The President's comments seem a bit too imperious for an attorney that seems to fail to respect how the triune government works. The Supreme Court rules on the constitutionality of laws passed by the congress now and then. It is not unprecedented as the President claims, for the Court to overturn laws. It seems to happen often enough.
The Democrat controlled congress forced through Obamacare without, I believe, a single Republican voting for the 2700 page omnibus law that might have enough provisions to make the President another V.I. Lenin-it is rumored that no one has actually read the entire bill.
The bill was not passed by 'a strong majority', but forced through by one party on a technicality.
The President referred to the Court justices as "an unelected group of people" and said thatÂ "I'm confident that the Supreme Court will not take what would be an unprecedented, extraordinary step of overturning a law that was passed by a strong majority of a democratically elected Congress".
Obamacare would force the poor that do free enterprise to provide the government with their current address and employment status forever I would think, and with the I.R.S. tax codes badly disposed for those making less than 10,000 annually with odd jobs perhaps travelling interstate while homeless it places unreasonable burdens on those not as established as Harvard alumni.
I rode a bicycle perhaps 30,000 miles looking for work around several states, and it would have been impractical to update various state's insurance exchange, postal addresses and so forth in any sort of realistic time paradigm. When in search of the work and free enterprise opportunities one does not know a priori where one will be next week. If work does not show up in a city in a week or two its usually best to move on. The secure and comfortable people that make laws like Obamacare are clueless about the real world beyond the class sinecures they dwell in. They simply pass bad laws of value to themselves as a middle and upper class that reflect their own view of social reality. Their work efforts are antipathetic toward the efforts of the poor and broke yet independent minded that just don't have their superior income revenue stream status.
All of the poor would need to have a computer and Internet access as well I guess to get and update all their personal data required by the Federal Government. Many of the poor are not computer users, and there may not be enough public computers available in the nation's public libraries for the use of the millions of the nation's poor.
The I.R.S. tax form S.E. isn't really designed for use of people working as laborers for a few days here, and a few hours there from one state to another. I file tax returns yet I would bet that myriads of the very poor do not for the trouble.
The President will probably be unelected in November after Obamacare fails in June so he seems to be getting a little stressed-enough to chastise the Court for even considering voting against his will.
With no representation for the poor in the Congress (there are no poor members of Congress) practical health care for the poor just doesn't occur to anyone in that August facility. The V.A. Hospital system should be expanded and provide free healthcare for the poor. Satellite clinics to triage and screen out those that don't require substantial care at large hospitals should be made there.
The poor require free health care while the middle class should pay for their own. The Democrats in Congress voted yes for renewal of the Bush era tax cuts for the rich and middle class so the economy is moribund for those out of world-and of course the employed middle class and rich don't really give a hoot.
Taxes should be raised on the middle class and rich, but they won't be of course, and Democrats instead will talk about the Republican war on women who are allied with the forces of depravity generally on the Democratic side. I believe its really a reference to the war of men upon women that is a basic premise of the Lesbian way of thinking.