A quick round-up
Find a Conversation
A quick round-up
| Mon, 03-22-2010 - 1:45am |
These are the states I know of that have already passed
Latest from the board
- Family ripped from their home at gunpoint; Police storm the property looking for terrorists 3
- The Real 'Re-Distribution' of Wealth 12
- Disgusting tweet from a Fox News Contributor 6
- "Mentally Ill" = Dangerous? 5
- Opinions on same sex marriage Supreme Court case? 4
- Can your elected representative win at Jeopardy? 1
- Government news manipulation 5
- Ask the White House Your Questions on Gun Control!
- Imminent threat to the 2nd amendment right now! 2
- Do You Think Hillary Will Run in 2016? 4
Memeber Support
Visit our Member Support area or browse the iVillage Help forum
| Q: | Where can I change my password? |
| A: | Log in, go to Edit My Preferences, and click the Account tab. Make and save your changes. |
According to CNN, 11 states are comitted to sueing now:
http://www.cnn.com/2010/POLITICS/03/22/health.care.lawsuit/
I hate to break it to you, but HRC has ALREADY passed.
"Taxes are the price we pay for a civilized society."
Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes
" See, by the time November rolls around, those items that are of such benefit to the public will be in place."
Yea, we know the left is hoping the US populace will still be high on this new junkie fix, having not seen the bill for it yet.
It is too bad so many in the US have the Pavlovian response, but without that the democratic party never would've gotten off the ground.
Still, there's this small group called the S.C., I guess you've not heard of them. I'm doubtful, but hoping they see this for what it is and laugh it away just as they did the Bamster's beloved gun bans that were also signed by executives.
Well, the SC - yeah, I've heard of them - will most assuredly not rule that this legislation is unconstitutional, because, of course, it's not.
And President Obama has had no executive orders on banning guns, which is not in this legislation.
And in a republic such as ours, the "people" don't have to "see" the bill though many most assuredly have.
"Taxes are the price we pay for a civilized society."
Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes
"Well, the SC - yeah, I've heard of them - will most assuredly not rule that this legislation is unconstitutional, because, of course, it's not"
It's unfortunate, but you may be right. I'm curious to see where the SC draws the line on a statement as vague as 'promote the general welfare.' Hell, maybe that includes passing a law requiring everyone to buy a helicopter too, 'cause everyone knows when people are spending money the economy does better so it's in everyone's best interest to pass laws forcing them to spend money right?