1 Double post!

That's numberwang!

2 The double posts have merged into a singularity.

3 I'll post my weiner on twitter if they rule it unconstitutional.

4 Mmmm... double post.

5 Less chai.
More chi.

6 Chai tea tastes like play-doh.

7 About time things got back to normal around here .

8 I've still got some Play-Doh.

It's up in my room.

9 Is there anything that suggests Congress can do this?

Are you serious? Are .. you ... serious?

10 My nipples are erect.Thanks Ace.

11 Those tea leaves sound accurate. This is as conservative a court as you can get right now. The 9th it ain't.

12 You bastards are fucked.  Fucked.

_{Well, they dressed it up with a lot of here-to-fores and mumbo-jumbo, but that's what they meant.}

13

What is being left out of this whole Case... is the fact that OVER half of the States say this is Unconstitutional, and have joined the case...

IF the Constitution of the US is a compact, between the People, STATES, and Fed Government about how we will govern ourselves, how can the Courts NOT take that into account?

Repubs in the House should now put forth a sense of the House vote on the Constitutionality of the Mandate.... which will give the Courts MORE cover... and input...

14 We've been burned before and...oh fuck it. Gooooo 11th Circuit! Sis boom bah! Rah rah rah!

15 Christine O'Donnell is boiling up a cauldron of tea with those leaves right now.

16 What is being left out of this whole Case... is the fact that OVER half of the States say this is Unconstitutional, and have joined the case...

What the States should do is all SIMULTANEOUSLY call for an Article V convention.

17

oh please, please, please.

I SO want to believe......

18 You know they are receptive to ruling it unconstitutional when they rule it unconstitutional.

19 Either way, it all comes down to me.

20 #14 Hey, I'll provide the marching band.

_{turns head, and shouts, "Yes the cave trolls get the tubas.  Duh."}

We'll be ready in a jif.

21 16,Vic,

Explain Art. V to me in Grunt speak Bro.

22 Either way, it all comes down to me. Posted by: Anthony Kennedy at June 08, 2011 03:41 PM (FkKjr) Ain't that the truth

23 16What is being left out of this whole Case... is the fact that OVER half of the States say this is Unconstitutional, and have joined the case...

What the States should do is all SIMULTANEOUSLY call for an Article V convention.

Posted by: Vic at June 08, 2011 03:39 PM (M9Ie6)

Why? To amend by reinforcing what it already says?

orrrrr... to Amend the power of Congress to regulate interstate commerce, to mean that it gets jurisdiction ONLY when States have problems regulating themselves (which was the origional intent, Congress was supposed to stay out of it unless the States had some sort of dispute).

Problem is that once an Article 5 convention is called... its hard to say what will come out of it... remember it will be the Two Partys who run it.

24 When I am reading the Final Judgment, I'll believe it.  Until then, I sincerely pray God's mercy on this nation.

25 Yeah, I should do the opposite, I should. Yes, I will do the opposite. I used to sit here and do nothing, and regret it for the rest of the day, so now I will do the opposite, and I will do... something!

26 18 You know they are receptive to ruling it unconstitutional when they rule it unconstitutional.

Posted by: Jimbo at June 08, 2011 03:40 PM (O3R/2)

I had to learn that the hard way in my first business.  Contracts are written on checks not letterhead.

27 You need more dong tea?

28 Chai is crappy tea.  Smart marketing made it trendy to new-age metrosexuals.

If Obamacare is upheld, they'll be making us all buy Chai, too.

29 If Obamacare does go down in flames, what would Barry run on? What else has he accomplished aside from cratering the economy and plunging us into crushing levels of debt?

30

Posted by: justice george costanza at June 08, 2011 03:44 PM (DUOUR)

 

Salmon would be the opposite of Tuna, because Tuna swim with the current and Salmon swim against it.

31 Usually "There is no hint anywhere in the Constitution the government has this power" is not followed by "But, sidenote, the government does in fact have this power."

You've got to look in the emanations from the penumbra.

32 Any hint about when they'll issue their ruling?

I read both linked articles but didn't see any speculation about it.

33 The 11th Circuit has made their decision, now let their army enforce it! muawahhahahaha

34 BREAKING:  Constitutional Scholar's Prime Achievement Unconstitutional

35

Chai is crappy tea.

 

Chai is spiced tea is it not? 

 I didn't think it was a specific tea, just a specific way of preparing it.

36 Drudge saying Obama will give Greece a bailout package.

Fucking wonderful.  We're broke as it is, now he wants to get a lifetime gyro and spanakopita card from Greece for himself.

37
The Democrats: Some poor, pathetic no-name peon
The Constitution: Dominique Strauss Kahn

38 'Nam Grunt

This explains it

But what it boils down to in simple speak is this; there are two ways to amend the Constitution:

1. What has been normally done is an amendment must be approved by 2/3 of both houses, then approved by 3/4 of the States
or
2. A convention may be called by the legislatures of 2/3 of the States to propose amendments which then must be approved by 3/4 of the States.

39 If the Government has the authority to require that I purchase insurance then they've established precedent to tell me I have to eat like this.

No thanks. Pass.

40 29 If Obamacare does go down in flames, what would Barry run on? What else has he accomplished aside from cratering the economy and plunging us into crushing levels of debt? Posted by: JackStraw at June 08, 2011 03:45 PM (TMB3S) Michelle's arms! Has there EVER been a FLOTUS with guns like that? Oh, and RAAAAAAAAAAAACIST!

41 Drudge saying Obama will give Greece a bailout package.

If he would have done it last year he could have used Chinese money.  Now we'll have to print more of our own.

42

"If we uphold this, are there any limits" on the power of the federal government?"

Assume for the moment that somehow, somewhere, the government is found to have the power to compel people to buy products.

What would the result be?

Isn't it obvious? Slavery.

You'll be forced to work for the financial benefit of others. That was outlawed by the 13th Amendment.

"Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.

We have the Constitutional right not to be forced to work against our will for the benefit of any private (or publicly-traded) company - except as punishment for a crime.

In the end though, it doesn't really matter what the courts rule, at any rate. If they rule ObamaCare is Constitutional, we will have no further use for courts, or government. It will be an all-out civil war on the elite and they will lose that war.

43 Problem is that once an Article 5 convention is called... its hard to say what will come out of it... remember it will be the Two Partys who run it.

Keep in mind that in a Constitutional Convention each State only gets ONE vote. There are more Red States than there are Blue States.

44 38,

Thanks Vic.

45 @ nickless Oh, VERY ouch, baby!

46 We're broke as it is, now he wants to get a lifetime gyro and spanakopita card from Greece for himself.
But when you spend a trillion you get a really cool sea captain's hat!

47 Usually "There is no hint anywhere in the Constitution the government has this power" is not followed by "But, sidenote, the government does in fact have this power."

I see you are unfamiliar with my work.

48 If he would have done it last year he could have used Chinese money.  Now we'll have to print more of our own.

* looks closely at printing press *

Made in China.

49 the judges opened the arguments by saying they knew of no case in American history where the courts had upheld the government's power to force someone to buy a product. Translation: pardon us while we set a little precedent.

50 LITERALLY!!!1!

51 And you know if it is constitutional the Volt will be our new mandatory government car, which I dub the Voltzwagen.   

52 If the Government has the authority to require that I purchase insurance then they've established precedent to tell me I have to eat like this.

No thanks. Pass.

Posted by: laceyunderalls at June 08, 2011 03:49 PM (pLTLS)

 

Before I open that link, I want assurances that it's not a picture of Weiner's weiner.

53 So far, everything has been down party lines.  This will be the same way.  It'll just keep rolling forward till it hits the supremes, then the wise lickalotapuss and her pale white lover will scissor in front of Kennedy and get it instated as law.

We're all fucked.

54 If Obamacare does go down in flames, what would Barry run on? What else has he accomplished aside from cratering the economy and plunging us into crushing levels of debt?

Posted by: JackStraw

Uh....I'll bring back the Oprah show? Michelle can run it?.....Racism?.... Greece likes me, I mean us? I may actually win a war for oil?

Or,

Vote for me or I'll resign, and Joe Biden will be President and he'll select Weiner as the replacement VP!

55

If it goes down, there will be a party, with tea.

We should have a tea party!

 

56 I'm at work, Soona, it's safe (as safe as a government food chart can be...)

57

"...then the wise lickalotapuss and her pale white lover..."

Gah!  I hope the knitting needles can reach my brain.  

58 Awesome sauce: http://tinyurl.com/3tmnkjq

59 >>That serious shame face looks like a serious dropping the kids at the pool face. Weiner's weiner is the new Rick Roll. No link will be safe.

60 I hope these three redneck judges from Georgia don't screw up a good thing. The healthcare law is good for the cuntry and will hurt many children and old folks if repealed. We must stand by President Obama and the working people............

61 17

oh please, please, please.

I SO want to believe......

Posted by: todler at June 08, 2011 03:40 PM (fPOY0)

Yeah, I did too.  Didn't work out so well, remember?

62 51 And you know if it is constitutional the Volt will be our new mandatory government car, which I dub the Voltzwagen.  

The Beast should be a Volt.  Except I don't think it could carry Barry's ego and Moochelle's......err......derriere, and the giant chip on her shoulder.

63 59 >>That serious shame face looks like a serious dropping the kids at the pool face.

Weiner's weiner is the new RDick Roll.

No link will be safe.

Posted by: JackStraw at June 08, 2011 03:57 PM (TMB3S)

FIFY

64 But think how much easier COngress would be if they allow this power.

GM needs a bailout because they gave 50 million dollars to the reelection campaign of... I mean because they're a vital part of the auto industry and our economy of course...

Instead of trying to get some money to give them, you mandate every citizen must purchase a GM vehicle in the next 5 years or face fines and penalties.

Everyone is likely to own a car at some point in their lives, and regulating commerce is what Congress does, and they can mandate a purchase... problem solved.

Lobbyist's wet dream as every company tries to get a law forcing the madatory purchase of hteir specific product/service to enforce a mandate, drive out their competition, and let them make serious money (which they will kick some back to the re-election campaign, family member salary, grift fund, whatever bribes are required).

Any reason to think this isn't what would happen?  Anyone want to argue that people are too honest, decent, kind, and Congress is not at all crooked and prone to taking bribes and abusing power?  Businesses wouldn't kick back some profit to be able to run a government mandated monopoly with a trapped clientele forced by law to buy their product?

65 I think for a jurist this case, more than most, this ties very closely to their core principles, honesty and eventual legacy.

The facts are so basic in terms of the Constitutional implications (e.g. the governments ability to force citizens to buy a product) there is nowhere for jurists to legally find cover which will obfuscate or clarify your opinion.

Yes we have seen some judges rule in the governments favor with very weak and discernibly partisan reasoning. Therein lies the despicable part of our court system. An unelected branch seeking to impose its will and tyranny on the people of our country.

An honest, thinking, patriotic jurist would never be part of the substantial dilution of individual liberty that will come out of ruling in favor of this monstrosity.

I really can't see the Ninth or SCOTUS ruling in favor of the government. It would be disastrous. And when that happens (the ruling against Obamacare), it will hang around the Democrat Party's neck like a giant albatross for a generation or more as the single, largest internal assault on freedom in our democratic republic.

66 The question I'd ask is: "If economic inactivity is the same as economic activity as far as federal jurisdiction is concerned, then why would the Constitution and the courts have bothered to have made a distinction between the two?"

67 No link will be safe.

Will you take a chance on this one? 

Safe for work...maybe.

Seriously, I wouldn't get my hopes up either about the 11th Circuit either.  That's just how it is, sadly. 

And the Supremes?  Well, I'd happily donate to a fund making sure Kennedy is "well-pleased" the night and morning before the ruling.

68 31 Usually "There is no hint anywhere in the Constitution the government has this power" is not followed by "But, sidenote, the government does in fact have this power."

You've got to look in the emanations from the penumbra.

Posted by: nickless at June 08, 2011 03:46 PM (MMC8r)

 

I would say that is right, nickles...but when they are going to do that, they typically do not telegraph that it is not IN the cosntitution. In that case,t ehy would telegraph something like:

While the constitution does not expressly state [note to law clerk: fill in the blank with some stuff.] it has been long uderstood that [ note to law clerk: make up some BS that will lead to me getting my way]. Bitches.

So I think there is good reason to believe that the judges are going to rule against obamacare.

69 dick pic NOW online - thanks Opie!

70 NEWS HEADLINES:  Temperatures Increase as Summer Approaches!

71

Yeah, I did too.  Didn't work out so well, remember?

Hope is the first step on the road to disappointment. 

72 If Obamacare does go down in flames, what would Barry run on? What else has he accomplished aside from cratering the economy and plunging us into crushing levels of debt?

Fore more years! Fore more years!

I er, um, have much work to do, to, um, uh, become a scratch golfer.

73 66The question I'd ask is: "If economic inactivity is the same as economic activity as far as federal jurisdiction is concerned, then why would the Constitution and the courts have bothered to have made a distinction between the two?"

Posted by: Socratease at June 08, 2011 04:01 PM (vaIln)

And, if economic Inactivity, is considered Activity, then to use the same standard, how can you have Freedom of Speech, but then not have the Right to ALWAYS remain silent...

74 OMG You have to follow my link. No, it isn't that. Seriously. Almost at the end, there is a codeword in there for us morons. Remember Ace=Weiner=Dan Wolfe? Irrefutable proof.

75

If your penumbra emanates for more than four hours you have a problem. 

  

76

Will the judges be sorta looking over their shoulders at what they think SCOTUS will do?

It'd kinda suck to be overruled in the biggest case in 50 years.

 

77 "I can't find any case" in the past where the courts upheld "telling a private person they are compelled to purchase a product in the open market Dammit! What are we going to do with all the stupid Volts?

78

It'd kinda suck to be overruled in the biggest case in 50 years.

 

Posted by: Buzzsaw at June 08, 2011 04:08 PM (M3mVf)

We don't see the problem.

79

The fact is that if the plaintiffs can find even one American who has self-insured and paid for all their own health care costs, the entire argument for the mandate and its supposed constitutionality go right out the window.  It is provably false that allowing people to go without health insurance means that ALL of them will use the health care system but others will pay for it, including the government.  And that is the sole thread upon which rests the theory that government has an interest in regulating my inactivity and making me buy health insurance. 

My brother is 62 years old and has paid cash for every checkup, operation, and procedure he has ever had.  He is no more adding to the government's costs as is the rabbit who lives in my backyard.  There is nothing in the Constitition that gives the government the power to make him buy health insurance, or to tax him if he refuses.  NOTHING!

80

67 And the Supremes?  Well, I'd happily donate to a fund making sure Kennedy is "well-pleased" the night and morning before the ruling.

 

From your lips to Gods ears, or Anthony's crotch. Whatever works for ya

81 Well, I'd happily donate to a fund making sure Kennedy is "well-pleased" the night and morning before the ruling.

Posted by: Kratos (Ghost of Sparta) at June 08, 2011 04:03 PM (c0A3e)

*rubs hands together*   I've got you my pretty. And your little dog Toto Blade of Olympus, too.

82

Appellate courts tend to use questions like that to show the issue that they are going to decide the case on.  Basically, they are saying "thanks for your other briefing, but we don't really care about those issues."

83

I like pizza ...

84 66 The question I'd ask is: "If economic inactivity is the same as economic activity as far as federal jurisdiction is concerned, then why would the Constitution and the courts have bothered to have made a distinction between the two?"

Posted by: Socratease at June 08, 2011 04:01 PM (vaIln)

For the same reason that they would actually write down a "living, breathing" Constitution.

85 Dammit! What are we going to do with all the stupid Volts?

Posted by: GM at June 08, 2011 04:08 PM (FcR7P)

 

Well, there's a lawn in TX that's been recently excavated.

86 If the courts say the government can't compel everyone to buy health insurance, then we'll just have to give everyone free government health care.

87

"And when that happens (the ruling against Obamacare), it will hang around the Democrat Party's neck like a giant albatross for a generation or more as the single, largest internal assault on freedom in our democratic republic."

Do you think we're just going to sit still for that? I own a gun and some bullets and a pocket Constitution that will be upheld one way or the other. My rights don't flow down from any court. They're God-given rights. The Constitution merely recognizes that fact and put them down on paper so everyone could have a handy copy.

I'm not going to be forced to purchase shit and I will not let my countrymen be yoked as slaves either.

Period.

Countries come and countries go. We've had a Civil War before with people who wanted to enslave their fellow man and we'll do it again. That's a promise.

88 The question I'd ask is: "If economic inactivity is the same as economic activity as far as federal jurisdiction is concerned, then why would the Constitution and the courts have bothered to have made a distinction between the two?"

You sound like not-a-lawyer.

There's no precedented distinction between activity and inactivity phrased in precisely that way, so by bringing it up, you open the worm-can to having a non-distinction ruled into existence, and you lead the judge directly to the rationale for that ruling.

Not that it matters. We're absolutely fucked if any O-care case makes it to the Supremes. There's precisely one Constitution-says-fuck-you vote up there. The rest of the "conservative wing" will bone us on this—subtly, but they're puttin' it in.

89 I will say that courts give extraordinary deference to Congress in enacting laws, as they should.  It is extremely rare for any court to find that Congress has passed and the President has signed a law that exceeds their authority under the Constitution.  But it has not been that long since the SCOTUS did just that, ruling that the Commerce Clause did not give Congress the authority for the Violence Against Women Act.  I'm sure the Ninth Circus disagreed with that ruling, but it stands as precedent that the 9th must apply in this case.  The Commerce Clause has limits. 

90 Amendment Xa:  All powers reserved to the people may be rescinded, revoked, or renounced, on a one-time basis, if immediately succeeded with "it was a goof."

91 See...it really needs to be spelled out more clearly to the court.

If congress can force people to buy health insurance claiming it is interstate commerce, then what is to stop congress from forcing federal courts to hire pantomime troupe to reenact, each morning, prior to hearing any of the court's business, the very special episode of D'frent Strokes where Dudley gets molested in back bike shop by Mr. Horton (played by Gordon Jump), claiming it is interstate commerce. 

To tell you the truth, I'd rather get felt-up by Gordon Jump than by JEF-Care.

92

@16: "What the States should do is all SIMULTANEOUSLY call for an Article V convention."

Yes! What could possibly go wrong!

93 86 If the courts say the government can't compel everyone to buy health insurance, then we'll just have to give everyone free government health care.

Posted by: Obama at June 08, 2011 04:12 PM (GfhFm)

Ha, let's see you run for reelection on that, Scooter.

94

"If the courts say the government can't compel everyone to buy health insurance, then we'll just have to give everyone free government health care."

Only if he can get that through the Congress. And if he can, so be it. That's Democracy. I'll gladly fight that fight and live with whatever the results are.

What's not going to happen is the Democrats forcing me to give money to State Farm. And State Farm then taking my money and giving it to the Democrat Party.

Fuck that shit.

Come and get me motherfuckers.

95 But 11th Circuit Panel Not Receptive To Ruling ObamaCare Unconstitutional is at 90 on InTrade!!!!

96 39 If the Government has the authority to require that I purchase insurance then they've established precedent to tell me I have to eat like this.

No thanks. Pass.

Posted by: laceyunderalls at June 08, 2011 03:49 PM (pLTLS)

*shudder*

I always try to turn it around when I explain to people why Obamacare is really bad.  Instead of saying, "If the government can tell you you have to buy health insurance, they can also say you have to buy broccoli," I say, "If the government can tell you what you have to buy, they can also tell you what you can't buy.  So that bag of Hershey Kisses you're buying?  Imagine getting up to the cash register and having your government-issued purchase card rejected because you've already reached your allowable chocolate ration for the year.  No more chocolate for a YEAR, except what you get on the down low.  Hello blackmarket fudge."

Threaten to take away chocolate, Chinese food, or coffee, and people seem to pay attention.  Is it something to do with the letter C?

97 You know what really bothers me about this whole crap sandwich? That the courts have a known party breakdown, which suggests that the law doesn't mean what is written down for all to see, it is subject to the whims and feeeeeeelings of some robed jerk. Our freedoms, and 1/6th of our economy basically rests on the feeelings of one man named Kennedy, not the fucking 10th Amendment which limits the power of the federal government to those and ONLY THOSE that are specified.

98

Countries come and countries go. We've had a Civil War before with people who wanted to enslave their fellow man and we'll do it again. That's a promise.

Posted by: someguy at June 08, 2011 04:13 PM (iIQ0a)

 

I got your six, brutha'. 

99

Well, either this thing is unconstitutional, and this court or the Supremes rule it that, or I spend my latter years in jail.   Probably won't be so bad.   Not like I'm getting laid, now, and the lezzies in jail wouldn't want a dried up old lady.   And, I won't have any bills to worry about or have to worry how I'll feed my face.   Won't even have to worry about how I clothe myself.   Wonder if it will cost the gubmint more to send me to jail than it would have if they hadn't tried to force me to do unconstitutional bullshit.

Eh, fuck 'em.

 

100 Fuck you, fuck Obamacare. Long as the gringo fight the war on drugs we can all get rich , Bwahahahahahahaha

101 Chist, I hope they strike that piece of socialist shit down. If they don't there is no limits to what the federal government can make us do. The only way back to a free society is civil war.

102 100,

And I have your seven! I could pile them up for days like cordwood in front of my bunker!

103 >Puts on his "serious face" <  They better get this one f@!^ing right this time. I'm gettin sick and tired of judges makin shit up and not understanding simple words.

104

@20: "#14 Hey, I'll provide the marching band.

_{turns head, and shouts, "Yes the cave trolls get the tubas.  Duh."}

We'll be ready in a jif."

You mufuckas ain't ready to be marching in Zulu or Endymion.  Maybe next year.

105

The bottom line is that some people want to - and always have wanted to - enslave their fellow man for their political and financial benefit.

We've already had one Civil War in this country for the express purpose of killing those fucking kinds of people. They refused to listen to reason, so we had to fucking shoot and kill our fellow Americans over just this issue.

And if necessary we're going to have us another Civil War, folks.

That's what is at hand. So, I hope the Supreme Court chooses wisely.

106

O/T I have seen refrences to some Dem internal poll that shows the JEF sucking much worse than any of the polls in the MFM.

Can someone put me on some knowledge about that? Is it real or was it "hacked"?

107 Who shit?!?

Oh, Hi Mary from Vt.

108 85 Dammit! What are we going to do with all the stupid Volts?
Posted by: GM at June 08, 2011 04:08 PM (FcR7P)

Well, there's a lawn in TX that's been recently excavated.
________

Can we stand them up, like carhenge?

109 91Amendment Xa: All powers reserved to the people may be rescinded, revoked, or renounced, on a one-time basis, if immediately succeeded with "it was a goof."

Posted by: Chief Justice Fritz, Barber, Bartender, and Shaman at June 08, 2011 04:15 PM (GwPRU)

Sadly? It all started with the idea that the Constitution COULD be ignored, because it 'was not a suicide pact'.... ignoring the idea that it could be AMENDED if we wished.

This is what happens when the only arbiter of Federal Power, is the Federal Government itself...

110 91 Amendment Xa: All powers reserved to the people may be rescinded, revoked, or renounced, on a one-time basis, if immediately succeeded with "it was a goof. #Hacked!"
__________

FIFY

111 one American who has self-insured and paid for all their own health care costs,

Yo, Over here--  WAVES HAND-   and supported a bride and four kids the past 33 years at the same time. Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of retirement and health benefits? I know not what course other morons may take, but as for me, give me liberty or give me death.

112

110 Can we stand them up, like carhenge?

_____________

That's just revolting

113 And in an ominous sign for the administration, the judges opened the arguments by saying they knew of no case in American history where the courts had upheld the government's power to force someone to buy a product.
_________

What about that one case where someone was told he couldn't grow his own wheat? Doesn't that emanate a penumbra requiring him to buy his wheat?

114 Whoa this thing is ready to do some Damage!

115

Imagine getting up to the cash register and having your government-issued purchase card rejected because you've already reached your allowable chocolate ration for the year.  No more chocolate for a YEAR, except what you get on the down low.  Hello blackmarket fudge

 

You get used to it...

116 Two judges appointed by Dems. One appointed by elder Bush. Which way do you think its going to go? Can you say "Commerce Clause."

117

118 We have hope that Ronald Reagan will save us from beyond the grave...

------

The third member of the panel, Marcus, from Florida, was first appointed as a district judge by Reagan, but Clinton appointed him to the appeals court.

118

@104: "And I have your seven! I could pile them up for days like cordwood in front of my bunker!"

THIS IS NOT AN ASSUALT! THIS IS NOT AN ASSAULT!

119 We can only pray that taking down the mandate takes down the whole thing, otherwise the courts will have simply decide to bankrupt private insurance.

Hello NHS.

120 @107: "The bottom line is that some people want to - and always have wanted to - enslave their fellow man for their political and financial benefit.

We've already had one Civil War in this country for the express purpose of killing those fucking kinds of people. They refused to listen to reason, so we had to fucking shoot and kill our fellow Americans over just this issue."

Actually, the Civil War was fought because one group of people wanted to leave the union and the FedGov said they couldn't.  Race-based slavery might have been destroyed as part of the endgame, but slavery to the FedGov was enforced at bayonet point.

121
If Obamacare does go down in flames, what would Barry run on? What else has he accomplished aside from cratering the economy and plunging us into crushing levels of debt?
Posted by: JackStraw at June 08, 2011 03:45 PM

Reinstating Obamacare. Otherwise known as Bride of Obamacare, Night of Obamacare, and Abbott and Costello Meet Obamacare.

122

Not like I'm getting laid, now, and the lezzies in jail

Posted by: Steph

So how YOU doin?

123

Actually, the Civil War was fought because one group of people wanted to leave the union and the FedGov said they couldn't. 

Why did they want to leave? The reason they wanted to leave was to preserve the ability to continue slavery as a means of enriching themselves at the expense and with the labor of their fellow man.

The war was about whether we as a country would continue slavery or break into slave/nonslave entities.

Bottom line: Democrats still want slavery. We can either prevent that from happening or there will be another Civil War over slavery and we'll be forced into a situation where we have to kill our fellow Americans just like in the Civil War. That's the stakes here.

124 Historically, Congress has been terrified of the possibility of an Article V Convention. Enough so that when the number of states gets close to the number required, Congress passes the proposed amendment. That said, what is needed is a House of Repeal, with each branch of the state legislatures appointing one Repealer (Nebraska's unicameral legislature can pick two). The House of Repeal's sole power would be to repeal legislation, regulation, and executive orders. While we are at it, they should also have the power to remove members of the House, Senate, and Courts for bad behavior (similar to the Roman Censors).

125 Yay! We get to fight the fucking Civil War over again on the internet! Whoopee!

Fucking morons.

126

The best pdf converter Windows and Mac OSX pdf converter for mac | pdf converter pdf to swf converter Powerful evidence: using