more fine print

Comments

RSS feed for comments on this post.

  1. So, it appears that CERTAIN parts of the Constitution are in effect and other parts are not.

    WTF?

    Comment by JoeBandMember™ — January 26, 2013 @ 3:59 pm

  2. “A Republic, if you can keep it.”

    I think we can and those that can change things are taking the important step.

    Comment by Jess — January 26, 2013 @ 4:09 pm

  3. JBM (1)
    Yeah, I’m rootin’ for a trend.

    Comment by DougM (Progophobe) — January 26, 2013 @ 5:10 pm

  4. I’m waiting— lets see what happens— he/they don’t cararre!!

    Comment by geezerette — January 26, 2013 @ 5:27 pm

  5. Obama will ignore the ruling and continue business as usual. He may react if the SCOTUS rules against him or then again, he may not.

    The AG will do nothing.

    We need businesses affected to start suing over invalid NLRB rulings.

    Then someone should sue for the salaries and expenses from the illegal appointees.

    Comment by Freddie Sykes — January 26, 2013 @ 5:37 pm

  6. I think I see pigs flying. A court actually upheld the Constitution over Obama.

    But I remember an earlier President (but not which one), when the Supreme Court ruled against him, said, “OK, they have made their ruling. Now let them enforce it.”

    (I think it was Andy Jackson and something to do with the Indians.)

    Comment by ZZMike — January 26, 2013 @ 6:41 pm

  7. Orly Taitz will find out on February 15th if it’s just a flash in the pan. She’s got enough evidence to convict Teh One about twenty times over. But so have others.

    Until then we have a glint of hope.

    Comment by JoeBandMember™ — January 26, 2013 @ 10:38 pm

  8. Saw a list of 174 sheriffs who will not enforce Captain Shitstain’s gun grab EO’s; many have writen Plugs a nice polite Fuck You letter:
    http://fromthetrenchesworldreport.com/list-of-sheriffs-standing-up-against-obamas-gun-control-updated/31948/

    Comment by dick, not quite dead white guy — January 26, 2013 @ 11:24 pm

  9. Sorry, crossposted above.
    I meant to say the three illegal members means the Board did not have a quorum, and a lack of quorum should invalidate the Board’s past year of rulings, which will just make union leader heads explode.
    Heh.

    Comment by dick, not quite dead white guy — January 26, 2013 @ 11:27 pm

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

Close this window.

0.163 Powered by WordPress