Obamacare Unconstitutional

[delldude]

Obama Health-Care Reform Act Ruled Unconstitutional

President Barack Obama’s health care law, assailed as an abuse of federal power in a 26-state lawsuit, was ruled unconstitutional by a U.S. judge who said Congress overstepped its authority to regulate commerce.

U.S. District Judge Roger Vinson in Pensacola, Florida, declared the entire law unconstitutional today in a 78-page opinion. He said the law’s provision requiring Americans over 18 to obtain insurance coverage exceeded Congress’ powers under the commerce clause of the U.S Constitution.

Article

 

[southwind]

No.....No..........NOOoooo ! :angry:

 

[Ms Tree]

He was a republican judge, what did you expect? The SCOTUS is 4-4 with a right leaning 9th judge so it will probably fail there too. Again, big surprise.

 

[dapoes]

He was a republican judge, what did you expect? The SCOTUS is 4-4 with a right leaning 9th judge so it will probably fail there too. Again, big surprise.

Ha ha, thats right...yes we can!!!!!

 

[delldude]

In ruling against President Obama‘s health care law, federal Judge Roger Vinson used Mr. Obama‘s own position from the 2008 campaign against him, when the then-Illinois senator argued there were other ways to achieve reform short of requiring every American to purchase insurance.

Kick in the Butt

 

[dapoes]

Heres what I think will happen next. The administration is going to string it out as long as possible ans use it as an re-election tool. They are so out of touch with the american people that it will end up with a Republican president, with a republican/tea party majority in the house and senate. Then the libtards can all move to Canada and enjoy their gov death panels.

 

[southwind]

Err, WTH !

Canadian Prime Minister: Heart Surgery in U.S.

http://www.patrioticdissent.net/2010/02/03/canadian-prime-minister-heart-surgery-in-u-s/

 

[Ms Tree]

Medical Tourism

 

[dapoes]

They sign a bill into law without reading it, then attack a judge who has read it. Typical liberal logic!

 

[southwind]

Out of the mouth of Pelosi......................."We have to pass it, so we can find out what's in it !"

Never a more idiotic statement made in the history of politics !

BTW.................think we found out what "It" is...............................................Unconstitutionality !

 

[Ms Tree]

If you are going to quote it, at least post the whole quote, or will that not prove your point?

It has not been ruled unconstitutional. Two judges have rules against it and two have ruled for it. That would be 50% and the only ruling that counts is the SCOTUS. For that we will have to wait.

 

[eolesen]

If you are going to quote it, at least post the whole quote, or will that not prove your point?

It has not been ruled unconstitutional. Two judges have rules against it and two have ruled for it. That would be 50% and the only ruling that counts is the SCOTUS. For that we will have to wait.

I'll disagree. There have been four rulings, but this was the largest of the cases to date, in that 26 states were part of it. Those states now have a ruling in their favor.

And go read the ruling... there is a lot more substance with regard to following previous Supreme Court rulings and direction in this than in the other three combined.

My favorite quote:

“It is difficult to imagine that a nation which began, at least in part, as the result of opposition to a British mandate giving the East India Company a monopoly and imposing a nominal tax on all tea sold in America would have set out to create a government with the power to force people to buy tea in the first place. If Congress can penalize a passive individual for failing to engage in commerce, the enumeration of powers in the Constitution would have been in vain for it would be ‘difficult to perceive any limitation on federal power,’ … and we would have a Constitution in name only.”

 

[southwind]

If you are going to quote it, at least post the whole quote, or will that not prove your point?

It has not been ruled unconstitutional. Two judges have rules against it and two have ruled for it. That would be 50% and the only ruling that counts is the SCOTUS. For that we will have to wait.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=KoE1R-xH5To

Why didn't we read the bill , so we knew what was in the bill before we passed the bill ?

 

[Ms Tree]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=KoE1R-xH5To

Why didn't we read the bill , so we knew what was in the bill before we passed the bill ?

If you don't want to postvthe quote or the video in its entirety that's fine but dont pretend it is an accurate portrail of what she said. Youbarencutting her off at a comma. I suspect you are not doing it intentionally but rather just posting a talking point with out verification.

 

[Ms Tree]

I'll disagree. There have been four rulings, but this was the largest of the cases to date, in that 26 states were part of it. Those states now have a ruling in their favor.

And go read the ruling... there is a lot more substance with regard to following previous Supreme Court rulings and direction in this than in the other three combined.

My favorite quote:

N

The number of participants in a suit do not affect the validity. Of the ruling.

As for mandatory insurance. How do we explain ss and Medicare?