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

The law should never have been implemented until appeals were resolved. Just another example of the sleaze in the executive branch.

I hope a 6-3 or 7-2 SCOTUS majority tells these thugs to pound sand.

1 posted on 05/04/2012 4:22:06 AM PDT by SoFloFreeper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: SoFloFreeper
It's not the SCOTUS’s job to worry about consequences of striking bad law when it's unconstitutional. The Rat controlled congress at that time should have never passed the law in the first place.
2 posted on 05/04/2012 4:37:31 AM PDT by tobyhill (Fight Fire With Fire)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: SoFloFreeper
The BEST outcome would be when SCOTUS takes the opportunity to Rule that ONLY U.S. Citizens are included in ALL Laws that provide BENEFITS from Taxpayer dollars, IN ALL CASES.

Obamacare being struck down is a perfect opportunity, to tell the Progressives that give-aways for votes from NON-CITIZENS is NOT part of the U.S. Constitution.

However, this would also be applied to Anchor Babies, which will never happen since SCOTUS wrongly allowed that bullshit to occur.

3 posted on 05/04/2012 4:44:19 AM PDT by traditional1 (Don't gotsta worry 'bout no mo'gage, don't gotsta worry 'bout no gas; Obama gonna take care o' me!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: SoFloFreeper

Did any of those Obama-care changes to medicare actually go into effect yet?


4 posted on 05/04/2012 4:48:42 AM PDT by sickoflibs (Romney is a liberal. Just watch him closely try to screw us.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: SoFloFreeper
Related, 27 comments.
5 posted on 05/04/2012 5:04:22 AM PDT by upchuck (Need is not an acceptable lifestyle choice; dependent is not a career. ~ Dr. Tim Nerenz)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: SoFloFreeper
administration lawyers have warned of “extraordinary disruption’’ if Medicare is forced to unwind countless transactions that are based on payment changes required by more than 20 separate sections of the Affordable Care Act.

This is exactly the game of Chicken that the administration always counted on going their way. Running Medicare is Obama's job. He knew the law was going to court so if he was so damned concerned with avoiding this outcome he would have administered the program properly in the first place.

This letter to SCOTUS is the government equivalent of writing your parents a letter from school asking for more money because you spent this semester's tuition on hookers and blow.

7 posted on 05/04/2012 6:11:08 AM PDT by Poison Pill (Obama is the hopium of the masses)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: SoFloFreeper

If Obamacare is implemented there will be a disruption to Medicare alright. If you are over 65 and poor you will be transferred to Medicaid. Now try and get a doctor to see you. The reimbursement rate to Medicaid is so low there are practically no doctors that will take Medicaid patients. Millions of people will be taken from Medicare and placed in Medicaid which will be a slow death sentence for many. Obama won’t tell you this though. He’s the biggest scam to ever hit America.


8 posted on 05/04/2012 6:31:14 AM PDT by Harley (Will Rogers never met Harry Reid.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: SoFloFreeper

Ahhh....I love the smell of desperation in the morning.

Since when does the Government file a motion pertaining to a SCOTUS decision that is already being written? Never in my memory.


9 posted on 05/04/2012 6:31:56 AM PDT by Buckeye McFrog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: SoFloFreeper
Just like the Mafia, it's so with the obozo, there are always consequences for those who disagree if he doesn't get his way.
10 posted on 05/04/2012 6:41:58 AM PDT by drypowder
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: SoFloFreeper

Congress will have to actually do some work setting pririties and writing laws.

They must not allow HHS to handle it through more regulations or 0bammy’s appointee (sebullus?) will continue the socialist agenda

IMHO


11 posted on 05/04/2012 6:44:20 AM PDT by John Galt's cousin (Principled Conservatism NOW! * * * * * * * * * * Repeal the 17th Amendment!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: SoFloFreeper

The White House likely got a leak of the SCOTUS decision from Justice Kagan and knows the court will strike down the law. Now its trying to do damage control and laying blame on the court for taking away your health care and ruining Medicare. It’s the same blame game the Obama White House has as the theme of the 2012 reelection campaign ...Obama tried to create a perfect world but others have stymied his efforts.


12 posted on 05/04/2012 6:45:46 AM PDT by The Great RJ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: SoFloFreeper

Obama- “Nice Medicare policy you have there. It would be a shame if something happened to it.”


13 posted on 05/04/2012 7:28:55 AM PDT by headstamp 2 (Liberalism: Carrying adolescent values and behavior into adult life.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: SoFloFreeper

Isn’t the arguments over? What gives?


14 posted on 05/04/2012 7:49:02 AM PDT by vpintheak (Occupy your Brain!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: SoFloFreeper
I would think overturning Obamacare would help Medicare since the $ 500,000,000.00 in cuts to fund Obamacare would not be necessary.
15 posted on 05/04/2012 9:14:12 AM PDT by HenpeckedCon (What pi$$es me off the most is that POS commie will get a State Funeral!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: SoFloFreeper
I would think overturning Obamacare would help Medicare since the $ 500,000,000.00 in cuts to fund Obamacare would not be necessary.
16 posted on 05/04/2012 9:14:39 AM PDT by HenpeckedCon (What pi$$es me off the most is that POS commie will get a State Funeral!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: SoFloFreeper

I might be wrong, but isn’t it illegal to try and influence a sitting judge or in this case influence 9 sitting judges?


19 posted on 05/04/2012 10:32:44 AM PDT by mupcat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: SoFloFreeper

Bump that. I really think the Supreme Court will throw it out on the religious freedom grounds.


30 posted on 05/04/2012 8:52:57 PM PDT by Salvation ("With God all things are possible." Matthew 19:26)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

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