Anyone else notice that he's calling them "conservative" judges.... when the judges and court system are supposed to be impartial. The sad thing is I think he's right... judges bought and paid for. No wonder fraud and corruption is running rampant.
I think Perry v. Schwarzenegger will be a court case to watch in the coming years. I'd like to see if they legalize same-sex marriage nationally or keep the state-by-state approach. During the appeal, even the most conservative judges were a bit uneasy taking rights away by referendum once they were given by the court. One outcome I predict is that same-sex marriage will become re-legalized after SCOTUS makes its ruling.
The supreme court is nine people we pay to translate english into english. The consititution is not hard to understand. The entire bill of rights is just a list of things we don't want the government to have power aned control over. The high court need only look to the 10th ammendment for anything not covered in our founding document. The power is to go back to the states and the people.
The disconnect between actual negative results and the people who are complaining about this law, esp. those who've probably read hardly ANY of it, let alone read summaries of the entirety of its functions, is astounding.
after full implementation (or nearly as bad) as you predict. You might be killing a good law, and then we're back to Square 1 in our healthcare system. :(
The funny thing about all this opposition to so-called "obamacare" is that hardly ANYONE (save, perhaps, a few small business owners) who's even AFFECTED by much of it in a HUGE disastrous way wants it REPEALED by any means necessary. Most of the bill isn't even implemented yet! It won't til 2014. Give it a few years, and THEN, if things are really as "bad" as you claim by 2015, you can bitch and complain and go to SCOTUS. Don't do this preemptive nonsense when things may not be as bad
@whoo689 I'm in the military. The healthcare I and all military members receive by all intents and purposes is socialized. I cannot complain about it, I don't see why everyone having the same option is a bad thing. A lot of fucking idiots in the military are completely against "obamacare." They complain that they don't want to pay increased taxes towards others to have the same care we receive, when everything we get is from tax dollars. The people against it are fucking idiots.
@Terminxman Spoken like a true politician who is so much smarter than everyone else and feels the need to dictate how everyone should live their lives. You're in the military and it sounds like I have a better understanding of the constitution, especially WHY it was written, than you do.... and I'm Canadian.
Can you REALLY strike down an entire 2000+ page bill simply because ONE piece (crucial as it may be) is "unconstitutional"? THAT sounds like judicial activism to me, if ever there was!
What I'd like to see with immigration is an easier path to citizenship. Make it easy, make it cheap, make it quick. That said, end entitlements. All of them. Anyone that doesn't want to work wont come for a free meal. True patriots can immigrate at a quicker rate and the economy will be better off. Give us your cold, your tired and your hungry. We'll give them a chance to make something of themselves without being a nanny state.
@TheDerpable How does illegal immigration relate to entitlements, illegal immigrate don't get entitlements. Social Security, medicare, medicare, well fair, food stamps, unemployment. Though, it must be said, legals that work above the table with fake SS# do pay into Social Security, medicare and unemployment, paying an estimated $7B into SS per year, while getting nothing out. The one "entitlements" they do get is there kids get a k-12 education and kids born in the US can get benefits.
@Loathomar Illegal aliens can get Medicare, medical care for uninsured, food stamps, public school education, subsidized public transportation, free school lunches, and federal aid to schools. This doesn't even count access to courts and prison systems.
@Timasion Show me any legal document that allows Medicare or food stamps for Illegal aliens, please. The children of Illegal aliens, who are born in the US can, as they are Americans, but not the illegal aliens. I already stated schools where the one benefits that kids do get, but I guess public transportation is a benefit, but it is not like the US spends a lot on public transportation and I am not sure I would count "public transportation" as an "entitlement".
@Loathomar Your response is in accurate. If one person in a household is a legal citizen, then all the people in the household are eligible for food stamps, not just that one person. Further, the fraud that occurs in the food stamp program is astonishing. As far as Medicare, they've always been eligible.
Lastly, if the government is subsidizing a program, such as public transportation, it is an entitlement.
@Timasion LOL, you wanted inaccurate not "in accurate". It an adult that is an American files taxes can put illegal immigrate children as dependents, and there by get tax brakes and food-stamps for those illegals, but it means someone is legal and paying for those kids. And no illegal immigration do not get Medicare, they never have any never will. They can get emergency crap care in the ER, but that is not covered by Medicare.
@Loathomar Sorry for my inaccuracy. Nonetheless, the substance was correct. If a child is a "citizen," his illegal alien mother could get food stamps, WIC, et cetera. She does not need to be a citizen or provide a SSN. As to Medicare, you may want to research that. I just saw a video of a Florida medical practitioner give testimony on how her state covered an illegal alien under Medicare. They are covering illegal aliens under Medicare, whether it's legal or not.
@Timasion If a state is committing fraud against Medicare, then they should be penalized, but saying some state brake the law does not change the law. That or the medical practitioner is just wrong, which would not be a shock. But as for children getting food stamps, it does change by state, some state cover the whole family and they get ~$200 a month others just the person where the get ~$80/month and some don't cover them at all, see Kansas. Though I think you way over estimate the numbers.
Kansas changed the food stamp policy to not include family with illegal parents, but legal citizens kids, so clearly there was a massive drop in food stamps in Kansas... 2066 kids where dropped, that a lot? About 10% of Kansas gets food stamps, that is 280,000 people getting food stamps, so dropping illegals with US kids drops the food stamps rate by less then 1% yet they make up an estimated 2.5% of the population (70K), so they are using food stamps at a rate 60% lower then average.
The EPA one sounds retarded, of coarse people should be able to challenge EPA control of peoples land in a court of law. I am by no means a "anti-EPA" person, but to say "You can't challenge the EPA ideas, ever." is just retarded, is it someone impossible for the EPA to make a mistake? No.
The Arizona law seems more questionable, I don't think anyone should have to prove their citizenship at anytime, it seems there is way to much room for abuse in the law.
@Kitswain59 Hitler did not create the public healthcare system in Germany, that was Bismark in 1883, which was the first in the world. Using ad hominem attacks and fear tactics generally just means you are unable to make reasonable arguments against a subject. This is not to say that a reasonable arguments against the health government care plan can not be made, more that you are seemly unable to make one.
@Shonenut213 Yea, heaven forbid those people in Arizona want people to enter our country legally as opposed to letting the criminals come across and steal money from our welfare system.
Do you have any facts or just filthy language? LOL!
am I understanding this correctly??? Sackett vs EPA won't settle whether or not the Sackett's have the right to build on their property rather that they have to go to the SCOTUS just to get permission to get their day in court, a lower court?
@thereprieve I believe the supreme court can make the decision to allow Sackett the right to build on their property, but people don't get in front of the decide what one person can do with their land, but to make a large change, which is if people should be able to challenge the EPA's findings that stop people from building in a lower court. Hopefully, that will be a 9-0 decision on the right to have a day in court.
@usaeagle1776 Whats going to happen,people take their second amendment rights to the streets?I can guarantee that even the most conservative republicans and tea party members lack the balls or are too lazy to do anything.
@warpedwiselegoman well, i would disagree. mod rule and violence in the streets is the venue for leftists, and libturds. we conservatives believe in the rule of law. better that way.
It is also the Federal Governments job to handle national defense, but I cant imagine if a state was getting occupied by illegal infiltration and the gov. wasn't doing anything to stop it that the state would just sit back and do nothing. Give me a break .. the gov. want's illegal immigration. That is obvious.
@vonGleichenT yes it has, among many of the taxes imposed already, large companies have started dis-mantling their self insurance programs in anticipation of pushing their employees onto the government plans.
Due to the 10% tax on medical devices... ("hey, lets make healthcare cheaper by making things more expensive!") Medical device companies have started shifting R&D $ from new product innovation to developing techniques and processes to build existing products more cheaply.
@uzimodem A part of me does wish that the Supreme Court would override the Individual Mandate because car owners are under an individual mandate for car insurance. I think it would be great to take advantage of one of the unintended consequences and precedent that repealing it would bring. I hate car insurance and I hate all insurance. It's the perfect scam... =p
@TigerghostPictures I agree with you. but as to a car and the insurance for that car, there is no law saying you have to have a car. therefore, you would not need car insurance. this outrageous healthcare bill is totally opposite. even if you dont want insurance, the govt can make you buy it. can you imagine if the govt made you buy car insurance even if you didnt have a car? the govt has no right to tell us what we can buy or not buy. this is a big over-reach of the govt.and unconstitutional.
@uzimodem I think it's going to be argued that if Congress has the power to mandate that everyone buy insurance then Congress has the power to mandate that everyone buy other products and services as well.
@uzimodem I hope that the Rule of Law is respected in each case, regardless of outcome. I think that the reasoning used by the judges is far more important than their decision.
@RustyIronloins well, you have more faith then I do. when they ruled that you have no rights to your property, that was a wake up call. emminent domain can now be used against any property owner by a business or persons, which is an outrage and totally un-American and is blatantly Un Constitutional.
I am the law.
TheNormalberries 13 hours ago
great videos, thx
JagsFan829 1 month ago
Originalism for the win.
philbelanger2 1 month ago
Do we still have a "balance of powers"?
yakyakyak69 1 month ago in playlist Reason.tv Features
"Supreme Court watcher". . . Yep, they need watching. Sometimes they're completely divorced from reality.
nemo227 1 month ago 2
Anyone else notice that he's calling them "conservative" judges.... when the judges and court system are supposed to be impartial. The sad thing is I think he's right... judges bought and paid for. No wonder fraud and corruption is running rampant.
Unkn0wnGuy 1 month ago 2
I think Perry v. Schwarzenegger will be a court case to watch in the coming years. I'd like to see if they legalize same-sex marriage nationally or keep the state-by-state approach. During the appeal, even the most conservative judges were a bit uneasy taking rights away by referendum once they were given by the court. One outcome I predict is that same-sex marriage will become re-legalized after SCOTUS makes its ruling.
TigerghostPictures 1 month ago
The supreme court is nine people we pay to translate english into english. The consititution is not hard to understand. The entire bill of rights is just a list of things we don't want the government to have power aned control over. The high court need only look to the 10th ammendment for anything not covered in our founding document. The power is to go back to the states and the people.
UtherPendragan 1 month ago 14
@UtherPendragan EXACTLY! Four pages of plain English. We don't need a priesthood for this.
TreachMarkets 1 month ago in playlist More videos from ReasonTV
Thanks for the updates, Nick.
lesliemcintire 1 month ago
The disconnect between actual negative results and the people who are complaining about this law, esp. those who've probably read hardly ANY of it, let alone read summaries of the entirety of its functions, is astounding.
whoo689 1 month ago
after full implementation (or nearly as bad) as you predict. You might be killing a good law, and then we're back to Square 1 in our healthcare system. :(
whoo689 1 month ago
The funny thing about all this opposition to so-called "obamacare" is that hardly ANYONE (save, perhaps, a few small business owners) who's even AFFECTED by much of it in a HUGE disastrous way wants it REPEALED by any means necessary. Most of the bill isn't even implemented yet! It won't til 2014. Give it a few years, and THEN, if things are really as "bad" as you claim by 2015, you can bitch and complain and go to SCOTUS. Don't do this preemptive nonsense when things may not be as bad
whoo689 1 month ago
@whoo689 I'm in the military. The healthcare I and all military members receive by all intents and purposes is socialized. I cannot complain about it, I don't see why everyone having the same option is a bad thing. A lot of fucking idiots in the military are completely against "obamacare." They complain that they don't want to pay increased taxes towards others to have the same care we receive, when everything we get is from tax dollars. The people against it are fucking idiots.
Terminxman 1 month ago
@Terminxman Spoken like a true politician who is so much smarter than everyone else and feels the need to dictate how everyone should live their lives. You're in the military and it sounds like I have a better understanding of the constitution, especially WHY it was written, than you do.... and I'm Canadian.
Unkn0wnGuy 1 month ago 4
@Unkn0wnGuy I used to feel the same way, but the constitution was written over 200 years ago. It isn't perfect, that's why there are amendments.
Terminxman 1 month ago
Can you REALLY strike down an entire 2000+ page bill simply because ONE piece (crucial as it may be) is "unconstitutional"? THAT sounds like judicial activism to me, if ever there was!
whoo689 1 month ago
What I'd like to see with immigration is an easier path to citizenship. Make it easy, make it cheap, make it quick. That said, end entitlements. All of them. Anyone that doesn't want to work wont come for a free meal. True patriots can immigrate at a quicker rate and the economy will be better off. Give us your cold, your tired and your hungry. We'll give them a chance to make something of themselves without being a nanny state.
TheDerpable 1 month ago
@TheDerpable How does illegal immigration relate to entitlements, illegal immigrate don't get entitlements. Social Security, medicare, medicare, well fair, food stamps, unemployment. Though, it must be said, legals that work above the table with fake SS# do pay into Social Security, medicare and unemployment, paying an estimated $7B into SS per year, while getting nothing out. The one "entitlements" they do get is there kids get a k-12 education and kids born in the US can get benefits.
Loathomar 1 month ago
@Loathomar Illegal aliens can get Medicare, medical care for uninsured, food stamps, public school education, subsidized public transportation, free school lunches, and federal aid to schools. This doesn't even count access to courts and prison systems.
Timasion 1 month ago
@Timasion Show me any legal document that allows Medicare or food stamps for Illegal aliens, please. The children of Illegal aliens, who are born in the US can, as they are Americans, but not the illegal aliens. I already stated schools where the one benefits that kids do get, but I guess public transportation is a benefit, but it is not like the US spends a lot on public transportation and I am not sure I would count "public transportation" as an "entitlement".
Loathomar 1 month ago
@Loathomar Your response is in accurate. If one person in a household is a legal citizen, then all the people in the household are eligible for food stamps, not just that one person. Further, the fraud that occurs in the food stamp program is astonishing. As far as Medicare, they've always been eligible.
Lastly, if the government is subsidizing a program, such as public transportation, it is an entitlement.
Timasion 1 month ago
@Timasion LOL, you wanted inaccurate not "in accurate". It an adult that is an American files taxes can put illegal immigrate children as dependents, and there by get tax brakes and food-stamps for those illegals, but it means someone is legal and paying for those kids. And no illegal immigration do not get Medicare, they never have any never will. They can get emergency crap care in the ER, but that is not covered by Medicare.
Loathomar 1 month ago
@Loathomar Sorry for my inaccuracy. Nonetheless, the substance was correct. If a child is a "citizen," his illegal alien mother could get food stamps, WIC, et cetera. She does not need to be a citizen or provide a SSN. As to Medicare, you may want to research that. I just saw a video of a Florida medical practitioner give testimony on how her state covered an illegal alien under Medicare. They are covering illegal aliens under Medicare, whether it's legal or not.
Timasion 1 month ago
@Timasion If a state is committing fraud against Medicare, then they should be penalized, but saying some state brake the law does not change the law. That or the medical practitioner is just wrong, which would not be a shock. But as for children getting food stamps, it does change by state, some state cover the whole family and they get ~$200 a month others just the person where the get ~$80/month and some don't cover them at all, see Kansas. Though I think you way over estimate the numbers.
Loathomar 1 month ago
Kansas changed the food stamp policy to not include family with illegal parents, but legal citizens kids, so clearly there was a massive drop in food stamps in Kansas... 2066 kids where dropped, that a lot? About 10% of Kansas gets food stamps, that is 280,000 people getting food stamps, so dropping illegals with US kids drops the food stamps rate by less then 1% yet they make up an estimated 2.5% of the population (70K), so they are using food stamps at a rate 60% lower then average.
Loathomar 1 month ago
Oh great, the EPA stops people from building homes, but if a factory wants to dump toxic waste into a river, that's just fine.
S1aptasticSquadalah 1 month ago 2
Oh great. So now we have to wait even longer for the healthcare case to go through. Damn it.
sniper6081 1 month ago
The EPA one sounds retarded, of coarse people should be able to challenge EPA control of peoples land in a court of law. I am by no means a "anti-EPA" person, but to say "You can't challenge the EPA ideas, ever." is just retarded, is it someone impossible for the EPA to make a mistake? No.
The Arizona law seems more questionable, I don't think anyone should have to prove their citizenship at anytime, it seems there is way to much room for abuse in the law.
Loathomar 1 month ago
"You can't fight city hall" is turning into "You can't fight. Shut up and pay your taxes."
TheDerpable 1 month ago
ObamaCare = HitlerCare = Death Panels = Eugenics
It's a horrifying thought when government bureaucrats decide if you live or die.
Kitswain59 1 month ago
@Kitswain59 :very true.
uzimodem 1 month ago
@uzimodem Watch main video on my channel. Since you're a veteran, please join oathkeepers org
Kitswain59 1 month ago
@Kitswain59 Hitler did not create the public healthcare system in Germany, that was Bismark in 1883, which was the first in the world. Using ad hominem attacks and fear tactics generally just means you are unable to make reasonable arguments against a subject. This is not to say that a reasonable arguments against the health government care plan can not be made, more that you are seemly unable to make one.
Loathomar 1 month ago
Fuck racist ass Arizona those faggots can go fuck themselves
Shonenut213 1 month ago
@Shonenut213 Yea, heaven forbid those people in Arizona want people to enter our country legally as opposed to letting the criminals come across and steal money from our welfare system.
Do you have any facts or just filthy language? LOL!
tomperanteau 1 month ago
Fuck those SCOTUS traitors they are all bought by lobbyists and corporations
Shonenut213 1 month ago
tanx!
eveningbuzz 1 month ago
Comment removed
FatherTime89 1 month ago
Anything done by these SCOTUS traitors is treason, because they are bought and paid for by walmart and the chamber of commerce!
HyperMediaNews 1 month ago
The Reason TV guy always reminds me of the sixties & seventies.
TWSceptic 1 month ago
am I understanding this correctly??? Sackett vs EPA won't settle whether or not the Sackett's have the right to build on their property rather that they have to go to the SCOTUS just to get permission to get their day in court, a lower court?
thereprieve 1 month ago
@thereprieve I believe the supreme court can make the decision to allow Sackett the right to build on their property, but people don't get in front of the decide what one person can do with their land, but to make a large change, which is if people should be able to challenge the EPA's findings that stop people from building in a lower court. Hopefully, that will be a 9-0 decision on the right to have a day in court.
Loathomar 1 month ago
the repubs on this court better not pussy out. they better vote Obumblecare unconstitutional or there will be trouble.
usaeagle1776 1 month ago 3
@usaeagle1776 Whats going to happen,people take their second amendment rights to the streets?I can guarantee that even the most conservative republicans and tea party members lack the balls or are too lazy to do anything.
warpedwiselegoman 1 month ago in playlist Reason.tv Features
@warpedwiselegoman well, i would disagree. mod rule and violence in the streets is the venue for leftists, and libturds. we conservatives believe in the rule of law. better that way.
usaeagle1776 1 month ago
@usaeagle1776 It's NOT about libs/cons, it's about PEOPLE fighting for their rights. Separation only leads to more of the same bs
ziger123456 1 month ago
@ziger123456 dont know what you mean by "separation." but politics does come into play on the SC. hopefully, the repubs will do what is right.
usaeagle1776 1 month ago
I know Mike Sackett personally... i can't believe the EPA can say whether or not somebody can build on their own freekin property
halomandrummer 1 month ago
@halomandrummer agreed. total bullshit in my opinion. another example of govt overreach that is in my opinion unconstutional.
uzimodem 1 month ago
How bout repealing indefinite detention for us citezens found in the NDAA law
FIGHTFOROURFREEDOM2 1 month ago in playlist Reason.tv Features
It is also the Federal Governments job to handle national defense, but I cant imagine if a state was getting occupied by illegal infiltration and the gov. wasn't doing anything to stop it that the state would just sit back and do nothing. Give me a break .. the gov. want's illegal immigration. That is obvious.
FIGHTFOROURFREEDOM2 1 month ago in playlist Reason.tv Features
Obamacare actually placed less restrictions on things like healthcare >_<; Kinda like free market principle BUT still gov't intervention.
kmelfina 1 month ago in playlist Reason.tv Features
Obama care hasn't done anything yet.
vonGleichenT 1 month ago
@vonGleichenT yes it has, among many of the taxes imposed already, large companies have started dis-mantling their self insurance programs in anticipation of pushing their employees onto the government plans.
Due to the 10% tax on medical devices... ("hey, lets make healthcare cheaper by making things more expensive!") Medical device companies have started shifting R&D $ from new product innovation to developing techniques and processes to build existing products more cheaply.
kwazadilla 1 month ago
This unAmerican govt' will be replaced one way or another!
BeantownJim 1 month ago in playlist Reason.tv Interviews 2012
This has been flagged as spam show
Ron Paul 2012!
BeantownJim 1 month ago in playlist Reason.tv Interviews 2012 41
hopefully they will nullify Obumblecare, support arizona and give the rights back to property owners.
uzimodem 1 month ago 36
@uzimodem A part of me does wish that the Supreme Court would override the Individual Mandate because car owners are under an individual mandate for car insurance. I think it would be great to take advantage of one of the unintended consequences and precedent that repealing it would bring. I hate car insurance and I hate all insurance. It's the perfect scam... =p
TigerghostPictures 1 month ago
@TigerghostPictures I agree with you. but as to a car and the insurance for that car, there is no law saying you have to have a car. therefore, you would not need car insurance. this outrageous healthcare bill is totally opposite. even if you dont want insurance, the govt can make you buy it. can you imagine if the govt made you buy car insurance even if you didnt have a car? the govt has no right to tell us what we can buy or not buy. this is a big over-reach of the govt.and unconstitutional.
uzimodem 1 month ago
@uzimodem I think it's going to be argued that if Congress has the power to mandate that everyone buy insurance then Congress has the power to mandate that everyone buy other products and services as well.
PissedFechtmeister 1 month ago in playlist Reason.tv Features
@PissedFechtmeister :exactly. where would it end? if the govt gets in who the hell knows what they would do with that power. very scary indeed.
uzimodem 1 month ago
@uzimodem I hope that the Rule of Law is respected in each case, regardless of outcome. I think that the reasoning used by the judges is far more important than their decision.
RustyIronloins 1 month ago
@RustyIronloins well, you have more faith then I do. when they ruled that you have no rights to your property, that was a wake up call. emminent domain can now be used against any property owner by a business or persons, which is an outrage and totally un-American and is blatantly Un Constitutional.
uzimodem 1 month ago
@uzimodem It's not faith... I want the SC to follow the Rule of Law and not merely argue post hoc to the decision they want.
RustyIronloins 1 month ago
@uzimodem
Amen to everything you just said!
GammaSigmaBeta 1 month ago in playlist Reason.tv Features
@GammaSigmaBeta :thanks!
uzimodem 1 month ago