Go Back   Literotica Discussion Board > Main Literotica Forums > General Board

Reply
 
Thread Tools

Old Yesterday, 10:47 AM   #1
BoyNextDoor
I'm so yuge!
 
BoyNextDoor's Avatar
 
BoyNextDoor is offline
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 11,010
Activist Judge legislates from the bench

Couldn't resist starting this one.

Judge uses Tiny's Tax Breaks For the Rich And Famous legislation as the basis. What a hoot.

The tax bill did not invalidate the Affordable Care Act — it did away only with the penalty for not being insured. Congress left the rest of the law intact.

Instead of respecting that legislative choice, Judge O’Connor proceeded to find all the operative provisions of the A.C.A. “inseverable”
from the hollowed-out individual mandate. The whole law must fall. He gave the Texas-led challengers precisely what they wanted
. - NYT

Not to mention the Judge shopping by the plaintiffs, yada yada yada

So Alt-Reich time to STFU about judicial activism.
  Reply With Quote

Old Yesterday, 11:41 AM   #2
coati
Literotica Guru
 
coati is offline
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 1,933
Quote:
Originally Posted by BoyNextDoor View Post
Couldn't resist starting this one.

Judge uses Tiny's Tax Breaks For the Rich And Famous legislation as the basis. What a hoot.

The tax bill did not invalidate the Affordable Care Act — it did away only with the penalty for not being insured. Congress left the rest of the law intact.

Instead of respecting that legislative choice, Judge O’Connor proceeded to find all the operative provisions of the A.C.A. “inseverable”
from the hollowed-out individual mandate. The whole law must fall. He gave the Texas-led challengers precisely what they wanted
. - NYT

Not to mention the Judge shopping by the plaintiffs, yada yada yada

So Alt-Reich time to STFU about judicial activism.
  • All that right-wing crap about judicial activism really was about enacting their own form of judicial activism.
  • All that right-wing crap about government over-reach really was about enacting their own form of government over-reach.
  • All that right-wing crap about political correctness and media bias really was about enacting their own form of political correctness and media bias.
  • All that crap about draining the swamp really was about creating a swamp that more directly benefits the "president's" family.
  • And, all that crap about the perils of government deficits really was about racking up the biggest deficit of all, the one that now portends economic depression.

So, what else is new about the Repugnicans? They take with both hands and blame others for the precise offenses they commit on an hourly basis.

Last edited by coati : Yesterday at 12:55 PM.
  Reply With Quote

Old Yesterday, 12:21 PM   #3
HisArpy
Loose canon extraordinair
 
HisArpy's Avatar
 
HisArpy is offline
Join Date: Jul 2016
Location: On the sunset coast
Posts: 6,609
Quote:
Originally Posted by BoyNextDoor View Post
Couldn't resist starting this one.

Judge uses Tiny's Tax Breaks For the Rich And Famous legislation as the basis. What a hoot.

The tax bill did not invalidate the Affordable Care Act — it did away only with the penalty for not being insured. Congress left the rest of the law intact.

Instead of respecting that legislative choice, Judge O’Connor proceeded to find all the operative provisions of the A.C.A. “inseverable”
from the hollowed-out individual mandate. The whole law must fall. He gave the Texas-led challengers precisely what they wanted
. - NYT

Not to mention the Judge shopping by the plaintiffs, yada yada yada

So Alt-Reich time to STFU about judicial activism.
You do realize that one purpose of the judiciary is to determine if a law is or isn't "legal" under the Constitution, don't you?

This was a multi-state lawsuit which was brought after the Congress passed the Tax Act and eliminated the individual mandate. The suit claimed that without the mandate, there was no "tax" provision to support the remainder of the law.

There is precedent for this point of view. There is precedent for the remedy, which is to strike the law as unconstitutional.

So, the timeline is:
Pass a law which is determined to be a tax. (note: NOT "activism")
Repeal the provision of the law which was used to determine the law was a tax. (not "activism")
Sue and allege there is no support for the remainder of the law as a tax. (more not "activism")
The law violates the Commerce Clause without the mandate's tax provisions. (established precedent and thus still not "activism")
The law is unconstitutional. (inescapable conclusion, not "activism")

This is not "activism" no matter what your MSM handlers have told you.
__________________
I don't particularly care if you don't like it.



My Literotica stories

Last edited by HisArpy : Yesterday at 12:24 PM.
  Reply With Quote

Old Yesterday, 01:02 PM   #4
coati
Literotica Guru
 
coati is offline
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 1,933
Quote:
Originally Posted by HisArpy View Post
This is not "activism" no matter what your MSM handlers have told you.
Thank God Lit has a semi-retired ambulance chaser to lecture us on the Fox News version of not-judicial-activism.

Actually, none of the MSM outlets that I saw yesterday even mentioned judicial activism. They just reported the decision.
  Reply With Quote

Old Yesterday, 01:08 PM   #5
BotanyBoy
Fuck Your Safe Space
 
BotanyBoy's Avatar
 
BotanyBoy is offline
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 40,766
Quote:
Originally Posted by coati View Post
Thank God Lit has a semi-retired ambulance chaser to lecture us on the Fox News version of not-judicial-activism.

Actually, none of the MSM outlets that I saw yesterday even mentioned judicial activism
. They just reported the decision.
LOL....here is your sign.

Good job supporting HisArpy's position.
  Reply With Quote

Old Yesterday, 01:49 PM   #6
someoneyouknow
Literotica Guru
 
someoneyouknow's Avatar
 
someoneyouknow is offline
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 25,941
The individual mandate is unconstitutional on two grounds.

First, it is not a tax, contrary to what the conservative Republican Justice John Roberts said. The money funds no government service which all taxes do.

Second, the government cannot force you to buy something you don't want. If they're forcing you to buy something, it's not a tax (see point above).

That said, if the Heritage Foundation, who first proposed using the government to force people to hand over their money for no reason, wrote a multi-page document on why this should be, and Republican Mitt Romney implement it, how bad can it be?
__________________
I live in my dreams because they are more real

Gwen, my love, if one tolerates bad manners, they grow worse. Our pleasant habitat could decay into the sort of slum Elli-Five is, with crowding and unmannerly behavior and unnecessary noise and impolite language. I must find the oaf who did this thing, explain to him his offense, give him a chance to apologize, and kill him. - Robert Heinlein, The Cat Who Walks Through Walls

If you can read this, the assassin has failed


  Reply With Quote

Old Yesterday, 01:54 PM   #7
coati
Literotica Guru
 
coati is offline
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 1,933
Quote:
Originally Posted by BotanyBoy View Post
LOL....here is your sign.

Good job supporting HisArpy's position.
Unlike consumers of Fox "News", other people don't need media outlets to feed them talking points about how to interpret the news. They have developed other parts of the brain, and they rely upon multiple sources of information.

Believe it or not, some people base their opinions on resources beyond the encyclopedia, the dictionary, Fox & Friends, and right-wing propaganda sites.

I know it is very difficult for you to understand that PBS and BBC did not mention judicial activism in their reports of the recent decision, but that editorial omission does not necessarily support the position of your buddy, the ambulance chaser.

Your middle school debating techniques are so precious...
  Reply With Quote

Old Yesterday, 01:57 PM   #8
BotanyBoy
Fuck Your Safe Space
 
BotanyBoy's Avatar
 
BotanyBoy is offline
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 40,766
Quote:
Originally Posted by someoneyouknow View Post
The individual mandate is unconstitutional on two grounds.

First, it is not a tax, contrary to what the conservative Republican Justice John Roberts said. The money funds no government service which all taxes do.

Second, the government cannot force you to buy something you don't want. If they're forcing you to buy something, it's not a tax (see point above).

That said, if the Heritage Foundation, who first proposed using the government to force people to hand over their money for no reason, wrote a multi-page document on why this should be, and Republican Mitt Romney implement it, how bad can it be?
Sad when the best HC plan the (D)'s can come up with is a rejected (R)epublican program.

Their supporters should have demanded something better....at least original, but they lapped it up and defended it....fuckin' suckers.
  Reply With Quote

Old Yesterday, 01:58 PM   #9
HisArpy
Loose canon extraordinair
 
HisArpy's Avatar
 
HisArpy is offline
Join Date: Jul 2016
Location: On the sunset coast
Posts: 6,609
Quote:
Originally Posted by coati View Post
Unlike consumers of Fox "News", other people don't need media outlets to feed them talking points about how to interpret the news. They have developed other parts of the brain, and they rely upon multiple sources of information.

Believe it or not, some people base their opinions on resources beyond the encyclopedia, the dictionary, Fox & Friends, and right-wing propaganda sites.

I know it is very difficult for you to understand that PBS and BBC did not mention judicial activism in their reports of the recent decision, but that editorial omission does not necessarily support the position of your buddy, the ambulance chaser.

Your middle school debating techniques are so precious...

Dude, the OP put it in the thread title. Or did you miss that part?

The rest is hyperbole. Did you miss that part too?
__________________
I don't particularly care if you don't like it.



My Literotica stories
  Reply With Quote

Old Yesterday, 02:10 PM   #10
BoyNextDoor
I'm so yuge!
 
BoyNextDoor's Avatar
 
BoyNextDoor is offline
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 11,010
Quote:
Originally Posted by HisArpy View Post
You do realize that one purpose of the judiciary is to determine if a law is or isn't "legal" under the Constitution, don't you?

This was a multi-state lawsuit which was brought after the Congress passed the Tax Act and eliminated the individual mandate. The suit claimed that without the mandate, there was no "tax" provision to support the remainder of the law.

There is precedent for this point of view. There is precedent for the remedy, which is to strike the law as unconstitutional.

So, the timeline is:
Pass a law which is determined to be a tax. (note: NOT "activism")
Repeal the provision of the law which was used to determine the law was a tax. (not "activism")
Sue and allege there is no support for the remainder of the law as a tax. (more not "activism")
The law violates the Commerce Clause without the mandate's tax provisions. (established precedent and thus still not "activism")
The law is unconstitutional. (inescapable conclusion, not "activism")

This is not "activism" no matter what your MSM handlers have told you.
Tell it to your Alt-Rech buddies. That is the "subtle" point of the OP that went completely over your head dumbass.
  Reply With Quote

Old Yesterday, 02:10 PM   #11
coati
Literotica Guru
 
coati is offline
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 1,933
Quote:
Originally Posted by HisArpy View Post
Dude, the OP put it in the thread title. Or did you miss that part?

The rest is hyperbole. Did you miss that part too?
Dude, the thread title is editorial in nature, and is not even cited to a specific "MSM" source. Have you found this thread title in any actual news report from the alleged "MSM handlers" you referred to?

Are you aware that there are many different media outlets, and there is no conspiracy among many of them to form a group called "MSM"?
  Reply With Quote

Old Yesterday, 02:12 PM   #12
BotanyBoy
Fuck Your Safe Space
 
BotanyBoy's Avatar
 
BotanyBoy is offline
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 40,766
Quote:
Originally Posted by coati View Post
Unlike consumers of Fox "News", other people don't need media outlets to feed them talking points about how to interpret the news.
Never said they did.

Quote:
Originally Posted by coati View Post
They have developed other parts of the brain, and they rely upon multiple sources of information.
Really? What part of the brain exactly?

Can you link some clinical research on that?

Quote:
Originally Posted by coati View Post
Believe it or not, some people base their opinions on resources beyond the encyclopedia, the dictionary, Fox & Friends, and right-wing propaganda sites.
Because academic references are the same as pop-media

And of course I believe it, because I do it too.

I like clinical research and academic papers a lot too and regularly hammer the science deniers of the left wing with those as well and wow do they hate biology....especially the feminist.


Quote:
Originally Posted by coati View Post
I know it is very difficult for you to understand that PBS and BBC did not mention judicial activism in their reports of the recent decision, but that editorial omission does not necessarily support the position of your buddy, the ambulance chaser.
That's because they aren't that dumb, in the case of using MSM as a relevant source?

Yea...it does, they are either valid references or they are not.

They aren't just valid when they agree with YOUR opinion and politics.

Logical consistency.....you have none.

Quote:
Originally Posted by coati View Post
Your middle school debating techniques are so precious...

*Says the king of ascription, ad hominem and false equivalencies rivaled only by Rory, Shitslinger and RacistDownSouth LOL!!!!*


Debate? I thought this was the GB.

I was never aware of any debate.
  Reply With Quote

Old Yesterday, 02:12 PM   #13
someoneyouknow
Literotica Guru
 
someoneyouknow's Avatar
 
someoneyouknow is offline
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 25,941
Quote:
Originally Posted by BotanyBoy View Post
Sad when the best HC plan the (D)'s can come up with is a rejected (R)epublican program.

Their supporters should have demanded something better....at least original, but they lapped it up and defended it....fuckin' suckers.
The Heritage Foundation pushed for it, Newt Gingrich went on a national tour touting it, and Mitt Romney finally implemented.

What makes Republicans mad is they got what they wanted, and didn't get any credit for it.
__________________
I live in my dreams because they are more real

Gwen, my love, if one tolerates bad manners, they grow worse. Our pleasant habitat could decay into the sort of slum Elli-Five is, with crowding and unmannerly behavior and unnecessary noise and impolite language. I must find the oaf who did this thing, explain to him his offense, give him a chance to apologize, and kill him. - Robert Heinlein, The Cat Who Walks Through Walls

If you can read this, the assassin has failed


  Reply With Quote

Old Yesterday, 02:12 PM   #14
coati
Literotica Guru
 
coati is offline
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 1,933
Quote:
Originally Posted by BotanyBoy View Post
Sad when the best HC plan the (D)'s can come up with is a rejected (R)epublican program.

Their supporters should have demanded something better....at least original, but they lapped it up and defended it....fuckin' suckers.
Lesson learned. Next time we try to achieve universal health care, we will deal the private insurance middle men out of the picture.

Single payer.
  Reply With Quote

Old Yesterday, 02:15 PM   #15
Hal9000_
Virgin
 
Hal9000_ is offline
Join Date: Dec 2018
Posts: 14
ACA fails to fix our system. Why are eyes and teeth separate insurances?
__________________
  Reply With Quote

Old Yesterday, 02:21 PM   #16
BoyNextDoor
I'm so yuge!
 
BoyNextDoor's Avatar
 
BoyNextDoor is offline
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 11,010
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hal9000_ View Post
ACA fails to fix our system. Why are eyes and teeth separate insurances?
I was just saying that to some folks at work the other day. The annual re-up "open enrollment" was happening and I was like "how is it that care for my eyes and teeth do not qualify as healthcare"??

I think Dental was an extra $23 and vision was $14 or something like that.
  Reply With Quote

Old Yesterday, 02:24 PM   #17
BotanyBoy
Fuck Your Safe Space
 
BotanyBoy's Avatar
 
BotanyBoy is offline
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 40,766
Quote:
Originally Posted by someoneyouknow View Post
The Heritage Foundation pushed for it, Newt Gingrich went on a national tour touting it, and Mitt Romney finally implemented.
In his blue state.

Quote:
Originally Posted by someoneyouknow View Post
What makes Republicans mad is they got what they wanted, and didn't get any credit for it.
Really? Which Republicans supported and voted for the ACA again??

Quote:
Originally Posted by coati View Post
Lesson learned. Next time we try to achieve universal health care, we will deal the private insurance middle men out of the picture.
Can't do that.....I mean you can but you'll lose the prohibition against insurance in court pretty quickly.

Also UHC is going to get shat upon too....because this is the USA, you can't tell all these medical professionals they can only work for the government and they have to do so at a loss.

That's how you Venezuela the USA.

Quote:
Originally Posted by coati View Post
Single payer.
Our right wing government and Constitution won't allow it.

Comrade....you cannot just take over/eliminate entire industries because feels, this is not Soviet Russia and there will be no Lenin or Stalin to bring about the utopia you desire.

The very best you can get is to open publicly funded HC clinics/hospitals for everyone.

Otherwise? It will be fought and go down in flames....as intended...
  Reply With Quote

Old Yesterday, 02:27 PM   #18
BotanyBoy
Fuck Your Safe Space
 
BotanyBoy's Avatar
 
BotanyBoy is offline
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 40,766
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hal9000_ View Post
ACA fails to fix our system.
That's the rub innit!!!

The sooner (D)'s can admit that to themselves the sooner they can get on with fixing it...LOL

They will never fix it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hal9000_ View Post
Why are eyes and teeth separate insurances?
Because they are different businesses.
  Reply With Quote

Old Yesterday, 02:33 PM   #19
Hal9000_
Virgin
 
Hal9000_ is offline
Join Date: Dec 2018
Posts: 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by BotanyBoy View Post


Because they are different businesses.
They all seem like overall "health", to me.
__________________
  Reply With Quote

Old Yesterday, 02:35 PM   #20
BotanyBoy
Fuck Your Safe Space
 
BotanyBoy's Avatar
 
BotanyBoy is offline
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 40,766
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hal9000_ View Post
They all seem like overall "health", to me.
Yea, but you don't run the insurance or HC industries so.....doesn't matter.
  Reply With Quote

Old Yesterday, 02:37 PM   #21
coati
Literotica Guru
 
coati is offline
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 1,933
Quote:
Originally Posted by BotanyBoy View Post
Can't do that.....I mean you can but you'll lose the prohibition against insurance in court pretty quickly.

Also UHC is going to get shat upon too....because this is the USA, you can't tell all these medical professionals they can only work for the government and they have to do so at a loss.

That's how you Venezuela the USA.

Our right wing government and Constitution won't allow it.

Comrade....you cannot just take over/eliminate entire industries because feels, this is not Soviet Russia and there will be no Lenin or Stalin to bring about the utopia you desire.

The very best you can get is to open publicly funded HC clinics/hospitals for everyone.

Otherwise? It will be fought and go down in flames....as intended...
I said nothing about prohibiting private health insurance. People of means can still go that route.

I am talking about extending Medicare to people who don't have means and to anybody who wants to use Medicare as their primary insurer and is willing to pay the premiums. The government is already in the health care business. It's been that way for a long time.

Last time we tried addressing universal health care, we tried working through private insurance companies. That did not work out. And, the Stable Genius did not use his two years of controlling the executive and legislative branches to repeal ACA and replace it with something far better, as he had promised.

So, lesson learned. Next time, access to single payer will be expanded. This will not be a right-wing dominated country forever. We have a precedent for single payer healthcare. We will eventually expand access. Get used to it.

Last edited by coati : Yesterday at 02:40 PM.
  Reply With Quote

Old Yesterday, 02:55 PM   #22
BotanyBoy
Fuck Your Safe Space
 
BotanyBoy's Avatar
 
BotanyBoy is offline
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 40,766
Quote:
Originally Posted by coati View Post
I said nothing about prohibiting private health insurance.
So NOT really universal HC.

Quote:
Originally Posted by coati View Post
I am talking about extending Medicare to people who don't have means and to anybody who wants to use Medicare as their primary insurer and is willing to pay the premiums.
If they are willing to pay the premiums then why don't they just go get private insurance which will be significantly better?

You can't have it both ways.

Are you talking about a welfare system or a public HC services?

Quote:
Originally Posted by coati View Post
The government is already in the health care business. It's been that way for a long time.
MMmhmmm...and look how awesome it is!!!

It's a wonder folks still want to give that disaster more money and power to control their lives.

Quote:
Originally Posted by coati View Post
Last time we tried addressing universal health care, we tried working through private insurance companies. That did not work out.
Nope.....sure didn't. Democrat and RINO ROmney's fascistic bullshit plan failed pretty hard.

Quote:
Originally Posted by coati View Post
And, the Stable Genius did not use his two years of controlling the executive and legislative branches to repeal ACA and replace it with something far better, as he had promised.
POTUS doesn't control the legislature....LOL

Do you know how our government works???


Quote:
Originally Posted by coati View Post
So, lesson learned. Next time, access to single payer will be expanded.
Uhhh......you'll have to create a single payer system before you can expand access to it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by coati View Post
This will not be a right-wing dominated country forever.
The Constitution and the fundamental structure of our government is Right wing.

The right wing will overall dominate because it has that advantage over the left.

Your only way out is a socialist revolution....or a constitutional convention.

Good luck with that.

Quote:
Originally Posted by coati View Post
We have a precedent for single payer healthcare.
REALLY?? Where is it?

Quote:
Originally Posted by coati View Post
We will eventually expand access. Get used to it.
I don't think you will, I think you're going to get fucked some more by the elites for another 35 years before they barely tinker with it and totally fuck shit up even worse than it is now.

Last edited by BotanyBoy : Yesterday at 02:59 PM.
  Reply With Quote

Old Yesterday, 03:02 PM   #23
coati
Literotica Guru
 
coati is offline
Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 1,933
BotBoy has once again been triggered into a frenzy of desperation. Rail on, BotBoy! Stomp your feet. Change is on the way.
  Reply With Quote

Old Yesterday, 03:10 PM   #24
BotanyBoy
Fuck Your Safe Space
 
BotanyBoy's Avatar
 
BotanyBoy is offline
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 40,766
Quote:
Originally Posted by coati View Post
BotBoy has once again been triggered into a frenzy of desperation.
Responding to you is being triggered?

LOL

More like you can't respond to any of it.....probably don't know how.

Hell you didn't even know that Trump doesn't control congress and seem to think we have a single payer system we can expand access to.

Frenzy of desperation? More like projection.....

Quote:
Originally Posted by coati View Post
Rail on, BotBoy! Stomp your feet. Change is on the way.
Uh hua.....sure.
  Reply With Quote

Old Yesterday, 03:11 PM   #25
Luk
Literotica Guru
 
Luk's Avatar
 
Luk is offline
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 29,342
Quote:
Originally Posted by coati View Post
BotBoy has once again been triggered into a frenzy of desperation. Rail on, BotBoy! Stomp your feet. Change is on the way.
He should just post this ( ) instead of words because that's a better representation of his "positions" than his fumbled words.
  Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:05 AM.

Copyright 1998-2013 Literotica Online. Literotica is a registered trademark.