Well looks like Obamacare may be thrown out in the courts
skafather84 wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
skafather84 wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
I've already pointed out that the source you two are citing has no credibility,
http://www.wrongplanet.net/postt145478.html
Didn't I also discredit your attempt to smear Fox News too?
Furthermore, I didn't even have to use Fox News to discredit your source in this article, all I had to do was follow the money trail and it led straight back the Arheim Foundation (spelling might be off) which leads directly to Barack Obama and Bill Ayers (the unrepentant domestic terrorist).
How many GOP politicians does Fox News employ, again? 8?
Uh you mean ex-politicians they could choose to get back in the ring, but then they would have to leave Fox News. I can think of a few Democrats that are employed by Fox News too. Bob Beckel for one.
skafather84 wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
Furthermore, I didn't even have to use Fox News to discredit your source in this article
Of course you do; because without that poison, you'd never know who George Soros was rather less that he's not a conservative elite like the rest.
Seriously, people aren't falling for the Saul Allinsky tactics anymore, give it up already at this point you are only further destroying what little credibility you have left.
Inuyasha wrote:
skafather84 wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
skafather84 wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
I've already pointed out that the source you two are citing has no credibility,
http://www.wrongplanet.net/postt145478.html
Didn't I also discredit your attempt to smear Fox News too?
Furthermore, I didn't even have to use Fox News to discredit your source in this article, all I had to do was follow the money trail and it led straight back the Arheim Foundation (spelling might be off) which leads directly to Barack Obama and Bill Ayers (the unrepentant domestic terrorist).
How many GOP politicians does Fox News employ, again? 8?
Uh you mean ex-politicians they could choose to get back in the ring, but then they would have to leave Fox News. I can think of a few Democrats that are employed by Fox News too. Bob Beckel for one.
skafather84 wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
Furthermore, I didn't even have to use Fox News to discredit your source in this article
Of course you do; because without that poison, you'd never know who George Soros was rather less that he's not a conservative elite like the rest.
Seriously, people aren't falling for the Saul Allinsky tactics anymore, give it up already at this point you are only further destroying what little credibility you have left.
You wouldn't know who Saul Alinsky was, either, if you didn't have your talking heads to tell you what to think.
_________________
Wherever they burn books they will also, in the end, burn human beings. ~Heinrich Heine, Almansor, 1823
?I wouldn't recommend sex, drugs or insanity for everyone, but they've always worked for me.? - Hunter S. Thompson
skafather84 wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
skafather84 wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
skafather84 wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
I've already pointed out that the source you two are citing has no credibility,
http://www.wrongplanet.net/postt145478.html
Didn't I also discredit your attempt to smear Fox News too?
Furthermore, I didn't even have to use Fox News to discredit your source in this article, all I had to do was follow the money trail and it led straight back the Arheim Foundation (spelling might be off) which leads directly to Barack Obama and Bill Ayers (the unrepentant domestic terrorist).
How many GOP politicians does Fox News employ, again? 8?
Uh you mean ex-politicians they could choose to get back in the ring, but then they would have to leave Fox News. I can think of a few Democrats that are employed by Fox News too. Bob Beckel for one.
skafather84 wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
Furthermore, I didn't even have to use Fox News to discredit your source in this article
Of course you do; because without that poison, you'd never know who George Soros was rather less that he's not a conservative elite like the rest.
Seriously, people aren't falling for the Saul Allinsky tactics anymore, give it up already at this point you are only further destroying what little credibility you have left.
You wouldn't know who Saul Alinsky was, either, if you didn't have your talking heads to tell you what to think.
I wouldn't have been aware of him, no. However, I did my own research and found those talking heads were telling the truth about him. I listened to what they said, did my own research and reached a similiar conclusion. So, quite frankly they didn't tell me what to think, my research corroborated what they were saying. You don't like that fact tough, I'm not a mindless puppet. I'm not going to mindlessly not believe a source because they happen to be Conservative, I used to listen to MSNBC actually until they started going off the deep end.
Inuyasha wrote:
You don't like that fact tough, I'm not a mindless puppet.
History might suggest otherwise. You like your Saul Alinsky tactics, don't you?
Inuyasha wrote:
I'm not going to mindlessly not believe a source because they happen to be Conservative, .
That's for tootin'.
Anyhoo, the Supreme Court ended up voting correctly.
MarketAndChurch
Veteran
Joined: 3 Apr 2011
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,022
Location: The Peoples Republic Of Portland
Yes, correctly they did. They have limited future misuse of the commerce clause, set up an entirely new set of complications because of how the issue has been reframed as a tax, and, give the American people the power to strike down the law by electing in an official who will repeal the tax that it is.
_________________
It is not up to you to finish the task, nor are you free to desist from trying.
Inuyasha wrote:
Judge Henry E. Hudson ruled Monday for the state's claim that the requirement for people to purchase health care exceeds the power of Congress under the Constitution's Commerce Clause or under the General Welfare Clause.
"It is not the effect on individuals that is presently at issue -- it is the authority of Congress to compel anyone to purchase health insurance," wrote Hudson, who was appointed to the federal bench in 2002 by President George W. Bush.
"Every application of Commerce Clause power found to be constitutionally sound by the Supreme Court involved some form of action, transaction or deed placed in motion by an individual or legal entity. The constitutional viability of the minimum essential coverage provision in this case turns on whether or not a person's decision to refuse to purchase health care insurance is such an activity," he wrote.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/12 ... -care-law/
Well looks like Obamacare may be thrown out entirely once the Supreme Court deals with it, because there is no "severability clause" (the Democrats forgot about it and didn't realize it wasn't in the bill cause they didn't read what they wrote).
"It is not the effect on individuals that is presently at issue -- it is the authority of Congress to compel anyone to purchase health insurance," wrote Hudson, who was appointed to the federal bench in 2002 by President George W. Bush.
"Every application of Commerce Clause power found to be constitutionally sound by the Supreme Court involved some form of action, transaction or deed placed in motion by an individual or legal entity. The constitutional viability of the minimum essential coverage provision in this case turns on whether or not a person's decision to refuse to purchase health care insurance is such an activity," he wrote.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/12 ... -care-law/
Well looks like Obamacare may be thrown out entirely once the Supreme Court deals with it, because there is no "severability clause" (the Democrats forgot about it and didn't realize it wasn't in the bill cause they didn't read what they wrote).
If such is the case, then if I ever get seriously ill I will spend my money in another country with socialized medicine. And if I ever get an injury that results in paralysis, I'll go to Sweden where embryonic stell cell therapy is available.
