• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Is Romney a traitor?

Is Romney a taitor?

  • No..he is simply fighting the machine.

    Votes: 2 16.7%

  • Yes...if he becomes President, he must follow the costitution

    Votes: 4 33.3%

  • it's murcky..we shoulod let the high courts decid

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • other.....

    Votes: 6 50.0%
  • Total voters
    12
istory.
jpevans said:

It will take a constitutional amendment to overturn.
I don't think the Romney-Bot a taitor, just not very clear on what a civilian can do. :peace
Click to expand...

Because it is considered a tax it will only take 50 republican senators sticking together to repeal Obamacare. If Romney wins, they hold the house, and pick up 3 senate seats it's history. Remember the dems have 23 senate seats to defend so it's very possible the law's repealed before it's implemented.
***************************************************************************************************
Repealing the law won't happen before January 2013. It would be dependent on a triple Republican victory this November: Mitt Romney would need to defeat President Barack Obama, Republicans must hold their majority in the House, and they must also gain enough seats in the Senate so they have at least 50 of their own in the upper chamber.

What about the filibuster? Don't you need 60 votes to do anything in the Senate?

Not in this case. Because Chief Justice John Roberts' majority opinion ruled the individual mandate a "tax," a Republican-led Senate could repeal that provision--and others--using what is called "budget reconciliation," a procedural tactic that requires only a simple majority vote. The Republican vice president, in this hypothetical scenario, would break the tie. (Democrats used the same method in 2010 to pass the health care bill
 
Learn a little history and come on back and we'll discuss this "traitor" BS. Start by taking a look at Madison v Marbury and Jefferson's reaction to the decision. The president has the ability to block many of the provisions (or rather their implementation) administratively. But mostly what the POTUS does when he feels the court has gone off the rails is to incentivize the congress to change the bill and take it out of the court's hands.

With a majority of the people against the mandate, should be easy to get support for the striking of that provision legislatively. Won't require a constitutional amendment, that's just silly.
 
Phys251 said:
Not so much a traitor as one of the biggest flip-floppers in political history.
Click to expand...

Spell check is a wonderful thing
Spell check.JPG
 
tecoyah said:
he has stated clearly....very.

He will fight the Supreme court over Obama/Romney Care...fist day.
Click to expand...


Traitor? No.


But he sure does know how to use his Etch-A-Sketch.
 
jpevans said:

It will take a constitutional amendment to overturn.
I don't think the Romney-Bot a taitor, just not very clear on what a civilian can do. :peace
Click to expand...

What? Where'd you get this painfully incorrect information?
 

Thanks for the Schooling, my bad. :3oops:
I thought I posted yesterday ackowledgeing my mistake, yet I must have done someting wrong. :doh
So, why is it that Citizens United requires an Amendment to overturn? :confused: :peace
jerry7 said:
istory.

Because it is considered a tax it will only take 50 republican senators sticking together to repeal Obamacare. If Romney wins, they hold the house, and pick up 3 senate seats it's history. Remember the dems have 23 senate seats to defend so it's very possible the law's repealed before it's implemented.
***************************************************************************************************
Repealing the law won't happen before January 2013. It would be dependent on a triple Republican victory this November: Mitt Romney would need to defeat President Barack Obama, Republicans must hold their majority in the House, and they must also gain enough seats in the Senate so they have at least 50 of their own in the upper chamber.

What about the filibuster? Don't you need 60 votes to do anything in the Senate?

Not in this case. Because Chief Justice John Roberts' majority opinion ruled the individual mandate a "tax," a Republican-led Senate could repeal that provision--and others--using what is called "budget reconciliation," a procedural tactic that requires only a simple majority vote. The Republican vice president, in this hypothetical scenario, would break the tie. (Democrats used the same method in 2010 to pass the health care bill
Click to expand...
 
jpevans said:

Thanks for the Schooling, my bad. :3oops:
I thought I posted yesterday ackowledgeing my mistake, yet I must have done someting wrong. :doh
So, why is it that Citizens United requires an Amendment to overturn? :confused: :peace
Click to expand...

You can't pass legislation to change the constitution. To explain it in a really, really, REALLY simplified and broad way...the CU case ruled that Corporations have first amendment rights. It ruled on actual constitutional interpritation. The only way to change that would be to actually amend the constitution.

The ACA case did not rule on an interpritation of the constitution. It ruled on whether or not a law was constutional. It didn't fundamentally change a constitutional interpritation, it simply said a law was constitutional. Just because a law isn't constitutional doesn't mean you can't get rid of it.

Let me explain it another way....

Again, being really, really, REALLY simplified here. Roe v. Wade established a new interpritation to a constitutional "right" of privacy that states that abortion is legal. That decision wasn't deeming simply a single law as being constitutional or not but defined an actual constitutional right through interpritation.

On the flip side...if the Patriot Act was found to be "constitutional" if it went up to the Supreme Court it would simply be deeming the law "okay" by the Constitution. It wouldn't prevent people from overturning it through the legislative process because just because a law is constitutional doesn't mean that it's PART of the constitution.

Citizen's United ruling that Corporations have 1st amendment rights essentially sets down Constitutional Precedent, meaning it needs constitutional level changes to actually overturn through the legislative process. The ACA Ruling that the Health Care Law is constitutional simply indicates the law itself is constitutional, and as such can be overturned through other legislative measures.
 
All Free Traders are Traitors, or Free Traitors.

I voted yes, he is a Taitor.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom