User Tag List

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 12

Thread: Kavanaugh & Roberts, Two Obamacare Nuts In The Same Shell

  1. #1
    Points: 10,339, Level: 24
    Level completed: 37%, Points required for next Level: 511
    Overall activity: 0.1%
    Achievements:
    Veteran10000 Experience Points
    Robo's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    411
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Posts
    644
    Points
    10,339
    Level
    24
    Thanks Given
    47
    Thanked 401x in 251 Posts
    Mentioned
    10 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Kavanaugh & Roberts, Two Obamacare Nuts In The Same Shell

    I'm thinking this morning that any judge that thinks and rules that Obamacare is constitutional couldn't get my vote if I were a U.S. Senator.
    No home run for Trump on the Kavanaugh pick in my opinion. I think he struck out this time. I wouldn't trust this judge any more than John Roberts. Both are BIG government swamp dwellers.


    "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people." (Amendment 10, United States Constitution)


    There is no authorized power in the Constitution for the feds to be involved in a national healthcare system. That power is reserved to the States or the people. The "general welfare" mentioned in the Constitution is simply only those things enumerated in the Constitution, see the writtings of Thomas Jefferson and James Madison. They reveiled the insanity of a BIG federal government making laws justified by the general welfare clause in effect reduce the rest of the Constitution aside from the general welfare clause to meaningless, toothless dribble.
    Government is force by definition and corruption by nature. The Bigger the government the greater the force and the greater the corruption.

  2. The Following User Says Thank You to Robo For This Useful Post:

    MisterVeritis (07-10-2018)

  3. #2
    Points: 84,523, Level: 70
    Level completed: 87%, Points required for next Level: 327
    Overall activity: 12.0%
    Achievements:
    Tagger Second Class50000 Experience PointsSocialVeteran
    Captdon's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    12826
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Location
    Charleston South Carolina
    Posts
    38,294
    Points
    84,523
    Level
    70
    Thanks Given
    67,690
    Thanked 12,837x in 10,134 Posts
    Mentioned
    161 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Robo View Post
    I'm thinking this morning that any judge that thinks and rules that Obamacare is constitutional couldn't get my vote if I were a U.S. Senator.
    No home run for Trump on the Kavanaugh pick in my opinion. I think he struck out this time. I wouldn't trust this judge any more than John Roberts. Both are BIG government swamp dwellers.


    "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people." (Amendment 10, United States Constitution)


    There is no authorized power in the Constitution for the feds to be involved in a national healthcare system. That power is reserved to the States or the people. The "general welfare" mentioned in the Constitution is simply only those things enumerated in the Constitution, see the writtings of Thomas Jefferson and James Madison. They reveiled the insanity of a BIG federal government making laws justified by the general welfare clause in effect reduce the rest of the Constitution aside from the general welfare clause to meaningless, toothless dribble.
    If they only applied to those things enumerated in the Constitution why would this have been written?

    The clause has been used and, maybe, overused but it isn't what you say it is. I've never seen a good definition of it yet. It sounds like a catch-all but I don't what it was supposed to mean.
    Liberals are a clear and present danger to our nation
    Pick your enemies carefully.






  4. #3
    Points: 264,380, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 83.0%
    Achievements:
    50000 Experience PointsSocialVeteranTagger First ClassOverdrive
    Awards:
    Activity Award
    MisterVeritis's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    307876
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Location
    Northern Alabama
    Posts
    104,545
    Points
    264,380
    Level
    100
    Thanks Given
    94,661
    Thanked 39,250x in 27,871 Posts
    Mentioned
    385 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Captdon View Post
    If they only applied to those things enumerated in the Constitution why would this have been written?

    The clause has been used and, maybe, overused but it isn't what you say it is. I've never seen a good definition of it yet. It sounds like a catch-all but I don't what it was supposed to mean.
    Either the general welfare clause means the government can do anything it wants or it is a shortcut phrase for the totality of the non-defense enumerated legislative authority found in Article 1 section 8.

    Which of the two is more likely? No state would have ratified an unlimited federal government.
    Call your state legislators and insist they approve the Article V convention of States to propose amendments.


    I pledge allegiance to the Constitution as written and understood by this nation's founders, and to the Republic it created, an indivisible union of sovereign States, with liberty and justice for all.

  5. #4
    Points: 10,339, Level: 24
    Level completed: 37%, Points required for next Level: 511
    Overall activity: 0.1%
    Achievements:
    Veteran10000 Experience Points
    Robo's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    411
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Posts
    644
    Points
    10,339
    Level
    24
    Thanks Given
    47
    Thanked 401x in 251 Posts
    Mentioned
    10 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Look up Jefferson and general welfare and see his opinion. The general welfare clause in the Constitution simply defines the enumerated powers in the Constitution and attaches the power to tax for those things to them.
    Government is force by definition and corruption by nature. The Bigger the government the greater the force and the greater the corruption.

  6. #5
    Points: 84,523, Level: 70
    Level completed: 87%, Points required for next Level: 327
    Overall activity: 12.0%
    Achievements:
    Tagger Second Class50000 Experience PointsSocialVeteran
    Captdon's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    12826
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Location
    Charleston South Carolina
    Posts
    38,294
    Points
    84,523
    Level
    70
    Thanks Given
    67,690
    Thanked 12,837x in 10,134 Posts
    Mentioned
    161 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by MisterVeritis View Post
    Either the general welfare clause means the government can do anything it wants or it is a shortcut phrase for the totality of the non-defense enumerated legislative authority found in Article 1 section 8.

    Which of the two is more likely? No state would have ratified an unlimited federal government.
    No, if it was meant as a shortcut it would be redundant. That makes no sense to me.

    I don't think it means the government could do as it pleased either.That would be nonsense.

    No, I still haven't heard a good explanation. I have never read anything from the Convention that really explains it. The Federalist paper have one view and Hamilton and his clique had another view.

    SCOTUS has been all over the place on it.
    Liberals are a clear and present danger to our nation
    Pick your enemies carefully.






  7. #6
    Points: 84,523, Level: 70
    Level completed: 87%, Points required for next Level: 327
    Overall activity: 12.0%
    Achievements:
    Tagger Second Class50000 Experience PointsSocialVeteran
    Captdon's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    12826
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Location
    Charleston South Carolina
    Posts
    38,294
    Points
    84,523
    Level
    70
    Thanks Given
    67,690
    Thanked 12,837x in 10,134 Posts
    Mentioned
    161 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Robo View Post
    Look up Jefferson and general welfare and see his opinion. The general welfare clause in the Constitution simply defines the enumerated powers in the Constitution and attaches the power to tax for those things to them.
    Jefferson wasn't at the Convention so his opinion is worth less than Madison and Hamilton. The powers are already enumerated and the power to tax is also. The welfare clause doesn't address either of those.

    Not trying to debate; just would like to know.
    Liberals are a clear and present danger to our nation
    Pick your enemies carefully.






  8. #7
    Points: 6,375, Level: 19
    Level completed: 4%, Points required for next Level: 675
    Overall activity: 0.1%
    Achievements:
    OverdriveVeteran5000 Experience Points
    DLLS's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    557
    Join Date
    Jul 2018
    Posts
    827
    Points
    6,375
    Level
    19
    Thanks Given
    140
    Thanked 547x in 344 Posts
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Captdon View Post
    No, if it was meant as a shortcut it would be redundant. That makes no sense to me.

    I don't think it means the government could do as it pleased either.That would be nonsense.

    No, I still haven't heard a good explanation. I have never read anything from the Convention that really explains it. The Federalist paper have one view and Hamilton and his clique had another view.

    SCOTUS has been all over the place on it.
    Ever read the Anti-Federalist Papers? The viewpoint of the "other side?"
    “I swear by my life and my love of it that I will never live for the sake of another man, nor ask another man to live for mine.”
    — Atlas Shrugged (Part 3, Chapter 1, Page 731)

    "The man who speaks to you of sacrifice, speaks of slaves and masters. And intends to be the master."
    — The Fountainhead (Part 4, Chapter 14, Page 637)

  9. #8
    Points: 264,380, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 83.0%
    Achievements:
    50000 Experience PointsSocialVeteranTagger First ClassOverdrive
    Awards:
    Activity Award
    MisterVeritis's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    307876
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Location
    Northern Alabama
    Posts
    104,545
    Points
    264,380
    Level
    100
    Thanks Given
    94,661
    Thanked 39,250x in 27,871 Posts
    Mentioned
    385 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Captdon View Post
    No, if it was meant as a shortcut it would be redundant. That makes no sense to me.
    What does defense mean if it is not a shortcut to mean all of the non-general welfare clauses in Article 1 section 8?
    I don't think it means the government could do as it pleased either. That would be nonsense.
    You may choose only one meaning.
    Call your state legislators and insist they approve the Article V convention of States to propose amendments.


    I pledge allegiance to the Constitution as written and understood by this nation's founders, and to the Republic it created, an indivisible union of sovereign States, with liberty and justice for all.

  10. #9
    Points: 41,437, Level: 49
    Level completed: 76%, Points required for next Level: 413
    Overall activity: 0.2%
    Achievements:
    Recommendation Second ClassSocial25000 Experience PointsVeteran
    Lummy's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    6307
    Join Date
    Apr 2018
    Posts
    12,618
    Points
    41,437
    Level
    49
    Thanks Given
    4,948
    Thanked 6,307x in 4,359 Posts
    Mentioned
    60 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Robo View Post
    I'm thinking this morning that any judge that thinks and rules that Obamacare is constitutional couldn't get my vote if I were a U.S. Senator.
    Not quite accurate ...
    In November 2011, Kavanaugh dissented when the D.C. Circuit upheld the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA), arguing that the court did not have jurisdiction to hear the case. After a unanimous panel found that the ACA did not violate the Constitution’s Origination Clause in Sissel v. United States Department of Health & Human Services (2014), Kavanaugh wrote a lengthy dissent from the denial of rehearing en banc. -- Wikipedia.

  11. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Lummy For This Useful Post:

    barb012 (07-10-2018),MMC (07-10-2018)

  12. #10
    Original Ranter
    Points: 388,252, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 0.2%
    Achievements:
    SocialRecommendation Second ClassOverdriveTagger First Class50000 Experience PointsVeteran
    MMC's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    70166
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Chicago Illinois
    Posts
    89,892
    Points
    388,252
    Level
    100
    Thanks Given
    54,131
    Thanked 39,163x in 27,727 Posts
    Mentioned
    243 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Joe Manchin: Vote on Brett Kavanaugh hinges on Obamacare.....



    Sen. Joe Manchin, D-W.Va., said Supreme Court nominee Judge Brett Kavanaugh’s views on Obamacare will affect the lawmaker's decision to confirm him.


    “The Supreme Court will ultimately decide if nearly 800,000 West Virginians with pre-existing conditions will lose their healthcare,” Manchin said, referring to a case winding its way through the courts challenging the legality of Obamacare. “This decision will directly impact almost 40 percent of my state, so I’m very interested in his position on protecting West Virginians with pre-existing conditions.”


    As I have always said, I believe the Senate should hold committee hearings, Senators should meet with him, we should debate his qualifications on the Senate floor, and cast whatever vote we believe he deserves," said Manchin. "I look forward to meeting with Judge Kavanaugh, examining his rulings and making a determination of whether to provide my consent.”....snip~


    https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/n...s-on-obamacare


    Looks like Manchin will vote to confirm Kavanaugh.
    History does not long Entrust the care of Freedom, to the Weak or Timid!!!!! Dwight D. Eisenhower ~

+ Reply to Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts