Quantcast

Do you think the conservative supreme court justice that voted in favor of obamacare, which, gave a 5-4 decision was paid off to vote that way?

boss hawg 2012/06/29 23:36:51
You!
Add Photos & Videos
i think it's possible. why else would a strict conservative vote for anything obama wants.
Add a comment above

Top Opinion

  • Mary 2012/06/30 05:11:45 (edited)
    yes
    Mary
    +13
    He stacked the deck very early on to insure the outcome of this vote....first appointment to the not-so-supreme court went to... Sonia Sotomayor the next appointment went to his good friend and associate...Elena Kagan...the vote was in the bag.



    Constitution Null and Void


    THIS RULING MUST BE REPEALED...

    WHERE OH WHERE IS CONGRESS...AS USUAL....NOWHERE TO BE SEEN.....THEY ARE TRAITORS TO THE AMERICAN PEOPLE... AND HAVE DISGRACED AND DISCARDED THEIR GREAT NATION!!!



    ELENA KAGAN BREAKS FEDERAL LAW BY HEARING OBAMACARE

    CASE - REPUBLICANS SILENT


    http://www.westernjournalism....

Sort By
  • Most Raves
  • Least Raves
  • Oldest
  • Newest
Opinions

  • OPOA912 2012/07/02 14:11:45
    yes
    OPOA912
    Not paid off as much as a reality check on the American people. Elections have consequences. All they did is make 65% of Americans even that more dedicated to getting rid of OZbama and the out of control spenders in DC
  • Claybern 2012/07/01 19:07:47
    no
    Claybern
    +2
    He has his reasons. He is pretty sure that Romney and the GOP will win in November to take control of the senate and repeal ObamaCare with a majority vote. The guy is no dummey.
  • Mike 2012/07/01 14:38:21
    no
    Mike
    +1
    Threatened
  • Torchmanner ~PWCM~JLA 2012/07/01 12:54:27
    yes
    Torchmanner ~PWCM~JLA
    +2
    Threatened. Remember obaaaama threatening the court?
  • Aqua Surf 2012/07/01 05:44:53
    yes
    Aqua Surf
    +1
    Graft, blackmail, threats; that's the Obama Way. Whatever is was, that gutless wonder of a judge will have the shame of his decision sticking to him for the rest of his life.
  • Daniel Aqua Surf 2012/07/01 13:01:40
  • jubil8 ... Aqua Surf 2012/07/03 01:01:55
    jubil8 BN-0 PON
    Don't you realize that Roberts gave Congress the go-ahead and a pathway to fix this? If he'd voted to strike down the whole law, what do you want to bet Obama would have used good old "Executive Privilege" again and done an end-run on it? Now he can't.

    He got "agreement" -- but without teeth. This may turn out to be winning the battle and losing the war.
  • Borat Obama 2012/07/01 04:00:20
    yes
    Borat Obama
    +2
    Money talks. It works most of the time.
  • jcadla 2012/07/01 03:19:45
    no
    jcadla
    There was no conservative Justice on the court who voted for his...
  • boss hawg jcadla 2012/07/01 04:18:35
    boss hawg
    what would you call roberts?
  • Maddog 2012/07/01 02:39:55
    no
    Maddog
    +1
    Even wise people are capable of occasional lapses into stupidity.
  • Lawnmowerman~PWCM~JLA 2012/07/01 02:27:22
    no
    Lawnmowerman~PWCM~JLA
    +1
    It was reported that he said it was to get the voters still on the fence to jump off on Romney's side so Obama gets his walking papers in November. I hope his gamble pays off.
  • Kane Fernau 2012/06/30 19:00:16
    no
    Kane Fernau
    +2
    Roberts was influenced, by who or what is the question.
  • Ryan 2012/06/30 12:42:07
    no
    Ryan
    +2
    He made a valid call.

    Congress has the right to set taxes, and all this individual mandate is really is an increase in your income tax with a deduction for having health insurance.

    Contrary to what Obama and most of the Democrats have been saying it is a tax.

    Though I think this part of his statement says it all:



    "Members of this Court are vested with the authority to interpret the law; we possess neither the expertise nor the prerogative to make policy judgments.

    Those decisions are entrusted to our Nation’s elected leaders, who can be thrown out of office if the people disagree with them.

    It is not our job to protect the people from the consequences of their political choices.”
  • jcadla Ryan 2012/07/01 03:21:48
    jcadla
    Members of the Supreme Court decide on the constitutionality of things,-not the legality...
  • Ryan jcadla 2012/07/02 02:49:56
    Ryan
    Pretty much.
  • jubil8 ... Ryan 2012/07/03 01:06:39
    jubil8 BN-0 PON
    Only when forced to do so usually. The SC tries to avoid citing the Constitution as part of a ruling. There's lots of language it can use -- a law is "vague" and therefore needs to be rewritten, but the Court doesn't decide its constitutionality, for instance.
  • Lady Whitewolf 2012/06/30 10:33:51
    no
    Lady Whitewolf
    Just no.
  • Angus 2012/06/30 10:01:30
    no
    Angus
    +3
    I would have to guess that there was some sore of threat to his life. However, this is a gift to Romney. The majority of Americans don't agree with the decision and will make their voices heard in November. Obama is a goner. Romney will repeal Obamacare; so will Congress on the 11th. Obama will be exposed for who he truly is and he will be impeached.
  • Selketskiss 2012/06/30 08:57:47
    no
    Selketskiss
    +4
    Threatened would be my guess...
  • XZQZQ 2012/06/30 08:21:43
    no
    XZQZQ
    +2
    I would not be surprised if some arrangement had been made, within the GOP, since this will virtually guarantee the WH & Senate will change hands....
  • D D 2012/06/30 07:35:50
    no
    D D
    +4
    I don't think he was paid off. I think is was a lot of pressure. Possibly future incentives. It was something, but I don't know what.

    As far as the actual Obamacare, as Daniel says, it is the foot in the door to get us all tagged.
  • Mary D D 2012/07/02 18:30:05 (edited)
    Mary
    R.F.I.D. chipping to be implemented by 2013..


    http://beforeitsnews.com/stor...

    Are you ready to have your RFID Chip Implanted? 3/23/2013 is your date!

    By Fred Brownbill on February 14, 2012 in Constitution Legal Watch


    This new Health Care (Obamacare) law requires an RFID chip implanted in all of us. This chip will not only contain your personal information with tracking capability but it will also be linked to your bank account. And get this, Page 1004 of the new law (dictating the timing of this chip), reads, and I quote: “Not later than 36 months after the date of the enactment”. It is now the law of the land that by March 23rd 2013 we will all be required to have an RFID chip underneath our skin and this chip will be link to our bank accounts as well as have our personal records and tracking capability built into it. polidics.com/news/another-hid...
    On Sunday March 21, 2010 the Senate Healthcare bill HR3200 was passed and signed into law the following Tuesday.

    Page 1004 of the new law (dictating the timing of this chip), reads, and I quote: “Not later than 36 months after the date of the enactment”

    H.R. 3200 section 2521, Pg. 1001, paragraph 1.

    “The Secretary shall establish a national medical device registry (in this subsection referred to as the ‘registry’)
    to facilitate analysis ...












    R.F.I.D. chipping to be implemented by 2013..


    http://beforeitsnews.com/stor...

    Are you ready to have your RFID Chip Implanted? 3/23/2013 is your date!

    By Fred Brownbill on February 14, 2012 in Constitution Legal Watch


    This new Health Care (Obamacare) law requires an RFID chip implanted in all of us. This chip will not only contain your personal information with tracking capability but it will also be linked to your bank account. And get this, Page 1004 of the new law (dictating the timing of this chip), reads, and I quote: “Not later than 36 months after the date of the enactment”. It is now the law of the land that by March 23rd 2013 we will all be required to have an RFID chip underneath our skin and this chip will be link to our bank accounts as well as have our personal records and tracking capability built into it. polidics.com/news/another-hid...
    On Sunday March 21, 2010 the Senate Healthcare bill HR3200 was passed and signed into law the following Tuesday.

    Page 1004 of the new law (dictating the timing of this chip), reads, and I quote: “Not later than 36 months after the date of the enactment”

    H.R. 3200 section 2521, Pg. 1001, paragraph 1.

    “The Secretary shall establish a national medical device registry (in this subsection referred to as the ‘registry’)
    to facilitate analysis of post-market safety and outcomes data on each device that— ‘‘is or has been used in or on
    a patient; ‘‘and is— ‘‘a class III device; or ‘‘a class II device that is implantable, life-supporting, or life-sustaining.”

    Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act:
    www.fda.gov/downloads/Medical...
    A class II implantable device is an “implantable radio frequency transponder system for patient identification and health information.” The purpose of a class II device is to collect data in medical patients such as “claims data, patient survey data, standardized analytic files that allow for the pooling and analysis of data from disparate data environments, electronic health records, and any other data deemed appropriate by the Secretary.”

    Class III devises are items such as breast implants, pacemakers, heart valves, etc. A Class II device that is implantable is, as you seen from the FDA, an implantable radio frequency transponder, RFID chip. From breast implants, to pacemakers, to RFID chips which one is the only possible one that can used for the stated purpose in section B which is, “for linking such data with the information included in the registry”? As we know from subsection A, the information in the registry is the name of a device. In plain speak, we are in a clear way being told that our electronic medical records are going to be linked to a class II implantable device!

    “The Secretary to protect the public health; shall establish procedures to permit linkage of information submitted pursuant to subparagraph (A, remember subparagraph A is the class 2 implantable device reference) with patient safety and outcomes data obtained under paragraph (3, which is electronic medical records); and to permit analyses of linked data;”

    Continuing on to page 1007, in the STANDARDS, IMPLEMENTATION CRITERIA, AND CERTIFICATION CRITERIA section, the secretary of health and human services is given full power to intact all mandates from the laundry list of to-do items in the creation process of the registry as well as dictate how the devises listed in the National Medical Device Registry are to be used and implemented.

    “The Secretary of the Health Human Services, acting through the head of the Office of the National Coordinator for Health Information Technology, shall adopt standards, implementation specifications, and certification criteria for the electronic exchange and use in certified electronic health records of a unique device identifier for each device described in paragraph 1 (National Medical Device Registry), if such an identifier is required by section 519(f) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 U.S.C. 360i(f)) for the device.”
    (more)
  • Pedro Doller ~POTL-PWCM~JLA 2012/06/30 06:17:32
    no
    Pedro Doller ~POTL-PWCM~JLA
    +6
    More like death threats, just like when they pushed the legislation through. Did the same when Ross Perot ran for president.
  • Daniel Pedro D... 2012/07/01 13:02:05
  • Bob DiN 2012/06/30 06:07:46
    yes
    Bob DiN
    +6
    Someone got to him.
  • Katherine 2012/06/30 05:54:05
    no
    Katherine
    +6
    More likely a death threat.
  • American☆Atheist 2012/06/30 05:27:16
    no
    American☆Atheist
    +3
    oh god, not another conspiracy theory.
  • D D America... 2012/06/30 07:37:35
    D D
    +5
    People do not believe our politicians are honest righteous people only thinking of the good for America and it's citizens.
  • Lady Wh... America... 2012/06/30 10:34:44
    Lady Whitewolf
    +3
    HEAR YA!!! Too many of them floating around!
  • Mary 2012/06/30 05:11:45 (edited)
    yes
    Mary
    +13
    He stacked the deck very early on to insure the outcome of this vote....first appointment to the not-so-supreme court went to... Sonia Sotomayor the next appointment went to his good friend and associate...Elena Kagan...the vote was in the bag.



    Constitution Null and Void


    THIS RULING MUST BE REPEALED...

    WHERE OH WHERE IS CONGRESS...AS USUAL....NOWHERE TO BE SEEN.....THEY ARE TRAITORS TO THE AMERICAN PEOPLE... AND HAVE DISGRACED AND DISCARDED THEIR GREAT NATION!!!



    ELENA KAGAN BREAKS FEDERAL LAW BY HEARING OBAMACARE

    CASE - REPUBLICANS SILENT


    http://www.westernjournalism....
  • America... Mary 2012/06/30 05:28:17
    American☆Atheist
    +2
    that site is propaganda
  • Mary America... 2012/06/30 06:34:23
    Mary
    +9
    Funny how the truth is always considered "propaganda" to a left-leaning lemming...the site I provided is balanced and highly reputable...but far be it from me to muddle your dreams with a little thing called reality....DONE HERE!
  • Ryan Mary 2012/06/30 12:30:51
    Ryan
    +2
    Actually the case was ruled correctly.

    And the Chief Justice explained it very well.


    "Members of this Court are vested with the authority to interpret the law; we possess neither the expertise nor the prerogative to make policy judgments.

    Those decisions are entrusted to our Nation’s elected leaders, who can be thrown out of office if the people disagree with them.

    It is not our job to protect the people from the consequences of their political choices.”


    That last line is the key to it in my opinion. We elected the people that enacted this bill. It's up to us to show the people what we think of it. Not sit back and wait for the supreme court to save us from ourselves.

    As for the reason it's Constitutional, that's easy.

    The Healthcare Individual Mandate is constitutional because it isn't a mandate. Its nothing more or less than an increase in your income tax with a deduction if you have health insurance.

    So even though all the democrats have spent more than a year claiming it isn't a tax. That's exactly what it is.

    And since Congress has the right to set taxes, their choice to increase them is valid.
  • OPOA912 Ryan 2012/07/02 14:13:47
    OPOA912
    Exactly, the one thing we don't need is legislation from the bench. We already have enough of that.
  • Ryan OPOA912 2012/07/03 00:50:04
    Ryan
    +1
    No, we have too much of that.
  • jcadla Mary 2012/07/01 03:22:55
    jcadla
    +1
    Thank you...
  • jubil8 BN-0 PON 2012/06/30 05:07:26
    no
    jubil8 BN-0 PON
    +1
    It must be really sad in your world -- everyone who does something you don't like is a crook. Beliefs, principles, nothing matters but what YOU want. Yuk.
  • Lord Em... jubil8 ... 2012/06/30 07:36:57
    Lord Emperor of Dune
    +6
    I bet you were crying the same thing when Bush was in office... But now your messiah is on top, and bam! You can talk down to people... It won't be much longer until you are back on the bottom, God willing... Then those of us who don't enjoy having the Democratic Party decide which of our Constitutional liberties should be honored can go back to breathing easy...
  • jubil8 ... Lord Em... 2012/06/30 13:19:58
    jubil8 BN-0 PON
    Am I supposed to be abashed because I think beliefs and values and the guts to stand up for them matter? You lose big time there, bucko.

    I don't think any member of the SC was paid off for his/her vote. And I don't give a damn whether you do or not. Bye.

See Votes by State

The map above displays the winning answer by region.

News & Politics

2013/05/25 18:01:51

Hot Questions on SodaHead
More Hot Questions

More Community More Originals