Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I see you don't know the difference between facts and opinion, all above is opinion, not factReality says no such thing, if they had overstepped their constitutional bounds, SCOTUS would determine it to be unconstitutional, you know, by following the constitution. Your OPINION is that they overstepped, not REALITY
You really have no clue what the difference between facts and opinion are? "it is destroying this country" is opinion, not reality
The fact is this country is falling apart at the seams. We are at each other's throats daily. This is a reality and only the blind do not see it. That is not to say a miracle can't save us, but right now we are not in good shape.
The fact is that SCOTUS can't rule on this until the issue is brought before them through a legal action. Hasn't happened and probably won't.
The fact is that the Constitution gives no such authority to the President unless you can find some obscure "right to privacy" type authorization. I doubt you can.
Immie
At each other's throats cause of ideological hacks that don't care about facts and reality, but being correct. The country has had some bad times before and wasn't destroyed, so that's a bit of an overreaction. Again OPINION, not fact
IF it doesn't, then the constitution has been followed. YOu calling it unconstitutional or gov't overstepping their bounds is OPINION, not fact.
Reality says no such thing, if they had overstepped their constitutional bounds, SCOTUS would determine it to be unconstitutional, you know, by following the constitution. Your OPINION is that they overstepped, not REALITY
You really have no clue what the difference between facts and opinion are? "it is destroying this country" is opinion, not reality
The fact is this country is falling apart at the seams.
No it is not.
Only on message boards...and we are a very small minority.
No it is not reality. Most people in this country are putzing along just as they have been doing for years.
The economy kind of sucks right now...but this is not the first time nor will it be the last time. The end of the world is not close to being nie.
The fact is that SCOTUS can't rule on this until the issue is brought before them through a legal action. Hasn't happened and probably won't.
Because most people recognize the common sense and humanitarianism of the decision. Others....not so much.
The fact is that the Constitution gives no such authority to the President unless you can find some obscure "right to privacy" type authorization. I doubt you can.
Immie
So, you want to whine about the President's authority to ask hospitals to take some kind of humanitarian action. What are you? A monster?
Too bad presidents from the past didn't realize they had this power, they could have just granted the right to vote to women, why pass a silly amendment? Why have a congress? Why have state governments? I didn't see the DHHS do a damn thing, only Obama.
I tried to be nice but it was wasted so pay attention you dumfuk.
"This was the only department of the U.S. government to be created through presidential reorganization authority, in which the president was allowed to create or reorganize bureaucracies as long as neither house of Congress passed a legislative veto. This power to create new departments was removed after 1962, and in the early 1980s the Supreme Court declared legislative vetoes unconstitutional."
Http://www.answers.com/topic/united-states-department-of-health-and-human-services
Just as the Prez has the authority to hire and fire US Attorneys the Prez can institute Policies in HHS. You may not like it, and I think it should be restructured, but you can't claim he abused his power when it was legal.
Perhaps you could point out just where in this BS it says that the President can tell a Hospital what their visitation policy is?
I tried to be nice but it was wasted so pay attention you dumfuk.
"This was the only department of the U.S. government to be created through presidential reorganization authority, in which the president was allowed to create or reorganize bureaucracies as long as neither house of Congress passed a legislative veto. This power to create new departments was removed after 1962, and in the early 1980s the Supreme Court declared legislative vetoes unconstitutional."
Http://www.answers.com/topic/united-states-department-of-health-and-human-services
Just as the Prez has the authority to hire and fire US Attorneys the Prez can institute Policies in HHS. You may not like it, and I think it should be restructured, but you can't claim he abused his power when it was legal.
Perhaps you could point out just where in this BS it says that the President can tell a Hospital what their visitation policy is?
This HHS Policy does not apply to all hospitals.
The fact is this country is falling apart at the seams.
No it is not.
Only on message boards...and we are a very small minority.
No it is not reality. Most people in this country are putzing along just as they have been doing for years.
The economy kind of sucks right now...but this is not the first time nor will it be the last time. The end of the world is not close to being nie.
Because most people recognize the common sense and humanitarianism of the decision. Others....not so much.
The fact is that the Constitution gives no such authority to the President unless you can find some obscure "right to privacy" type authorization. I doubt you can.
Immie
So, you want to whine about the President's authority to ask hospitals to take some kind of humanitarian action. What are you? A monster?
It seems you can't read either... how many times have I said in this thread that I support the right of visitation for same sex couples?
Yes, I do want to discuss the President's authority. I started discussing the President's authority about the time President Bush pushed through the Patriot Act and I don't believe I have stopped since.
This is an important issue. It goes to the rights we as individuals have. I realize this is a slippery slope argument, but what rights can we as citizens expect if the President feels he has the right to force us to comply with his wishes?
Immie
And what the hell do you think the SCOTUS rules on? Guess what... they render Opinions, not facts!
The facts are as I said. This country is falling apart at the seams. You being naive enough not to see it, does not change the facts.
I care very much about these facts. This is my country and I don't relish the state we are in. A state that partisan hacks such as yourself have put us in... and that is again fact as well as opinion.
Immie
No it is not.
Only on message boards...and we are a very small minority.
No it is not reality. Most people in this country are putzing along just as they have been doing for years.
The economy kind of sucks right now...but this is not the first time nor will it be the last time. The end of the world is not close to being nie.
Because most people recognize the common sense and humanitarianism of the decision. Others....not so much.
So, you want to whine about the President's authority to ask hospitals to take some kind of humanitarian action. What are you? A monster?
It seems you can't read either... how many times have I said in this thread that I support the right of visitation for same sex couples?
Yes, I do want to discuss the President's authority. I started discussing the President's authority about the time President Bush pushed through the Patriot Act and I don't believe I have stopped since.
This is an important issue. It goes to the rights we as individuals have. I realize this is a slippery slope argument, but what rights can we as citizens expect if the President feels he has the right to force us to comply with his wishes?
Immie
Wow, way to dodge the main points of his post, where its pointed out yet again that you are trying to pass off "facts" and reality as "opinions".
And what the hell do you think the SCOTUS rules on? Guess what... they render Opinions, not facts!
The facts are as I said. This country is falling apart at the seams. You being naive enough not to see it, does not change the facts.
I care very much about these facts. This is my country and I don't relish the state we are in. A state that partisan hacks such as yourself have put us in... and that is again fact as well as opinion.
Immie
Oh, so you know the difference between facts and opinions when it comes to SCOTUS (based on your response to my post) but don't when it comes to your opinions?
At least SCOTUS "opinions" have legal standing, making it a "fact" until overruled.
, Bodecea, made an attempt beyond, "you are wrong". Which, I might be, but I don't think I am and so far you have done absolutely zero to prove me wrong.
It seems you can't read either... how many times have I said in this thread that I support the right of visitation for same sex couples?
Yes, I do want to discuss the President's authority. I started discussing the President's authority about the time President Bush pushed through the Patriot Act and I don't believe I have stopped since.
This is an important issue. It goes to the rights we as individuals have. I realize this is a slippery slope argument, but what rights can we as citizens expect if the President feels he has the right to force us to comply with his wishes?
Immie
Wow, way to dodge the main points of his post, where its pointed out yet again that you are trying to pass off "facts" and reality as "opinions".
No, that was not the main point of her post. Her main point was that she sees things differently than I do... a right that I feel she has and a right that you don't seem to want to grant to me.
And what the hell do you think the SCOTUS rules on? Guess what... they render Opinions, not facts!
The facts are as I said. This country is falling apart at the seams. You being naive enough not to see it, does not change the facts.
I care very much about these facts. This is my country and I don't relish the state we are in. A state that partisan hacks such as yourself have put us in... and that is again fact as well as opinion.
Immie
Oh, so you know the difference between facts and opinions when it comes to SCOTUS (based on your response to my post) but don't when it comes to your opinions?
At least SCOTUS "opinions" have legal standing, making it a "fact" until overruled.
You have shown nothing to disprove any of the facts that I have stated.
At least she
Immie
I see you don't know the difference between facts and opinion, all above is opinion, not fact
At each other's throats cause of ideological hacks that don't care about facts and reality, but being correct. The country has had some bad times before and wasn't destroyed, so that's a bit of an overreaction. Again OPINION, not fact
IF it doesn't, then the constitution has been followed. YOu calling it unconstitutional or gov't overstepping their bounds is OPINION, not fact.
I see you don't know the difference between facts and opinion, all above is opinion, not fact
At each other's throats cause of ideological hacks that don't care about facts and reality, but being correct. The country has had some bad times before and wasn't destroyed, so that's a bit of an overreaction. Again OPINION, not fact
IF it doesn't, then the constitution has been followed. YOu calling it unconstitutional or gov't overstepping their bounds is OPINION, not fact.
Liar
And I addressed some, but like an intellectually dishonest person like you are, you ignored them, while continue to spout idiocy.
You being naive enough not to see it, does not change the facts.
Well it is my Opinion that it is fact that Mr Obama is the president of the United States of America, and not yet the King of the United Socialist States of America. And while I don't have a problem with anyone visiting someone in the hospital I do have a problem with his orders.
I see you don't know the difference between facts and opinion, all above is opinion, not fact
At each other's throats cause of ideological hacks that don't care about facts and reality, but being correct. The country has had some bad times before and wasn't destroyed, so that's a bit of an overreaction. Again OPINION, not fact
IF it doesn't, then the constitution has been followed. YOu calling it unconstitutional or gov't overstepping their bounds is OPINION, not fact.
Liar
I addressed this in post number 161 therefore when you say:
And I addressed some, but like an intellectually dishonest person like you are, you ignored them, while continue to spout idiocy.
With this:
You being naive enough not to see it, does not change the facts.
It proves in fact, that it is you who is the
I see you can not handle a friendly debate without stooping to name calling. Grow up.
Immie
Grow up, you don't know the difference between opinion and fact. I may need to grow up, you need to go back to school and learn the difference between the two.
Liar
I addressed this in post number 161 therefore when you say:
With this:
You being naive enough not to see it, does not change the facts.
It proves in fact, that it is you who is the
I see you can not handle a friendly debate without stooping to name calling. Grow up.
Immie
typical troll, post nonsense, continually ignore other's posts and twist it or focus on a tiny part of it and not the main post, when called out on it, play the "name calling" card. So unoriginal, you all act the same. Seems more childish than anything I've said here
Well it is my Opinion that it is fact that Mr Obama is the president of the United States of America, and not yet the King of the United Socialist States of America. And while I don't have a problem with anyone visiting someone in the hospital I do have a problem with his orders.
Orders?
Well it is my Opinion that it is fact that Mr Obama is the president of the United States of America, and not yet the King of the United Socialist States of America. And while I don't have a problem with anyone visiting someone in the hospital I do have a problem with his orders.
Obama orders hospitals to grant same-sex couples visitation rights
finally..... such BS they coudn't before
What's BS is the idea that they couldn't before.
I went to visit my adult daughter (who has a different last name from me) in the hospital a couple of weeks ago. Walked right up to the information desk, bold as brass, and asked them for the room number. Didn't tell them who I was, or why I was visiting. They told me where to find her, and I marched to the elevator, rode it to the seventh floor, and wandered down the hall, free as a bird, right into her room. No maitre'd, no velvet rope, no bouncers, and no one asking me about my sexual orientation. Had I chosen to, I could just as easily have popped into any of the other rooms and visited with the complete strangers staying there. I've gone to visit neighbors, friends from my social club, and acquaintances at all of the various hospitals in town at one time or another, with exactly the same result. The hospitals have stringent security where children are concerned, but not for adult patients.
In ICU? I find this hard to believe.
Other than in the Emergency room where policy is one person at a time, I have never had a problem visiting anyone in the hospital to include ICU.
I don't believe anyone should be told that a friend or partner cannot visit them.
I do believe that Obama does not or shouldn't have the power to order this though.
what in the hell does visitation have to do with insurance? that's the dumbest thing I've ever heard.
Hospitals are liable for whom they let into see patients.
If your were in ICU would you want an ex spouse or bill collector coming in to see you?
some hospitals let the patient say who to allow in some patients are not able to make that decision for themselves. Hospitals have an obligation to guard the helpless patients in their care from many things.
hey! obie wan ass kisser,, all you have to do is tell the staff you don't want to see your ex wife,, and she won't get in,, it is unlawful for bill collecter to stalk you in icu.. try again,, it has fuck to do with insurance.
Obama orders hospitals to grant same-sex couples visitation rights
finally..... such BS they coudn't before
