- Joined
- Dec 22, 2005
- Messages
- 66,438
- Reaction score
- 47,477
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Independent
I see. The Constitutional law professor didn't understand what they were doing.
Did they argue under congress' authority to tax by mistake, as well?
I don't see that. He didn't believe it was a tax. A good lawyer covered his bets and won. But, practically, it makes no difference.
you should notice that the law advocated by that Constitutional scholar prevailed
The JD legal eagles argued that point before the Supremes. Of did you think the Supremes made that up out of whole cloth?
Waiting times were already getting longer in the United States. Obamacare didn't solve the problem, nor did it create the problem. Why we're debating this is beyond me, as it has nothing to do with what was decided yesterday.
And when you think about it, it's the perfect metaphor for his entire Presidency. Neither caused nor solved the problem.
As I understand it it's like the private system: better in some places than others.
The JD legal eagles argued that point before the Supremes. Of did you think the Supremes made that up out of whole cloth?
Right, as a tax. You should note that he was well aware it was a tax while he was saying it was not a tax.
It was upheld as a tax penalty. What did Democrats say it was? A: a tax penalty.
Much as cons want to hang their hats on semantics, there's just no hook there.
It was upheld as a tax penalty. What did Democrats say it was? A: a tax penalty.
Much as cons want to hang their hats on semantics, there's just no hook there.
Hey, I giving you what those that I know, sorta the Horses Mouth, have said.
Moderator's Warning: |
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?