Obama warns 'unelected' Supreme Court against striking down health law
President Obama, employing his strongest language to date on the Supreme Court review of the federal health care overhaul, cautioned the court Monday against overturning the law -- while repeatedly saying he's "confident" it will be upheld.
The president spoke at length about the case at a joint press conference with the leaders of Mexico and Canada. The president, adopting what he described as the language of conservatives who fret about judicial activism, questioned how an "unelected group of people" could overturn a law approved by Congress.
"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," Obama said.
Maybe he should look up 'strong majority' in the dictionary...or FDR vs SCOTUS in the history books.
Posted by CashCowMoo on :
Wow, just wow. Get this jerk out of the White House.
Posted by SeekingFreedom on :
Obama expects high court show 'deference' to Congress in health law review
President Obama, for the second day in a row, put public pressure on the Supreme Court to uphold the federal health care overhaul -- saying the court has traditionally shown "deference" to Congress.
......
Asked about the court case, Obama once again said he's confident the law will be upheld while offering words of warning to the high court.
"The Supreme Court is the final say on our Constitution and our laws and all of us have to respect it. But it's precisely because of that extraordinary power that the court has traditionally exercised significant restraint and deference to our duly elected legislature, our Congress," Obama said.
"The burden is on those who would overturn a law like this. Now, as I said, I expect the Supreme Court actually to recognize that and to abide by well established precedents out there," he added.
.......
Rep. Lamar Smith, R-Texas, told Fox News Radio he was "disappointed" by the president's remarks.
"It is not unprecedented at all for the Supreme Court to declare a law unconstitutional; they do that on a regular basis so it's not unprecedented at all," he said. "What is unprecedented is for the president of the United States trying to intimidate the Supreme Court."
quote:Originally posted by CashCowMoo: Wow, just wow. Get this jerk out of the White House.
are u in the white house now?...
isn't it great to have a 10k deductible and 400 a month payments for health insurance?
Posted by CashCowMoo on :
are you done being a sheep yet jordan? I swear, if Bush said this stuff you would be all over it and never let it go. Obama says radical things like this, and what do you have to say? "are you in the white house now?"
Really..
A 10K deductible for what? I dont pay 400 a month for health insurance either.
Posted by jordanreed on :
at 58 and my pre-exixting conditions, its what it is. Im a sheep?...u want to follow the same path we've been on for decades. U claim to be a christian,,,what would your jesus do? I think he would throw u out of the temple. He would also care for the poor and weak...u would have them fend for themselves....what a pathetic excuse for a manboy.
Posted by CashCowMoo on :
I care for the poor and the weak. The modern day temple right now would be the halls of congress, which you have great faith in collecting more taxes, and wisely spending it on more and more temples.
Posted by SeekingFreedom on :
Last I checked, charitable feeling or christian spirit is not a legally recognized basis to pass laws that are 'unconsitutional' (assuming SCOTUS strikes it down).
I sympathize with the '10k 400/mo', Jordan, and I do agree there NEEDS to be a better system. However, FORCING other people to pay for your bills is not the system we should be trying to implement. Just mho.
Posted by glassman on :
quote:Originally posted by SeekingFreedom: Last I checked, charitable feeling or christian spirit is not a legally recognized basis to pass laws that are 'unconsitutional' (assuming SCOTUS strikes it down).
I sympathize with the '10k 400/mo', Jordan, and I do agree there NEEDS to be a better system. However, FORCING other people to pay for your bills is not the system we should be trying to implement. Just mho.
OK, i have said several times now i beleive the law to be unConstutioanl, siad it the first time i heard they were going to force people to Purchase Private Insurance.
the problem here is that this was Congress being Congress and kissing the azzes of big biz like they always do.
It isn't Obamas fault that he couldn't MAKE Congress "do better"--
in fact? those of US in th emiddle who chose Obama chose him BECAUSE he was not a 40 year political monster like Hillary and McCain right?
so how do we do waht is correct? we FORCE people to pay for everybodies insurance at the minimal level, and contrary to HillaryCare we make it possibelt o buy your own health care.
this current Obamacare plan apssed by the Dems in Congress was actually Newt and Doles plan in response to Hillarycare...
if people cannot figure out that the Congress is really together on screwing their constituents in favor of lobbyist money then the People get waht they deserve.. bent over the barrel every day..
i for one am sick and tired of it
Posted by SeekingFreedom on :
quote:the problem here is that this was Congress being Congress and kissing the azzes of big biz like they always do.
Which is why this law MUST be struck down, Glass. For too long they have slowly eroded all of the protections intended by the Founders. Somewhere it has to stop. If this is upheld, it opens the gates wide to anything and EVERYTHING under the Commerse and General Welfare clauses(excuses).
quote:It isn't Obamas fault that he couldn't MAKE Congress "do better"--
This is a pet peeve of mine. It's not the Pres' job to 'make' Congress do anything. His (and the Exec Branch) job is to enforce the laws of the land...not make them.
quote:so how do we do waht is correct? we FORCE people to pay for everybodies insurance at the minimal level, and contrary to HillaryCare we make it possibelt o buy your own health care.
No. We stop coddling everyone and if we MAKE them do anything, we MAKE them learn that they are fully capable of acting like adults...and then getting out of their way.
quote:this current Obamacare plan apssed by the Dems in Congress was actually Newt and Doles plan in response to Hillarycare...
Which should be reason enough to toss it by itself. :0)
quote: for one am sick and tired of it
Amen, Glass. Amen.
Posted by glassman on :
ah'm glad we agree. but what to do?
get paul to run as an indie? that will assure Obama anothe turn IMO..
the Tparty? i really tried to find soemthing there that i could agree on. heck i woulda gone tot eh original TParty in Boston just for the thrill... but the TParty today is goofy...
Posted by raybond on :
So far I have not seen anything that has been posted on this topic as an answer to any problem. Just a bunch of right wing swill.And a throwing around of the founding fathers like they were gods. welcome back SF its going to be interesting.
Posted by glassman on :
quote:Originally posted by raybond: So far I have not seen anything that has been posted on this topic as an answer to any problem. Just a bunch of right wing swill.And a throwing around of the founding fathers like they were gods. welcome back SF its going to be interesting.
LOL...
Obmacare was right wing swill when Newt ran the House and Dole was iin th eSeante.
it's the same basic principle.
as i suggested? the solution is to tax everyone enough to run a natioanl health care program, but keep private insurance legal.... choose what you want, but pay the tax either way, just like we pay for schools in our proprty tax even tho our kids are all gone to college and we moved to a better neighborhood. We still don't get a tax break for not using the schools..
you have to have a few rules, like a doctor cannot have a private practice and govt practice in the same office/building... you can't have the private peeps showing up an jumping to eh frot of the line.
I bet alot of doctors would be happy to get a 9 to 5 job with none of the headaches associated with running your own business (like 90 hr work weeks), and take GS15 salaray; start at 11 or twelve and work up based on merit.... GS 15 ain't bad pay, and htere'd be no business insurance malpractice insurance, payroll duties, etc etc etc... none of that is particuarly hard to do, but it does end up being expensive just to manage it...
seems to me that there are alot of good doctors who would like to practice healing, they just need a chance to get to it.
We could even start a medical academy like Annapolis or West Point only the docs serve at urban ER's or as GP;s for ten years in rural areas to pay back the college bills... heck they should still get paid starting at GS 10 or 11 and time at the job would be the payback not cash... that's how the military academy works...
i be tthe competition to get into the that would be intense and we could actually stop importing doctors from other countries...
govt health care will help small businesses to thrive because they have a hard time attracting peopel who want health care. I have one kid out of college now still on our health care paln, and the new job doesn't have health benefits. It's with asamll growing biz and the owners have insurance for themselves but not the employees YET. Obamacare made this possible...
Posted by raybond on :
I like a lot of your ideas. What you are saying is we should be looking at the health care like we look at defence just an expence to keep the welfare of are country in top notch.
As for keeping private insurance in the game that is fine with, me it works ok in germany as an option I have heard about 10% of the population still opt for the private lable.
Posted by glassman on :
quote:Originally posted by raybond: I like a lot of your ideas. What you are saying is we should be looking at the health care like we look at defence just an expence to keep the welfare of are country in top notch.
As for keeping private insurance in the game that is fine with, me it works ok in germany as an option I have heard about 10% of the population still opt for the private lable.
amen! please send that back up the chain of command...
Posted by SeekingFreedom on :
quote:Originally posted by raybond: So far I have not seen anything that has been posted on this topic as an answer to any problem. Just a bunch of right wing swill.And a throwing around of the founding fathers like they were gods. welcome back SF its going to be interesting.
You still living with the hippies in Cali, Ray? Or have you returned to America? lol
Remember, one man's swill is another man's Tea.
I never claimed to have the answer to this question, Ray, but I sure as hell know that giving the Gov't the POWER to tell us what we HAVE to spend OUR money on in the PRIVATE SECTOR is a huge step toward Totalitarianism.
Make no mistake on this one, if this law is upheld, nearly NOTHING will be outside of the range of Big Brother's authority. All they have to do is cite this case along with the General Welfare\Commerce clauses (excuses) and they can dictate everything in our lives...for the "Greater Good."
While I don't agree with Glass' suggestion above, simply on principle, it would at least fall within the established powers of the federal government as it currently stands. I believe it would absolutely destroy the healthcare system...but my crystal ball is a little fuzzy.
Before we get any deeper into this one, I would like to ask two questions...and hopefully get a straight answer.
Ray (and whoever else wants to reply to this),
Do you believe that the Founding Fathers,who lived under actual tyranny, wrote the Constitution's restraints on the Federal government for a good reason?
and
If they did, shouldn't we be very careful about removing those restrictions?
Posted by glassman on :
IMO? the health care system along with most of the country is swirling in the bowl anyway SF...
Posted by raybond on :
One if you want the supreme court to decide every thing when you don't get your way you are not very democratic, in like elections,and laws.
If you believe that the founding fathers lived under tyanny and gave every body freedom you are very foolish.
As far as voting only white males that owned property of a certain dollar value could vote.
The senate was an appointed body by the president and was not elected.
Any freedom that we have was won by progressives over a period of time of 200 hundered and some years. ending with the civil rights movement and really still going on today. You can look at the bill of rights which was not granted to people until the founding fathers were forced to at gunpoint by Daniel shay after the revolution.
The only thing great about our society is that the ablity to change is permitted after a large amount of struggle.Like I said before I would like to see single payer that is what I will fight for and that i really don't care what happens to affordable health care because it is not my cup of tea, and not for any of the same reasons as you.
As far as the founding fathers living under tyranny. They were englishmen wanting there rights as englishmen and living tax free. they wanted protection and laws and court as english men without paying for it. So they went to the gun got there freedom and set themselves as a class of privlege.
Posted by SeekingFreedom on :
quote:Originally posted by glassman: IMO? the health care system along with most of the country is swirling in the bowl anyway SF...
I can't say I really disagree with you Glass...but just because that's true doesn't mean you attach a fire hydrant to the tank to speed things along.
Posted by glassman on :
quote:Originally posted by raybond: One if you want the supreme court to decide every thing when you don't get your way you are not very democratic, in like elections,and laws.
If you believe that the founding fathers lived under tyanny and gave every body freedom you are very foolish.
As far as voting only white males that owned property of a certain dollar value could vote.
The senate was an appointed body by the president and was not elected.
Any freedom that we have was won by progressives over a period of time of 200 hundered and some years. ending with the civil rights movement and really still going on today. You can look at the bill of rights which was not granted to people until the founding fathers were forced to at gunpoint by Daniel shay after the revolution.
The only thing great about our society is that the ablity to change is permitted after a large amount of struggle.Like I said before I would like to see single payer that is what I will fight for and that i really don't care what happens to affordable health care because it is not my cup of tea, and not for any of the same reasons as you.
As far as the founding fathers living under tyranny. They were englishmen wanting there rights as englishmen and living tax free. they wanted protection and laws and court as english men without paying for it. So they went to the gun got there freedom and set themselves as a class of privlege.
here's the problem i have ray, and i voted for Obama, and Bush the first (twice) and Bush the Younger once, but never again.
i beleive int eh US Constitution, and i belive it has been ignored for about a century now (almost exactly) since the pure food and drug acts and the Federal reserve were created. take your pick.. 1900's to 19teens...
i do understand the simple fact that Freedom really is based on population density, and the more people we have the less freedom there is to be had... Freedom isn't really something you can share IMO...
there were options that would allow for Freedom (of choice )AND health care for all, and what we got was a tax on being alive...
that said? Choice is a freedom that is in danger by the same people complaing about loss of freedom too... and the swirling gets louder...
Posted by SeekingFreedom on :
Ray, please trust me when I say that I do not believe that the Founder's were Saints. I truly don't. However, your post is so full of liberal bias (not neccessarily UNtrue...just a seriously slanted view of the 'facts') that I don't know if we're even capable of finding a middle ground upon which we can base a reasonable discussion here.
A couple of points from your post I'd like to address....
First, we are (supposedly) a nation of LAW. The Judiciary was established to make sure the other two branches remembered that. Appealing to SCOTUS was supposed to be the People's last recourse if the 'Powers that Be' go beyond their appointed bounds (which I personally believe they have here). There is nothing Un-Democratic in this. It holds BOTH sides in check to make sure neither side goes too far when they hold a (temporary) majority.
Second, a point of trivia perhaps but one I think deserves attention. The Senate was originally appointed by the GOVERNOR and state legislatures of each state...not the President. It was supposed to be a form of ambassador from a Sovereign State to the Joint Body. It wasn't until the 17th amendment (which I'm proud to say Utah rejected) that Senator's were elected by popular vote.
quote:Any freedom that we have was won by progressives over a period of time of 200 hundered and some years.
Really? I believe that there is a large body of service men and women (alive and dead) who might disagree with that statement.
quote:The only thing great about our society is that the ablity to change is permitted after a large amount of struggle.
I don't even know how to respond to that one, Ray...lol
BTW, you still didn't answer my questions. Posted by SeekingFreedom on :
quote:and i voted for Obama,
Sucker!!!!!
(lol, sorry, Glass. Couldn't resist.)
Posted by raybond on :
service men defend the country changing laws and civil rights are a different altogther.
Posted by glassman on :
quote:Originally posted by SeekingFreedom:
quote:and i voted for Obama,
Sucker!!!!!
(lol, sorry, Glass. Couldn't resist.)
no need to apologise, i'm not afraid to admit my mistakes... and my choices were? seriously, you think Hillary or Mcain and Palin would have made today a better day? Hillary is going to quit next year if Obama wins and start campaigning for the next term...
i think she stands a better chance of winning in 2016 if Obama loses, so watch her and bill and the rest of th eClinton team to see if they don't behave oddly this fall
Obama made a error in judgement scolding the SCOTUS while they are deciding his case this week... a huge error in political judgement and in common sense...
Posted by CashCowMoo on :
Obama is always having to backtrack and pretend something he said never happened. It is so funny!
Posted by jordanreed on :
thats not true at alll....u r always trying to paint him as a bad prez and/or person, and that is just not the case. since day1 all u have done is follow the repuke mantra..u have parroted EVERYTHING that your leaders have brainwashed u to say.....get over it!!!! He is black and he is our president...and will be till 2016. Done!! Lying will not change anything...put up a qualified, intelligent,likable person to run and u might of had a chance,,,,but its too late now.lol...ur toast and u know it.....u want to talk sheep??? give me ONE original thought out of that pea u call a brain..just one..
Posted by jordanreed on :
btw..i have nothing useful to say....
Posted by glassman on :
i tend to agree with you on that jr, Romney is almost as much of a robot as Gore Posted by buckstalker on :
quote:Originally posted by glassman: ah'm glad we agree. but what to do?
Buy lots of ammo and silver...
Posted by raybond on :
Silver are you the lone ranger Buck
Posted by raybond on :
As far as I am concerned President Obama has nothing to back track on he has done so far almost everything he has said he was going to get done some things he was blocked on but he tried and is still not finished. As far as I can see he will have until 2016 to finish.
Posted by glassman on :
quote:Originally posted by raybond: As far as I am concerned President Obama has nothing to back track on he has done so far almost everything he has said he was going to get done some things he was blocked on but he tried and is still not finished. As far as I can see he will have until 2016 to finish.
yep, see; even tho i am disappointed about somethings? Obama didn't write Obamacare, Congress did and the GOPs were involved in writing it and then voting against it and making lots of barnyard noises about how bad it is...
i still will have only two choices, and i will vote for one or the other cuz when you stop voting? they stop paying any attention to you at all.
Obama who picks fights with SCOTUS (the way the Founders designed it) or Romney who is just the robot Gore 2.0
Posted by CashCowMoo on :
quote:Originally posted by glassman:
quote:Originally posted by raybond: As far as I am concerned President Obama has nothing to back track on he has done so far almost everything he has said he was going to get done some things he was blocked on but he tried and is still not finished. As far as I can see he will have until 2016 to finish.
yep, see; even tho i am disappointed about somethings? Obama didn't write Obamacare, Congress did and the GOPs were involved in writing it and then voting against it and making lots of barnyard noises about how bad it is...
i still will have only two choices, and i will vote for one or the other cuz when you stop voting? they stop paying any attention to you at all.
Obama who picks fights with SCOTUS (the way the Founders designed it) or Romney who is just the robot Gore 2.0
What do you think about Romney--Ryan? Paul Ryan is far more on top of things than Joe Biden.
Posted by SeekingFreedom on :
quote:Buy lots of ammo and silver...
I think a little more of the former and less of the latter...but I'm with you on this one, Buck.
Posted by SeekingFreedom on :
quote:Obama who picks fights with SCOTUS
Picks fights? I don't think a more inappropriate eupemism for attempting to influence the Court could be found, Glass.
quote:Romney who is just the robot Gore 2.0
As long as Robo-Gore 2 has a better economic plan than 'throw more taxpayer money at it' I may just give him a shot.
Posted by glassman on :
quote:Originally posted by SeekingFreedom:
quote:Obama who picks fights with SCOTUS
Picks fights? I don't think a more inappropriate eupemism for attempting to influence the Court could be found, Glass.
quote:Romney who is just the robot Gore 2.0
As long as Robo-Gore 2 has a better economic plan than 'throw more taxpayer money at it' I may just give him a shot.
LOL... i stand by my statemnet and reassert it.
Obama has picked fights with SCOTUS by chiding them at the state of the union a couple years ago over the superpac decisions, and also more recently by telling them they they shouldn't "mess" with democratically decided law.
this was prolly politcally motivated, but it was dumb IMO nonethelss.
Obama ISa Constitutioanl Law Professor. He knows the Founders set up a "triangular" system of checks and ballances, it was part of the basic high school textbook program when Obama and i wer ein high school (he's a hair younger than me)
as to Romeny throwing money around? if you think Bush was bad? (i did and he was) Romney willmake Obama and Bush together seem like penny pinchers.
I've spent alot of time here trying to splain how economics doesn't work properly in the US. The reason we are having a much higher deficit under Obama is not because he personally has spent that much more than anybody else, i've shown the figures before, here they are again, please take note that Obama had almost nothign to do with spending more revenues in 2009... that was the "hangover form the Bush era, and Obama's first budget took effect in Oct 2009 for the NEXT year.. he didn't even get into office until Jan '09 and the budget was already made AND IN EFFECT FOR THREE MONTHS , but never passed, spending was ad hoc:
also note that chart is form CBO and provided for me to use here by the Wall st Journal (rupert mudrock). Niether are Obama fans.
Now that said? i don't think Obama is a penny pincher either, but i do know that whoever is n power spends and whoever is out of pwer complains, but they change sides as easily as a quadruple agent in the cold war.
The GOP's set up our economy to fail after they lost control for political reasons to make just htis argument, adn furthermore, th eproff is in the fact thatthey made the Bush tax cuts to expire. that was also politcal stcking of the deck,
when is everybody going to stop chasing their own tails over this and start demanding real action?
you cannot just "cut" govt spending, it will also destroy the economy because so much of GDP is dependant on it...
you can't take 1/4 to 1/2 million jobs from middle class people and expcet the economy not to tank! that's waht cutting the govt budget does.
you MUST freeze the govt spending or cut it by ONLY 1% per year across the board to all and allow the agencies a way to work thru it till the revenues return...
![[Cool]](cool.gif)
![[Wall Bang]](graemlins/wallbang.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
