Page 30 of 54 FirstFirst ... 20282930313240 ... LastLast
Results 291 to 300 of 540

Thread: Obama’s ‘Unprecedented’ Remarks: Is the President Running Against the Supreme Court?

  1. #291
    Sage
    AdamT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Last Seen
    02-13-13 @ 04:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    17,773

    Re: Obama’s ‘Unprecedented’ Remarks: Is the President Running Against the Supreme Cou

    Quote Originally Posted by Chiefgator View Post
    So, what if Congress mandated that solar power shall be installed in every home. The ompanies that manufacture the solar panels are interstate commerce, so it is not the house that is regulated and mandated, it is the purchase of the panels...

    Would that be within the scope of commerce clause in your opinion? Green energy is for the common good and general welfare, after all .......
    I think it's possible that Congress could do that but it's hard to say because you haven't posited ANY rational basis for the regulation.

    Of course we know that solar panel "mandates" have already been created under the tax code, in the form of tax credits. In the same way we are already "mandated" to purchase home mortgages, and "mandated" to buy hybrid vehicles, and "mandated" to give to charity.
    "The necessaries of life occasion the great expense of the poor. They find it difficult to get food, and the greater part of their little revenue is spent in getting it. The luxuries and vanities of life occasion the principal expense of the rich, and a magnificent house embellishes and sets off to the best advantage all the other luxuries and vanities which they possess. ... It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion."

    -- Adam Smith

  2. #292
    Sage
    AdamT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Last Seen
    02-13-13 @ 04:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    17,773

    Re: Obama’s ‘Unprecedented’ Remarks: Is the President Running Against the Supreme Cou

    Quote Originally Posted by Harshaw View Post
    Oh, I'm sure I can think of something, let's see, off the top of my head . . . growing a crop for your own personal consumption.


    Nice try, but a whiff. The law in Wickard regulated the sale of wheat generally. Wheat tends to be just a wee bit more mobile than a house.

    You're saying that the home financing market doesn't cross state lines? Really?
    Are you under the impression that Congress doesn't already regualte the home financing market?

    You're saying home construction doesn't cross state lines? Really?

    You're saying no one ever buys a home in a different state? Really?
    Buying a home

    And you're saying that the housing market in all its permeations doesn't "substantially affect interstate commerce" in the sense contemplated by Wickard? Really?

    Whew.
    Whew indeed. Apparently you simply can't grasp the difference between direct regulation of intERstate commerce (not home purchases), which Congress has virtually limitless power to regulate, and intRAstate commerce that may have a substantial effect on intERstate commerce, which is more circumscribed, per Lopez.
    Last edited by AdamT; 04-05-12 at 01:58 AM.
    "The necessaries of life occasion the great expense of the poor. They find it difficult to get food, and the greater part of their little revenue is spent in getting it. The luxuries and vanities of life occasion the principal expense of the rich, and a magnificent house embellishes and sets off to the best advantage all the other luxuries and vanities which they possess. ... It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion."

    -- Adam Smith

  3. #293
    Filmmaker Lawyer Patriot
    Harshaw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:57 AM
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    29,592

    Re: Obama’s ‘Unprecedented’ Remarks: Is the President Running Against the Supreme Cou

    Quote Originally Posted by AdamT View Post


    Nice try, but a whiff. The law in Wickard regulated the sale of wheat generally. Wheat tends to be just a wee bit more mobile than a house.
    Weaseling yet again. You didn't didn't say anything about the law. It was about things which might affect interstate commerce less than the purchase of a home. Doesn't matter if wheat is "mobile" if it isn't ever going to go anywhere.

    And what's more "mobile" than money?


    Are you under the impression that Congress doesn't already regualte the home financing market?
    Yet another weasel.

    Tell me, if purchasing a home doesn't affect interstate commerce at all (your claim, as you said you can't think of anything which affects it less), then why would Congress have power to regulate its financing?

    Do people generally pay cash for homes? No? Hmmmm. Do billions of dollars per year cross state lanes to finance the purchase of homes? Yes? Hmmmmm.

    I guess a home purchase DOES substantially affect interstate commerce after all. Imagine that. Oh, wait; you already said you were incapable of it.


    Whew indeed. Apparently you simply can't grasp the difference between direct regulation of interstate commerce (not home purchases), which Congress has virtually limitless power to regulate, and INTRASTATE commerce that may have a substantial effect on inTERstate commerce, which is more circumscribed, per Lopez.
    What I grasp is that you were caught with your pants down on home buying, and are trying desperately, yet unsuccessfully, to save face. I suspect I'm not the only one reading who grasps it as well.
    “Offing those rich pigs with their own forks and knives, and then eating a meal in the same room, far out! The Weathermen dig Charles Manson.”-- Bernadine Dohrn

  4. #294
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Canada, Costa Rica
    Last Seen
    05-16-16 @ 09:45 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    31,645

    Re: Obama’s ‘Unprecedented’ Remarks: Is the President Running Against the Supreme Cou

    Uh, no, as I said before, I don't dispute that affirmative action may have played a role in his admission to Columbia and Harvard. But it did not play a role in his performance at Harvard.

    What Obama wrote was that he was, "someone who may have benefited from the Law Review’s affirmative action policy when [he] was selected to join the Review last year…"
    So you disagree with Obama that he MAY have benefited? This despite the article by the NY Times outlining how he benefited? What makes you think you know better than BHO himself or the HLR board?

    Presumably what he meant is that he wrote onto the law review, as opposed to being selected on the basis of his first year grades.
    "Presumably" what he meant? Why does Chance the Gardener, this greatest orator, this most articulate president ever, need interpreters to redefine what he really meant to say. That's what's going on repeatedly with his ridiculous public musings on law, on precedent, on the SCOTUS, and on the role of Congress.

    Apparently the selection process was changed to half grade-on and half write-on in recognition of the fact that minorities might be at a disadvantage in a purely grade-on process.
    Yes, they set aside his grades. That much is obvious.
    However, there is no affirmative action within the writing competition, which is completely anonymous.
    His writing is awful. Did you not see that?
    Likewise affirmative action had nothing to do with the fact that he graduated at the top of his class while working 50+ hours/wk at the law review.
    He graduated at the top of his class? That is not even close to the truth. If you have the evidence that this guy graduated at the top, what his grades were, or even that he worked 50+ hours a week at the HLR, then lets see it.

    http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0078841/quotes
    Last edited by Grant; 04-05-12 at 05:00 AM.

  5. #295
    Educator
    Chiefgator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Lake Jem, FL pop:35
    Last Seen
    05-08-15 @ 08:21 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    1,172

    Re: Obama’s ‘Unprecedented’ Remarks: Is the President Running Against the Supreme Cou

    Quote Originally Posted by AdamT View Post
    I think it's possible that Congress could do that but it's hard to say because you haven't posited ANY rational basis for the regulation.

    Of course we know that solar panel "mandates" have already been created under the tax code, in the form of tax credits. In the same way we are already "mandated" to purchase home mortgages, and "mandated" to buy hybrid vehicles, and "mandated" to give to charity.
    I think you are confusing and incentive with a mandate. The mandatory requirement that all new vehicles have automatic tire pressure sensors is a mandate. getting a tax break to owning a hybrid vehicle is an incentive.

    Those examples you gave, are only incentives. You still have a choice on whether or not you want to own a hybrid vehicle. I have solar power at my house. That was my choice. I do not, however, have a hybrid vehicle. Again...my choice.

    A mandate, a requirement, to purchase any product or service is way beyond the scope of the constitutional clause of regulation of interstate commerce.
    Regulating whether or not something can or cannot be sold across state lines is well within the scope of that clause.
    As a dreamer of dreams and a travellin' man, I have chalked up many a mile.
    Read dozens of books about heroes and crooks and I've learned much from both of their styles!

  6. #296
    Sage
    AdamT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Last Seen
    02-13-13 @ 04:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    17,773

    Re: Obama’s ‘Unprecedented’ Remarks: Is the President Running Against the Supreme Cou

    Quote Originally Posted by Grant View Post
    So you disagree with Obama that he MAY have benefited? This despite the article by the NY Times outlining how he benefited? What makes you think you know better than BHO himself or the HLR board?
    I already explained this. You don't seem to understand the selection process.

    "Presumably" what he meant? Why does Chance the Gardener, this greatest orator, this most articulate president ever, need interpreters to redefine what he really meant to say. That's what's going on repeatedly with his ridiculous public musings on law, on precedent, on the SCOTUS, and on the role of Congress.
    Hmm, I believe the quote you're referring to was pulled from a letter he wrote while in law school? How dare he not anticipate your obsession with his academic record 20 years in the future!

    Yes, they set aside his grades. That much is obvious.
    No, they didn't "set aside" his grades. Half the people on the law review are chosen on the basis of grades and the other half are chosen on the basis of a writing competition.

    His writing is awful. Did you not see that?
    WTF are you talking about?

    He graduated at the top of his class? That is not even close to the truth. If you have the evidence that this guy graduated at the top, what his grades were, or even that he worked 50+ hours a week at the HLR, then lets see it.
    It is absolutely the truth. Did you go to college? Do you know what it means to graduate magna cum laude? Hint: it means that you graduated at the top of your class. In the case of Harvard Law, at the time Obama was there, it meant that you were in the top 13% or better.
    "The necessaries of life occasion the great expense of the poor. They find it difficult to get food, and the greater part of their little revenue is spent in getting it. The luxuries and vanities of life occasion the principal expense of the rich, and a magnificent house embellishes and sets off to the best advantage all the other luxuries and vanities which they possess. ... It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion."

    -- Adam Smith

  7. #297
    Sage
    AdamT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Last Seen
    02-13-13 @ 04:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    17,773

    Re: Obama’s ‘Unprecedented’ Remarks: Is the President Running Against the Supreme Cou

    Quote Originally Posted by Harshaw View Post
    Weaseling yet again. You didn't didn't say anything about the law. It was about things which might affect interstate commerce less than the purchase of a home. Doesn't matter if wheat is "mobile" if it isn't ever going to go anywhere.

    And what's more "mobile" than money?




    Yet another weasel.

    Tell me, if purchasing a home doesn't affect interstate commerce at all (your claim, as you said you can't think of anything which affects it less), then why would Congress have power to regulate its financing?

    Do people generally pay cash for homes? No? Hmmmm. Do billions of dollars per year cross state lanes to finance the purchase of homes? Yes? Hmmmmm.

    I guess a home purchase DOES substantially affect interstate commerce after all. Imagine that. Oh, wait; you already said you were incapable of it.




    What I grasp is that you were caught with your pants down on home buying, and are trying desperately, yet unsuccessfully, to save face. I suspect I'm not the only one reading who grasps it as well.
    Come back when you figure out the difference between direct and indirect regulation of commerce. Until you get that distinction I just don't see the point in trying to discuss this with you.
    "The necessaries of life occasion the great expense of the poor. They find it difficult to get food, and the greater part of their little revenue is spent in getting it. The luxuries and vanities of life occasion the principal expense of the rich, and a magnificent house embellishes and sets off to the best advantage all the other luxuries and vanities which they possess. ... It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion."

    -- Adam Smith

  8. #298
    ANTI**ANTIFA
    ReverendHellh0und's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Temple of Solomon
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 06:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    75,740

    Re: Obama’s ‘Unprecedented’ Remarks: Is the President Running Against the Supreme Cou

    Quote Originally Posted by AdamT View Post
    Can you point me to the places in the Constitution where it distinguishes between activity and inactivity?





    com·merce/ˈkämərs/
    Noun:

    The activity of buying and selling, esp. on a large scale.



    Not buying something, is not..... **Commerce** the FEDGOV has no right to FORCE you into the activity of commerce, through the levy of fines and penalties.. Please show me some examples where they do. Thanks.
    Let evil swiftly befall those who have wrongly condemned us

  9. #299
    ANTI**ANTIFA
    ReverendHellh0und's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Temple of Solomon
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 06:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    75,740

    Re: Obama’s ‘Unprecedented’ Remarks: Is the President Running Against the Supreme Cou

    Quote Originally Posted by AdamT View Post
    I can point you to the part where it says that Congress can regulate interstate commerce. That's the part.


    You do realize its to regulate trade amongst the several states, not to dictate to the citizen the requirment to purchase a product or service.
    Let evil swiftly befall those who have wrongly condemned us

  10. #300
    ANTI**ANTIFA
    ReverendHellh0und's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Temple of Solomon
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 06:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    75,740

    Re: Obama’s ‘Unprecedented’ Remarks: Is the President Running Against the Supreme Cou

    Quote Originally Posted by AdamT View Post
    Yeah, most experts would be liberal. It's an IQ thing.

    Given your display of ignorance on the constitution, the Commerce clause, et al. I suspect your position here is less than accurate.
    Let evil swiftly befall those who have wrongly condemned us

Page 30 of 54 FirstFirst ... 20282930313240 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

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