Our disingenuous, obfuscating, lying president: "It would be 'unprecedented' for the Supreme Court to strike down Obamacare." Really???
|
|
|||||
|
13 votes
|
|
26% | ||
|
16 votes
|
|
32% | ||
|
1 vote
|
|
2% | ||
|
13 votes
|
|
26% | ||
|
7 votes
|
|
14% | ||
Appeals court fires back at Obama's comments on health care case
- By
- Jan Crawford
- Topics
- Supreme Court
(Credit:
AP Photo/Carolyn Kaster)
Updated 6:55 p.m. ET
(CBS News) In the
escalating battle between the administration and the judiciary, a
federal appeals court apparently is calling the president's bluff --
ordering the Justice Department to answer by Thursday whether the Obama
Administration believes that the courts have the right to strike down a
federal law, according to a lawyer who was in the courtroom.
The
order, by a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th
Circuit, appears to be in direct response to the president's comments yesterday about the Supreme Court's review of the health care law.
Mr. Obama all but threw down the gauntlet with the justices, saying he
was "confident" the Court would not "take what would be an
unprecedented, extraordinary step of overturning a law that was passed
by a strong majority of a democratically elected Congress." ["Strong majority?" This guy just can't help himself - his lying must be congenital!! Obamacare barely passed in the House and only passed in the Senate on a bare majority after the "Louisiana Purchase" and another 'special deal' for Nebraska were given to the senators of those two states to purchase their votes. And even then, it was passed only with the 'reconciliation' process which is normally used only for budget bills, in order to avoid a filibuster!]
Overturning
a law of course would not be unprecedented -- since the Supreme Court
since 1803 has asserted the power to strike down laws it interprets as
unconstitutional. The three-judge appellate court appears to be asking
the administration to admit that basic premise -- despite the
president's remarks that implied the contrary. [Much more than "implied" - "baldly stated" would be more accurate.] The panel ordered the
Justice Department to submit a three-page, single-spaced letter by noon
Thursday addressing whether the Executive Branch believes courts have
such power, the lawyer said.
The panel is hearing a
separate challenge to the health care law by physician-owned hospitals.
The issue arose when a lawyer for the Justice Department began arguing
before the judges. Appeals Court Judge Jerry Smith immediately
interrupted, asking if DOJ agreed that the judiciary could strike down
an unconstitutional law.
The DOJ lawyer, Dana Lydia
Kaersvang, answered yes -- and mentioned Marbury v. Madison, the
landmark case that firmly established the principle of judicial review
more than 200 years ago, according to the lawyer in the courtroom.
Smith
then became "very stern," the source said, suggesting it wasn't clear
whether the president believes such a right exists. The other two judges
on the panel, Emilio Garza and Leslie Southwick--both Republican
appointees--remained silent, the source said.
Smith, a
Reagan appointee, went on to say that comments from the president and
others in the Executive Branch indicate they believe judges don't have
the power to review laws and strike those that are unconstitutional,
specifically referencing Mr. Obama's comments yesterday about judges
being an "unelected group of people."
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-504564_162-57408827-504564/appeals-court-fires-back-at-obamas-comments-on-health-care-case/
Judge upset by Obama's comments on health law
Apr. 3, 2012 06:18 PM
Associated Press
HOUSTON -- A federal appeals
court judge seems to have taken offense at comments President Barack
Obama made this week in which he warned that if the Supreme Court
overturned his signature health care overhaul it would amount to
overreach by an "unelected" court.
The Supreme Court is set to rule later this year on the overhaul's fate.
During oral arguments Tuesday in Houston in a separate challenge to
the health care law, U.S. 5th Circuit Court of Appeals Judge Jerry Smith
said Obama's comments troubled people who have read them as a challenge
to federal courts' authority.
While judicial review of laws has long been established, Smith
ordered a federal attorney to submit a letter by Thursday stating the
government's position on this issue in light of the Obama's comments.
Read more: http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/2012/04/03/20120403texas-judge-upset-by-obamas-comments-health-law.html#ixzz1r29aUZqa
Comment:
Here we have a president who has nothing but disdain for the
Constitution and its system of checks and balances on presidential
power, also having called it a "seriously flawed" document because it
doesn't allow for "redistributive justice." Now he has attacked the
very authority of the courts to strike down laws passed by congress as
unconstitutional, and falsely stated that it would be "unprecedented" if
the Supreme Court were to strike down "Obamacare." Unprecedented?
Since the case of Marbury vs. Madison in 1803, over 180 laws passed by
congress and signed by the president have been declared
unconstitutional! If we don't have a system of "checks and balances",
three branches - legislative, executive and judicial - that are able to
check the power of one-another, we will end up as a tyranny! Which side
is our president on?
http://www.factcheck.org/2012...
Notice they didn't provide a reference in the CBO report because it is garbage.
Did you know that in Great Britain under their government "single payer" health care, women your age, and a lot younger, are told to "live with it" when diagnosed with breast cancer? Make no mistake about it, that would be the end result of Obamacare if it is fully implemented in this nation.
http://www.nationalcenter.org...
http://healthcare-economist.c...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
http://www.cbc.ca/health/stor...
“Nine medical societies, including the American Society of Clinical Oncology and the American College of Cardiology, representing nearly 375,000 physicians are challenging the widely held perception that more health care is better, releasing lists Wednesday of tests and treatments their members should no longer automatically order.”
"A lot of testing now done in medicine involves tests that are not especially accurate, tests done solely to protect against the fear of lawsuit and due to hyping of tests by manufacturers, providers and hospitals" says Caplan,”
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4...
Tort reform will lower your medical insurance. It will stop wasting money on unnecessary test. However, there is no tort reform in Obamacare.
We need to dump Obamacare and start over.
"Affordable Care Act--its expansion of Medicaid coverage to 16 million more Americans--may actually reduce those individuals' access to health care."
"In many cases, Medicaid pays doctors less than it costs to care for Medicaid patients, meaning that doctors face the choice of caring for the poor, and going broke, or shutting their doors to Medicaid patients. One survey found that internists were 8.5 times as likely to accept no Medicaid patients at all, relative to those with private insurance. Another found that two-thirds of kids on Medicaid were denied a doctor's appointment for a serious condition, relatively to only 11 percent for the privately-insured."
http://www.theatlantic.com/bu...
The first thing we need to do is cut out procedure that accomplish nothing. We need to stop lining the pockets of lawyers. Doctors pay hundred of thousand of dollars of insurance just to protect themselves against multi million dollar law suite.
Drug companies pay millions in lawsuits which add to the cost of their drugs. There was no tort reform in Obamacare which really would have driven down cost.
There is a lot of fraud in Medicare and Medicaid but again Liberal are against doing anything about it. Nothing in Obamacare.
Doctors and nurses can tell you what's wrong with the system.
The AMA was destroyed by doctors because it supported Obamacare.
Doctors don't want big government dictating their treatment.
Doctors want tort reform.
Doctors want to eliminate fraud in the system.
Doctors want to eliminate unnecessary treatments.
Obamacare did nothing to reduce cost. It was a welfare programs designed to buy votes for the party. If Obamacare isn't a welfare program, why does it cost 1.75 trillion. It going to cost much more then that if 40 percent of the doctors quit.
Your doctors appointment will cost more then $300 because of the supply of doctors and demand of patients.
Look who voted FOR 0webama care that were APPOINTED not elected to their seat.
http://bioguide.congress.gov/...
http://bioguide.congress.gov/...
http://bioguide.congress.gov/...
http://bioguide.congress.gov/...
Read at the bottom of the list of appointed senators and look up how they voted for 0WEbama care. I dont know why those links dont work now.
You might need the government to control your life but the MAJORITY of Americans are against it. Maybe Cuba or some other country would suit you better. You would fit right in in one of those countries.
He came out with his criticism of the Supreme Court just after the vote.
He had a temper tantrum just like a little kid.
Second, it was not passed by a "strong majority." The margin in the House of Representatives was 219 representatives for and 212 against - a margin of 7. In the Senate it was even closer, a bare majority, after Obama and Reid cut "deals" with the senators from Nebraska and Louisiana exempting their states from some of the more onerous expenses in the act. In fact Harry Reid took the unprecedented route of invoking "reconciliation" in a non-budget bill, so that the minority could not use a filibuster to stop the vote. And today, Obamacare is grossly unpopular with the people, with polls showing upwards of 60% of the people wanting the "individual mandate" or the entire bill repealed.
Since I've been on Medicare, they've been making money off of me. I haven't even used the amount I pay in my Medicare premiums, around $1200 a year, in my single annual visit to the doctor's office.
The Clown is a lying fraud. Remember he dissed the SC before at the state of the union.
Hope Justice Kennedy throws it back in his face with his vote.
Only Toad Kagan agrees with Obies view.