Must just be missing this.....

[Guest TankerHC]

Because I cant seem to find anything about it on our very own US News. Someone will Im sure...but easily found around the world news, just not ours. I just checked Fox and CNN and it isnt there, maybe later.

 

EDIT: OK, found it on Fox, but its not Politics, its Health and its not a news article, its an editorial by Jay Sekulow. on how these suits MAY reach the Supreme Court. If they win in Federal Court and the Supreme Court refuses to hear them then THEY are the law of the land, at least in the states with enough balls to stand up to these thugs in Washington.

 

Of course to the rest of the world, this story is what it is, a Bombshell. Although since we now have taxation without representation (I see no one representing anyone) and the Constitution is Continually trampled underfoot, when Federal Judges rule in their favor, it probably wont even get a second glance from Washington.

 

 

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2471978/Bombshell-Federal-judge-suddenly-green-lights-lawsuit-stop-Obamacare-tracks.html

Edited October 23, 2013 by TankerHC

[Steelharp]

If the Daily Mail wasn't the equivalent of The Enquirer...

[Guest TankerHC]

Except its entirely true.

[2.ooohhh]

Typing "obamacare" into google news and looking at the last 24 hours brings up dozens upon dozens of results from reputable sources in the US. Doesn't appear anyone is hiding it.

 

Washington Times

 

Politico

 

Wall Street Journal

 

CNBC

 

LA Times

 

 

 

Not really news worthy anyway and certainly not a bombshell, IMHO until the Judge rules that the case has merit and allows it to proceed.

Edited October 23, 2013 by 2.ooohhh

[Guest TankerHC]

CNBC, LA times reputable sources? If your a leftist. But yes, I knew someone would find it. (Mentioned in the OP).

 

I try hard to NOT read anything from 3 of the 5 you mentioned. Unfortunately you have to know your enemy, so I do read their take on things I give a crap about, just to see the pro leftist spiel and see what they are up to next.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

If the Daily Mail wasn't the equivalent of The Enquirer...

Where'd you come up with that?

[bersaguy]

My :2cents: :2cents: on the entire bill is this. The Supreme court made it's ruling based on the original bill(law) the way it was written. Since the vote by the Court Obama has re written so many parts of it that it is no longer the same law the Court ruled on. I think the new writing of the law should go back to the Supreme Court and be ruled on again now that the Court has seen how it really works. I don't think it would pass a second judgement and would be shot down by the Supreme Court this time.............jmho

[2.ooohhh]

CNBC, LA times reputable sources? If your a leftist. But yes, I knew someone would find it. (Mentioned in the OP).

 

I try hard to NOT read anything from 3 of the 5 you mentioned. Unfortunately you have to know your enemy, so I do read their take on things I give a crap about, just to see the pro leftist spiel and see what they are up to next.

 

I don't read any single news source but rely on the aggregate to point me to what's worth reading more about, By searching the entire news stream instead of a single site I can see how many outlets are reporting it, If if find a single source it is suspect and often false, if I find dozens it's likely news and not being hidden(may not be on CNN b/c they care more about ratings than accurate reporting) but should still be looked into if it interests me, if all sources were outside the US I might believe that it was attempting to be hidden or hushed by the administration or the mainstream US media,(saw this often with the earliest Snowden data)

 

 

I took issue that you insinuated that it was "not easily found" in national news sources here, when MANY national news sources were top results of even the simplest of cursory searches utilizing a mainstream search engine.

 

Reputable and without bias are different things. I can stand a factually correct story with a left lean though I don't like my news leaning either way, but I can not stand a source such as the daily mail being presented as "reputable" when it has often in the past falsified sources and stories to sell papers/get web hits.

 

http://www.poynter.org/latest-news/mediawire/222979/mail-online-executive-false-stories-not-completely-out-of-the-realm-of-possibility/

 

http://www.poynter.org/latest-news/regret-the-error/173261/daily-mail-reporter-cant-explain-how-false-report-got-published/

 

http://www.theguardian.com/media/2012/jan/12/daily-mail-neil-morrissey-damages

 

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/10/16/fox-news-promotes-false-story-about-transgender-student-harassing-girls-in-bathroom/

 

http://www.globalresearch.ca/britains-daily-mail-u-s-backed-plan-to-launch-chemical-weapon-attack-on-syria/5346912

 

http://www.millenniumvillages.org/field-notes/daily-mail-retracts-false-claim-about-millennium-villages

 

http://www.hobo-web.co.uk/amanda-knox-freed-daily-mail-guilty-lols/

[Guest TankerHC]

My :2cents: :2cents: on the entire bill is this. The Supreme court made it's ruling based on the original bill(law) the way it was written. Since the vote by the Court Obama has re written so many parts of it that it is no longer the same law the Court ruled on. I think the new writing of the law should go back to the Supreme Court and be ruled on again now that the Court has seen how it really works. I don't think it would pass a second judgement and would be shot down by the Supreme Court this time.............jmho

I agree with this. But Obama says it's the law of the Land. Which I thought was the constitution. Who coulda guessed we have been wrong for over 230 years. Glad Barry came along to straighten us out so our children can now live in utopia.

Sent from my SPH-L720 using Tapatalk 2

[Guest 6.8 AR]

News shouldn't lean either way. If it leans, it is called propaganda, from either direction. News is just news, if you can

find it.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

This is different from what the Supreme Court ruled on in the case of Obamacare, if I remember correctly. The

only ruling, so far, was in determining whether or not the charges associated with the law were taxes, or penalties.

It was so finely decided on that the only outcome would be whether or not a tax could be forced on a citizen, as

opposed to a penalty. I doubt it went as far as determining whether or not the IRS had the authority to enforce

the provisions, which it should have ruled against.

 

Since Obama has effectively changed the laws he wanted so bad, he may now be stuck with his own unintended

set of consequences. If the law says one thing, and he makes changes in the law for one group, state or other

entity, he could have effectively nullified his own law. At one point, there were 35 states that wanted nothing to

do with the pools, and they had to have those pools to work with Obamacare. There evidently wasn't anything

in the law for the federal government to legitimately form those pools without the states first starting them.

 

All this may go nowhere because of the cynical, submissive public cowering once again to the Chosen One, but

then it just might be the downfall because the law is full of inclusions and exclusions due to its being modified by

something other than Congress. Several states tried to sue in federal court once before about this, I think, and

it got nowhere, but there may be a new twist, this time.

 

I don't see how the ACA can stand on it's own, anyway, but I'd rather see it shot down in court before too much

cost and damage effects us.

 

One thing I do know is if I have to see that Kathleen Sebelius's picture too much more, I'm going to scream.

Edited October 24, 2013 by 6.8 AR

[Guest Lester Weevils]

Maybe it will make a splash, but seems "the fix is in" on obammycare.

[Steelharp]

Where'd you come up with that?

This is the Brit's opinion, from one of my friends over there:

 

"The `Mail` is just your average tabloid newspaper with leanings to the Right. The tabloids are full of `celebrity` nonsense. and the broadsheets are too cumbersome. The Daily Mail has the same credibility as any tabloid. Dodgy!"