Well tomorrow is the day they pass judgment on Obama doesn't Care.

I hope we still have at least a sliver of separation of powers left and they finally kill that Turkey!

 

I'm eating my popcorn on that and the Eric Holder ordeal.

 

Which ever way the court rules, the media will have egg on their face, giving us yet another reason to not pay attention to them.

The spin on both the SCOTA and Holder contempt ruling is going to be dizzying.

 

The Court just announced that it will be upheld. MSNBC has four anchors talking about it and basically applauding. Fox has Neil interviewing Rupert. Gotta love the media.

 

Upheld, but not exactly. The mandate has been ruled a tax. They also have allowed the states to opt out of the medicaid expansion provisions.

Fox may have been interviewing Rupert when you were watching, but that was just a few minute interlude.

 

Chief Justice Roberts blew it, IMO.

If the Democrats had been honest that this was a tax increase, it may not have passed, and the Dems would probably have lost the Senate as well as the House in 2010.

Horrible decsision, but OTOH, Romney and the next Congress will repeal as much of it as possible in six months.

 

I've been trying to make sense of this decision all day.............I've come to the conclusion that there isn't any sense in it. Just another "ramjob" by the Government.

I guess our only hope is to make the upcomming election a landslide. Maybe then they will know where the people stand. On a good note I heard that Romney's donations spiked today just after the anouncement.

Also at least Congress voted to hold Holder (A.K.A the gun runner) in contempt.

 

I had been following this Supreme Court decision on various outlets and noted that the liberal response was immediate

and the conservatives responded as soon as they got home from work.

 

It was either "us or them". There was going to be part of the population unhappy with the ruling no matter what it was. We can argue what happened all day long, but in the end the court made it's decision.

If there is a shread of common sense left in this country, thoes opposed to this power grab, which is apparently a majority, will make sure that the president responsible for this violation of the peoples trust will not be rewarded with a second term. We will hold the next guys feet to the fire and moving forward, will be more careful about who we choose to represent us.

It's debatable whether there is a shread of common sense though.

 

One of my favorite quotes from King of the Hill - "I guessed right 3 out of 4 times" - Bill regarding the recent vote.

Too many in the mainstream don't even know what they are voting for or how it affects them. The really said part, most of them will say they don't care or I don't follow politics..............

 

 

That's post of the year material! I might have to borrow it to irritate my liberal friends.

 

same as the obama inaguration. 2 million people there and only a dozen missed work

 

It's a sad, sad day when the Chief Justice writes that it is not the job of the Supreme Court to rule on the validity of a law and protect the citizenry from laws passed by a duly elected Congress. UH Jackarse THAT is the job of the Supreme Court. YOU determine if a law is Constitutional or not. Anything else is being an activist.

I hear rumblings from the far right (although not as far right as they were) about revolution. The sad part is the Chief Justice had the opportunity to stop it, but didn't because he was concerned about the legacy of his court. This is going to get very ugly before it gets good. How's the legacy of your court knowing you could have stopped what could be the beginnings of the end for this country, but refused because it wasn't the job of the Supreme Court to rule on the Constitutionality of a law passed by a Congress.

It has been several years since I took government, but I recall an idea called the division of power. No one branch had total power and all could limit the power of the other branches. The way the Supreme Court wielded its power was to determine if a law was Constitutional. If this Chief Justice believes the court does not have the power to rule a law unconstitutional, why do we have the courts as a branch of government and not part of either the legislative or executive branch? That tells me we are paying the Supremes way too much money, if they believe they do not have the power to do their jobs.