Latest baseball scores, trades, talk, ideas, opinions, and standings

Archive for the ‘unconstitutional’ Category

>Federal Court Rules Health Care Bill Unconstitutional, but NY Times Reports That Obama Can Ignore That Ruling Because The Supreme Court Might Review The Case – Hogwash!

> link “pig iron” to

   I am an attorney and beg to differ with your conclusion that despite a federal judge ruling against the entire ObamaCare bill that it stays in effect until it is appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court. That is definitely not the law of the land. The judge has handed down a ruling that states all parts of the bill are unconstitutional. 
   And have you thought of the possibility that the Supreme Court will refuse to hear this case? Also, in that case the ruling in Florida would rule over anything Eric Holder or Barak Obama might say and try to do. When a law is under a court ruling declaring it unconstitutional the law is specific. Until and unless it is ruled constitutional by the Supreme Court it is unconstitutional and that could take a year to resolve, or it could refuse to hear the case, which is quite common with this court. End of report. Any attempt by the Obama administration to disavow or ignore the ruling would be in violation of the court ruling and could land Mr. Holder et al in jail for contempt of court. A president is not all powerful. He cannot, with impunity, ignore a court order of this magnitude. 
   When a Federal Judge brings a ruling it is improper civil procedure for him to, as you suggest, “stay his opinion pending appeal.” That is improper civil procedure and if you persist in reporting this lie you are guilty of a gross misrepresentation and false reporting, which has been done time and time again by the New York Times in the last fifty years. There was a time when you could rely on the infallibility of The NY Times, but not any longer. It has become a political tool of the left. 

   The court ruled and the ruling is final until overturned. Which part of the American jurisprudence system  don’t you people understand? Get your own legal counsel involved immediately and have them give you a legal opinion before you continue on your errant ways of misleading the public, I would expect you would print a retraction immediately.
   Apparently, the Obama Administration believes it is above the law. The law in this country is made by three branches of government and can be overruled as unconstitutional at any time by a Federal or Supreme Court Judge. One or the other, it is the same, 
Until or unless the Federal Judge’s ruling of unconstitutionality is overturned. the current status is that there is no law.  To resurrect it requires a formal appeal to the Supreme court and a favorable ruling on that appeal. Until then, the law is suspended, null and void, and Obama and Holder and their people likewise should suspend all efforts to continue as if it was still the law of the land. 
They knew their Health Care Bill was suspect from the get-go, yet they acted as if it was the law – which is irrational – and went onward and upward with their insanity, misleading the public and making plans as if this would never receive judicial review.
Donald M. White, JD, Orlando, FL
Windermere, Florida 34786

From: News Alert
To: dusanotes@YAHOO.COM
Sent: Mon, January 31, 2011 3:26:30 PM
Subject: News Alert: Federal Judge Rules Health Care Law Violates Constitution

Breaking News Alert
The New York Times
Mon, January 31, 2011 — 3:25 PM ET

Federal Judge Rules Health Care Law Violates Constitution

A federal judge in Pensacola, Fla., ruled that the entire
health care overhaul enacted last year was void because one
provision, requiring nearly all Americans to obtain health
insurance, was unconstitutional.

A previous decision in a Virginia case found that the mandate
provision was unconstitutional, but did not say that it
necessarily affected the whole law’s validity. In two other
cases tried so far, the law passed muster.

As in the Virginia case, the judge in Pensacola stayed his
decision pending an appeal, which could take more than a year
to decide, so the law remains in effect for now.

Read More:

About This E-Mail
You received this message because you are signed up to receive breaking news
alerts from

>If There Were A Way, I’d Abolish All Paid Lobbiests


July 27, 2010

Lott of Chutzpah

Some people you can always count on. Like former congressmen and current lobbyist Trent Lott.
Count on Lott to confirm that he’s a true-blue partisan of gravy-train politics-as-usual, a dyed-in-the-wool establishmentarian committed to extinguishing each faint, flickering chance to downsizeLeviathan.
The man is a rock.
“We don’t need a lot of Jim DeMint disciples,” Lott with calm, sneering authority recently told the Washington Post, as his granite-hard jaw jutted with stern, rectitudinous integrity. “As  soon as they get here, we need to co-opt them.”
What kind of creature is a “Jim DeMint disciple”? What terrible deeds will these zombie-like Jim-DeMintians perpetrate if the heroic former congressmen and his redoubtable cohorts fail to co-opt them in time?
The creatures are affiliated with the Tea Party rebellion against the super-escalating scope and reach of the federal government, as manifested in the looming takeover of the medical industry, trillion-dollar annual budget deficits, etc. Senate candidate Rand Paul told the Post that the goals of Jim-DeMintian Tea Party sympathizers like himself have something to do with fighting for term limits, abalanced budget amendment, and legislation that is consistent with the Constitution.
Sounds like if they make any headway we can expect more freedom, more real wealth, less red ink, less Washington-based strangling of everybody.
Hence, Trent Lott to the rescue.
This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.
Paul Jacob is President of Citizens in Charge andCitizens in Charge Foundation, which sponsors both Common Sense and Paul’s weekly Townhall Column. The opinions expressed in Common Sense are Paul Jacob’s and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of Citizens in Charge or Citizens in Charge Foundation.

Forward email