|
|
|
jofortruth
|
 |
« Reply #1 on: March 26, 2012, 12:00:46 PM » |
|
Ron Paul Suspects Court will rule Monstrosity Obamacare Constitutional:http://www.infowars.com/ron-paul-suspects-...constitutional/  If the high court rules for Obamacare, saying you can be forced to buy it, those voting the wrong way are acting unconstitutionally and should be impeached! There should be no more tolerance for traitors in high places in America, no matter where they are! Enough of this insanity and treasonous behavior! A line in the sand needs to be drawn by the American people! This decision will be yet another violation, if it goes the wrong way! How many strikes do these so called leaders of America get before we stand up? They are destroying this nation with every violation they get by with! Are you going to continue being silent? This is about your future!
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
America2
|
|
« Reply #2 on: March 26, 2012, 12:47:37 PM » |
|
They need to take away these LIFETIME appoinments on the USSC.
For that matter too, ALL political offices should have *term limits*.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
jofortruth
|
|
« Reply #3 on: March 26, 2012, 12:58:52 PM » |
|
They need to take away these LIFETIME appoinments on the USSC.
For that matter too, ALL political offices should have *term limits*.
That's right! They should also start impeaching a few of the Supremes to set a precedent that TREASON will not be tolerated on this high court! The same should happen in every top office until these people get it and learn who they are supposed to work for - The People! |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
jofortruth
|
|
« Reply #4 on: March 26, 2012, 03:50:09 PM » |
|
Kagan Must Recuse Herself from Obamacare Casehttp://www.nationalreview.com/bench-memos/...n-jeff-sessionsAs solicitor general of the United States, Justice Elena Kagan served as the head of an office responsible for formulating the Obama administration’s legal defense of its domestic agenda priority — Obamacare. It could be no surprise to President Obama who appointed her to the Supreme Court that any former solicitor general would have many conflicts for years to come. Now, the Court will soon hear a constitutional challenge to the health-care law. Despite mounting evidence of her substantial participation in the administration’s legal defense of that law, she still has not announced whether she will recuse herself from presiding over the case as a justice.
According to Section 455(b)(3) of Title 28 of the U.S. Code, justices must disqualify themselves in cases where they have “served in governmental employment and in such capacity participated as counsel, adviser, or material witness concerning the proceeding or expressed an opinion concerning the merits of the particular case or controversy.” In United States v. Gipson, the Tenth Circuit held that judges must recuse themselves if they have “previously taken a part, albeit small, in the investigation, preparation, or prosecution of a case.” Other courts have suggested that, merely by virtue of a lawyer’s position as the head of an office during the preparation of a case, he or she is disqualified to sit as a judge on that case. For example, several U.S. Circuit Courts of Appeal have held that U.S. attorneys who later become judges must recuse themselves from any proceeding that had been pending in any way in their offices, even if they were not substantively involved.
More you should know about Kaganhttp://z4.invisionfree.com/The_Great_Deception/index.php?showtopic=8326
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
jofortruth
|
|
« Reply #5 on: March 26, 2012, 04:11:26 PM » |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
jofortruth
|
|
« Reply #6 on: March 26, 2012, 08:25:57 PM » |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
a ReVoLuTIONarY ideA
|
|
« Reply #7 on: March 27, 2012, 02:27:24 AM » |
|
After listening to the majority of the audio from the Monday SCOTUS case on Obamacare I am convinced that, at the very least, the individual mandate will be struck down. That will leave Obamacare as a useless bill that will only add to the deficit (honestly, what new gov't bill doesn't?) Below is a link to the SCOTUS audio of the arguments from Monday, but it is quite boring... There will also be arguments on Tuesday and Wednesday that will also have audio posted on the SCOTUS website. http://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_audio_detail.aspx?argument=11-398-Monday |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
jofortruth
|
|
« Reply #8 on: March 27, 2012, 09:26:23 AM » |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
TahoeBlue
|
|
« Reply #9 on: March 27, 2012, 10:28:17 AM » |
|
After listening to the majority of the audio from the Monday SCOTUS case on Obamacare I am convinced that, at the very least, the individual mandate will be struck down. That will leave Obamacare as a useless bill that will only add to the deficit (honestly, what new gov't bill doesn't?) ... My innocent friend, Just wait for the next twist of the knife... |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
John_Back_From_The_Club_O
|
|
« Reply #11 on: March 28, 2012, 07:20:58 AM » |
|
It's only a matter of time before the Nazi care bill forces HEALTHY people to see shrinks and be put on a ton of meds AND TAKE FORCED EXPERIMENTAL VACCINES / CANCER TREATMENT DRUGS.
The best health care is a PREVENTATIVE health LIFESTYLE!
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
jofortruth
|
|
« Reply #13 on: March 28, 2012, 07:36:28 AM » |
|
It's only a matter of time before the Nazi care bill forces HEALTHY people to see shrinks and be put on a ton of meds AND TAKE FORCED EXPERIMENTAL VACCINES / CANCER TREATMENT DRUGS.
The best health care is a PREVENTATIVE health LIFESTYLE!
Yesterday, Breyer used an example of how if there was a mass epidemic, couldnt the government require mass innoculate? He used this example a few times, and then under pressure stopped using it as an example. I found this very interesting. Yes, if the govt is allowed to force people to buy health insurance, where does the limit stop? It won't! Breyer statement pg 62 & 85 (See Transcript above for 3-27-12) |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
jofortruth
|
|
« Reply #15 on: March 28, 2012, 07:56:27 AM » |
|
Misc Notes:
See pg 13 Tuesday transcript for Scalia's comments RE: Toobin video above.
After hearing a few of Kennedy's comments, it's very possible he will vote NO and be the swing vote like Toobin mentions above. That would make the vote 5-4 against Obamacare. Let's hope that's the case.
I think it is a travesty that Elena Kagan didn't recuse herself. She is in a major conflict of interest in being on the court deciding this case. The woman has no integrity, as shown by this act! I question why Roberts did nothing about this?
This healthcare bill is not the answer. It needs to go back to the drawing board and a real Healthcare bill needs to emerge, and the current people involved in writing it need to be kicked out. They have the wrong motives in crafting such a bill!
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
JT Coyoté
|
|
« Reply #16 on: March 28, 2012, 10:42:55 AM » |
|
This mandate is blatant anti-life, anti-liberty, anti-American TYRANNY of the highest order, and should be resisted to DEATH!!!!!!!!!!!!!
All branches of the Usurped federal government are co-opted and controlled by an enemy foreign power... This is beyond TREASON... this is OPEN TYRANNY!!!!!!!!
Oldyoti
"Letting a bunch of foreign banks take over your
country, and send us off to war... by the way, the
same Mega-bankers through the media they own
will demonize us in Europe and in the media they
own here, say the war is good... they're blaming
this whole stinking world government on the
American People...an' we're PAYING FOR IT!"
~Alex Jones, on the air, 11/13/11
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
jofortruth
|
|
« Reply #17 on: March 28, 2012, 10:52:52 AM » |
|
NOTE: ELENA KAGAN IS PARTICIPATING AND HAS NOT RECUSED HERSELF! IF SHE WAS ETHICAL, SHE WOULD HAVE DONE SO!Background:http://romanticpoet.wordpress.com/tag/elen...amacare-recusal When Solicitor General Elena Kagan–whose job was to defend the administration’s position in federal court cases–assigned her top deputy to handle the anticipated legal challenges to the health-care bill that President Barack Obama was pushing through Congress in 2010 did she indicate to that deputy that the administration should defeat those challenges?
Common sense might say: Of course.
But if the common sense answer were in fact the true answer, then the plain sense of the law governing recusals by Supreme Court justices would seem to require Kagan to recuse herself from judging the legal challenges to President Obama’s health-care law.
In the questionnaire she filled out for the Senate Judiciary Committee during her confirmation process, Kagan said she would abide by the “letter and spirit” of 28 U.S.C. 455 in determining whether she needed to recuse herself from any case as a Supreme Court justice.
This law says that any “justice … shall disqualify himself in any proceeding in which his impartiality might be reasonably questioned.” It further says any justice “shall also disqualify himself … [w]here he has served in governmental employment and in such capacity participated as counsel, adviser or material witness concerning the proceedings or expressed an opinion concerning the merits of the particular case in controversy.”
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
larsonstdoc
|
|
« Reply #18 on: March 28, 2012, 11:19:41 AM » |
|
If the Soetoro Administration lived under the rule of law, Big Fat Kagan would recuse herself. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
TahoeBlue
|
|
« Reply #19 on: March 28, 2012, 12:17:50 PM » |
|
If the Soetoro Administration lived under the rule of law, Big Fat Kagan would recuse herself.
 Senate Hearings Confirm Kagan’s Leftism
During her Senate hearings this week, Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan confirmed, beyond any doubt, that she is indeed the leftist which most objective observers have always known her to be. In one of her more remarkable assertions of the week, Kagan denied that the late Thurgood Marshall, whom she identifies as one of her heroes, could properly be described as an “activist” judge. Yet this was the same Thurgood Marshall who advised judges to “do what’s right and let the law catch up”; who said that the U.S. Constitution, “as originally drafted and conceived,” was “defective” and thus in need of fundamental change; and who, in a defense of affirmative-action policies, once told William O. Douglas, “You {white} guys have been practicing discrimination for years. Now it’s our {blacks'} turn.” For whatever merits Marshall may have had as a civil-rights crusader and a jurist, he was clearly an activist on the bench.
...
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
larsonstdoc
|
|
« Reply #21 on: March 28, 2012, 08:32:52 PM » |
|
Senate Hearings Confirm Kagan’s Leftism
During her Senate hearings this week, Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan confirmed, beyond any doubt, that she is indeed the leftist which most objective observers have always known her to be. In one of her more remarkable assertions of the week, Kagan denied that the late Thurgood Marshall, whom she identifies as one of her heroes, could properly be described as an “activist” judge. Yet this was the same Thurgood Marshall who advised judges to “do what’s right and let the law catch up”; who said that the U.S. Constitution, “as originally drafted and conceived,” was “defective” and thus in need of fundamental change; and who, in a defense of affirmative-action policies, once told William O. Douglas, “You {white} guys have been practicing discrimination for years. Now it’s our {blacks'} turn.” For whatever merits Marshall may have had as a civil-rights crusader and a jurist, he was clearly an activist on the bench.
...
Does a woman get any uglier? |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Monkeypox
|
|
« Reply #22 on: March 28, 2012, 10:05:14 PM » |
|
Does a woman get any uglier?
Yes:  |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
War Is Peace - Freedom Is Slavery - Ignorance Is Strength
"Educate and inform the whole mass of the people... They are the only sure reliance for the preservation of our liberty."
—Thomas Jefferson
|
|
|
|
Femacamper
|
|
« Reply #23 on: March 28, 2012, 11:25:41 PM » |
|
Look like clones...except Napolitano is older so she's uglier.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
JT Coyoté
|
|
« Reply #24 on: March 28, 2012, 11:57:59 PM » |
|
Look like clones...except Napolitano is older so she's uglier.
You mean Reno, right? The ones pictured a Kagan and Reno... but I'm sure Ms(r). Napolitano will show up... Napolitano would be in the middle age wise... "The Three Kalis" ugly, uglier, ugliest... and with her ill-fated "1994 womb to tomb Hillary-Care," Ms. Uglery Clinton plays the role of Curly Joe for the Three Kalis... Phew! JTCoyoté "I find it very interesting that the very people
who wanted to deregulate everything, are the
same people leading the socialist bail out."
~Jesse Ventura, on Alex Jones, 10/01/08 |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Femacamper
|
|
« Reply #25 on: March 29, 2012, 02:13:07 AM » |
|
Ah yes, here is the dung beetle queen herself:  You can see how I made that mistake. Such an uncanny resemblance! |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
larsonstdoc
|
|
« Reply #26 on: March 29, 2012, 06:01:15 AM » |
|
OK, we are off thread and out of control---just like the government.
One thing is for sure--most Democratic lesbians get a lot uglier as they get older.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
America2
|
|
« Reply #27 on: March 29, 2012, 09:17:15 AM » |
|
Why in the world are they waiting until JUNE to make a ruling?
If these justices are truely "skeptical" like they sound, shouldn't they be making a ruling NOW?
Seriously, I'm not going to predict anything, but they shouldn't be waiting this long for what is beyond the obvious.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
jofortruth
|
|
« Reply #28 on: March 29, 2012, 10:22:13 AM » |
|
OK, we are off thread and out of control---just like the government.
One thing is for sure--most Democratic lesbians get a lot uglier as they get older.
Guys, thx for trashing this thread! Can you please show some restraint? This is a serious thread, and your comments are uncalled for! If you want to criticize these women, then do it based on merit (their true injustices), not appearance. That has nothing to do with the topic, and is rather childish! Come on guys! I know you can do better than this! |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
lee51
|
|
« Reply #29 on: March 29, 2012, 05:01:52 PM » |
|
America2 I also wondered why they had to wait until June to make a decision on this. I remember in one of Obama's speeches he wasn't to kind in his remarks about the Supreme Court Justices and he said it right in front of them while the camera panned in on them. I don't think there is a lot of love lost between Obama and SCOTUS. Even Justice Alito shook his head no in the video and mouthed "not true" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4pB5uR3zgsA |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
