What will be the outcome of Supreme Court and Obamacare or ACA?

moreluck

golden ticket member
What exactly do you think president OBAMA said? I am really curious how you UNDERSTAND his comments? Please, tell me what he said that is sooo outrageous?

Afterwards, Ill post his words (word for word) and we can see how far off you are.

Thanks.

Peace

TOS
Here are his exact words...............
"Ultimately, I am confident that the Supreme Court will not take what would be an unprecedented, extraordinary step of overturning a law that was passed by a strong majority ofriend a democratically elected Congress," Obama said at a news conference with the leaders of Canada and Mexico.

Seven is not a LARGE majority in anybody's book unless your group only consists of 10.
 

The Other Side

Well-Known Troll
Troll
Here are his exact words...............
"Ultimately, I am confident that the Supreme Court will not take what would be an unprecedented, extraordinary step of overturning a law that was passed by a strong majority ofriend a democratically elected Congress," Obama said at a news conference with the leaders of Canada and Mexico.

Seven is not a LARGE majority in anybody's book unless your group only consists of 10.

I asked you about the "CONTEXT" of what OBAMA says, not the extrapolated version of sound bites carefully cut to make what he said sound horrible.

THIS is how he started the conversation:

"I actually continue to be confident that the Supreme Court will uphold the law. And the reason is, because in accordance with precedent out there, it's constitutional.
"That's not just my opinion by the way. That's the opinion of legal experts across the ideological spectrum, including two very conservative appellate court justices that said this wasn't even a close case."
"I think it's important - because I watched some of the commentary last week - to remind people that this is not an abstract argument. People's lives are affected by the lack of availability of healthcare, the inaffordability of healthcare, their inability to get healthcare because of preexisting conditions.
"The law that's already in place has already given 2.5 million young people healthcare that wouldn't otherwise have it. There are tens of thousands of adults with preexisting conditions who have healthcare right now because of this law. Parents don't have to worry about their children not being able to get healthcare because they can't be prevented from getting healthcare as a consequence of a preexisting condition. That is part of this law.
"Millions of seniors are paying less for prescription drugs because of this law. Americans all across the country have greater rights and protections with respect to the insurance companies, and are getting preventive care because of this law.
"So, that's just the part that's already been implemented. That doesn't speak to the 30 million people who stand to gain coverage once it's fully implemented in 2014.
"And I think it's important, I think the American people understand and I think the justices should understand that in the absence of an individual mandate, you cannot have a mechanism to ensure that people with preexisting conditions can actually get healthcare.

"So there's not only an economic element to this and a legal element to this but there's a human element to this, and I hope that's not forgotten in this political debate. Ultimately I'm confident that the Supreme Court will not take what would be an unprecedented, extraordinary step of overturning a law that was passed by a strong majority of a democratically-elected Congress.

"And I'd just remind conservative commentators that for years what we've heard is the biggest problem on the bench was judicial activism or a lack of judicial restraint. That an unelected group of people would somehow overturn a duly constituted and passed law. Well, this is a good example, and I'm pretty confident this court will recognize that and not take that step."

(In response to follow up question)

"I'm confident this will be upheld because it should be upheld. And again, that's not just my opinion, that's the opinion of a whole lot of constitutional law professors and academics and judges and lawyers who've examined this law, even if they're not particularly sympathetic to this particular piece of legislation or my presidency." (end quote)

Now what he was saying in this last paragraph was a reminder to the FOX news, RUSH Limbaughs of the right wing who have for three years complained of judicial activism on the bench and USED THEIR VERY ARGUMENT OF THE RIGHT WING AGAINST THEM, and NOT AGAINST THE SUPREME COURT JUSTICES.

He didnt make an all out attack on the supreme court, instead, he made it clear that the RIGHT WING has made claims of UNELECTED GROUPS OF PEOPLE changing laws against democratically elected officials wishes.

Its pretty clear what he was talking about. He furthers by saying that this case was an EXAMPLE, and an EXAMPLE of the RIGHT WINGS POSITIONS.

What did you miss? FOX news can slice and dice his words and leave out this most important Caveat to make it appear worse than what it was, but it falls flat when you keep it in CONTEXT.Peace

TOS
 

moreluck

golden ticket member
You asked me what he said. I told you and you don't like the answer. Getting harder to defend the SOB isn't it ??
 

roadrunner2012

Four hours in the mod queue for a news link
Troll
Read all the way to the end of your article. The last paragraph can be a bitch when you only read the headlines.

Reading comprehension is not your strong suit. Most of the Framers that were in Congress voted in favor. The last paragraph correctly points out that the Framers were not a majority in Congress.

6th grade reading level is above average for most US adults, so don't feel too bad about yourself.
 

av8torntn

Well-Known Member
Apparently the Framers of the Constitution had no problem mandating the purchase of health care or other goods.

Did you read the article? How many Framers were in Congress? Did not an overwhelming number agree?

from your article said:
"Packed" means at least a majority; 22 percent is not a majority.

Like I posted before if you would have read your own article instead of just the title you would have know that, in fact it did not prove your point that an overwhelming number believed that Congress could force every citizen to purchase health insurance. It happens to be a fact that 22 percent is not an "overwhelming majority" like you falsely claimed.

6th grade reading level is above average for most US adults, so don't feel too bad about yourself.

I find the insecurity in your educational level amusing.

Most of the Framers that were in Congress voted in favor.

Since only a small minority of the founders were in Congress at the time and this law had nothing to do with forcing the citizens to purchase health insurance I don't even think that you see your point.


The fact of the matter is, this is being challenged simply because it is a cornerstone of President Obama's presidency.

The fact of the matter is that you are also wrong on this point.
 

moreluck

golden ticket member
20uqwpj.gif
 

roadrunner2012

Four hours in the mod queue for a news link
Troll
Like I posted before if you would have read your own article instead of just the title you would have know that, in fact it did not prove your point that an overwhelming number believed that Congress could force every citizen to purchase health insurance. It happens to be a fact that 22 percent is not an "overwhelming majority" like you falsely claimed.



I find the insecurity in your educational level amusing.



Since only a small minority of the founders were in Congress at the time and this law had nothing to do with forcing the citizens to purchase health insurance I don't even think that you see your point.




The fact of the matter is that you are also wrong on this point.

The majority of Framers that were in Congress voted in favor. They were not a majority of Congress. I retract my earlier statement, 4th Grade reading comprehension, at best.

Can I make it any clearer?
 

av8torntn

Well-Known Member
Apparently the Framers of the Constitution had no problem mandating the purchase of health care or other goods. .

OK i realize you are slow but this does not equal your following post.

The majority of Framers that were in Congress voted in favor.

Your posting that because a small minority of the framers happened to be in a Congress that passed a law requiring the largest shipping companies to provide their sailors with health insurance means that the framers of the Constitution as a whole thought it would be OK for Congress to mandate that every citizen purchase health insurance is one thing, but the "proof" that you offered is what is so laughable since it is apparent that all you did was read a headline. Yes the joke is on you and I don't really blame you for running from your original posting now.

I retract my earlier statement, 4th Grade reading comprehension, at best.

Can we just assume that your personal attacks mean that you have no subject matter knowledge here and just move on?



As for the other part of your blog link I don't think anyone has argued that Congress did not have the power to raise an Army.
 

roadrunner2012

Four hours in the mod queue for a news link
Troll
McCulloch vs. Maryland

Read it until you understand it.

Try also Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution.

Slippery slope, indeed.
 
Top