Obama Health Care Law Upheld, Fed Court Dismisses Challenge

Thomas probably not, but I think I can make a pretty good argument that MLK should be considered as belonging to that august group given he was a founding voice for the current state of the civil rights in this nation of ours. Want to debate that position with me as well Kate?

PrintSmith wrote: Thomas probably not, but I think I can make a pretty good argument that MLK should be considered as belonging to that august group given he was a founding voice for the current state of the civil rights in this nation of ours. Want to debate that position with me as well Kate?

:Snooze

LadyJazzer wrote: Yeah, I know... I worry about that... (Pssst: Thomas was NOT a "founding father"...)

Of course, starting a sentence with "perhaps you fail to understand" when I've already stated that it's "not the end" of the process is sure to win me over...

Only a fool would think the reason that Virginia lacked standing would translate to every other state lacking standing as your earlier post alluded to - thus the comment that perhaps you failed to understand the latest ruling and why it was issued.

PrintSmith wrote: Thomas probably not, but I think I can make a pretty good argument that MLK should be considered as belonging to that august group given he was a founding voice for the current state of the civil rights in this nation of ours. Want to debate that position with me as well Kate?

Debating with you is pointless, as you twist facts to support your preconceived position. Thanks for the offer, though.

Recuse Thomas? Talk about the sins of the wife. How about recusing Kagan since she served the administration that signed it into law?

Kate wrote:

PrintSmith wrote: Thomas probably not, but I think I can make a pretty good argument that MLK should be considered as belonging to that august group given he was a founding voice for the current state of the civil rights in this nation of ours. Want to debate that position with me as well Kate?

Debating with you is pointless, as you twist facts to support your preconceived position. Thanks for the offer, though.

Just as I thought, without the built in ability for ridicule, the reason to oppose a more liberal interpretation of inclusion disappears. Thanks for confirming this point that was made in the earlier debate on that subject.

PrintSmith wrote:

Kate wrote:

PrintSmith wrote: Thomas probably not, but I think I can make a pretty good argument that MLK should be considered as belonging to that august group given he was a founding voice for the current state of the civil rights in this nation of ours. Want to debate that position with me as well Kate?

Debating with you is pointless, as you twist facts to support your preconceived position. Thanks for the offer, though.

Just as I thought, without the built in ability for ridicule, the reason to oppose a more liberal interpretation of inclusion disappears. Thanks for confirming this point that was made in the earlier debate on that subject.

When you finally decide to stop altering facts to fit your arguments, then I will gladly debate you.

Ultimately, all this BS is going to go the way of the dinosaurs, when our economy collapses and our perverted government along with it. Revel while it lasts.

LadyJazzer wrote:

Obama Health Care Law Upheld, Federal Court Dismisses Challenge To Affordable Care Act

A federal appeals court has dismissed a challenge to President Barack Obama's health care reform law.

The ruling vacates a lower court's decision that the centerpiece of the Affordable Care Act requiring U.S. citizens to buy health insurance or pay a penalty starting in 2014 is unconstitutional.

The 4th circuit court of appeals did not rule on the question of whether the individual mandate is constitutional. Instead, it found that Virginia did not have sufficient standing to bring the lawsuit in the first place.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/09/0 ... 53896.html

Obama wins another round.... It ain't over... But that's another one down....

:woo hoo:

I would hardly call this a win. This was not an issue of whether the law is Constitutional, this is an issue of who has the standing to challenge it. The 4th circut simply said that a state has no standing to challenge it in Federal court.