What's new
By:

Too Bad

PearlWatson

PearlWatson

Well-Known Member
It is unconstitutional to force Americans to buy a product.

It would have been sweet to make Laker Fans buy D-Will Jerseys.
 
Actually, in that case I was only referencing the time. The time, not I, was wasted. However, I do see and understand how you drew that conclusion of myself being wasted.
 
VINYLONE said:
I think in the long run the mandate to having to buy HI from a private entity will turn out to be unconstitutional.
Click to expand...

I love the qualification of "in the long run."

Even if the Supreme Court eventually rules the other way that doesn't mean jack to Viny. He's interested only "in the long run."

I also think it's fun to qualify my statements so that I'm never wrong. I'm just not right yet. You wait and see.
 
Sirkickyass said:
I love the qualification of "in the long run."

Even if the Supreme Court eventually rules the other way that doesn't mean jack to Viny. He's interested only "in the long run."

I also think it's fun to qualify my statements so that I'm never wrong. I'm just not right yet. You wait and see.
Click to expand...

I'm sure he knows the Supreme Court is the end of the "long run."
 
Millsapa said:
I'm sure he knows the Supreme Court is the end of the "long run."
Click to expand...


You might be surprised. Those who take a specific legal position tend to believe that the Supreme Court will "get it right" as soon as the justices change. That's been an active political strategy relating to at least one case for decades.
 
Sirkickyass said:
I love the qualification of "in the long run."

Even if the Supreme Court eventually rules the other way that doesn't mean jack to Viny. He's interested only "in the long run."

I also think it's fun to qualify my statements so that I'm never wrong. I'm just not right yet. You wait and see.
Click to expand...

Look, Kicky, all Im saying is that I think once it reaches the supreme court, it will be deemed unconstitutional. Yes, there is a diversity of opinion from the courts right now, but in the end the SC will vote unconstitutional.
 
I'd be more concerned about being required to buy a product for others who drive up the cost of the product cuz they cant stop eating or smoking and refuse to exercise.
 
VINYLONE said:
Look, Kicky, all Im saying is that I think once it reaches the supreme court, it will be deemed unconstitutional. Yes, there is a diversity of opinion from the courts right now, but in the end the SC will vote unconstitutional.
Click to expand...

Upon what do you base your opinion?

Honest question: How many pieces of Congressional legislation can you think of in the last 30 years that were invalidated by the Supreme Court as exceeding the limits of the Commerce clause?
 
Sirkickyass said:
Upon what do you base your opinion?

Honest question: How many pieces of Congressional legislation can you think of in the last 30 years that were invalidated by the Supreme Court as exceeding the limits of the Commerce clause?
Click to expand...

No idea. I am not a lawyer. That said, the articles Ive read based the decision on the individual mandate part.
 
Sirkickyass said:
Upon what do you base your opinion?

Honest question: How many pieces of Congressional legislation can you think of in the last 30 years that were invalidated by the Supreme Court as exceeding the limits of the Commerce clause?
Click to expand...

Yeah, because according to liberals it is impossible to exceed the limits of the commerce clause.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page
Back
Top