scale it back because neither party really wants to do that. But it looks like he has found his way to vote in favor of the admin and against the American people.
28 posted on 03/05/2015 11:36:39 AM PST by Major Matt Mason ("Journalism is dead. All news is suspect." - Noamie)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

By putting it off a few more years they just get more people on the subsidies and make it harder to get rid of.


29 posted on 03/05/2015 11:38:01 AM PST by Beagle8U (NOTICE : Unattended children will be given Coffee and a Free Puppy.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

It is really disturbing that the Justices of the Supreme Court seem more interested in politics, the effect of overtrning a law that was a sham to begin with, than they are in interpreting the law as written, and exercising their Constitutional duty.

So if someone gets away with murder, they get away with murder, ya can’t bing the deceased back, right?

Really troublesome. I guess Roberts doesn’t pay attention to off-year elections like ‘10 and ‘14. Just presidential elections where they drag out the dead to vote.


30 posted on 03/05/2015 11:40:54 AM PST by EDINVA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

President Cruz’s first act should be to revoke ALL of 0bama’s Executive Orders.


34 posted on 03/05/2015 11:46:35 AM PST by Uncle Miltie (Bush / Clinton 2016! Clinton / Bush 2020! Uniparty Forever!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

There is no way they’re going to harm ACA. Does anyone actually believe a “future president” will dismantle a gargantuan government program affecting millions of people?

Anyone believing this is living in a state of denial.

Like it or not, we’ve got it and it’s permanent.


35 posted on 03/05/2015 11:46:35 AM PST by cydcharisse (`)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: E. Pluribus Unum
Roberts is at it again. Damn traitor. Doesn't believe in the rule of law and the law definitely states no subsidies for those in the 36 States. It should have nothing to do with hardship. But if does have to do with LAW!
36 posted on 03/05/2015 11:48:01 AM PST by Logical me
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-31 next last

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