Obama Warns Supremes-again: Don't Overturn Healthcare Reform: (going for a Win Win)

The Obama administration warned the Supreme Court this week via papers filed with the Court that if Obamacare is struck down, there will be an “extraordinary disruption” in Medicare. Medicare was not discussed during the Supreme Court arguments, since it was not a Constitutional issue. This is a practical argument, not a legal one; it’s the Obama administration applying pressure to the Supremes.

But that’s what the Obama administration does – they focus on the politics of the situation rather than on the legalities. If they can’t win on the law, they figure, they’ll push the Court to act via “empathy,” President Obama’s favorite legal standard. And if they lose, they’ll blame the Court for destroying Medicare.

Source: www.breitbart.com...

Here we go again. More threats of Gloom & Doom.

HEY OBAMA>.... We big kids and can handle ourselves. WE DON'T need you telling us or the SCOTUS how to do things. I think it is clear enough you are incapable of any clear and helpful concepts for the Majority of USA.

I hope to hell the SCOTUS absolutely GOES OFF on Obama & Co when they make their ruling. Slap him back a few steps and we'll send him home.

The lack of honor he has is again shining brightly.

Come on SCOTUS, don't let us down!!!!

reply to post by anon72


Obama already destroyed Medicare when he passed another bill after the big health care reform to extend Medicare benefits to qualifying individuals under new rules.

The cost of this new extension is not even taken into consideration when it comes on the cost of Obama care.

As usual it is the working class that will be exploited once again for political financial gains to benefit the political rats benefactors pimps the big insurance business and pharma.

Still the shock and awe of the news of the dangers on Medicare if the supreme court strikes the mandatory has nothing to do with the Obama care but those that will benefit from this clause, I guess Shock and awe and doom and gloom work for the financial system when they wanted tax payers to pay for their loses and worked for Pelosi in congress, perhaps Pelosi will come out and stand in front of the supreme court and do it again.

The only disruption is what they've caused by passing a law that kinda mickey moused it's way into effect over the course of years. They knew and were told from a dozen directions this would be challenged in court. It WAS filed on almost instantly.

If they plowed right on ahead, knowing it was going through the courts and might not survive a Super challenge, then they are solely to blame for the chaos their bill created. The system wasn't falling with fire and brimstone BEFORE Queen Pelosi banged her comically oversize gavel on that piece of sludge they call Obamacare. If it falls apart NOW, it's their fault and no one else's,

It hasn't been THAT long since they passed their nightmare. The system would never have had time to fall that far, this fast without their help. Doom on the Doomsayers this time.

forcing one top buy a a plan of any kind, is called extortion!!Forced payed protection!!! Buy in or pay a fine, this is what the Obama administration wants, we the people do not count nor matter!!!!

I for one feel betrayed... for I voted for Obama.

I do have PCN, health care, bare bones basic coverage,I payed for it, this and workers comp is all need, others do need more. To force a coverage up on one is not right nor lawful. one should have the right to choose what plan if any is best for him or her.

The great thing about the court is that they can do what is best, because they can not be fired.

Sock it to him...

I think they are still ticked off about the thing at the state of the union speech. He has a habit of rubbing people the wrong way.



What? No applause??

reply to post by anon72
This behaviour is beneath contempt!

This is reason alone for people to vote for anyone BUT Obama.

The insurance companies love it

fascist healthcare
fascist healthcare
fascist healthcare

I do have to agree with the merger of corporate and government via Obamacare and the fundamental lack of Character,honesty,integrity in the current "corporatist in chief".

Also have to agree of hoping that the Scotus lays the smackdown on the great big O and give him a taste of humility.

reply to post by beezzer

I agree with you there. If nothing else, it's a straight up constitutional thing. Other Presidents have started to get frisky about the whole separation of powers concept and eventually been spanked. I'm still waiting.....no spanking from Congress. It'll have to be Chief Roberts and the Supreme's, The days the next batch of rulings come down are probably going to be among the most watched since the civil rights cases.

reply to post by Wrabbit2000


Agreed. What is insulting is that Obama is a constitutional lawyer yet we find more knowlegeable people here on ATS!

reply to post by beezzer


Just goes to show that Harvard educations

are over-rated

reply to post by beezzer


He knows it is unconstitutional.

Everything he does has a purpose.

He knows...

Originally posted by kawika
reply to post by beezzer

 

He knows it is unconstitutional.

Everything he does has a purpose.

He knows...

Cloward-Piven Strategy.

I've been preaching!

Wow...the fake outrage in this thread is hilarious.

The Obama administration informed the court of a possible disaster if the entire bill is overturned...can someone explain to me how this is unconstitutional???

They didn't issue a warning, "do this or else", they are giving the court information they need to make a proper decision.


But yes...let's all freak out and say he is in contempt of court.

Originally posted by OutKast Searcher
Wow...the fake outrage in this thread is hilarious.

The Obama administration informed the court of a possible disaster if the entire bill is overturned...can someone explain to me how this is unconstitutional???

They didn't issue a warning, "do this or else", they are giving the court information they need to make a proper decision.


But yes...let's all freak out and say he is in contempt of court.

Their decision should be based soley on the constitutionality of the law. Not what it "may" impact!

reply to post by beezzer

Their decision should be based soley on the constitutionality of the law. Not what it "may" impact!

If that was the case, then they should only be considering the mandate and not what overturning the mandate "MAY" impact in the rest of the bill.

Oh...that's right....it's fine when it fits your agenda...I forgot.

Originally posted by kawika
reply to post by beezzer

 

He knows it is unconstitutional.

Everything he does has a purpose.

He knows...

What is unconstitutional about one branch of government talking to another branch of government???

Please give a detailed description of what exactly is unconstitutional.

Originally posted by OutKast Searcher
reply to post by beezzer

 

Their decision should be based soley on the constitutionality of the law. Not what it "may" impact!

If that was the case, then they should only be considering the mandate and not what overturning the mandate "MAY" impact in the rest of the bill.

Oh...that's right....it's fine when it fits your agenda...I forgot.

Your defense is poor. So you're saying that SCOTUS needs more "info" from the president so that they can make the "right" (cough-your position) decision?

Originally posted by beezzer

Originally posted by OutKast Searcher
reply to post by beezzer

 

Their decision should be based soley on the constitutionality of the law. Not what it "may" impact!

If that was the case, then they should only be considering the mandate and not what overturning the mandate "MAY" impact in the rest of the bill.

Oh...that's right....it's fine when it fits your agenda...I forgot.

Your defense is poor. So you're saying that SCOTUS needs more "info" from the president so that they can make the "right" (cough-your position) decision?

I see you have completely side stepped the issue about them overturning the entire bill because of what removing the mandate "MAY" impact....this is your exact argument against them considering medicare....hypocrisy???

I would say the SCOTUS needs as much information as they can get about the entire bill and the impact it will have removing all, parts, or none of it.

Providing information to the court does not make someone in contempt of court...would you care to explain why you think Obama is "beyond contempt"???

a 26 year old on mommy and daddies insurance is enough contempt for anyone to have

For crying outloud A 26 YEAR OLD legal to drink and legal to get a CDL and someone to have finished college and oh say GET A JOB!.