
Obama Care is being argued in federal court on its constitutionality, on whether or not congress has the constitutional authority to compel people to buy a product sold by a certain industry. Of course they do not, but that will be up to the court to decide. Why will it be up to them? Because in this country we live by a thing called 'the rule of law", and the day that we do not is the day that we are no better than banana republic. OK, you got me on that one, because we have already not lived up to the rule of law, for example, when Bush bailed out the auto industry without congressional approval, illegally using the TARP (bank bailout money) to do it. But the difference, in my defense, is that it was not challenged. Without a challenge to an illegal act, it is in a way not illegal, as was the case involving the Tyrant's of Bush and Obama bailing out the auto industry. I could go on about the illegal auto industry bailout, about how Obama, by the nod of his head, deprived the secured bond holders of the auto companies what was legally theirs, and then gave it to the auto unions, but that is in another video I made at the time, so I will get back to the "crime" at hand. If you listen to the entire argument, and if you're a traditionalist as I am, then you will realize just how far the commerce clause of the constitution has been stretched. They discuss things that will blow your mind (not in the part I uploaded), about the powers that the federal government has over our <b>...</b>
Florida
health
and
human
services
department
arguments
suing
Obama
care
states
11th
Constitutionality
Affordable
Act
Eleventh
Circuit
Court
of
Appeals
individual
mandate
legality
challenged
hearing
case
supreme
unconstitutional
jbranstetter
04