Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 04-02-2012, 06:15 PM
 
Location: My little patch of Earth
6,193 posts, read 5,407,898 times
Reputation: 3059

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bulldogdad View Post
First, I think "back to" is missing.

Second, It is the Supreme Court's responsibility to strike down any laws it deems unconstitutional. Whether or not it is popular.
I fully expect O to disband the SC on some wild ass idea he has of 'his' Constitutional authority. He thinks striking down the healthcare law is an affront to 'his' legacy legislation.

He already openly shows contempt towards the other branch of government.

His attitude towards this country and it's people however thinly veiled is dangerous to the survival of America.

We are are looking at 20 years of this idiot should he get his wish. And we know what that is.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 04-02-2012, 06:16 PM
 
20,184 posts, read 24,038,901 times
Reputation: 9284
Quote:
Originally Posted by crbcrbrgv View Post
It is constitutional.
Unfortunately for you, the Supreme Court is the ultimate authority on that..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-02-2012, 06:17 PM
 
Location: My little patch of Earth
6,193 posts, read 5,407,898 times
Reputation: 3059
Quote:
Originally Posted by crbcrbrgv View Post
It is constitutional.
Please support that claim, with circles and arrows and a paragraph on the back explaining what each one is.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-02-2012, 06:19 PM
 
5,524 posts, read 9,995,783 times
Reputation: 1867
A Supreme Court Justice has life tenure. They cannot be ousted unless there is severe reasoning. The POTUS cannot "bully" a Supreme Court Justice. A Justice is a Justice until they die, retire or are found to have besmirched the role they are in.

[MOD CUT/off topic]

Last edited by Ibginnie; 04-03-2012 at 06:39 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-02-2012, 06:20 PM
 
5,036 posts, read 5,177,543 times
Reputation: 2356
Quote:
Originally Posted by wrench409 View Post
Please support that claim, with circles and arrows and a paragraph on the back explaining what each one is.
Obama's guy did an awful job trying to defend it last week. If they some how rule in favor of it, I cant wait to see the write ups from the court on it. Because thus far, ive not heard one good reason why it should be declared Constitutional. The liberal judges will say yes no matter what, and Ill still like to see how the hell they come up with their conclusion even if its defeated. We know they are going to vote for it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-02-2012, 06:21 PM
 
25,619 posts, read 37,012,908 times
Reputation: 23300
Quote:
Originally Posted by crbcrbrgv View Post
It is constitutional.
So which SCOTUS are you and do your associate Justices know your posting on CD?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-02-2012, 06:24 PM
 
29,407 posts, read 22,182,357 times
Reputation: 5456
Quote:
Originally Posted by TempesT68 View Post
Repealing the 18th amendment was a good thing, unless you enjoy huge government, religious fanatic laws. FDR also is about as far away from fascism as it gets. On the contrary, he saved the world from fascist tyranny.
Yeah as long as you don't mind citizens being interned and your gold confiscated by the government.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-02-2012, 06:31 PM
 
Location: Va. Beach
6,391 posts, read 5,208,090 times
Reputation: 2283
Let me get this straight in my head.

The same president who's federal courts are telling states they cannot enforce legally passed legislation concerning illegal aliens, and voting laws, is telling the highest court in the nation, they cannot overturn the illegal obamacare?

It's so sad it's funny.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-02-2012, 06:37 PM
 
1,652 posts, read 2,569,545 times
Reputation: 1463
Obama could say the sky was blue and you guys would claim he was an arrogant, bully fascist

He gave a strong, confident statement about the healthcare law he got passed.

What did you guys expect him to say? That he thinks the SC will/should strike it down????

The SC will decide how they decide. Cheerleaders on BOTH sides of the argument are making predictions and statements in support or contemporary of the law. What President Obama said is no different.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-02-2012, 06:39 PM
 
Location: Pluto's Home Town
9,982 posts, read 13,869,107 times
Reputation: 5694
Interesting to me is that if this is struck down, we get closer to the liberal dream of single payer health care. This larded law is basically built to protect he health insurance industry. We either proceed with the current system without the mandate, which would devastate the industry, or we go back to the single payer model of socialized health care, which the people want, but the GOP does not.

Frankly, I am all in for the single payer model. Plenty of other successful countries do it, and it takes a heavy burden off their companies. So, the SCOTUS is basically saying the private model suggested by the GOP in the 1990s, and adopted by Obama with modifications, is not tenable. Fine. Time to join the rest of the civilized world with single payer.

I think the SCOTUS is smart enough to see these consequences, and so will not rule against it. It is the biggest boon to the health insurance industry in our history. Now that I think of it, I hope they do turn it down!

*** As an aside, I enjoyed listening to the justices debate this. It is a very important question for our country, and it is cool to have these discussion. That is, if people are really thinking about the implications of this issue.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:37 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top