Individual mandate in trouble?

[Polk]

Since when does anyone trust the analysis of conservatives further than they can throw them?

You CONZ are just whistling past the graveyard on this one.


Tell me...what will you do if the court finds this constitutional?

Bitch about the LIBERAL BIAS on the Supreme Court?

Tell me...what will you do if the court finds this unconstitutional?

Redouble my efforts to make sure Obama is reelected in case a member of the conservative wing of the court resigns/dies.

 

[Conservative]

the majority 'of the people' were and are against Obamacare.

True, but 1) irrelevant to his question, and 2) misleading. The correct answer is that the court IS supposed to strike down popular laws that are unconstitutional. If the people want the law badly enough, they can amend the Constitution to allow it.

It's misleading in that people who say this are lumping together those who dislike the ACA from the right (and don't want universal health care coverage) and those who dislike it from the left (and want a single payer system). That's completely improper.

I was simply explaining to him that Obamacare was not 'the will of the people'.

 

[Polk]

60% are against ACA, 30% want single payer.

The first figure includes the second. That is to say, those who want single payer are also against the ACA. Those who are against the ACA and DON'T want single payer are only 30%.

Opposition to single payer includes those who support the ACA (40%) as well as those who are against it from the right (30%). If the ACA is struck down, and/or proves what a piece of shit it is, the number of people supporting it will decline, while those who support single payer will increase.

There is zero chance single payer will happen in the U.S. any time in the near future and it would be unconstitutional anyway.

Why would single payer be unconstitutional? Note, we already have a single-payer system for senior citizens.

 

[Avorysuds]

I see the US falling apart. Just look at the debate, it's not a debate, it's borderline war.

I don’t wear some tin foil hat by thinking there are some elite out there that want to rule over everyone and do so in a secret room. I honestly think people like Bush and Obama re so entirely stupid and power hungry they just do evil as force of habit. The FF created the constitution to stop the Government from being exactly what it has become.

There was no rule that because of the constitution people freedoms were safe from power hungry leaders, you have to fight for it to protect it. Freedom is the hardest thing to fight for because freedom offers no entitlements, you are fighting for a life to make or break yourself while the true evil in this country and world offers gifts at the expense of your freedoms.

Both Dems and Reps elected to office on both sides have done this, it’s near sickening watching both sides blame each other as if the other is solely responsible. Bush and his Reps grew Government in every direction just as Obama and his Dem congress have done. There is no repeal, there is no small Government limited by the constitution. We have illegal wars across the board just as we have illegal entitlement programs bogging this country down with debt that will never be paid down.

One side claims the War powers act is a declaration of war despite nothing about it is constitutional while the other side claims the General welfare clause gives them right to spend on anything and everything. Never repealing, always expanding upon the other side’s once condemned actions. Did Bush end the DoE, Governments involvement in HC, foreign aid, welfare and Government’s spending and involvement in the economy? No… Did Obama repeal homeland security, end Iraq, Afghanistan and end Bush era tax cuts? No…All of these things are still in place and most have been expanded upon. Everything but Iraq I should say, Obama was kicked out when he tried to push past Bush’s timetable.

 

[LoneLaugher]

It was passed in the manner outlined in the constitution. Therefore, it is the will of the people.

 

[LoneLaugher]

The first figure includes the second. That is to say, those who want single payer are also against the ACA. Those who are against the ACA and DON'T want single payer are only 30%.

Opposition to single payer includes those who support the ACA (40%) as well as those who are against it from the right (30%). If the ACA is struck down, and/or proves what a piece of shit it is, the number of people supporting it will decline, while those who support single payer will increase.

There is zero chance single payer will happen in the U.S. any time in the near future and it would be unconstitutional anyway.

Why would single payer be unconstitutional? Note, we already have a single-payer system for senior citizens.

It would not be. That statement was made without thinking.

 

[Caroljo]

Yes. Do you think you have trapped me or something? The law was passed by duly elected representatives of the people and signed by the duly elected President of the United States. They shouldn't even be hearing the case.

It only passed because Obama manipulated Senator Stupak to vote for it when he was against it....ONLY because Obama PROMISED to remove the part that would force us to pay for abortions! THEN after it was all passed and signed, Obama never fulfilled his promise. Surprise! Surprise! This thing was shoved down our throats, the majority of people screamed that we did not want this. Hell, we didn't even know what was IN IT! Do you always vote for something not even knowing anything about it? Then you're just as stupid.

Where do you come up with this shit?

First here.....
Stupak to Vote Yes on Health Care Bill - Political Hotsheet - CBS News

Then this....
President Obama Signs Pro-Abortion Health Care Bill, Ignores Executive Order | LifeNews.com

And this.....

"Unlike yesterday’s bill-signing celebrations in the East Room and the Department of the Interior, the president will sign this executive action behind closed doors, with nary a camera present. No reporters allowed. No member of the media permitted to attend to record the moment for history."
Away from the Cameras, President Obama to Sign Executive Order on Abortion - ABC News

Did he REALLY sign it? Who knows!!!!!!?????????

 

[Dragon]

And it's [Medicare] going bankrupt and many doctors no longer accept it because it underpays them,

Both of which would be solved if Medicare was expanded to cover everyone. That would give it the leverage to hold down health-care prices, and make it so that physicians would not have the option of refusing to accept it.

which is one of the reasons why the cost of health care is going up, by the way.

No, it's not.

Has it been challenged?

Good question. Obviously not successfully, but lemme do a quick search:

Yes, apparently there have been court challenges involving Medicare. Here's one recent example.

Court says Medicare beneficiaries are stuck with government program - The Hill's Healthwatch

 

[Polk]

It only passed because Obama manipulated Senator Stupak to vote for it when he was against it....ONLY because Obama PROMISED to remove the part that would force us to pay for abortions! THEN after it was all passed and signed, Obama never fulfilled his promise. Surprise! Surprise! This thing was shoved down our throats, the majority of people screamed that we did not want this. Hell, we didn't even know what was IN IT! Do you always vote for something not even knowing anything about it? Then you're just as stupid.

Where do you come up with this shit?

First here.....
Stupak to Vote Yes on Health Care Bill - Political Hotsheet - CBS News

Then this....
President Obama Signs Pro-Abortion Health Care Bill, Ignores Executive Order | LifeNews.com

And this.....

"Unlike yesterday’s bill-signing celebrations in the East Room and the Department of the Interior, the president will sign this executive action behind closed doors, with nary a camera present. No reporters allowed. No member of the media permitted to attend to record the moment for history."
Away from the Cameras, President Obama to Sign Executive Order on Abortion - ABC News

Did he REALLY sign it? Who knows!!!!!!?????????

Anyone who understands how executive orders work knows he signed it. They aren't secret documents. They're published in the Federal Register.

 

[AmericanFirst]

Since when does anyone trust the analysis of conservatives further than they can throw them?

You CONZ are just whistling past the graveyard on this one.


Tell me...what will you do if the court finds this constitutional?

Bitch about the LIBERAL BIAS on the Supreme Court?

Better then trusting narratives from the idiot lefties.

 

[LoneLaugher]

Have some free time?

http://philosophyfaculty.ucsd.edu/faculty/rarneson/Courses/Waldroncore.pdf

 

[Polk]

And it's [Medicare] going bankrupt and many doctors no longer accept it because it underpays them,

Both of which would be solved if Medicare was expanded to cover everyone. That would give it the leverage to hold down health-care prices, and make it so that physicians would not have the option of refusing to accept it.

which is one of the reasons why the cost of health care is going up, by the way.

No, it's not.

Has it been challenged?

Good question. Obviously not successfully, but lemme do a quick search:

Yes, apparently there have been court challenges involving Medicare. Here's one recent example.

Court says Medicare beneficiaries are stuck with government program - The Hill's Healthwatch

That goes to show why a constitutional challenge to Medicare would likely fail. The author of that opinion, Kavanaugh, is one of the most conservative jurists in the country.

 

[Conservative]

It was passed in the manner outlined in the constitution. Therefore, it is the will of the people.

That is quite possibly the dumbest comment I have ever seen on this board.

If 99.999% of the voters signed a petition against a particular bill in Congress, but Congress passed it and the President signed it, THAT is still the 'will of the people', even though 99.999% of 'the people' were against it?

You are a fucking loon.

 

[Conservative]

There is zero chance single payer will happen in the U.S. any time in the near future and it would be unconstitutional anyway.

Why would single payer be unconstitutional? Note, we already have a single-payer system for senior citizens.

It would not be. That statement was made without thinking.

As are most of yours.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

DTMB,

Here ya go...............learn something. Because something is does not mean that it should be.

John Marshall, Marbury v. Madison, and Judicial Review

Just shut the fuck up and stop embarrassing yourself. Seriously. Nothing is more pathetic than someone too stupid to realize it.

 

[Katzndogz]

The first figure includes the second. That is to say, those who want single payer are also against the ACA. Those who are against the ACA and DON'T want single payer are only 30%.

Opposition to single payer includes those who support the ACA (40%) as well as those who are against it from the right (30%). If the ACA is struck down, and/or proves what a piece of shit it is, the number of people supporting it will decline, while those who support single payer will increase.

There is zero chance single payer will happen in the U.S. any time in the near future and it would be unconstitutional anyway.

Why would single payer be unconstitutional? Note, we already have a single-payer system for senior citizens.

Not really since any senior can get a private supplemental policy. Portions of it are single payer but there is certainly a provision for additional insurance taking it out of a mandated single payer only system.

 

[LoneLaugher]

And...........for those who would like a simpler discussion:

Supreme Court & Judicial Review

 

[Polk]

There is zero chance single payer will happen in the U.S. any time in the near future and it would be unconstitutional anyway.

Why would single payer be unconstitutional? Note, we already have a single-payer system for senior citizens.

Not really since any senior can get a private supplemental policy. Portions of it are single payer but there is certainly a provision for additional insurance taking it out of a mandated single payer only system.

Okay, but that would also be the case if we passed a universal single-payer system. You'd still be able to buy insurance for things the single-payer insurance does not cover.

 

[LoneLaugher]

Since when does anyone trust the analysis of conservatives further than they can throw them?

You CONZ are just whistling past the graveyard on this one.


Tell me...what will you do if the court finds this constitutional?

Bitch about the LIBERAL BIAS on the Supreme Court?

Better then trusting narratives from the idiot lefties.

THAN

Idiot.

 

[Amelia]

It was passed in the manner outlined in the constitution. Therefore, it is the will of the people.

It was passed by 'reconciliation' because the will of the people was so crystallized against it that Massachusetts did the unimaginable and sent a Republican to the senate to help defeat it.

But the will of the people be damned. Obama and Pelosi knew what was best for us. If we were smart enough we would be able to understand how wonderful it was for them to pass that in spite of the groundswell against it. All we needed was time, and we would figure out how great it all was.

But the time Obama was willing to give us to realize that he was doing the right thing of course had to happen after the passage of the bill and before a realistic assessment of the costs.

Will of the people. lol