Log in

View Full Version : Guess who predicted the Obamacare ruling



DarrinS
02-01-2011, 06:18 PM
7-1SMV3ok58

jack sommerset
02-01-2011, 06:21 PM
That darn Obongo

Parker2112
02-01-2011, 06:37 PM
Obama is owned just like Bush was owned. You cant trust a damn word from any president. This proves Obama is a puppet. Just like Bush.

Your elected officials are $owned$.

Stringer_Bell
02-01-2011, 06:50 PM
That darn Obongo

Obongo? Cuz he played the asses of white females with a college education like bongos during the Presidential elections? Yep yep yep yep yep!

Point of clarification, if you please: In that clip Obama wants a Public Option, not a requirement for all citizen's to buy health insurance, right?

Yonivore
02-01-2011, 06:57 PM
Obama is owned just like Bush was owned. You cant trust a damn word from any president. This proves Obama is a puppet. Just like Bush.

Your elected officials are $owned$.
Yeah, except I don't recall Bush trying to implement Obamacare.

Parker2112
02-01-2011, 08:36 PM
Yeah, except I don't recall Bush trying to implement Obamacare.

Iraq was worse than Obamacare...or just as bad at least, and just as unconstitutional.

The two party paradigm is a fraud.

And such a blatant example gets ignored here.

I would put this story on ignore too if I wanted to continue to invest my faith in one of the two major parties/frauds.

Wakedafuggup.

Parker2112
02-01-2011, 08:54 PM
One man stands above the fray :toast

-EywYDhPeY8
PbOQE8hsQpo

One man is a fraud.
HUTYL8HfCGo

Wakedafuggup.
4fHfdSi-GDo

ChumpDumper
02-01-2011, 09:17 PM
Does Ron Paul have a health care plan?

Nbadan
02-01-2011, 09:48 PM
Yes, he does....it's run by the government....

ChumpDumper
02-01-2011, 10:24 PM
Should have been more specific. Not his own insurance -- everyone knows he has the "Cadillac" plan per Cosmic Cowboy -- I wondered if he had a health care reform plan.

PublicOption
02-01-2011, 10:29 PM
7-1SMV3ok58


you know fuckface, that provision to mandate people buy insurance was something lobbied by the insurance companies and demanded by the GOP so they wouldn't lose customers that would just rely on Obamacare only when they got sick or injured.

you fucks wanted that shit and no wyou use the very thing you wanted against it.


you fucks are retarded. Obamacare is good for the country and you are not going to win.

sickdsm
02-01-2011, 11:12 PM
Hey, if you can't get the point across, you can always cuss and use names. Reminds me of one of those guys on that show a few years ago, Growing up Gotti.

Blake
02-01-2011, 11:22 PM
Hey, if you can't get the point across, you can always cuss and use names. Reminds me of one of those guys on that show a few years ago, Growing up Gotti.

reminds me of the nba forum

The Reckoning
02-01-2011, 11:24 PM
i wonder how cheap healthcare would be if there was no health insurance nor a socialized system. do yall think healthcare costs would be drastically reduced because doctors wouldnt have to pay overhead?

Wild Cobra
02-01-2011, 11:54 PM
Iraq was worse than Obamacare...or just as bad at least, and just as unconstitutional.

Except the war wasn't unconstitutional. Obamacare is. Don't you think any one liberal or state would have brought the war topic to a judge if there was a chance of declaring it unconstitutional?

boutons_deux
02-02-2011, 12:26 AM
Darrins Lies

not "ruling" but "rulings" with more to come. Vinson's is widely seen as outlier

boutons_deux
02-02-2011, 12:27 AM
Except the war wasn't unconstitutional.

The war was treason, with the criminals dubya, dickhead, Repugs lying about WMD, Saddam-AQ, Saddam-9/11.

Wild Cobra
02-02-2011, 12:32 AM
The war was treason, with the criminals dubya, dickhead, Repugs lying about WMD, Saddam-AQ, Saddam-9/11.
Then why isn't someone convicted? What wasn't it taken to court? Just because you don't understand those concepts, and want your opinion to be fact, doesn't make it so.

boutons_deux
02-02-2011, 12:42 AM
Like Clinton didn't go after the Poppy Repugs (and got nothing in return), Barry didn't go after the dubya Repugs (and got nothing in return).

Because the Dems are stupid, dickless wimps doesn't absolve the Repugs of crimes. Absence of prosecution isn't absence of guilt

boutons_deux
02-02-2011, 12:42 AM
...

boutons_deux
02-02-2011, 12:42 AM
...

Wild Cobra
02-02-2011, 12:48 AM
LOL...

If you say it three times, does your wish come true?

jack sommerset
02-02-2011, 08:18 AM
Obongo? Cuz he played the asses of white females with a college education like bongos during the Presidential elections? Yep yep yep yep yep!

Point of clarification, if you please: In that clip Obama wants a Public Option, not a requirement for all citizen's to buy health insurance, right?

LoL@asses of women. Chewy is the only woman anyone has claimed Obongo has been with. As for white ass, Larry Sinclair is on the record saying barry hit that. Our president likes the cock.

George Gervin's Afro
02-02-2011, 09:00 AM
Then why isn't someone convicted? What wasn't it taken to court? Just because you don't understand those concepts, and want your opinion to be fact, doesn't make it so.


Irony alert!

George Gervin's Afro
02-02-2011, 09:01 AM
cock.


like clockwork..:lmao

ChumpDumper
02-02-2011, 01:33 PM
like clockwork..:lmaojack clearly likes it too.

Nbadan
02-02-2011, 11:37 PM
Even conservative legal scholars are debunking this headline seeking waste of taxpayer dollars by conservative Governors.....while they fire teachers....

Conservative legal scholar: We already regulate inactivity
By Greg Sargent


In an interview with me just now, a conservative law professor made an interesting case for the individual mandate: In multiple cases, he said, the federal government has already regulated "inactivity," and it has passed muster with the Constitution.

The cases this professor cited: Jury duty, and the draft.

New York University law professor Rick Hills describes himself as a "registered Republican and outspoken conservative," but he maintains that the primary argument conservatives use against the mandate -- that it's unconstitutional to regulate economic inactivity by forcing people to buy insurance, as Judge Vinson ruled -- is bunk.

Hills frames the question this way: If the federal government can't tell people they don't have the right to refuse to buy insurance, then why was it okay for the federal government to regulate people's "pacifism," i.e., their refusal to fight in wars? Why is it okay for the government to regulate people's refusal to serve on juries?

"If you can regulate inaction to raise juries, and you can regulate inaction to raise an army, then why isn't there equally an implied power to conscript people to buy insurance, to serve the goal of regulating the interstate insurance market?" Hill asks.

Link (http://wapo.st/dXwtv8)