Unbelievable - White House Calls Obamacare Ruling Judicial Overreach

[General of Darkness]

What's nice is that the judge also wrote this. “I note that in 2008, then-Senator Obama supported a health care reform proposal that did not include an individual mandate because he was at that time strongly opposed to the idea, stating that ‘if a mandate was the solution, we can try that to solve homelessness by mandating everybody to buy a house,’” Judge Vinson wrote in a footnote toward the end of the 78-page ruling Monday.

Unreal… White House Calls Obamacare Ruling Judicial Overreach
Posted by Jim Hoft on Monday, January 31, 2011, 5:33 PM

U.S. District Judge Roger Vinson ruled today that Obamacare is unconstitutional.

The White House today said the Obamacare ruling by Judge Roger Vinson was a plain case of judicial overreach.
Forbes reported:

Earlier today Judge Roger Vinson ruled that the health reform legislation passed last year is unconstitutional. Not surprisingly this evoked a harsh reaction from the administration, which does not want to its main domestic accomplishment during the President’s first two years in office to be nullified by the courts.

On the White House’s blog, spokeswoman Stephanie Cutter writes: “Today’s ruling – issued by Judge Vinson in the Northern District of Florida – is a plain case of judicial overreaching.” She continues: “Those who claim that the “individual responsibility” provision exceeds Congress’ power to regulate interstate commerce because it penalizes “inactivity” are simply wrong. Individuals who choose to go without health insurance are actively making an economic decision that impacts all of us.”

http://gatewaypundit.rightnetwork.com/2011/01/unreal-white-house-calls-obamacare-ruling-judicial-overreach/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed:+gatewaypundit2+%28Gateway+Pundi t%29

[Ares]

They can call it "judicial overreach" all they want. But I know plenty of people who will not take part in it and will die defending themselves from it.

[madfranks]

On the White House’s blog, spokeswoman Stephanie Cutter writes: “Today’s ruling – issued by Judge Vinson in the Northern District of Florida – is a plain case of judicial overreaching.” She continues: “Those who claim that the “individual responsibility” provision exceeds Congress’ power to regulate interstate commerce because it penalizes “inactivity” are simply wrong. Individuals who choose to go without health insurance are actively making an economic decision that impacts all of us.”

Well then, using the house analogy Obama used in '08, everyone who refuses to buy a house is actively making an economic decision that impacts all of us too.

[General of Darkness]

On the White House’s blog, spokeswoman Stephanie Cutter writes: “Today’s ruling – issued by Judge Vinson in the Northern District of Florida – is a plain case of judicial overreaching.” She continues: “Those who claim that the “individual responsibility” provision exceeds Congress’ power to regulate interstate commerce because it penalizes “inactivity” are simply wrong. Individuals who choose to go without health insurance are actively making an economic decision that impacts all of us.”

Well then, using the house analogy Obama used in '08, everyone who refuses to buy a house is actively making an economic decision that impacts all of us too.


Well on top of that, every illegal, person on welfare, unemployed and having a child is making an impact on all of us. Stephanie Cutter is very much of a socialist mindset.

[Plastic]

I have finally had enough and will now officially name my hemorrhoid Obama.

[Low_five]

More like a judicial chimpout.

[cthulu]

On the White House’s blog, spokeswoman Stephanie Cutter writes: “Today’s ruling – issued by Judge Vinson in the Northern District of Florida – is a plain case of judicial overreaching.” She continues: “Those who claim that the “individual responsibility” provision exceeds Congress’ power to regulate interstate commerce because it penalizes “inactivity” are simply wrong. Individuals who choose to go without health insurance are actively making an
economic decision that impacts all of us.”


Isnot that why bernanke wants more inflation

Well then, using the house analogy Obama used in '08, everyone who refuses to buy a house is actively making an economic decision that impacts all of us too.

[Apparition]

And the corrupt SCOTUS's ruling on FDR's plan to suppress how much wheat a farmer can grow entirely on his/her farm land is perfectly acceptable considering that the WH's justification for the mandate is based on that?

Yep, it makes perfect sense. :sarc:

[sirgonzo420]

And the corrupt SCOTUS's ruling on FDR's plan to suppress how much wheat a farmer can grow entirely on his/her farm land is perfectly acceptable considering that the WH's justification for the mandate is based on that?

You can grow whatever you like on your farm. You just better not have a contract with the USDA when you do it.


Well.... depends on the plant.


Contract or no contract, if your field looks like this:

http://thegoat.backcountry.com/files/2009/05/marijuana-field-1.jpg


You will likely be hassled, raided, and/or have your fields burned.

[madfranks]

And the corrupt SCOTUS's ruling on FDR's plan to suppress how much wheat a farmer can grow entirely on his/her farm land is perfectly acceptable considering that the WH's justification for the mandate is based on that?

You can grow whatever you like on your farm. You just better not have a contract with the USDA when you do it.


This guy didn't have a contract and was strong armed by the gov't into what he could and could not grow on his farm:

http://mises.org/daily/3759

[madfranks]

This guy didn't have a contract and was strong armed by the gov't into what he could and could not grow on his farm:

http://mises.org/daily/3759


There is a lot of ignorance concerning what constitutes a contract. Following Roosevelt seizure of gold the law of contracts was restated (in the late 30's). The reason for this is that common law requires the major element of consideration and Roosevelt taking substance away removed consideration. So now one method of agreeing to contracts is silence. An offer is made and not rejected or canceled and you are dealing with a contract.

Here is part of what your article says


When the County Production and Marketing Administration office in Collegeville, Pennsylvania, notified Blattner and his son John, who manages the farm, that they could plant 16 acres of wheat and no more, they paid no attention. They sowed 24 acres, with more in corn, enough for the proper feeding of 6,000 laying hens that are the mainstay of their operation on North Wales Road, near the old Welsh community of Center Square in Worcester township, just beyond Philadelphia's suburbs.

Whether they had a signed paper signifying a contract or not they did have notice and they accepted the offer provided them by SILENCE. Therein lies the contract.




Thanks for reading and replying to the article. To get back on topic, what if I send the proper authority a notice that I am opting out of Obamacare and will not be buying insurance, and they ignore it. When my assets get seized to pay the penalty, somehow I doubt they would accept that by ignoring my notice they contractually agreed to my terms.

[madfranks]

I appreciate your views and you definitely give me (and all of GSUS) things to think about.