• 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!

Obama says Supreme Court should never have taken up health law case

warning that a ruling against subsidies would be a "twisted interpretation" of the law.

The only thing twisted in this story is him.

That's an example of how this guy thinks. Because the law doesn't say what he wants it to say, reading it as written is considered "twisted" to him. But twisting the law the way he wants it twisted is okay. Libs see nothing wrong with that.

Things are starting to get dangerous when our president can decide that a law doesn't really mean what it says, but means whatever he decides it means. Now, if he could enforce that, and he's getting closer, we are in big trouble. Oh, and not just one party, every single person in the country, though many don't realize it.
 
No, I want to see a bill before it is voted upon. Since Medicare is on budget how do you know that it is Medicare funds being robbed? Don't really care what was proposed but rather what the bill says.

Your double standard in print. Enough said!
 
IOW, 700 million is pocket change, and your a hypocrite. But no surprise. ;)

Didn't read the article did you? When would the reduction take place? Do you know what a budget gimmick is? You simply cannot admit you are wrong on any subject.
 
It really is sad what Obama supporters have made this nation and their total ignorance as to the role of the Federal Govt. and where the money comes from for that govt. It is easy for them to ask for subsidies because they just don't get it, subsidies come from tax revenue paid for by actual taxpayers.

One of the worst things to ever happen in this country was LBJ creating the unified budget where all tax revenue from all tax sources goes into one pot regardless of what the tax was supposed to fund. That makes it easy for politicians to spend money and then when the item the taxes were to fund runs out of money simply say the program is broke and we need to tax the taxpayers more. Obama supporters have no problem taking from someone else and Obama has no problem promoting wealth redistribution.

They are aware of it, they just don't care. They believe people who have more than they do acquired it dishonestly and therefore desrve to have it taken away. If they did it themselves they'd be shot, so they look to their proxy (federal government) to do it for them.
 
Ah, so THIS President isn't allowed to have an opinion. Yet, he is right. The Congressional intent is crystal clear and the court should have not taken the case.

Not surprising that you have no concept as to the role of the Supreme Court and the fact that Obama as a Constitutional Scholar is a joke. You also lack understanding of leadership and proper decorum of the President. He shows it over and over again where it be chastising the Court during the state of the union, using the bully pulpit to destroy a sitting Congressman over the budget, and now ignoring that the two lower courts were split on this issue.
 
Didn't read the article did you? When would the reduction take place? Do you know what a budget gimmick is? You simply cannot admit you are wrong on any subject.

You mean the "flavor of a gimmick" because it takes effect in the future equates to you as not taking effect. That's funny, hope deferred huh. :roll:
 
Not surprising that you have no concept as to the role of the Supreme Court and the fact that Obama as a Constitutional Scholar is a joke. You also lack understanding of leadership and proper decorum of the President. He shows it over and over again where it be chastising the Court during the state of the union, using the bully pulpit to destroy a sitting Congressman over the budget, and now ignoring that the two lower courts were split on this issue.
What I denote is your double-standard with respect to Mr. Obama. What was acceptable practice for other presidents is im"proper decorum" for this President.

41.gif
Statement on the Supreme Court Decision on the Lee v. Weisman Case
June 24, 1992
I am very disappointed by the Supreme Court's decision in Lee v. Weisman. The Court said that a simple nondenominational prayer thanking God for the liberty of America at a public school graduation ceremony violates the first amendment.

George W. Bush:

Statement by President Bush on Supreme Court Decision on Partial-Birth Abortion
I am pleased that the Supreme Court upheld a law that prohibits the abhorrent procedure of partial-birth abortion.

Criticize a 2008 ruling recognizing the rights of prisoners held at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba.

President Richard M. Nixon:


Said he was disappointed with a 1974 decision ordering him to turn over the tapes that would help end his presidency.

The idea that the President of the United States has fewer rights to express his opinion regarding a court case -- a right every citizen has, is mind boggling.
 
You mean the "flavor of a gimmick" because it takes effect in the future equates to you as not taking effect. That's funny, hope deferred huh. :roll:

Yes, a gimmick, something that is supposed to take effect in 9 years and you are worried about it now? I don't support taking anything from Medicare because it was a self funded program just like SS and yet LBJ put it on budget and all Presidents and Congress have spent the money. The reality is this is an accounting gimmick as the article said and yet fear mongers like all liberals will continue to ignore that fact.
 
What I denote is your double-standard with respect to Mr. Obama. What was acceptable practice for other presidents is im"proper decorum" for this President.

View attachment 67185482





The idea that the President of the United States has fewer rights to express his opinion regarding a court case -- a right every citizen has, is mind boggling.

All those comments came AFTER the decision was made, not BEFORE!!!!!!!
 
Yes, a gimmick, something that is supposed to take effect in 9 years and you are worried about it now? I don't support taking anything from Medicare because it was a self funded program just like SS and yet LBJ put it on budget and all Presidents and Congress have spent the money. The reality is this is an accounting gimmick as the article said and yet fear mongers like all liberals will continue to ignore that fact.

But I've told you repeatedly that I don't agree with LBJ's bundling. Why do you keep arguing that with me. Otherwise, just because it doesn't take effect for nine years, doesn't mean that it doesn't take effect!
 
But I've told you repeatedly that I don't agree with LBJ's bundling. Why do you keep arguing that with me. Otherwise, just because it doesn't take effect for nine years, doesn't mean that it doesn't take effect!

It means that it is fear mongering by the left to get a reaction out of people like you. There are more important problems facing this country than worrying about what is going to happen 9 years down the road. You really think that the Congress of the United States is going to actually cut Medicare funding?
 
So you were bull****ting, ok.

Not at all. And you know that full well. You just dislike, what you are hearing, because it destroys much of your emotional leanings.
 
It means that it is fear mongering by the left to get a reaction out of people like you. There are more important problems facing this country than worrying about what is going to happen 9 years down the road. You really think that the Congress of the United States is going to actually cut Medicare funding?

But the left is working with the right on this. ;)
 
Not at all. And you know that full well. You just dislike, what you are hearing, because it destroys much of your emotional leanings.

Pretty funny dude, don't flatter yourself so!
 
Um, that's not what I said though. :roll:

You gave a list of sites none of which would be called Conservative(Right) sites but rather all are left leaning sites that always tries to stir up the Gruber voter.
 
Back
Top Bottom