D
Dawnia
Guest
I am.You are part of the mases.
I am.You are part of the mases.
Just speculating, but why does it always seem to be the conservative that cedes and never the liberalI’m going with the latter…Republicans or Conservatives have a tendency to let the Democrat-Media-Complex affect them and they vote Stalin in hopes of gaining their appeasement.
It does seem that way, sometimes. That’s one of the things that bothers me so much about the Health Care Plan. It was forced through on uni-partisan support alone. Back in 2008, I kept hearing about how Obama was going to be this big source for unity in America. If unity was a priority, it seems there would have been more of an effort to craft a bill that wasn’t so one-sided.Just speculating, but why does it always seem to be the conservative that cedes and never the liberal
At the moment I don’t have audio on my computer. Can you summarize in a sentence or paragraph what his point was?Had Roberts voted with the other 4 Justices (including Kennedy) the Commerce clause still would have been limited…John Roberts upheld ObamaTax as Constitutional on the most incoherent grounds.
I don’t have any literature, but Mark Levin is a Constitutional scholar and I think he NAILED IT on his show last night.
marklevinshow.com/sectional.asp?id=32930#
Because the liberals have something the Conservatives still don’t…Zealots. The Democrat party is dominated by fanatical Marxist zealots and if you don’t agree with them you are a racist, homophobe, Islamophobe, bigot, misogynist or worse…a Republican.Just speculating, but why does it always seem to be the conservative that cedes and never the liberal
Not as detailed as the audio…I’m sure Mark is working on an essay for this, but here’s a snippit.At the moment I don’t have audio on my computer. Can you summarize in a sentence or paragraph what his point was?
This is an interesting question now that will need to be adjudicated. The judging business is a good one to be in never an end to it. Set for life. It comes from one of the bloggers in the link.Not as detailed as the audio…I’m sure Mark is working on an essay for this, but here’s a snippit.
http://www.facebook.com/notes/mark-levin/one-of-the-most-absurd-columns-ever-written-by-george-will/10150881959150946
Where can you get health insurance for $50?For less than $50 a month you can get health insurance in America.
People without health insurance today pay that for their cell phones.
This is all about government control.
Was that meant as a joke?Because the liberals have something the Conservatives still don’t…Zealots.
You mean for small pets right? Cuz that wouldn’t even cover the last puppy we had.For less than $50 a month you can get health insurance in America.
People without health insurance today pay that for their cell phones.
This is all about government control.
Well in a way not as active….you don’t see conservatives defecating on police cars, smashing store fronts beating up cops shutting down ports wrecking private property all for the sake of social justice. Someday maybe but not right now.Was that meant as a joke?
Don’t trust politifact, OK I get that.Do not trust PolitiFact as the arbiter of political truth. PolitiFact claimed before that the Hyde amendment protects abortion from not being funding through ObamaCare which is not true because the money does not go through HHS appropriations so the Hyde amendment does not apply to ObamaCare. I exposed PoltiFact’s untruths
forums.catholic-questions.org/showpost.php?p=9146695&postcount=327
You forgot MSNBC and The Huffington PostDon’t trust politifact, OK I get that.
But we should trust Breitbart, lifesitenews, Daily Mail?
Somethings not quite right there.
Right, can you get a waiver from paying a mandatory tax?This is an interesting question now that will need to be adjudicated. The judging business is a good one to be in never an end to it. Set for life. It comes from one of the bloggers in the link.
Under equal taxing will the waivers be unconstitutional?
Human beings are by nature unpredictable. Maybe Roberts decided to use his independent thought processes rather than bow to partisan politics - I for one applaud him and encourage others to emulate his example and resist becoming androids.Everybody is trying to figure out why Justice Roberts rewrote the statute. Did he do it because he wanted to help Romney? Did he do it because he was swayed by those who said the court had become too political?
May never know.
Just because.Just speculating, but why does it always seem to be the conservative that cedes and never the liberal
nationalreview.com/articles/304363/roberts-s-ruling-took-guts-jonah-goldberg…Indeed, before and after the ruling, much of the journalistic and legal establishment argued that a 5–4 ruling to overturn Obamacare would be “political” because the majority would be comprised entirely of Republican appointees. But a 5–4 ruling to uphold Obamacare would be apolitical because, well, it just would be.
Human beings are by nature unpredictable. Maybe Roberts decided to use his independent thought processes rather than bow to partisan politics - I for one applaud him and encourage others to emulate his example and resist becoming androids.