This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.

Appeals Court Finds Obamacare Mandate For Individual Health Insurance Unconstitutional

Tyler Durden's picture




 

Another constitutional slap in the face for the constitutional scholar. Just out from Reuters: the 11th Circuit Court of "Appeals court rules that Obama's healthcare law's individual mandate to own health insurance unconstitutional." It has thus found in favor of the 26 states that challeneged a requirement that Americans should purchase health insurance. What next: Obama takes Obamacare to the Supreme Court? And just when the summer seemed like it may finally get boring for a change...

From Reuters:

A U.S. appeals court ruled on Friday that President Barack Obama's healthcare law requiring Americans to buy healthcare insurance or face a penalty was unconstitutional, a blow to the White House.

 

The U.S. Appeals Court for the 11th Circuit, based in Atlanta, found that Congress exceeded its authority by requiring Americans to buy coverage, but also ruled that the rest of the wide-ranging law could remain in effect.

 

The legality of the so-called individual mandate, a cornerstone of the healthcare law, is widely expected to be decided by the U.S. Supreme Court. The Obama administration has defended the provision as constitutional.

 

- advertisements -

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Fri, 08/12/2011 - 13:19 | 1554686 the not so migh...
the not so mighty maximiza's picture

i agree, you can't force private citizens under threat of fine to purchase health insurance from for profit companies.

Fri, 08/12/2011 - 13:31 | 1554730 Azannoth
Azannoth's picture

Try living in Europe you'd be amazed at all the things the government can Force you to do here (fuking commies)

And forget fines try prison

Fri, 08/12/2011 - 13:33 | 1554750 Joe Sixpack
Joe Sixpack's picture

We are not Europe (yet, well not completely). That is why we need to elect someone like Ron Paul. We are and have been moving in that direction for many many decades (over a century).

Fri, 08/12/2011 - 13:38 | 1554780 StormShadow
StormShadow's picture

Ron Paul would be a great Secretary of the Treasury, but a miserable president. 

Fri, 08/12/2011 - 13:47 | 1554819 Overpowered By Funk
Overpowered By Funk's picture

Really? more miserable than GWB or O'Bomba?

Sat, 08/13/2011 - 01:06 | 1556506 Jack Napier
Jack Napier's picture

/-\-/=[-<>-]=\-/-\
Greetings seemingly intelligent folks who have been suckered by Ron Paul. His father was a freemason. His wife and daughters are in the order of the eastern star. You are being deceived. If you are truly awake, do not support the controlled opposition such as Dr. Paul and Alex Jones. There is no savior in Washington. Even if there were, we all know elections are rigged. Buy silver and crash JP Morgan. It's the only thing we can do without personal risk.
\-/-\=[-<>-]=/-\-/

Fri, 08/12/2011 - 14:51 | 1555090 SWCroaker
SWCroaker's picture

My mind pretty much seized up trying to even fathom a ruler more miserable than GWB/Obama.  Maybe Vlad the Impaler, but even then I'm pretty sure he wouldn't lecture me daily from behind a pair of teleprompters about how he's doing everything possible to assist me, how my impaled condition is all due to absolutely everyone other than him, and that my vitals statistics all point to a lifeless recovery.  ;)

Fri, 08/12/2011 - 15:45 | 1555297 TBT or not TBT
TBT or not TBT's picture

Going back to the subject of the article, where the judicial branch is working up to deleting, or not deleting, a plainly tyrannical law that would transform the commerce clause into a writ allowing the federal, no, scratch that, CENTRAL government of the US to do anything to you that it pleases...reconsider which president was worse, the the one who appointed originalists to the bench and the supreme court, or the one who appointed the worst statists he could get through Congress??

Here in is the very core of the reason Western Civilisation cannot afford another Obama term. He would very clearly appoint people who would make decisions ending this grand experiment in human freedom, by rewriting the constitution to statist ends.

Fri, 08/12/2011 - 15:44 | 1555298 TBT or not TBT
TBT or not TBT's picture

Going back to the subject of the article, where the judicial branch is working up to deleting, or not deleting, a plainly tyrannical law that would transform the commerce clause into a writ allowing the federal, no, scratch that, CENTRAL government of the US to do anything to you that it pleases...reconsider which president was worse, the the one who appointed originalists to the bench and the supreme court, or the one who appointed the worst statists he could get through Congress??

Here in is the very core of the reason Western Civilisation cannot afford another Obama term. He would very clearly appoint people who would make decisions ending this grand experiment in human freedom, by rewriting the constitution to statist ends.

Fri, 08/12/2011 - 18:16 | 1555784 nmewn
nmewn's picture

Well stated.

I read this Bloomie editorial this morning. I had to read and re-read it to make sure what my eyes were telling my brain was accurate to what was on the page. The pertinent passages from this particular fluff piece...

"Obama, asked about asserting a 14th Amendment right to raise the debt limit unilaterally -- or at least threatening to do so -- said: “I’ve talked to my lawyers. They are not persuaded that this is a winning argument.” And that was that.

Obama’s reluctance to use a power he felt he wasn’t entitled to was impressive, even if the former constitutional lawyer was wrong in his interpretation. When was the last time a president voluntarily gave up power for no better reason than obeying the Constitution (which, just incidentally, he has sworn an oath to defend)? If it had been a Republican president and his supporters in the legislature were making such a case for an imperial presidency, liberals would be having fits.

Obama’s stand on principle is especially noble because he might well have been able to use the public debt clause to have his way, even if his interpretation of it was wrong. First, he could have threatened to use it, even knowing in his heart that he would not. And second, there’s a good chance the Supreme Court would not take such a case."

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-08-12/obama-s-14th-amendment-stand-counters-wimp-factor-claims-view.html

The mental calisthenics involved, for the editorial board of Bloomies to write that is breathtaking to me.

A "constitutional lawyer"...who never argued a case before SCOTUS. Or even a petty theft case before any municipal judge or any case anywhere for that matter.

He "consulted" his lawyers before determining what he was contemplating doing was un-constitutional, so he can now be said by the Bloomie editorial board as standing on principle?

I need a drink...a stiff one.

Fri, 08/12/2011 - 20:10 | 1555993 New_Meat
New_Meat's picture

"I need a drink...a stiff one.... "

Dude, have one on me.  I'll follow suit.  But Boomberg is a great view into wtf is going on, especially in the morning.  Keene and Pruit do a good job of a) being pussies, but b) queuing up opposing  viewpoints.  So the themes of their shows are to have their guests battle out  the issues across sessions.

- Ned

Fri, 08/12/2011 - 20:53 | 1556090 nmewn
nmewn's picture

"Dude, have one on me.  I'll follow suit."

Quick, hurry up,..they're slidin down easy...lol.

This particular type of garbage MSM meme will always catch my eye. Here is a man propped up by nothing but illusion. He's not a "constitutional lawyer" or a professor or scholar of the Constitution. This is a man who once said the Constitution is a collection of "negative liberties".

Think about the implications of that for a second...................

He has always interpreted the Constitution as a hinderence to what the states plans are for the people, instead of what the peoples plans are for the state.

And Bloomie, by propagating the lie that he is a constitutional lawyer or that he is learned of our basic law and then omits the fact he has been consistently wrong with his "scholarly" opinions from the Heller case to his own health insurance nightmare legislation gets nmewn's razzie for the day ;-)

Fri, 08/12/2011 - 15:59 | 1555327 Michael
Michael's picture

All our problems are already solved by blaming George Bush.

See how great BO and the Obamabots are? Problems solved.

"Al-Qaeda gonna getch yah? Odds unlikely."

You can quote me on that. MJN

You can even make bumper stickers out of that saying.

Fri, 08/12/2011 - 14:04 | 1554877 baby_BLYTHE
baby_BLYTHE's picture

'Miserable' President, eh? I have to ask you, who has a more consistent credible track-record?

  • He has never voted to raise taxes.
  • He has never voted for an unbalanced budget.
  • He has never voted for a federal restriction on gun ownership.
  • He has never voted to raise congressional pay.
  • He has never taken a government-paid junket.
  • Passed legislation for a full audit of the Federal Reserve system acquiring in the process 320 co-sponsors in the process

  • He has never voted to increase the power of the executive branch.
  • He voted against the Patriot Act.
  • He voted against regulating the Internet.
  • He voted against the Iraq war.
  • He does not participate in the lucrative congressional pension program.
  • He returns a portion of his annual congressional office budget to the U.S. treasury every year.
  • Warned American's about an unsustainable economic boom, emanating from artificially-low interest rates, which fueled a speculative housing bubble and consequent bust
  • Introduced legislation American Traveler Dignity Act, to disband the TSA and return Americans their right to privacy at airports
Fri, 08/12/2011 - 14:05 | 1554886 shushup
shushup's picture

He has voted "Present" more frequently than anything else.

Fri, 08/12/2011 - 14:10 | 1554903 baby_BLYTHE
baby_BLYTHE's picture

Go ahead and vote Romney then. He admits to loving the Federal Reserve, no public audits and never to abolish it.

Go ahead, put another Fascist in and watch American burn to the ground.

Fri, 08/12/2011 - 14:17 | 1554938 PuppetRepubl1c
PuppetRepubl1c's picture

Go ahead, put another Fascist in and watch American burn to the ground.

 

+1 agree completely

 


Fri, 08/12/2011 - 16:32 | 1555471 Libertarians fo...
Libertarians for Prosperity's picture

No single group of people enjoy watching America burn to the ground more than libertarians. 

Do you not read the comments section around here?

Fri, 08/12/2011 - 17:06 | 1555613 JW n FL
JW n FL's picture

but only the Republicans have the votes to cause burning to occur.

well???

 thats not exactly true.. becuase we all know the Democrats have not done anything the republicans dont do.. so two peas in a pod, really.

dog and pony show.

there is no difference between team red and blue! just all part of the show for the sheepish consumers!

Fri, 08/12/2011 - 19:46 | 1555951 Joe Sixpack
Joe Sixpack's picture

We're all happy in Barney's (read blue+red = purple) America!

Fri, 08/12/2011 - 18:33 | 1555807 Dr. Acula
Dr. Acula's picture

>No single group of people enjoy watching America burn to the ground more than libertarians. 

It's true; there's a lot of schadenfreude in seeing what happens when others do the opposite of what Austro-libertarian theory indicates, i.e. less freedom, more taxes, more government spending, more government interventions, more bailouts, more welfare, more warfare, etc. I wish I could live in an era where society wasn't self-destructing, though.

Sun, 08/14/2011 - 11:05 | 1558755 I did it by Occident
I did it by Occident's picture

"I wish I could live in an era where society wasn't self-destructing, though."

 

Yeah, but you have to admit there is certain entertainment value.  Front row seats to history and all that.  Peace and prosperity might be too boring for human nature. 

Fri, 08/12/2011 - 21:12 | 1556128 Founders Keeper
Founders Keeper's picture

[No single group of people enjoy watching America burn to the ground more than libertarians.]---Libertarians fo...

I consider myself a "classic libertarian."  I'm a constitutionalist.  Very conservative.  I'm a Tea Party member, as well as an Oath Keeper.

Not sure if you'd lump me into your "libertarian" catagory.  I don't know of any like-minded folks who enjoy watching America burn to the ground.  Mind you, much of the burning happened before I was born.

Are you confusing anarchists for Libertarians? 

On the otherhand, Leftists are the only ones I know who truely salivate at the destruction of capitalism, rule of law, unalienable rights, natural law, private property rights, limited govt, etc.

 

Sat, 08/13/2011 - 13:30 | 1557268 cdskiller
cdskiller's picture

We leftists also salivate at the idea of accountability, equal rights, conservation, justice and education. On that note: please learn how to spell.

Sun, 08/14/2011 - 10:13 | 1558639 Founders Keeper
Founders Keeper's picture

 

 

 

Oh my goodness, there's a leftist on ZH.  Welcome.

(Don't worry cdskiller, this isn't gonna hurt a bit.) 

Equal Rights.  I thought I already mentioned equal rights under "unalienable rights."  Unless, of course you have a different idea of what "equal rights" mean.  What does it mean to you?  From whence come these "equal rights"?  The govt? No.

Accountability.  Sounds good.  But, who is accountable to whom?

Conservation.  Sounds good.  I enjoy the outdoors too.  Who determines what?

Justice.  I like justice too---individual justice in a court of law.  Social justice? No.  Sorry.  Our Founders didn't believe in collective justice.

Education.  Indeed, our Founders strongly believed in an educated informed electorate.  Public education has an important role.  And, private schools should play a larger competitive role.  Schooling directed from the Federal level?  No.  That's up to each state---a state's rights issue.  Our Constitution does not expressly give to any federal branch the authority to create, direct, or regulate public education.

Now, see?  That didn't hurt. 

 

Sun, 08/14/2011 - 11:14 | 1558780 I did it by Occident
I did it by Occident's picture

I think it's the Phoenix idea.  Basically the US is too far down the path of tyranny, that the system inevitably imploding is seen as the only way for a return to constitutional/classical liberal ideals (i.e. negative liberties, rule of law, personal and individual self-reliance, true capitalism, minimal govt in the economic sphere, etc.).  Too many are dependent on the central state (even the states) and will fight to keep their unconstitutional benefits, thus making the implosion inevitable.  But the fires of renewal will hopefully return the US to its first principles.

Fri, 08/12/2011 - 23:39 | 1556400 A Nanny Moose
A Nanny Moose's picture

Not America...just 70-80% of the Feral government.

It's not so much about satisfaction, as it is about recognition of, and resignation to, the inevitable.

 

Sat, 08/13/2011 - 14:26 | 1557330 DaBernank
DaBernank's picture

Agreed, "America" is not the power hungry idiocracy in D.C.

Sun, 08/14/2011 - 02:57 | 1558076 gaoptimize
gaoptimize's picture

And no other group will enjoy and do more to help in rebuilding America around sustainable Constitutional principles.  Suggest you read about and see pictures of what has resulted from the Yellowstone fires of 1988.  At the time, few wanted the fires and a lot of money was spent fighting them.  Then think about Japan after WWII and South Korea after the Korean War.

It is way past time to worry about how to apportion blame for the overgrown and unroductive underbrush that is choking our economy.  At this point, it is also pointless to worry about who struck the match and far too expensive to create lines around much.  There isn't the political will to allow controlled backfires to burn, we had our chance in 2008.

As a libertarian, I'm offended that you think there is some evil or selfish motivation that would cause me to enjoy suffering.  I fought as hard as I could against, but now accept and prepare for, the inevitable consequences of the policies of non-libertarians.

Fri, 08/12/2011 - 17:45 | 1555707 srelf
srelf's picture

+2

Fri, 08/12/2011 - 14:24 | 1554965 Problem Is
Problem Is's picture

Willard Romney... More spineless than Hairy Reid... The First Douche among Douches... The Republican version of Gavin Newsome... A two dimensional pretty boy card board cut out of a politicain with brains of.... cardboard...

Willard Romney:

"Corporations are people!"

Iowans should have pelted that worthless bitch with tomatoes and corn cob on the spot and drove him off of the stage and out of Iowa on a rail...

Willard "The Rat" Romney (As in the movie: Willard...)
A perfect example of the complete and utter uselessness and failure of the US political class... Kulaks one and all...

Fri, 08/12/2011 - 14:25 | 1554969 Jasper M
Jasper M's picture

Too true

+1

Fri, 08/12/2011 - 15:50 | 1555321 TBT or not TBT
TBT or not TBT's picture

Yup, Romney is a statist, a guy who promises to make government "work", which is how we got here: Democrats enact vast vote-buying, dependency building federal bureaucracies, and Republicans like Romney, rather than deleting them, promise to make them work. This goes in one direction only. We need a president who'll delete programs entirely, not tweak, apply iso 9000 management consulting makeovers to the orwellian Dept of Education, useless Dept of Energy, and on and on.

Sat, 08/13/2011 - 17:02 | 1557493 milkchaser
milkchaser's picture

Thankfully, our choices are not limited to Romney or Ron Paul.

Fri, 08/12/2011 - 14:30 | 1554988 Dangertime
Dangertime's picture

That is actually a compliment considering all of the awful things Congress has done in the past 30 years.

Fri, 08/12/2011 - 22:12 | 1556243 zhandax
zhandax's picture

BB was talking about Ron Paul.  As you pointed out, there is very little obummer has ever voted for (or against).

Sat, 08/13/2011 - 01:01 | 1556501 StychoKiller
StychoKiller's picture

Progressive/Socialists/Obamatron supporters/Decepticrats don't really need reading comprehension skillz, just a loud voice (or in this instance, a keyboard), and a willingness to do what Big Brother tells them, especially during the 10-minutes hate!

Fri, 08/12/2011 - 14:06 | 1554888 the not so migh...
the not so mighty maximiza's picture

i like your bullet point thingies

Fri, 08/12/2011 - 14:11 | 1554910 SMG
SMG's picture

I agree with every single one of those votes.   But in the end we got everything he voted against done to us.   He is not charasmatic and although I'm not sure, I think he's controlled opposition.   We need another champion of these ideals.

Fri, 08/12/2011 - 14:17 | 1554939 baby_BLYTHE
baby_BLYTHE's picture

we don't have much time left, the economy will totally implode before the next election.

I would rather put a Pro-American president in now then risk losing the nation.

Fri, 08/12/2011 - 15:16 | 1555193 A Lunatic
A Lunatic's picture

The nation is already lost. It was taken from us through the principles of adverse possession. Unconstitutional laws were ushered in throughout the last hundred years and allowed to stand, like razor wire fences well within the borders of our own private properties, intentionally put there to steal from generations of people who were not around to defend themselves against future tyranny of the Nanny State. Until we the people decide to survey the land with both our Deed and wire cutters in hand, and take back the land the previous two generations unwittingly yet intentionally gave away as a matter of convenience and false prosperity, then TPTB will continue on with their own dark and maddening version of Amerika the beautiful.

Fri, 08/12/2011 - 15:26 | 1555236 JW n FL
JW n FL's picture

So I read this GREAT Post that has stuck with me.. in spite of my readers digest mentality.

the last time I read something here that stuck with me / moved me was.. forgive my regurgitating this thought improperly (to the original poster).

There can be no us or them.. only when we are them..

that abortion of a mis-quote was in reference to educating the masses.. only after everyone is educated will we ALL be better off.

 

Back to this GREAT POST that got my ADD attention to settle down..

The description of right verses left.. can be described one way.. throughout history.

The Right Looks at the World from a Top Down Perspective.

The Left Looks at the World from a Bottom Up Perspective.

 

http://www.zerohedge.com/contributed/obama-implementing-plans-war-throug...

 

***** "If you want a clear logical definition of what differentiates 'right wing' thinking from 'left wing' thinking I would say that it lies in the confrontation of 'top down logic' and 'bottom up logic'; the French revolution and the American revolution incarnated the triumph of the latter in their declaration of human rights; the corner stone of 'left' logic." ******

 

Which takes us back to.. People Not! Corporations or Government should have the Power.

of course as much as Most of us here will Love the idea of this.. the majority of Citizens in the United States are NOT! Capable of caring for themselves let alone comprehending what is truly Good v. Bad for them. Thusly! we have a Two Party System that accepts more money from the Interests of Foreign Countries more so than ALL the Big Brand Name Wall Street Banks!

 

The Lobby Owns Our Government!

"We the People" have allowed the Government to Sell Itself Off!

"We the People" have allowed an Electoral College to Vote for "We the People"??

I could go on and on.. but the bottom line is that the Bottom or the Majority.. "We the People" Broadly do NOT! give a fuck about anything other than what "We the People" are programmed with by 24 hour a day Corporate Owned News Agencies.

 

So??????? how do we.. the Few! influence / educate the idiot majority Sheepish Consumer Masses? How do we the few? minus 5th Ave. multi-market / sub market testing.. create meme's that can compete with the MTV Generation / Readers Digest Mentality Majority? How can we help ourselves with Truth? or more reasonably.. can we? can we help ourselves? or are we ALL too far gone?

Fri, 08/12/2011 - 18:03 | 1555749 cranky-old-geezer
cranky-old-geezer's picture

 

 

 

It's too late to save America.

It's too late to save other people.  They're not worth saving anyway.

Save yourself.

Fri, 08/12/2011 - 21:42 | 1556189 Founders Keeper
Founders Keeper's picture

[***** "If you want a clear logical definition of what differentiates 'right wing' thinking from 'left wing' thinking I would say that it lies in the confrontation of 'top down logic' and 'bottom up logic'...]---JW n FL

Hi JW.  I disagree.

But, it's encouraging to see someone who cares enough and is curious enough to intelligently drill down to the core of our ideological differences.

 

Fri, 08/12/2011 - 14:16 | 1554935 jmc8888
jmc8888's picture

He has never voted for an unbalanced budget

- doesn't matter like you think it matters...those who value balanced budgets over everything else, have unbalanced minds

Should we be prudent? Yes.  But anyone that thinks balanced budgets should be law #1 in America are idiots.  So are the Keynesians.  Both are equally idiotic. Austrians are just as stupid as Keynesians..we just live in Keynesian world..so it's easy to overlook that Austrians are still MONETARISTS.

Monetarism is an Anti-American and anti-constitutional economic system. 


I'm not here to argue whether or not he'd be better than Nero or Dumbfuck Bush, but he'd be bad in his OWN way, if he was allowed to be. 

He has some major plusses, but a greater many minuses obscured by Keynesian insanity we currently are showcased every day.

The Austrian School of economic non-thought are idiots.  Just a little less idiotic in today's world.  If the Austrian school was in charge, the keynesians would look good, and think their shit don't stink. 

Monetarism as a whole is what's wrong.  All the schools of monetarism are WRONG.  All are OLIGARCHICAL in NATURE. Those are facts.

But it all goes back to one side of the propaganda.

Healthcare, Social Security, and certain things the gov't pays for, IS NOT what caused this problem.  The fact Ron would basically do nothing but shut stuff down is not a good president.

What are his ideas to DO something?

He just wants to tear down good and bad things.

Thus if he was president...we'd get rid of a lot of bad things...while creating new problems as he got rid of good things.

Why? Because he would listen to the dogma of his idiotic, anti-american MONETARY school of non-thought.

 

Ron Paul isn't the answer.  Even if he supports some good things.  He again, supports many bad things. 

What we need is someone who will get rid of the bad things, and create good things.  Ron isn't that guy.  Rand surely isn't.

 

Glass-Steagall

American Credit System (not monetary system)

Good luck to all!

Fri, 08/12/2011 - 14:26 | 1554971 Beam Me Up Scotty
Beam Me Up Scotty's picture

What exactly are the good things government does again??

 

*crickets...crickets....crickets....*

If you think its social security you are crazy.  How people think that sending the government their money so they can get 75% of it OR LESS back is a good deal is so totally beyond me, its amazing.

Fri, 08/12/2011 - 15:16 | 1555201 Trial of the Pyx
Trial of the Pyx's picture

for the most part keeping the rivers from catching fire

 

oh...I forgot, we can trust the enlightened self interest of corporations to do the right thing

Fri, 08/12/2011 - 14:28 | 1554976 Sean7k
Sean7k's picture

Never voting for an unbalanced budget means he never voted to create debt where revenues were insufficient to pay. This means he was prudent, not unbalanced.

Austrians are not monetarists, not even close. You are confused by Friedman's collaborations with Hayek. Hayek diverged from Mises on the important issue of taxation and monetary theory regarding government. You might want to do a little reading before you open your mouth.

Ron Paul has very sound ideas regarding economics. His consistency encourages the idea he will not be reckless or driven by "dogma" without a thorough evaluation of the events. 

You on the other hand, not so much.

 

Fri, 08/12/2011 - 19:50 | 1555956 Joe Sixpack
Joe Sixpack's picture

Thre may be times when an unbalanced budget makes sense, but not everytime and all the time for sure!

Fri, 08/12/2011 - 14:26 | 1554975 Conax
Conax's picture

He has delivered thousands of babies, served honorably in the USAF, stacks gold and silver, and hasn't changed his positions regardless of which way the wind was blowing.

I read he's a mason, so some people are ragging him on that.

George Washington was a mason, and a pretty fine president.

I would rather he wasn't, but hell, he's still better than anyone else, IMO. Can you imagine the spasms of outrage on the left, were he to be elected?

Hahaha!

(Being decent and honorable, he doesn't stand a chance. There's no dirt to control him with, he hasn't made his bones...)

 

Fri, 08/12/2011 - 14:28 | 1554981 baby_BLYTHE
baby_BLYTHE's picture

Ron Paul's father was a Freemason. Ron Paul has acknowledged that long ago. He, himself, is not one. Nor is he a member of the John Birch Society.

Fri, 08/12/2011 - 16:05 | 1555378 Conax
Conax's picture

That's cool!

Well, that removes my only quibble about the Honorable Dr. Paul.

Can you imagine the upheaval in DC if a guy like him were in the WH? They'd put a dead hooker in his bed and impeach him the next day!

HA!

Sat, 08/13/2011 - 01:11 | 1556510 Jack Napier
Jack Napier's picture

Dear ignorant human being guided by an enemy of freedom. Dr. Paul's wife and daughters are practicing members in the masonic order. Your quibble is justified, and your willingness to go back to sleep is a testament to why we deserve what we get. The fact that he wants to sell the gold in Fort Knox says it all. This web site is supposed to have the awakened people, but you're all in love with your slavery so much you'll elect Ron Paul.

Sat, 08/13/2011 - 15:51 | 1557439 baby_BLYTHE
baby_BLYTHE's picture

we'll your boy Obama looks like he will win a 2nd term, congrads.

Most Americans are tired of getting bent over the table at the expense of the TBTFs and Military Industrial Complex, but you yourself are ready for another round of anal rape. 

Fri, 08/12/2011 - 14:33 | 1555008 John_Coltrane
John_Coltrane's picture

Spot on comment, Blythe.  The guy has character with a capital C!  The first candidate I've actively supported (with contributions) since Reagan.  I just love the guy and his deep understanding of sound money and limited government.  And I've very cynical which is why I enjoy ZH so much.

To me voting against the patriot act and wanting to disband the TSA and the FED and his consistent support of true liberatarian principles (against foreign wars) are the key reason for any freedom loving person to support him actively-if only to disseminate his ideas more widely during the debates.  Audit and end the FED.  There can be no sound economy without sound (e.g. gold backed) money.

Fri, 08/12/2011 - 15:25 | 1555234 pazmaker
pazmaker's picture

You forgot one baby!

 

Ron Paul never fails to bring home the Bacon to his district via earmarks!

 

Pork barrel project expert!

 

I like him and all that but let's tell the whole story!

http://freestudents.blogspot.com/2007/07/ron-pauls-personal-pork-project...

2007 article but holds true

Fri, 08/12/2011 - 16:25 | 1555445 Calculated_Risk
Calculated_Risk's picture

He's taking back the tax money his constituents paid in. He's said before, the money is going to go somewhere, so it may as well go back to my people! Now GFO with your liberal fucking article, shitbag!

Fri, 08/12/2011 - 16:40 | 1555507 baby_BLYTHE
baby_BLYTHE's picture

plus, it is constitutional since all spending bills and appropriations must originate in the House of Representatives

Fri, 08/12/2011 - 19:05 | 1555891 nmewn
nmewn's picture

He is now the Chairman of the House Financial Serivces Subcommittie on Domestic Monetary Policy & Tech.

Its time for him to shit and start issuing subpoenas (if needed, that he now has the power to do) or get off the pot.

Simple as that.

Fri, 08/12/2011 - 14:18 | 1554943 DosZap
DosZap's picture

StormShadow,@13:38

I was embarrased at the hubris, and total lack respect shown the ONLY Constitutional scholar on the GOP Fox Iowa debates last night.

I used to like Santorum,but his attacks, and flat out asshole slamming of THE only one on the stage that has fought for the REAL America,and in Congress for 25yrs was STUPID,and showed a lack of character.

I got a kick out of Newt (he's a Huge prick) eating Wallaces lunch, but otherwise, we are in real trouble if those are our only choices to run against The Black Knight in 2012.

Newt's idea's would do what he said, just no way HE or anyone else w/out a solid majority in both Senate and House could ever get done.

Fri, 08/12/2011 - 13:38 | 1554781 Confused
Confused's picture

Don't look now, but the Fiat is being sold in the US!!!!

 

Oh no. We are going to live like Europeans!!!!

Fri, 08/12/2011 - 14:27 | 1554960 Sudden Debt
Sudden Debt's picture

better prepare for crazy food prices than...

I just did a budget overview. Last month food bills: 2000 euro for my family (2 adults, 2 kids) and that doesn't include restaurant bills which where about 600 euro.

thats about 2850 dollars just to fill up the fridge for one month.

I really didn't realize it was so high already. compaired to last year, it was about 1300 per month.

It kind of depressed me today to see that.

And now they are  talking about raising taxes again.

Fri, 08/12/2011 - 14:35 | 1555018 Chump
Chump's picture

Wow, you spend more on food than I make in a month.  (No point, just a random observation).

Fri, 08/12/2011 - 14:59 | 1555133 V in PA
V in PA's picture

This might help.
http://www.couponbug.com

We spend $125 a week for family of four. We eat out 2-3 times per month and order water (no beer or soda) when we do.

1 cup of rice
1 cup of beans
1 packet goya
4 Italian sausage

Dinner for 4 and cost less than $6.00

Fri, 08/12/2011 - 16:06 | 1555383 reescher
reescher's picture

you lost me at "install coupon printer" software

Fri, 08/12/2011 - 17:04 | 1555505 Not For Reuse
Not For Reuse's picture

wow, what a thoughtless way to behave. Do you think restaurants are all NPOs or something? Seriously, why bother going out to eat if you're not even going to spend enough money to pay for your share of the electricity while you're sitting there, let alone help cover the basic cashflow issues of rent, salaries, ingredients, etc? I bet they LOVE seeing you tightwad assholes walk in the door. Let me guess, you also tip exactly 15% on your free basket of bread with water. Right down to the exact penny?

Fri, 08/12/2011 - 17:07 | 1555617 VisualCSharp
VisualCSharp's picture

Let me get this straight: you are saying he has an obligation to spend too much money when he goes to a restaurant? No, he doesn't. A restaurant visit is a contract. I pay the restauranteur and he provides a meal in return. Why do you think receipts are required at the point-of-sale?

If the restaurant wants to offer free bread and water, that's their right, just like it's his right to consume them for free.

Fri, 08/12/2011 - 18:07 | 1555713 Not For Reuse
Not For Reuse's picture

Who said anything about spending too much money? Do you have some sort of obligation to set up too many strawmen when you post?

What I'm saying is that it takes a real scumbag to go out to a restaurant and not order a glass of wine or a beer or at least a fucking milkshake with your food. I'm not saying you have any obligation to NOT act like a scumbag. If you like being a cheap shitty scumbag, that's your right. But liking it certainly doesn't make you any less of one

Fri, 08/12/2011 - 18:40 | 1555830 TeresaE
TeresaE's picture

So, Not For Reuse, you are saying the restauranteur and the waitstaff would rather get 100% of NOTHING, instead of 15-20% of what I freaking order?

Huh, I'll have to tell my struggling buddy (that owns a diner) that.  Or my high school friend that just opened a new bar/restaurant.

I bet they say you are a moron.

Yes, if you cannot afford the TIP on what you order you should keep your punk ass home.

The waitstaff has ZERO right to "expect" me to order anything other than that which I order.

And trust me, as a former waitress & hostess, my waitstaff appreciates my business everytime, even if I only order water and no dessert.

I just love people that 100% or nothing.  You must go through life depriving yourself and just plain missing out.

Fri, 08/12/2011 - 19:32 | 1555927 Not For Reuse
Not For Reuse's picture

missing out on what, the fabulous taste synergy between a professionally cooked meal and a glass of 2011 vintage tap water? How is it "depriving" myself to enjoy a real drink with my food? I guess I don't understand what you're saying there.

As far as you not caring about whether your friend's diner makes enough money to stay in business, I think I already made it absolutely clear that I agree. You have the right to order whatever you want. No one else has the right to "expect" you to order anything. And I'm sure your friends will love you no matter what you order. But I'm also sure your friends are grateful for all the other customers out there picking your slack and boosting the per-table average to a level that allows them to keep opening the doors every month

Fri, 08/12/2011 - 21:14 | 1556132 johnnynaps
johnnynaps's picture

Man, i must be a real scumbag then cause i like to order water and pass on the empty 400 calorie soda. From the sounds of it, you must fit the stereo-typical american slob!

Sat, 08/13/2011 - 08:27 | 1556891 Not For Reuse
Not For Reuse's picture

so the only two drinks at your restaurant are water and 400 calorie soda? Where is this place, Honduras? You're the one who must be a "typical american slob," why would you even bother going out to eat at a restaurant that only serves water and 400 calorie soda?

Fri, 08/12/2011 - 15:07 | 1555162 Joe Sixpack
Joe Sixpack's picture

2000 euros?

Do you have to eat lobster and caviar EVERY night? And can't you find something besides champagne to wash it down with?

Or maybe food is outrageous in Europe. Wow. I know rerstaurants are. I mean I bought all this stuff in France, and it weas not that bad (2008)- 10.73 euros: http://legourmet.me/hotel_picnic.html

Fri, 08/12/2011 - 15:46 | 1555288 Sudden Debt
Sudden Debt's picture

totally not. I'm going to make some cuts in that bill believe you me.

but compaired to last year, price have sometimes doubled if I compaire bills from last year.

our meat does come from a caterrer but nothing extravagent and the vegetable, fruits and fish come from the market so that is cheaper than at the supermarkets.

It's just nuts.

Fri, 08/12/2011 - 17:40 | 1555696 Crack-up Boom
Crack-up Boom's picture

It's nowhere near that in the US yet, but food prices have risen quite a bit in the past year and I don't see why that trend would reverse anytime soon.   

Fri, 08/12/2011 - 15:30 | 1555249 pazmaker
pazmaker's picture

What are you buying?   Filet Mignon.  Lobster, Caviear, etc?

Fri, 08/12/2011 - 16:26 | 1555448 MachoMan
MachoMan's picture

I can get 8oz filets for ~$6 from a local butcher...  he literally must be just eating the money.

Fri, 08/12/2011 - 23:54 | 1556426 A Nanny Moose
A Nanny Moose's picture

he literally must be just eating the money.

Perhaps in the future this will not be so uncommon.

Fri, 08/12/2011 - 17:41 | 1555699 mkkby
mkkby's picture

Are you EFFING NUTS?  There are lots of poor people in Europe who are perfectly happy living on 20% of that.  You must live at a resort and never venture out.

Fri, 08/12/2011 - 18:55 | 1555872 Not For Reuse
Not For Reuse's picture

ZOMGZ he must be EATING all the money

let's see.. 2600€ per month

@ 30 days/mo that's about $120 per day

@ 4 family members, $30 per person

@ 3 square meals, $10 each per meal per day

So tell me again why this food budget is so ridiculous for someone living in an urban area? You can't even get a small bag of mixed salad greens for less than $12 at any farmers market in NYC, should he just force his kids to eat recycled plastic like they do in China?

Sat, 08/13/2011 - 11:23 | 1557042 DosZap
DosZap's picture

Not For Reuse

If your spending that much money for food per day, then your not eating home meals, your eating out.(maybe close to fast food joints)

Not anything special, but that's a lot of $$ per meal. A lot.

If food prices are that high at a farmers mkt, then it's time to move.

NYC is the model(along w/Kali) on how NOT to run a ciy, or a state.

The place is a festering fistule of Liberal dogma.

Sat, 08/13/2011 - 14:48 | 1557361 DaBernank
DaBernank's picture

Wow! You're in Belgium, correct? Here in Austria food is definitely not that expensive. My wife and I bought 3 bags of groceries today for €46. Mainly essentials: eggs, fruits, vegetables, chicken, milk, yogurt, cheese, bread. All of those only have 10% VAT. Wine, coffee, beer (and we don't drink it but soda as well) all have 20% VAT.

Addendum: We recently bought a car, and filling the tank is €80. Americans will be burning shit in the streets once it costs them $120 to fill up. Coming soon, yanks. Good Luck to ye.

Fri, 08/12/2011 - 14:00 | 1554867 Cow
Cow's picture

You don't have to go to college, Danny. This isn't Russia. Is this Russia? This isn't Russia.

Fri, 08/12/2011 - 16:58 | 1555587 mkkby
mkkby's picture

This comment shows the utter hopelessness out there.  Stop looking for a savior.  The bankers rule the world.  If you want to beat them, beat them at their own game.  Just STOP FEEDING THE BEAST.

The banks and most corps are so leveraged, they'll tip over very easily.

Stop doing business with international banks.  Stop buying crap on credit.  Stop watching the electronic billboard (TV) and buying all the crap advertised on it.  If very many of us did this, imagine the impact on taxes and the power of dot gov. 

It would just be acting in your own best interest, and it would bring down lots of chaos to a ponzi system.  STOP FEEDING THE BEAST.

 

 

Fri, 08/12/2011 - 21:05 | 1556093 Rick64
Rick64's picture

This is the only real answer. Unity. Unfortunately we are divided by religious, race, political, and other trivialities even though most of us want the same things. They got a label for everybody liberal, conservative, republican, democrat, commie, socialist, ect.. Divided we fall. Whats so Ironic is that without our participation it would be impossible for them to continue.

Fri, 08/12/2011 - 21:55 | 1556212 nmewn
nmewn's picture

"This is the only real answer. Unity."

True.

But I'll tell ya, I'm getting worn out from reaching out. I'm sick of reaching out to the unappreciative who slap my hand away and only want more from the productive. The productive are people too and at some point they will say...ok fine, let it burn I'll grab some popcorn, sit back & watch...when its out we'll rebuild without the dead wood in the way.

Fri, 08/12/2011 - 22:44 | 1556295 Rick64
Rick64's picture

If your refering to Obamacare I am adamantly against it. I am not against low cost healthcare, but not under the facade of enriching the Insurance co. and Big Pharma while being forced on us. If an affordable gov. healthcare plan was successful people would want to use it and it wouldn't need to be forced on us, but I am under the impression that this isn't really the agenda.

 I don't like unappreciative people either or ones that have a sense of entitlement, but that would include financial institutions, corporations, gov. workers, and most politicians. If there is no accountability in government what can we expect? Gov. executives getting overpaid for doing an incompetent job, some recieving more than one pension, politicians abusing the system, committing fraud and continuing their terms then recieving their pension while working for one of the corporations they helped when in office.  I said this before start cleaning at the top, lead by example and I don't think there would be as much resistance to cuts in welfare programs and other handouts.

Fri, 08/12/2011 - 23:24 | 1556368 nmewn
nmewn's picture

"If your refering to Obamacare I am adamantly against it."

My compassion for my fellow man has been drained by these people. Maybe I'll feel different tommorow...but I doubt it.

Fri, 08/12/2011 - 23:56 | 1556432 Rick64
Rick64's picture

I hear ya. My tolerance for government and politicians has been drained.

Fri, 08/12/2011 - 13:37 | 1554776 Confused
Confused's picture

Can't compare the two. Commies? Really, who still uses that? Hasn't it been replaced with the T word?

Fri, 08/12/2011 - 13:44 | 1554804 Jonas Parker
Jonas Parker's picture

Here they're not "fuking commies", they're "progressives - same shitheads/different name...

Fri, 08/12/2011 - 13:49 | 1554831 Freewheelin Franklin
Freewheelin Franklin's picture

Barosso is a commie. He just calls himself a Social Democrat, or something.

Fri, 08/12/2011 - 13:51 | 1554838 Freewheelin Franklin
Freewheelin Franklin's picture

They are not commies, they are Eurofanatics.

 

Vote UKIP

Fri, 08/12/2011 - 16:30 | 1555465 Pay Day Today
Pay Day Today's picture

Whether you're middle income or unemployed life is far far better in Europe than in the US. And if Germany and France would just let their bleeding unsaveable zombie banks die by allowing the PIIGS to default, they would race ahead.

Fri, 08/12/2011 - 17:33 | 1555681 Crack-up Boom
Crack-up Boom's picture

Europe doesn't have the US Constitition.  It's been shredded in the past 50 years or so, but apparently at least 2 federal judges still understand what it's supposed to do.  I'm not sure how widely accepted the view is, but I've read histoirians who say that England didn't have the Inquisition to the same degree as Spain and France because England had the Magna Carta.  It's the same kind of thing with the Constititution. 

I would think any sane person would be terrified by the claim that the commerce clause enables the Federal gov't to mandate indvidulsl to purchase health insurance.  THe power that gives tot he Federal Gov't is astounding.  A central planner's wet dream.  Is thre anything -- ANYTHING -- you do in your life that doesn't requires you to buy something??   If you have to buy something, the Fed Gov't can regulate the activity through the commerce clause.  Incredible.  

THe 4th Circuit will be issuing yet another ruling on the statute and, with any luck, it will not only find the individual mandate to be uncosntitutional, but will throw out the whole thing because there is no severability clause (which would allow a segment found unconstitional to be jettisoned (severed from the rest of the statute)).   

     

Sat, 08/13/2011 - 01:17 | 1556516 StychoKiller
StychoKiller's picture

Where it's headed:

Atlas Shrugged: Directive 10 289...

In the name of the general welfare, to protect the peoples security and total stability, it is decreed for the duration of the national emergency that:

#1. All workers, wage earners, and employers of any kind whatsoever shall henceforth be attached to their jobs and shall not leave nor be dismissed nor change employment, under penalty of a term in jail. The penalty shall be determined by the Unification Board, such Board to be appointed by the Bureau of Economic Planning and National Resources. All persons reaching the age of 21 shall report to the Unification Board, which shall assign them to where, in its opinion, their services will best serve the interests of the nation.

#2.  All industrial, commercial, manufacturing and business establishments of any nature whatsoever shall henceforth remain in operation, and the owners of such establishments shall not quit nor leave nor retire, nor close, sell or transfer their business, under penalty of the nationalization of their establishment and of any and all of their property.

#3.  All patents and copyrights, pertaining to any devices, inventions, formulas, process and works of any nature whatsoever, shall be turned over to the nation as a patriotic emergency gift by means of Gift Certificates to me signed voluntarily by the owners of all such patents and copyrights. The Unification Board shall then license the use of such patents and copyrights to all applicants, equally and without discrimination, for the purpose of eliminating monopolistic practices, discarding obsolete products and making the best available to the whole nation. No trademarks, brand names or copyrighted titles shall be used. Every formerly patented product shall be known by a new name and sold by all manufactures under the same name, such name to be selected by the Unification Board. All private trademarks and brand names are hereby abolished.

#4.  No new devices, inventions, products, or goods of any nature whatsoever, not now on the marker, shall be produced, invented, manufactured or sold after the date of this directive. The Office of Patents and Copyrights is hereby suspended.

#5.  Every establishment, concern, corporation or person engaged in production of any nature whatsoever shall henceforth produce the same amount of goods per year as it, they or he produced during the Basic Year, no more and no less. The year to be known as the Basic or Yardstick Year is to be the year ending on the date of this directive. Over or under production shall be fines, such fines to be determined by the Unification Board.

#6.  Every person of any age, sex, class, or income, shall henceforth spend the same amount of money on the purchase of goods per year as he or she spent during the Basic Year, no more and no less. Over or under purchasing shall be fined, such fines to be determined by the Unification Board.

#7.  All wages, prices, salaries, dividends, profits, interest rates and forms of income of any nature whatsoever, shall be frozen at their present figures, as of the date of this directive.

#8.  All cases arising from the rules not specifically provided for in this directive, shall be settled and determined by the Unification Board, whose decisions will be final.

Fri, 08/12/2011 - 14:17 | 1554942 SheepDog-One
SheepDog-One's picture

Whatever decision some court makes, I refuse to obey Obama.

Fri, 08/12/2011 - 15:24 | 1555229 chumbawamba
chumbawamba's picture

Oh yeah?  Supreme Court will say that you "purchase" national defense and other sundry "benefits" (of empire) that come along with income taxes and use that as a precedent for making people buy something they "don't necessarily demand but nonetheless benefit from".  Something to that effect.  In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if Scalia lifts this sentence out of my comment and just inserts it in his decision.

No, I'm not cynical, just realistic.

I am Chumbawamba.

Fri, 08/12/2011 - 23:01 | 1556319 AEGeneral
AEGeneral's picture

Scalia uphold a provision of Obamacare?

Surely you meant Ginsburg. Because there's not a snowball's chance in hell Scalia will uphold the mandate.

Sat, 08/13/2011 - 17:05 | 1557497 chumbawamba
chumbawamba's picture

Are you kidding?  That corpulent fucker takes every opportunity to give the government more power over the individual.

- Chumblez.

Fri, 08/12/2011 - 16:00 | 1555361 Andy_Jackson_Jihad
Andy_Jackson_Jihad's picture

"i agree, you can't force private citizens under threat of fine to purchase health insurance from for profit companies."

You need it to drive don't you?  Many states make motorcyclists buy DOT approved helmets from for profit companies.

Not that I disagree with you but the genie is already out of that bottle. 

If mandated healthcare stays it opens up any sort of health or bodily risk taking to everyone elses' business.  No bacon, no fast cars, no smoking or drinking because the it will add to the cost of health care and banning those things is for the greater good or something.

Fri, 08/12/2011 - 17:47 | 1555718 Crack-up Boom
Crack-up Boom's picture

Wait - no!  The US Constitution grants and limits the powers of the Federal government - not the individual States (except for what the States ceded to the Federal).  If Oregon passes a law saying you have to buy a helmet to roller skate, you have to go back to the Oregon constitution to challenge it.  It's vastly different for individual states to require something.         

Fri, 08/12/2011 - 18:30 | 1555811 cranky-old-geezer
cranky-old-geezer's picture

No state constitution gives a state government authority to requre citizens to apply for anything (like a driver license) nor buy anything (like a motorcycle helmet).

Said authority comes from applying for a title for the vehicle.  Titling a vehicle transfers legal ownership to the state. Since the state now owns the vehicle they can require you to do anything they wish regarding that vehicle. ...including taking it from you.

Sat, 08/13/2011 - 14:58 | 1557382 DaBernank
DaBernank's picture

You choose to have a car though. When I worked in the states I did not have a car and was not forced to buy a product from a for-profit company.

I don't understand why the US doesn't just help to underwrite the cost of medical catastrophies then send in an accountant to extract a portion of the cost from you if you can't pay the whole bill yourself. This notion that everybody over 65, no matter how wealthy, gets medical services paid for by the rest of the tax payers is just ridiculous. You just know Warren Buffet is using Medicare when he can.

Sat, 08/13/2011 - 15:08 | 1557396 IQ 145
IQ 145's picture

In similar fashion all State Laws requiring you to buy automobile insurance are without foundation. You can, and should, challenge these laws in your state supreme court; the state will not be able to defend it's position. The State has no police powers delegated to it to force a citizen to take money out of their pocket and pay an insurance company. Just as a reminder, I grew up in a free country and a free world; graduated from high school in 1960 in the US; there was no such thing as "mandatory insurance" and everything worked just fine. People didn't go around playing bumper cars on the roads; there was no problem that needed to be fixed. There's a good project for someone with some time available. Obviously the effect of these laws is just to increase cost of living and decrease the effeciiency of the country as a whole.

Fri, 08/12/2011 - 13:19 | 1554690 Ancona
Ancona's picture

They knew it was unconstitutional when they wrote the fucking abomination.

Fri, 08/12/2011 - 13:33 | 1554756 Buckaroo Banzai
Buckaroo Banzai's picture

I would disagree. Most of Congress doesn't really know what is in the Constitution, or what it means. Without a knowledge of the Constitution, they can't know what is un-Constitutional.

One thing is for sure: the Constitution is a dead letter to all three branches of Federal Government. It means whatever they want it to mean. They have the same relationship to the Constitution as Dr. Leo Spaceman has to Science: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZBewm0vRpAg

Fri, 08/12/2011 - 13:46 | 1554820 RickC
RickC's picture

I am sorry to say, Buckaroo, you are correct in that Congress ignores the Consitution if it gets in the way of doing something they want to do.  The only time "Constitutional" comes up is by someone who opposes whatever it is Congress wants to do.

Fri, 08/12/2011 - 14:07 | 1554893 Manthong
Manthong's picture

"constitutional scholar"

Obama is to Constitutional scholarship what Pewee Herman is to Shakespearian acting. 

Fri, 08/12/2011 - 14:12 | 1554913 WestVillageIdiot
WestVillageIdiot's picture

Obama is to constitutional scholarship what Obama is to pro golf. 

Fri, 08/12/2011 - 15:47 | 1555308 James
James's picture

Were being bamboozled on this "constitutional scholar" bullshit. I want to see papers to that effect

Nobody even remembers him from school.

Fri, 08/12/2011 - 16:04 | 1555374 TwelfthVulture
TwelfthVulture's picture

I second that.  Really, really smart people, the kind who graduate magna cum from MIT with PhD's in physics or rocket science, don't hesitate to let you know just how really smart they are.  A con man, however, who is trying to make you believe they are genius in order to perpetuate their con WOULD have his educational records/transcripts sealed and hidden from public inspection.

Fri, 08/12/2011 - 21:54 | 1556208 Manthong
Manthong's picture

He gave lectures (probably on the virtues of Communism) at the University of Chicago.. and the pinkos at UC covered for him saying he "served as a professor" when the exaggeration was challenged by Hillary during the campaign.

 

Sat, 08/13/2011 - 15:11 | 1557402 IQ 145
IQ 145's picture

It's called "affirmative action"; a kind of reverse racism; they held his hand and walked him through Harvard; he doesn't know his ass from a hole in the ground.

Fri, 08/12/2011 - 17:03 | 1555602 mkkby
mkkby's picture

Too funny, the constitutional scholar who isn't even a citizen. 

Fri, 08/12/2011 - 22:02 | 1556220 Manthong
Manthong's picture

Oh, he is probably a citizen (although he has not provided indisputable documentation).

What he in fact was and is NOT, is a constitutionally qualified citizen to run and serve as President as his father (a real piece of work) was a British colonial subject.

You can thank Pelosi and the Democrats for that.

 

Fri, 08/12/2011 - 17:50 | 1555725 Crack-up Boom
Crack-up Boom's picture

You can't even say that CONgress ignored the Constitution - no one in CONgress READ the bill, much less WROTE it.  They had no idea whether it violated the Constitition. 

Fri, 08/12/2011 - 13:54 | 1554850 DosZap
DosZap's picture

Anocona,@13:19

LOL, That's Obamanation..

 

Tyler D,

 never one for a play on words are you..........LOL

"And just when the summer seemed like it may finally get boring for a change..."

Loved this one

Fri, 08/12/2011 - 15:17 | 1555202 V in PA
V in PA's picture

O-bama-nation
-noun
1) A failed State
2) A vile, shameful or detestable action. (voting progressive is an obamanation)

Fri, 08/12/2011 - 13:57 | 1554856 DosZap
DosZap's picture

Have you not figured out yet, THEY HATE THE CONSTITUTION.

It is a stumbling block to their fascist goals.

Fri, 08/12/2011 - 14:25 | 1554972 Cojones
Cojones's picture

Who cares about the constitution when COG has been activated a long time ago.

 

Fri, 08/12/2011 - 13:20 | 1554691 rubearish10
rubearish10's picture

So, the impact on fx and markets??? Deficit? .....Nada. Reason? Failure, already baked in.

 

Fri, 08/12/2011 - 13:20 | 1554692 Waffen
Waffen's picture

The only surprise is that any judges can still understand the constitution.

Fri, 08/12/2011 - 13:58 | 1554861 DosZap
DosZap's picture

Waffen,

They have it on their Kindle.

Fri, 08/12/2011 - 17:46 | 1555712 mkkby
mkkby's picture

Sure they do.  The constitution is the document that guarantees the rights of illegal aliens.

Sat, 08/13/2011 - 15:14 | 1557404 IQ 145
IQ 145's picture

What a sick fucking joke of a country.

Fri, 08/12/2011 - 13:20 | 1554697 greased up deaf guy
greased up deaf guy's picture

just think what this will do to obama's legacy. wait... lol

Fri, 08/12/2011 - 13:38 | 1554775 TwelfthVulture
TwelfthVulture's picture

The guy that lost America's AAA rating.

Fri, 08/12/2011 - 23:08 | 1556336 mayhem_korner
mayhem_korner's picture

Oh I think he's gonna make us forget that little "achievement"..

Fri, 08/12/2011 - 13:22 | 1554703 machineh
machineh's picture

Most of the economic looting is bipartisan.

But the Obamacare abomination was the sole creation of the DemonRat party.

They paid at the polls last November, losing their House majority. But they should pay a lot more. 

Fri, 08/12/2011 - 13:25 | 1554716 Abitdodgie
Abitdodgie's picture

When people say this party did this and that party did that , it makes me realise that they have still not got that there is only ONE party .

Fri, 08/12/2011 - 13:30 | 1554740 machineh
machineh's picture

Right -- the welfare/warfare party. Efamol!

Fri, 08/12/2011 - 15:15 | 1555198 11b40
11b40's picture

....the CORPORATE/BANKSTER welfare/warfare party.  Fixed it for you.

Fri, 08/12/2011 - 13:35 | 1554769 Rodent Freikorps
Rodent Freikorps's picture

Not on this.

The final vote tally for the Senate version of President Obama's health care reform legislation in the House was 219-212, with 34 Democrats joining all Republicans in opposition.

The Dems own this in full measure.

Fri, 08/12/2011 - 13:53 | 1554841 nedwardkelly
nedwardkelly's picture

I hope your point isn't that this means that Republicans are kickass awesome and Democrats aren't.

The differences between the two parties are just enough to convince the average dumbass that they really are in fact two seperate parties. To anyone paying attention, on all the things that really matter, they're the fucking same.

Fri, 08/12/2011 - 14:00 | 1554871 Rodent Freikorps
Rodent Freikorps's picture

The Rs suck in absolute terms.

I'm just saying they don't suck as much.

Fri, 08/12/2011 - 14:06 | 1554892 Burnbright
Burnbright's picture

how so? In reality all the repubs opposed the measure because they could and the bill would still get passed. Its a chess move, that was all. 

Fri, 08/12/2011 - 14:20 | 1554952 Chump
Chump's picture

So some Rs would've voted for it if more Ds had not voted for it?

Your comment doesn't make sense.

And on a side note, related to comments further up: you're allowed to acknowledge the failure and shittiness of the Democrat party without simultaneously making some off-hand comment about how much Republicans suck as well.  There's a lot of stupid fucking partisanship trying to hide behind the mask of non-partisanship here.  Republicans will do something stupid again without fail, so don't worry your pretty little heads about the well-deserved lashing Dems are taking on this issue.

Fri, 08/12/2011 - 14:29 | 1554984 nedwardkelly
nedwardkelly's picture

you're allowed to acknowledge the failure and shittiness of the Democrat party without simultaneously making some off-hand comment about how much Republicans suck as well

Sure you can, just like you can acknowledge the failure and shittiness of the politicians that wear boxers, Vs the politicians that wear briefs. But what's the point? Boxers, Briefs, Republican, Democrat - they're all the same.

Fri, 08/12/2011 - 14:38 | 1555026 Chump
Chump's picture

Thanks for so aptly illustrating my point.

Fri, 08/12/2011 - 15:02 | 1555148 nedwardkelly
nedwardkelly's picture

Which point?? That I'm partisan hiding behind a mask of non partisan? If that was your point, you're crazy, take a look through my post history. If that wasn't your point, maybe I need to check my reading comprehension skills.

Fri, 08/12/2011 - 16:23 | 1555438 Andy_Jackson_Jihad
Andy_Jackson_Jihad's picture

I think his point is that he doesn't realize one set of boxers has poop stains them because they are dark navy silk while the other are plain white cotton that shows an equally large poop stain better.

Fri, 08/12/2011 - 14:23 | 1554958 SheepDog-One
SheepDog-One's picture

I have no idea what it will take to make people finaly realize there is only a 2 headed 1 party political system in this country.

American sheeple are the biggest suckers ever for this political WWF show nonsense, they just cant help lapping it up.

Fri, 08/12/2011 - 14:53 | 1555101 TwelfthVulture
TwelfthVulture's picture

Since most have been educated by the public school system, they believe that the American political system is, and has always been, a two-party system whereas the 2-party system is actually a rather recent development in American politics.

Sat, 08/13/2011 - 11:02 | 1557007 BrosMacManus
BrosMacManus's picture

We've learned the efficient markets theory is total bunk, and CAPM is being relegated to the dustbin of history. Now hat our .gov rulers now see US citizens as a bigger threat to the "homeland" than foreign interests, the masks will come off the R's and D's within a generation and many self evident truths will be learned on a mass scale.

 

Fri, 08/12/2011 - 14:19 | 1554950 SMG
SMG's picture

Just to make your point.

Both parties support:

  • Never ending war.
  • Unlimited Illegal Immigration.
  • The Federal Reserve.
  • The Patriot Act.
  • Bank Bailouts.
  • US subjegation to supranational entities like the WTO and UN.

and that's just a partial list.  They are two heads of the same demon dog.

Fri, 08/12/2011 - 14:25 | 1554970 the not so migh...
the not so mighty maximiza's picture

nice optimos prime

Fri, 08/12/2011 - 14:32 | 1555004 nedwardkelly
nedwardkelly's picture

Here's some more:

  • Welfare state
  • Gigantic government
  • Ignoring the constitution
  • Lobbying
  • Ethanol Idiocy
  • Corporate interests
  • Etc Etc Etc

but the most important one that 'the' party supports:

  • The status quo
Fri, 08/12/2011 - 15:12 | 1555185 tarsubil
tarsubil's picture

Is it correct that no one listed government controlled healthcare? Bush did nothing to limit while adding the prescription drug plan. I am so sick of this soap opera.

Do NOT follow this link or you will be banned from the site!