Health care to go to SCOTUS

[Conservative]

Yeah, because if the scotus follows the constitution, they will overthrow the part of the law in question.

And IF that part of the LAW is determined to be unConstitutional? The whole law to Obama will be worthless. They are counting on it to FUND it. The whole social experiment will be dead with NO funding except the $500BN diverted from Medicare.

And conservatives can celebrate yet another nail in the coffin of personal responsibility. You guys kill me. We finally put forth a law that forces people to take some personal responsibility and you guys want to overturn it.

And talk about social experiments......I'm sure we can all agree that the "Trickle Down Economics" social experiment was a horrible and expensive failure. Time for Obama and congress to send it to the graveyard and repeal the MASSIVE tax breaks enjoyed by the rich over the past 30 years. Create jobs????? My ass.

Like JosefK alludes to....what happens if the SCOTUS overturns it? Then the conservatives will be seen as the party who got a law overturned that is already starting to gain popularity.

And if the conservative controlled SCOTUS doesn't overturn it what then?

.

you're either really stupid, or really uninformed about the topics you post on... which is it?

Health Care Law Still Really Unpopular - Megan McArdle - Business - The Atlantic

When you compare each individual poll with prior polls by the same outfit, they all show a jump in unfavorables of roughly 3-5% since the fall.

Health Care Law - Rasmussen Reports™

56% Favor Repeal of Health Care Law, 52% Say Law Is Bad for the Country

In other news, Obamacare is still really unpopular | Philip Klein | Beltway Confidential | Washington Examiner

Despite Democratic predictions that it would become popular once passed, more than a year after Obama signed the law, just 38 of American favor it, according to the Pollster.com average -- that's the lowest level since the site started keeping track. Opposition is at 46 percent -- off the all time high, but still comfortably outpacing the favorable levels.

 

[The T]

It's gonna get shot down if the Court does its job honestly.

But, then again, there are a few too many libs on the SCOTUS, and the actual command of the Constitution may hold no sway.

Will we see if it is indeed honest and You know who recuses herself from the fray?

 

[Liability]

It's gonna get shot down if the Court does its job honestly.

But, then again, there are a few too many libs on the SCOTUS, and the actual command of the Constitution may hold no sway.

Will we see if it is indeed honest and You know who recuses herself from the fray?

I'm gonna have to go with "No recusal! I can be fair!" just before she ignores the command of the Constitution and "votes" to "find" that the Constitution permits that the Constitution be ignored.

 

[The T]

It's gonna get shot down if the Court does its job honestly.

But, then again, there are a few too many libs on the SCOTUS, and the actual command of the Constitution may hold no sway.

Will we see if it is indeed honest and You know who recuses herself from the fray?

I'm gonna have to go with "No recusal! I can be fair!" just before she ignores the command of the Constitution and "votes" to "find" that the Constitution permits that the Constitution be ignored.

In the scheme of things and the volitility (Read that Statist PC idiocy and precident) of it all? I have to sadly agree...and will we see stories highlighting her involvement IN ObamaCare before she was appointed to the Court?

*I rather tend to doubt it*

 

[Liability]

Will we see if it is indeed honest and You know who recuses herself from the fray?

I'm gonna have to go with "No recusal! I can be fair!" just before she ignores the command of the Constitution and "votes" to "find" that the Constitution permits that the Constitution be ignored.

In the scheme of things and the volitility (Read that Statist PC idiocy and precident) of it all? I have to sadly agree...and will we see stories highlighting her involvement IN ObamaCare before she was appointed to the Court?

*I rather tend to doubt it*

Let's just say: » Documents Raise Questions about Kagan

 

[The T]

I'm gonna have to go with "No recusal! I can be fair!" just before she ignores the command of the Constitution and "votes" to "find" that the Constitution permits that the Constitution be ignored.

In the scheme of things and the volitility (Read that Statist PC idiocy and precident) of it all? I have to sadly agree...and will we see stories highlighting her involvement IN ObamaCare before she was appointed to the Court?

*I rather tend to doubt it*

Let's just say: » Documents Raise Questions about Kagan

Look for the Source to be dismissed...Right wing conspiracy and all of that...

 

[Liability]

In the scheme of things and the volitility (Read that Statist PC idiocy and precident) of it all? I have to sadly agree...and will we see stories highlighting her involvement IN ObamaCare before she was appointed to the Court?

*I rather tend to doubt it*

Let's just say: » Documents Raise Questions about Kagan

Look for the Source to be dismissed...Right wing conspiracy and all of that...

Of course.

But regardless of the bias of the source, the material getting quoted is what is already factually known about Kagan's involvement.

There is already no doubt that she should recuse herself.

But there is a huge doubt about whether she will.

At least the House is looking into it. So the Administration's ability to spin this is going to get a crushing beat down.

Except in the main stream media, perhaps.

 

[Intense]

And conservatives can celebrate yet another nail in the coffin of personal responsibility. You guys kill me. We finally put forth a law that forces people to take some personal responsibility and you guys want to overturn it.

And talk about social experiments......I'm sure we can all agree that the "Trickle Down Economics" social experiment was a horrible and expensive failure. Time for Obama and congress to send it to the graveyard and repeal the MASSIVE tax breaks enjoyed by the rich over the past 30 years. Create jobs????? My ass.

Like JosefK alludes to....what happens if the SCOTUS overturns it? Then the conservatives will be seen as the party who got a law overturned that is already starting to gain popularity.

And if the conservative controlled SCOTUS doesn't overturn it what then?

.

Government subsidies and directing 1/7th of the US Economy by force is responsible?

Call me when you have bought a fucking clue. Healthcare is a Responsibility of the Individual...NOT for the Gubmint to enforce by force jackass.

And we all know that individuals have been nicely stepping up to the plate on this responsibility, don't we?

Call me when you get a clue that you have been paying out the ass for medical treatment for people who CHOOSE not to buy HC. They rightly figure that jackasses like you will gladly pay for it and even fight any efforts to make them responsible.

You're so fucking predictable.

.

It's not Fair unless Everyone gets screwed over equally? So you are advocating Value for Value all of a sudden? Fuckin A!!! That is just so amazing!

Now let's work for fairer pricing. That Evil Big Government, Big Insurance Company, Big Medicine, Big Attorney, Scheme, that has jointly pissing on all of us needs to be exposed for what it is.

 

[MeBelle]

"Sixty-one percent (61%) of union members are in favor of repealing the law. While most Mainstream voters want to repeal the health care law, a bare majority of Political Class voters are opposed. "

Interesting stat from Rasmussen.
Most Unions received waivers.

 

[francoHFW]

Yup, and a majority admit they don't UNDERSTAND health reform. They'll find out they love it. Pub dupes!!

And if the Supreme Court rules against, they'll be taking out the INDIVIDUAL MANDATE, which Obama didn't WANT, and it will go forward, just people will figure out it's just a great deal. Our CORPORATE media suqs, not to mention the Pub Propaganda machine. D'OH!!

 

[Big Fitz]

The Obama administration chose not to ask the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals to re-hear a pivotal health reform case Monday, signaling that it’s going to ask the Supreme Court to decide whether President Barack Obama’s health reform law is constitutional.

The move puts the Supreme Court in the difficult position of having to decide whether to take the highly politically charged case in the middle of the presidential election.



Read more: Health reform lawsuit appears headed for Supreme Court - Jennifer Haberkorn - POLITICO.com

The case to decide if we are free people or cattle is about to begin.

 

[Intense]

We are not Commodities.

 

[The T]

We are not Commodities.

Nor are we to be trifled with when it comes to our own liberties.

 

[Conservative]

Yup, and a majority admit they don't UNDERSTAND health reform. They'll find out they love it. Pub dupes!!

And if the Supreme Court rules against, they'll be taking out the INDIVIDUAL MANDATE, which Obama didn't WANT, and it will go forward, just people will figure out it's just a great deal. Our CORPORATE media suqs, not to mention the Pub Propaganda machine. D'OH!!

you're a moron and a liar...

Obama Backs Off Individual Mandate for States

President Barack Obama, under fire from the courts, Congress and GOP governors over the individual mandate, appeared for the first time on Monday to back off somewhat from the controversial federal mandate that all citizens must have health insurance coverage.

He was for it... before he was against it. This was just another in the long line of Obama capitulations to opponents. He can't seem to stand up for much of his own work, huh.

 

[manifold]

Only an authoritarian dipshit would confuse the imposition of an authoritarian law with personal responsibility.

You can't legislate personal responsibility any more than you can morality.

No, but you can legislate away loopholes that people use to game the system.

And the Red Sox can blow a 9 game lead in September. But that too, has nothing to do with this discussion.