The Obamacare Supreme Court Decision Thread

[g5000]

and do you really think there's a substantive difference between having to pay FICA and having to buy into a pool of insurers to cover services you will at some point in time use.

See Shell #1.

 

[jillian]

and do you really think there's a substantive difference between having to pay FICA and having to buy into a pool of insurers to cover services you will at some point in time use.

See Shell #1.

you really should properly attribute your nonsense to the links you took it from...

or did you delete the email you got from the koch brothers front site?

the constitutional analysis was top shelf.

 

[Dr.House]

easy... 200 years of caselaw... but it's not like that means anything to the rightwingnuts or their embarrassing henchmen on the Supreme Court.

What caselaw says all Americans MUST purchase a good or service from the government?

There was a reason the 0bama lawyer was laughed at during oral arguments, dear...

the commerce clause has been broadly interpreted for as long as its been interpreted.

They laughed at the 0bama lawyer, Jillian... LAUGHED at him when he went with that argument... Even the leftwingnut justices....lol It was a weak argument and the majority of them told him so...

and do you really think there's a substantive difference between having to pay FICA and having to buy into a pool of insurers to cover services you will at some point in time use.

Yes, yes I do.... FICA was never meant to be a permanent solution.... Don't even go with the auto insurance argument... That failed long ago...

i love how that was peachy keen when the heritage foundation came up with it as an alternative to Hillary Clinton's single payor, but suddenly became "unconstitutional" when this president signed it into law.

Just because one dude at the Heritage Foundation came up with something doesn't justify a 2900+ page law of pure bullshit... Point me to where a majority of conservatives agreed with this idea...

Weak argument, counselor...

And why the hell should we turn to the Heritage Foundation for the substance of our laws? Do you suggest we have all our congrespersons consult them prior to legislation?

he wasn't laughed at by the judges. he was laughed at by people like you because he came off like the bill buckner of constitutional lawyers. but that was personally, not the law behind him, dear.

There was no substance to his argument... He was laughed at and you know it... Los of left-leaning people in the field were "facepalming" his arguments...

You know I love you, but epic fail on this one...

 

[Ernie S.]

Pity there can’t be a thread where the ruling would be discussed in an objective, unemotional, and rational manner.

There is nothing rational about this. The fact it made it this far is a testament to how committed conservatives are to tearing down the government. This was the conservative solution to the health care problem..and now it's one they want reversed.

And they aren't doing it in congress..they are doing it in court.

Granted. It was an idea floated by a Republican think tank, but never really got much traction. A bill was proposed by Sen Cafey R, RI (hardly what you would call a Conservative)
The closest implementation was in Massachusetts, where it was a foregone conclusion that some form of state administered HC reform would pass.

But fine. Call Republicans hypocritical if you like. Wasn't it barack obama who said while campaigning against hillary clinton for the Democratic nomination,

"What's she not telling you about her health-care plan? It forces everyone to buy insurance, even if you can't afford it, and you pay a penalty if you don't."

LINK

 

[paulitician]

They'll do what they always do. They'll uphold parts of it, and strike down parts of it. Obviously the Mandate is wrong and Unconstututional, so that will probably go. Personally, i feel the whole thing should be struck down. But that won't happen. Our Supreme Court has become a bit of a sham.

 

[Meister]

Obamacare is a stepping stone to a single payer healthcare. No question in my mind that within 50 years Obamacare would drive out competition and the government step in and take over the industry. Obama has stated he is for a single payer program, he just couldn't get his democrats to go along with his vision. He wudda if he cudda.

 

[Ernie S.]

They'll do what they always do. They'll uphold parts of it, and strike down parts of it. Obviously the Mandate is wrong and Unconstututional, so that will probably go. Personally, i feel the whole thing should be struck down. But that won't happen. Our Supreme Court has become a bit of a sham.

I tend to agree, but that's OK. The mandate provision is how it is funded. If it is struck down, there will need to be a new bill to provide alternate funding. It will never pass the House.

 

[paulitician]

They'll do what they always do. They'll uphold parts of it, and strike down parts of it. Obviously the Mandate is wrong and Unconstututional, so that will probably go. Personally, i feel the whole thing should be struck down. But that won't happen. Our Supreme Court has become a bit of a sham.

I tend to agree, but that's OK. The mandate provision is how it is funded. If it is struck down, there will need to be a new bill to provide alternate funding. It will never pass the House.

Good points.

 

[Missourian]

Where's the prediction poll?

Get everyone on the record... before and after.

 

[JoeB131]

I'm going to have mixed feelings no matter what they decide today, so I'll go with that.

either they will strike down the law in its entirity, they will strike down the Individual Mandate only, which will trigger the "Death Spiral" of private insurance, or they will leave it stand in it's entirity.

If they strike it down in its entirity on a party line vote, that's just a case of outright judicial activism.

If they strike down the mandate and the mandate only, the simple solution would be to call it a tax instead of a mandate. Good luck getting that through this congres, though.

If it's upheld, I guess that's fine, but my problem with ObamaCare (AKA RomneyCare Mark II) is that it doesn't address the overall problem, which is that health care costs are spiralling out of control. It just increases access and forces everyone into the system. (Although you can argue that if everyone is going to get treated, they are already in the system.) Little in it actually controls costs.

And, no, I don't have any answers to that problem, I'm just pointing it out.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Where's the prediction poll?

Get everyone on the record... before and after.

It should be struck down at least the mandate but to try and predict how the justices will rule is crazy.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Obamacare is a stepping stone to a single payer healthcare. No question in my mind that within 50 years Obamacare would drive out competition and the government step in and take over the industry. Obama has stated he is for a single payer program, he just couldn't get his democrats to go along with his vision. He wudda if he cudda.

50 years? how about 10 years.

 

[Mustang]

So, now that the ruling has come down, how many conservatives are ready to move to Texas and urge Gov Oops to secede from the Union?

All kidding aside, there's an inherent psychological danger in becoming too emotionally invested in SC rulings like it's some kind of Indiana HS basketball championship.

On a lighter note, Mark Levin's show should be HIGHLY entertaining tonight since you just know you'll be able to feel the veins popping out in his temples as he rails against the ruling. But one thing should be clear at this point. Levin's much ballyhooed self-promotion as a constitutional expert is essentially in tatters, not that I ever thought much of his partisan-motivated arguments in the first place.

My advice, for what it's worth, is that people should relax, make plans for the weekend, and get away from all the so called expert talking heads who make their bones on everyone else's outrage. At least play some music on the car stereo for a change instead of listening to talk radio. Play some heavy metal to channel the anger. Then listen to something soothing. Drink some chamomile tea. Whatever you do, don't drive to DC, get drunk, and then shoot out Justice Roberts' front porch light while screaming about 2nd Amendment solutions because chances are your case will never make it to the SC, and if it does, the Justices likely won't buy your defense that you're a political prisoner.

 

[Mustang]

Pity there can’t be a thread where the ruling would be discussed in an objective, unemotional, and rational manner.

I remember seeing a documentary about the Swiss healthcare system overhaul that took place a few years ago. There was a fair amount of fear and uncertainty about it. There was also a lot of fear-mongering about it, as well. After it was approved (by a small margin, as I recall), it ultimately became very popular.

I'm not saying that our case would mirror that one, but it's undeniably true that almost any societal change is met with a great deal of resistance, and there are a lot of people who gin up fear in an effort to prevent change. And all too frequently, the alleged negatives of change are widely exaggerated, and the fears are almost always wholly unwarranted. It's the same story, time and time again. That's the way it always seems to play out. You would think that people in general would catch on to that fact at some point, but they never seem to make the connection.

Perhaps.

But the issue is more partisan politics than fear of change.

Fear of change is at the heart of it. People are afraid of what will happen to their health care. Others are afraid their taxes will go up. Others have a fear that America is fundamentally changing into some kind of 'socialist' state. Partisan politics is merely the mode of expressing that fear.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

So, now that the ruling has come down, how many conservatives are ready to move to Texas and urge Gov Oops to secede from the Union?

All kidding aside, there's an inherent psychological danger in becoming too emotionally invested in SC rulings like it's some kind of Indiana HS basketball championship.

On a lighter note, Mark Levin's show should be HIGHLY entertaining tonight since you just know you'll be able to feel the veins popping out in his temples as he rails against the ruling. But one thing should be clear at this point. Levin's much ballyhooed self-promotion as a constitutional expert is essentially in tatters, not that I ever thought much of his partisan-motivated arguments in the first place.

My advice, for what it's worth, is that people should relax, make plans for the weekend, and get away from all the so called expert talking heads who make their bones on everyone else's outrage. At least play some music on the car stereo for a change instead of listening to talk radio. Play some heavy metal to channel the anger. Then listen to something soothing. Drink some chamomile tea. Whatever you do, don't drive to DC, get drunk, and then shoot out Justice Roberts' front porch light while screaming about 2nd Amendment solutions because chances are your case will never make it to the SC, and if it does, the Justices likely won't buy your defense that you're a political prisoner.

You're going to be paying for my healthcare coverage. I'm quitting my job and going to sit on my ass while you pay for me.

 

[Mustang]

So, now that the ruling has come down, how many conservatives are ready to move to Texas and urge Gov Oops to secede from the Union?

All kidding aside, there's an inherent psychological danger in becoming too emotionally invested in SC rulings like it's some kind of Indiana HS basketball championship.

On a lighter note, Mark Levin's show should be HIGHLY entertaining tonight since you just know you'll be able to feel the veins popping out in his temples as he rails against the ruling. But one thing should be clear at this point. Levin's much ballyhooed self-promotion as a constitutional expert is essentially in tatters, not that I ever thought much of his partisan-motivated arguments in the first place.

My advice, for what it's worth, is that people should relax, make plans for the weekend, and get away from all the so called expert talking heads who make their bones on everyone else's outrage. At least play some music on the car stereo for a change instead of listening to talk radio. Play some heavy metal to channel the anger. Then listen to something soothing. Drink some chamomile tea. Whatever you do, don't drive to DC, get drunk, and then shoot out Justice Roberts' front porch light while screaming about 2nd Amendment solutions because chances are your case will never make it to the SC, and if it does, the Justices likely won't buy your defense that you're a political prisoner.

You're going to be paying for my healthcare coverage. I'm quitting my job and going to sit on my ass while you pay for me.

Let me ask you a question. If you or someone in your family gets seriously ill or injured, who do you think pays for the treatments and all of those large doctor and hospital bills after you've paid your premiums, co-pays and other out-of-pocket expenses?

 

[JoeB131]

So, now that the ruling has come down, how many conservatives are ready to move to Texas and urge Gov Oops to secede from the Union?

All kidding aside, there's an inherent psychological danger in becoming too emotionally invested in SC rulings like it's some kind of Indiana HS basketball championship.

On a lighter note, Mark Levin's show should be HIGHLY entertaining tonight since you just know you'll be able to feel the veins popping out in his temples as he rails against the ruling. But one thing should be clear at this point. Levin's much ballyhooed self-promotion as a constitutional expert is essentially in tatters, not that I ever thought much of his partisan-motivated arguments in the first place.

My advice, for what it's worth, is that people should relax, make plans for the weekend, and get away from all the so called expert talking heads who make their bones on everyone else's outrage. At least play some music on the car stereo for a change instead of listening to talk radio. Play some heavy metal to channel the anger. Then listen to something soothing. Drink some chamomile tea. Whatever you do, don't drive to DC, get drunk, and then shoot out Justice Roberts' front porch light while screaming about 2nd Amendment solutions because chances are your case will never make it to the SC, and if it does, the Justices likely won't buy your defense that you're a political prisoner.

Solid advice, my friend, solid advice.

While the thought of watching people's head's explode this weekend has its amusing thoughts, I'm going out of town with no internet access starting tomorrow. And I'll be better off for it.

 

[daveman]

There is nothing rational about this. The fact it made it this far is a testament to how committed conservatives are to tearing down the government. This was the conservative solution to the health care problem..and now it's one they want reversed.

And they aren't doing it in congress..they are doing it in court.

It’s also a testament to how committed conservatives are to tearing down Obama, regardless the damage to the Nation.

To be fair..they engaged in this sort of nonsense with Clinton as well. Conservatives are seriously not interested in preserving Democratic institutions.

What they want, ultimately, is that the common folk have no voice..or vote.

And that this country is ruled by very rich people.

You need to get your head CAT scanned.

 

[daveman]

There is nothing rational about this. The fact it made it this far is a testament to how committed conservatives are to tearing down the government. This was the conservative solution to the health care problem..and now it's one they want reversed.

And they aren't doing it in congress..they are doing it in court.

It’s also a testament to how committed conservatives are to tearing down Obama, regardless the damage to the Nation.

So the nation is going to be damaged by the Courts upholding the Constitution?

Yes, if by "nation" you mean "the leftist agenda" -- like Jones does.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

It’s also a testament to how committed conservatives are to tearing down Obama, regardless the damage to the Nation.

To be fair..they engaged in this sort of nonsense with Clinton as well. Conservatives are seriously not interested in preserving Democratic institutions.

What they want, ultimately, is that the common folk have no voice..or vote.

And that this country is ruled by very rich people.

You need to get your head CAT scanned.

It would turn up empty... Sallow's mildly retarded I think.