LA Gov. Bobby Jindal refuses to implement Obamacare despite Supreme Court ruling

[Listening]

And you think you know more than Roberts?
He didn't rewrite anything, read his comments on his decision.

And I may know jack diddly, but I have a feeling I know more than you. Because you obviously didn't understand his decision( not rewrite).

Sure...about half the national/cable talk show buzz was just about how he had to essentially reframe it. So, while you may know Jack Diddly...you don't know squat about the rest.

What is more funny is that Kennedy and Co...called the whole thing bogus while Ginsburg and Co. wanted to blow open the whole Commerce Clause (talk about pushing social engineering) argument to essentially allow Obama to do whatever he wanted....

Roberts was on his own......

So who was wrong ?

Do you believe everything you hear on cable? Read his actual comments.
He was slapping Obama in the face while saying it was constitutional. If you don't get that I can't help you.

You mean you can't explain a point that does not exist.

Got it.

 

[Zander]

He's smart. Why spend tax payer money on something that will be repealed shortly after Obama loses the election?

Do you truly think it can be repealed so easily? What would it take to repeal it?

Based upon the precedent that Obama has set , a simple executive order "refusing to implement" will be the first step. Then the Senate can vote to repeal the entire clusterfuck using a simple majority vote (google "reconciliation"). The House follows and.....Bang Boom Bam!! ObamataxandspendcuzwedontCare is shredded like a piece of garbage.....along with Obama's legacy of incompetence and failure.

 

[Luissa]

Sure...about half the national/cable talk show buzz was just about how he had to essentially reframe it. So, while you may know Jack Diddly...you don't know squat about the rest.

What is more funny is that Kennedy and Co...called the whole thing bogus while Ginsburg and Co. wanted to blow open the whole Commerce Clause (talk about pushing social engineering) argument to essentially allow Obama to do whatever he wanted....

Roberts was on his own......

So who was wrong ?

Do you believe everything you hear on cable? Read his actual comments.
He was slapping Obama in the face while saying it was constitutional. If you don't get that I can't help you.

You mean you can't explain a point that does not exist.

Got it.

Since you asked

"Roberts disagreed -- and his distinction swung the case. Roberts argued that the penalty resembled a tax in a few ways. First, it raises money (about $4 billion a year according to the IRS) just like a tax. Second, it's paid to Treasury when households file their tax returns. Third, the fee is calculated based on taxable income and number of dependents, like taxes."
http://m.theatlantic.com/business/a...ed-obamacare-why-the-penalty-is-a-tax/259140/
Like I said read his comments, he didn't rewrite anything. He simply pointed out that penalty was essentially a tax, even though the bill said differently. Trying reading his actual comments, and not believing everything on cable news.

 

[Google]

He's smart. Why spend tax payer money on something that will be repealed shortly after Obama loses the election?

Do you truly think it can be repealed so easily? What would it take to repeal it?

Based upon the precedent that Obama has set , a simple executive order "refusing to implement" will be the first step. Then the Senate can vote to repeal the entire clusterfuck using a simple majority vote (google "reconciliation"). The House follows and.....Bang Boom Bam!! ObamataxandspendcuzwedontCare is shredded like a piece of garbage.....along with Obama's legacy of incompetence and failure.

Kind of correct, but the precedent Obama has set doesn't even require an executive order. Without issuing an executive order, Obama proclaimed that he is ordering his appointments to not enforce federal immigration laws.

I've asked this again and again to the liberals on this board and to Norman Goldman on his nationally syndicated show this evening--what prevents a Romney administration from doing exactly what this current administration has done and simply ignore and not enforce this law?

 

[Google]

Do you believe everything you hear on cable? Read his actual comments.
He was slapping Obama in the face while saying it was constitutional. If you don't get that I can't help you.

You mean you can't explain a point that does not exist.

Got it.

Since you asked

"Roberts disagreed -- and his distinction swung the case. Roberts argued that the penalty resembled a tax in a few ways. First, it raises money (about $4 billion a year according to the IRS) just like a tax. Second, it's paid to Treasury when households file their tax returns. Third, the fee is calculated based on taxable income and number of dependents, like taxes."
The Tiny Distinction That Saved Obamacare: Why the Penalty Is a Tax - Atlantic Mobile
Like I said read his comments, he didn't rewrite anything. He simply pointed out that penalty was essentially a tax, even though the bill said differently. Trying reading his actual comments, and not believing everything on cable news.

Oh, you wait until the tens of millions of people that rely on their income tax return every year see a dramatic chunk ($650) taken out.

 

[buckeye45_73]

It is just a ploy to put him up further on the list of VP candidates.

If he's Romney's running mate I'll vote for Romney just to get that idiot out of Louisiana.

Yeah you liked Blanco didnt ya? Figures, she was as stupid as Granholm in Michigan.

 

[Luissa]

You mean you can't explain a point that does not exist.

Got it.

Since you asked

"Roberts disagreed -- and his distinction swung the case. Roberts argued that the penalty resembled a tax in a few ways. First, it raises money (about $4 billion a year according to the IRS) just like a tax. Second, it's paid to Treasury when households file their tax returns. Third, the fee is calculated based on taxable income and number of dependents, like taxes."
The Tiny Distinction That Saved Obamacare: Why the Penalty Is a Tax - Atlantic Mobile
Like I said read his comments, he didn't rewrite anything. He simply pointed out that penalty was essentially a tax, even though the bill said differently. Trying reading his actual comments, and not believing everything on cable news.

Oh, you wait until the tens of millions of people that rely on their income tax return every year see a dramatic chunk ($650) taken out.

Well they should get health insurance then.

 

[Google]

Since you asked

"Roberts disagreed -- and his distinction swung the case. Roberts argued that the penalty resembled a tax in a few ways. First, it raises money (about $4 billion a year according to the IRS) just like a tax. Second, it's paid to Treasury when households file their tax returns. Third, the fee is calculated based on taxable income and number of dependents, like taxes."
The Tiny Distinction That Saved Obamacare: Why the Penalty Is a Tax - Atlantic Mobile
Like I said read his comments, he didn't rewrite anything. He simply pointed out that penalty was essentially a tax, even though the bill said differently. Trying reading his actual comments, and not believing everything on cable news.

Oh, you wait until the tens of millions of people that rely on their income tax return every year see a dramatic chunk ($650) taken out.

Well they should get health insurance then.

It's cheaper to pay the tax, and that is the damned point. Obama said in 2007 he wants a single payer system, but that it is going to have to happen incrementally.

What prevents me from not purchasing insurance and pay the tax, and then down the line when I get cancer I go to the insurance company and say cover me? By law they have to cover me.

Could you imagine doing this with car insurance? Pay the tax and then when you total your car the government tells State Farm they have to BY LAW provide insurance to that car.

Obama care will destroy private insurance by design, and I'll post the videos of Democrat Senators and Congressmen saying that they want to destroy private insurance.

 

[Jroc]

He's smart. Why spend tax payer money on something that will be repealed shortly after Obama loses the election?

Do you truly think it can be repealed so easily? What would it take to repeal it?

Whats good for the goose....

Senate GOP Will Use Reconciliation in Attempt to Repeal Obamacare

Now that the Supreme Court has ruled that Obamacare’s health insurance mandate is in fact a tax levied on those who do not purchase insurance, Senate Republicans will look to repeal the full law through the budget reconciliation process.

Reconciliation was used to push Obamacare through the Senate in 2009. Generally reserved strictly for budget-related measures, it eliminates the possibility of a filibuster, meaning Republicans would only need 51 votes to repeal that portion of the law – or even the full law itself.

Sen. Jim DeMint (R-SC) seemed open to that approach during a speech at The Heritage Foundation shortly after the Supreme Court handed down its decision. The court’s ruling “does present some options for us” to pursue more unconventional options for repeal, DeMint said. He mentioned reconciliation as a potential avenue.

A senior Senate Republican aide involved in the repeal effort later confirmed to Scribe that the GOP will use the budget reconciliation process in an attempt to repeal the full law, not just the portion requiring all Americans purchase health insurance.

While a repeal effort via reconciliation would only require a majority of senators to pass, Republicans will likely wait until next year to employ the tactic.

Senate GOP Will Use Reconciliation to Repeal Obamacare

 

[Jroc]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IIJ38FhEJFA&feature=related]Romney: I Will Repeal Obamacare - YouTube[/ame]

 

[Jroc]

Since Obamacare is a tax it is now appropriate to use Reconciliation to repeal it

In order to entice House Democrats to support the Senate bill, the leadership might promise to change the law through the budget process. You see, in the 1970s the Senate adopted a rule that applies to the budget process that allows for limited debate, which means that there cannot be a filibuster. The process is called "reconciliation."

Here's how reconciliation works. Each of the Senate and the House passes a concurrent resolution instructing one or more committees to report changes in a law affecting by a certain date. Those committees then support their reports to the budget committee, which combines them into a single omnibus bill. In the Senate, the reconciliation bill then gets only 20 hours of debate before the final vote. So there's no filibuster risk and the bill can pass with support of just 51 Senators.

Originally, this process was limited to bills passed to cover gaps between budget resolutions. In the 1980s, however, they came to be used for big omnibus budget resolutions that sought to reduce the budget deficit. In 1996, the Republicans changed the rules so that reconciliation could be used for almost any bill affecting spending or the collection of revenue

Read more: Health Care Reform And Reconciliation - Business Insider

 

[Jroc]

Walker refuses to implement Obamacare

Gov. Scott Walker pledged again Thursday not to phase in any parts of President Barack Obama's signature health care reform law ahead of November's elections even though the U.S. Supreme Court ruled it is constitutional.

Walker, a Republican, has said he holds out hope the GOP will recapture the White House and gain full control of Congress and repeal the legislation. He reiterated his stance Thursday minutes after the court released its ruling.

Read more: Walker refuses to implement Obamacare | Times 247

 

[Annie]

If they are smart, all governors would refuse to set up exchanges and other aspects of Obamacare, until they know what's what in November.

Why waste money?

 

[Political Junky]

Jindal will eventually comply, but this is getting him votes from teabaggers.

 

[Google]

Jindal will eventually comply, but this is getting him votes from teabaggers.

November is going to be here soon enough. Obama care cost the Democrats the House, several Senate seats, nearly every single state legislature, and nearly every governorship in 2010--and in 2012 it will cost them even more.

America has gotten to see the difference between the Tea Party and the Occupy Wall Street hippies, and guess what? The Democrats have hitched their horse to a loser.

 

[007]

I think Roberts voted as he did on purpose, because he knew that it would energizes the republicans and ensure an obama lose in November, and then the entire bill would be repealed anyway.

"Loss" The english language.. learn it...love it.

The only thing "sure" is if the GOP wastes the next four months trying to kill a bill that was passed and co-signed by the Supreme court they will pay dearly for this waste of the taxpayers money in November.

You teabaggers are really the dumbest motherfuckers to ever come upon the American political scene.

Why SNUGGLES... I'm impressed... you reared your ugly little bubble head just long enough to catch a rare mistake I made, and then go on to show once again you just can't get the thought of some male dropping his big, sweaty, sagging ball sack in your mouth. You must really like that, huh. You just can't stop thinking about tea bagging. Well, no real reason any more for you to stay in the closet, come on out, declare your homoness, own it, love it.

The Supreme Court doesn't "pass laws" moron. They're supposed to uphold the law through strict interpretation of the constitution, and in this case, they failed in horrendous fashion with leftist judges voting in shear partisan hack fashion, and one idiotic turn coat that will go down in history as one of the worst people to ever sit on the bench.

 

[Listening]

Why SNUGGLES... I'm impressed... you reared your ugly little bubble head just long enough to catch a rare mistake I made, and then go on to show once again you just can't get the thought of some male dropping his big, sweaty, sagging ball sack in your mouth. You must really want that, huh. You just can't stop thinking about tea bagging. Well, no real reason any more for you to stay in the closet, come on out, declare your homoness, own it, love it.

The Supreme Court doesn't "pass laws" moron. They're supposed to uphold the law through strict interpretation of the constitution, and in this case, they failed in horrendous fashion with leftist judges voting in shear partisan hack fashion, and one idiotic turn coat that will go down in history as one of the worst people to ever sit on the bench.

Trying to reason with Huggy ?

You'll have more luck trying to raise Ted Kennedy from the dead (which I would prefer you not try.........I like him just where he is....and if you happen to get lucky....).

 

[007]

Why SNUGGLES... I'm impressed... you reared your ugly little bubble head just long enough to catch a rare mistake I made, and then go on to show once again you just can't get the thought of some male dropping his big, sweaty, sagging ball sack in your mouth. You must really want that, huh. You just can't stop thinking about tea bagging. Well, no real reason any more for you to stay in the closet, come on out, declare your homoness, own it, love it.

The Supreme Court doesn't "pass laws" moron. They're supposed to uphold the law through strict interpretation of the constitution, and in this case, they failed in horrendous fashion with leftist judges voting in shear partisan hack fashion, and one idiotic turn coat that will go down in history as one of the worst people to ever sit on the bench.

Trying to reason with Huggy ?

You'll have more luck trying to raise Ted Kennedy from the dead (which I would prefer you not try.........I like him just where he is....and if you happen to get lucky....).

Oh SNUGGY and I go back a long way. I learned quite awhile ago that he's nothing more than a garden variety, spew the party line, never an original thought, leftist dolt.

 

[WillowTree]

If they are smart, all governors would refuse to set up exchanges and other aspects of Obamacare, until they know what's what in November.

Why waste money?

What each state should do is start their own INS co. for their residents only. Have a huge pool and those who want to can participate. Those who don't are on their own.

 

[The T]

Why SNUGGLES... I'm impressed... you reared your ugly little bubble head just long enough to catch a rare mistake I made, and then go on to show once again you just can't get the thought of some male dropping his big, sweaty, sagging ball sack in your mouth. You must really want that, huh. You just can't stop thinking about tea bagging. Well, no real reason any more for you to stay in the closet, come on out, declare your homoness, own it, love it.

The Supreme Court doesn't "pass laws" moron. They're supposed to uphold the law through strict interpretation of the constitution, and in this case, they failed in horrendous fashion with leftist judges voting in shear partisan hack fashion, and one idiotic turn coat that will go down in history as one of the worst people to ever sit on the bench.

Trying to reason with Huggy ?

You'll have more luck trying to raise Ted Kennedy from the dead (which I would prefer you not try.........I like him just where he is....and if you happen to get lucky....).

Interesting you bring up Teddy as everyone knows Healthcare for all was one of his pet causes...

Hurl Alert: Pelosi Tells Ted Kennedy’s Widow After Obamacare Ruling, “Now, Teddy Can Rest”…

"Now Teddy can rest," Pelosi tells Kennedy's widow