residents of Moron City: Supreme Court (save Alito/Thomas/Scalia)

R

republicanchick

New member
Where does a rational person begin to critique this ...this... What's the word? This (for lack of a better term) MORONic decision

oh wait... we shouldn't insult morons..

In any case, I will itemize some of the many thoughts that come to me:




  • [*]the Supreme Court apparently READ the Affordable (ha ha) Act. Isn't it ironic that they uphold a law that was not even READ in Congress (yet passed)? What would happen if a college student claimed to have read Shakespeare, wrote an essay on Shakespeare and the teacher (who has actually READ Shakespeare) gave him an A even though the paper didn't have much to do with Shakespeare and distorted his writings?


    [*]the Supreme Court is supposed to interpret law, not MAKE law. The 6 lib justices went against the clear meaning of those 4 words, which as Scalia notes are mentioned SEVEN times in the ACA... 7 times it was found to be ambiguous... so they had to read the whole law (something that had yet to be done by those who are SUPPOSED To read laws before passing, are PAID by We the People to read...) and look for INTENT...


    [*]This decision is reminiscent of another un-Constitutional, irrational, activist SC decision: Roe v Wade... with all its "penumbras" and "emanations" and all that tomfoolery that was used (1973) to justify MURDER


    [*]How ironic... the Supreme Court upholds a law that NOT ONE Republican in Congress voted for! And no one seems to have READ! [until the SC finally read it??)


    (Maybe it is time to change the rules in Congress, so that if not ONE person in one of the two parties votes for a bill, it doesn't pass?)


    [*]The Supreme Court is supposed to respect legislation written by Congress, not just throw it out when... there are problems, such as four "ambiguous" (ha ha) words in some law. I guess that is their excuse for this decision. Talk about IRONY! Why didn't they just say "Hey, you bozos in Congress didn't even READ the darn thing, that alone invalidates the AKA!"


    [*]etc.... etc... etc..


.



++


 
Last edited:
R

republicanchick

New member
i think Scalia used the word ABSURD to describe the -- LOL -- "reasoning" behind this decision

and he said that 21 pages didn't make it less so

I would LOVE to have a copy of the full Dissent


maybe u can get such things on line?

__
 
R

republicanchick

New member
as w/ the gay "marriage" decision today, the biggest problem is how STATE power is being removed from the states

the federal gov is taking over..

Thank God Roberts seems to see this, @ least in this last Decision.

the federal government is taking over. That is a HUGE problem because..

to simplify, just a few words or sentences should do:

  • Veteran's Affairs (remember how vets were dying due to substandard medical care and CORRUPTION in the VA?)
  • Lois Lerner (corruption, lying)
  • Eric Holder (corruption, racism)
  • IRS (corruption, legalized theft)


T e d C r u z,



we LOVE YOU!​

(and Ben Carson, and Fiorina... and maybe a few others)

++++
 
R

republicanchick

New member
oh gee, i htought there might be an intelligent response here

:juggle:

guess it's time to go to Foxnews...

I don't like Moron City

it's boring


++++
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top