Activist Judges Protect Obama Care

[Bro. Curtis]

The term "legal precedent", simlpy means "existing law". There was no legal mandate to buy any kind of insurance, now there is not only one for that, the mandate also states existing insurance companies will have to compete with team zero for a profit. No such law existed before, now a court says it does. Activist. The very definition.

And I am still waiting for you to produce something that isn't commie trash. Something that's not an opinion column. I won't read it. Find the specific laws that they overturned, and let's examine the history of those laws, and then we can see who the real "activists" are.

 

[targus]

Crabby is told to read the O/P for the answer to his question as to which judges are activist and he says "off topic" !!! :laugh:

This is just priceless !!! :laugh:

 

[Crabtownboy]

And I am still waiting for you to produce something that isn't commie trash. Something that's not an opinion column. I won't read it. Find the specific laws that they overturned, and let's examine the history of those laws, and then we can see who the real "activists" are.

Interesting that you consider the American Bar Association as publishing 'commie trash'.

I am still waiting for you to name the left leaning judges you condemn in earlier posts ... names and decisions please.

Do you consider the Washington Times a commie newspaper.

Here is a quote from them:

“It is a jolt to the legal system when you overrule a precedent,” Judge Roberts told senators. “Precedent plays an important role in promoting stability and evenhandedness. It is not enough — and the court has emphasized this on several occasions — it is not enough that you may think the prior decision was wrongly decided.”

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2005/sep/14/20050914-120153-7482r/?page=all

As we know Roberts has voted to overturn precedence on several occasions....so he has "jolted the legal system".

 

[mandym]

Interesting that you consider the American Bar Association as publishing 'commie trash'.

I am still waiting for you to name the left leaning judges you condemn in earlier posts ... names and decisions please.

Do you consider the Washington Times a commie newspaper.

Here is a quote from them:



As we know Roberts has voted to overturn precedence on several occasions....so he has "jolted the legal system".

And he continues to be off topic

 

[Crabtownboy]

And he continues to be off topic

Then the comment I responded to was off topic. In case you missed it it was:

Originally Posted by Bro. Curtis View Post
And I am still waiting for you to produce something that isn't commie trash. Something that's not an opinion column. I won't read it. Find the specific laws that they overturned, and let's examine the history of those laws, and then we can see who the real "activists" are.

I am still waiting for your answer to my question.

 

[Havensdad]

Then the comment I responded to was off topic. In case you missed it it was:



I am still waiting for your answer to my question.

So you agree then, that the activist judges should have overturned Obamacare?

 

[mandym]

Then the comment I responded to was off topic. In case you missed it it was:

That was your choice but you are the person who seems to point out what you see as being off topic. Here you went from Obama and judges in the op to bush and judges. you are inconsistent. If you are going to play games with people then at least be consistent. anyway we are all just as guilty for responding to your silliness. take care

 

[Crabtownboy]

That was your choice but you are the person who seems to point out what you see as being off topic. Here you went from Obama and judges in the op to bush and judges. you are inconsistent. If you are going to play games with people then at least be consistent. anyway we are all just as guilty for responding to your silliness. take care

At least I answer questions and respond to comments ... and I do not use impolite words and attempt insult other posters. Several have posted how this makes you look in their eyes.

So you believe the court in VA was incorrect in its decision?

 

[Bro. Curtis]

I am still waiting for you to name the left leaning judges you condemn in earlier posts ... names and decisions please.

This is why I call you a liar. The names and decisions are articulated quite well in the O/P. I have told you this. Others have, as well.

You are a liar.

 

[Crabtownboy]

This is why I call you a liar. The names and decisions are articulated quite well in the O/P. I have told you this. Others have, as well.

You are a liar.

I believe calling someone a liar is a board violation. It should be.

You made the comments, so you must know of many left leaning judges. I was asking for their names and decisions. I was not rehashing the OP and I you did not specify the OP in your comment. So my question stands. Who are all these left leaning judges? What were their decisions?

Why do you disagree with the VA judges? Under the Federal sovereign immunity a state cannot sue the federal government unless the federal government has waived its immunity. [See Gray v. Bell, 712 F.2d 490, 507 (D.C. Cir. 1983)] Federal sovereign immunity dates back to the founding of the country.

The federal court ruled correctly as the federal government had not waived its immunity.

I will accept your apology.

 

[Robert Snow]

I believe calling someone a liar is a board violation. It should be.

You made the comments, so you must know of many left leaning judges. I was asking for their names and decisions. I was not rehashing the OP and I you did not specify the OP in your comment. So my question stands. Who are all these left leaning judges? What were their decisions?

Why do you disagree with the VA judges? Under the Federal sovereign immunity a state cannot sue the federal government unless the federal government has waived its immunity. [See Gray v. Bell, 712 F.2d 490, 507 (D.C. Cir. 1983)] Federal sovereign immunity dates back to the founding of the country.

The federal court ruled correctly as the federal government had not waived its immunity.

I will accept your apology.

Curtis does this regularly. He gets frustrated because he can't defend his position and lashes out, kind of like a child throwing a tantrum!

BTW, I reported his violation.

 

[Bro. Curtis]

I believe calling someone a liar is a board violation. It should be.

It should be against the board rules to call someone a liar, but not against the rules to post something demonstrably untrue ? I want no part of such a message board. Ban me.

I will accept your apology.

You are a joke.

 

[Crabtownboy]

It should be against the board rules to call someone a liar, but not against the rules to post something demonstrably untrue ? I want no part of such a message board. Ban me.

So prove it is untrue? Your opinion does not prove anything. You used the word demonstrably ... so demonstrate it.

You are a joke.

Probably another board violation.

 

[Bro. Curtis]

So prove it is untrue? Your opinion does not prove anything. You used the word demonstrably ... so demonstrate it.

It is beyond me why you will not aknowledge the answer to your question is in the O/P. Like Robert Snow, I promise never to engage you, again.

 

[Crabtownboy]

It is beyond me why you will not aknowledge the answer to your question is in the O/P. Like Robert Snow, I promise never to engage you, again.

Promises, promises. :laugh:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nQqjG7yPxuE&feature=fvsr