This Romney did too excuse

[g5000]

Dumbfuck, there is a difference between a state doing it compared to the Federal Govt making a board sweeping change across the USA where other states oppose it.

If the wackos of MA want to pay for their neighbor's brown teeth, then so be it but don't force me in another state to pay for them.

So you believe is not a violation of individual rights if your state forces you to buy health insurance or pay a penalty against your will?

 

[Inthemiddle]

But the MISSING piece of the puzzle RightwingShitflinger is that it was DONE...as a soverign State under the auspies of the 9th and 10th Amendments.

So insurance mandates were an original power of the states at the time the constitution was ratified?

 

[GoneBezerk]

No, the elected state legislature and the Governor decided that for their state citizens.

If you don't like it, move away.

One can't just move away from the USA if Obamination tells all states to do it.

States have rights to pass gay marriage, universal healthcare, etc but the Federal govt needs to stay out of that business of dictating those issues across all states.

Romney has said it 100 times that MA has the right to have RomneyCare but Obamacare is bullshit, because people in North Dakota are different than people in Mass.

Dumbfuck, there is a difference between a state doing it compared to the Federal Govt making a board sweeping change across the USA where other states oppose it.

If the wackos of MA want to pay for their neighbor's brown teeth, then so be it but don't force me in another state to pay for them.

So you believe is not a violation of individual rights if your state forces you to buy health insurance or pay a penalty against your will?

 

[Jackson]

But the MISSING piece of the puzzle RightwingShitflinger is that it was DONE...as a soverign State under the auspies of the 9th and 10th Amendments.

So insurance mandates were an original power of the states at the time the constitution was ratified?

Don't forget it was unconstitutional under the Commerce Clause.

 

[Inthemiddle]

But the MISSING piece of the puzzle RightwingShitflinger is that it was DONE...as a soverign State under the auspies of the 9th and 10th Amendments.

So insurance mandates were an original power of the states at the time the constitution was ratified?

Don't forget it was uncostitutional under the Commerce Clause.

And this logical fallacy is called "red herring."

 

[g5000]

No, the elected state legislature and the Governor decided that for their state citizens.

If you don't like it, move away.

One can't just move away from the USA if Obamination tells all states to do it.

States have rights to pass gay marriage, universal healthcare, etc but the Federal govt needs to stay out of that business of dictating those issues across all states.

And so you disagree with those who say your individual rights cannot be trumped by the state. You believe a state can force you to buy private health insurance. You believe the federal government cannot violate states rights, but that states CAN violate individual rights.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Nobody ever said GoneBezerk was consistent in his thinking.

No, the elected state legislature and the Governor decided that for their state citizens.

If you don't like it, move away.

One can't just move away from the USA if Obamination tells all states to do it.

States have rights to pass gay marriage, universal healthcare, etc but the Federal govt needs to stay out of that business of dictating those issues across all states.

And so you disagree with those who say your individual rights cannot be trumped by the state. You believe a state can force you to buy private health insurance. You believe the federal government cannot violate states rights, but that states CAN violate individual rights.

 

[The T]

So insurance mandates were an original power of the states at the time the constitution was ratified?

Don't forget it was uncostitutional under the Commerce Clause.

And this logical fallacy is called "red herring."

In YOUR case? A case of the RED ASS.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Or that The T could think constructively, for that matter.

 

[Inthemiddle]

Don't forget it was uncostitutional under the Commerce Clause.

And this logical fallacy is called "red herring."

In YOUR case? A case of the RED ASS.

And this logical fallacy is called "ad hominem."

 

[dblack]

I'd love to believe Romney is the guy to make things better. But we can't change our nation with wishful thinking. Every sane assessment of Romney's political values and governing style show him to be every bit the corporatist liar that Obama is - even down to favoring most of the same policy preferences (and I'm talking about his actual record, not the sales pitch).

We have to face up to what's happened here. The big money interests have rigged the game, yet again, and secured the nomination of both parties with candidates friendly to their cause. Supporting either of them is endorsing their continued corruption, their continued attack on freedom.

 

[The T]

And this logical fallacy is called "red herring."

In YOUR case? A case of the RED ASS.

And this logical fallacy is called "ad hominem."

SAME as YOURS.

Isn't it?

DUMBASS

 

[HUGGY]

No logical falacy

Romney is attacking Obamacare as unnecessary and unwarranted at he same time he passed a similar bill.

The logic is called hypocrisy

Calling a Bill passed for a tiny state with a Tiny Population, by a State Government, the similar to a Bill that Effects 1/6th the US economy, and every Person living in the Country, passed by the Federal Government. Is also a Fallacy.

You guys like to Keep pointing out Obama Care was Modeled on Romney Care, but you seem to not want to look at how much Romney Care is Costing that State, and how Those Costs continue to Spiral out of control.

lol

Well I'm glad you brought that up. Being a tiny state ..that makes Willard a tiny state's governor... too small to compare to being the president of 320 million people maybe?

PS Thank you for that observation.

 

[Care4all]

What Romney did was get told by the people of Massachusettes that they wanted a mandated health plan. His job at that point was to create one. He did that. It works for Massachusettes because they only had 8% uninsured. Romney's point is that the same plan that is successful in Massachusettes wouldn't work everywhere. It wouldn't work in Arizona that has a very high percentage of uninsured illegals. It wouldn't work in California with a 20% unemployment rate. If the people of MA had said that they didn't want a mandated insurance plan, Romney would never have created one.

At least 60% of Americans, some say as high as 75% of Americans don't want the federal plan and especially don't like obama's plan. obama does it anyway because he alone knows what's best for us.

a good deal that were upset with the ACA was because they believe ''it did not go far enough''....the devil is in the details....

 

[g5000]

Nobody ever said GoneBezerk was consistent in his thinking.

This is the same inconsistency I am seeing in a lot of Romney supporters these days.

 

[GoneBezerk]

A state can force you to get a driver's license and auto insurance if you want to drive a car in the state.

If you want to live in that state and use their hospitals then they have the right to force you to pay your way in the system via health insurance. You are a burden on the taxpayers of that state if you use their hospitals for FREE.

You see dumbfuck, someone using a hospital in IL for FREE isn't a burden on the citizens of CA.....but they are a burden on the citizens of IL, so the citizens can vote in a Governor and legislation to protect them from freeloaders like you.

Obamination telling ND that they need to be like MA is bullshit because states have rights under the Constitution.

No, the elected state legislature and the Governor decided that for their state citizens.

If you don't like it, move away.

One can't just move away from the USA if Obamination tells all states to do it.

States have rights to pass gay marriage, universal healthcare, etc but the Federal govt needs to stay out of that business of dictating those issues across all states.

And so you disagree with those who say your individual rights cannot be trumped by the state. You believe a state can force you to buy private health insurance. You believe the federal government cannot violate states rights, but that states CAN violate individual rights.

 

[GoneBezerk]

Both of you idiots don't understand the difference between a State and the Feds.

Just quit paying your auto insurance, license plate fee and getting a new license to find out the power of a state......

Nobody ever said GoneBezerk was consistent in his thinking.

This is the same inconsistency I am seeing in a lot of Romney supporters these days.

 

[rightwinger]

Simple logic

How does Romney say the Government mandating that people be insured is wrong when he did it himself and has not disavowed it?

But the MISSING piece of the puzzle RightwingShitflinger is that it was DONE...as a soverign State under the auspies of the 9th and 10th Amendments.

NOT Federally.

Go find another clue asshole.

So?

Obamas was done per the Constitution

Go find another clue asshole

 

[Charles_Main]

So insurance mandates were an original power of the states at the time the constitution was ratified?

Don't forget it was uncostitutional under the Commerce Clause.

And this logical fallacy is called "red herring."

And you need to Read the Ruling.

It clearly states the Mandate is Not Constitutional as a power under the Commerce Clause, Stating that what they were trying doing went beyond Regulation Commerce to Forcing the Creation of Commerce.

That is Important for 2 Reason.

1. This Ruling can now be used to argue Against Further Attempted Abuses of the Commerce Clause.

2. Because it was Ruled a Tax, The mandate and most of the Rest of the Bill Can be Repealed in whole or Piece by Piece with only a Simple 51 Vote Majority in the Senate instead of 60.

The Very Bad Precedent the Ruling sets is the Idea that Government Can do almost anything it wants, Force you to do, or Buy what ever, through basically holding a gun to your head with a tax penalty if you don't do it.

But At least the Fuckers will have to stand up and be counted and vote for Tax Increases every time they want to fuck with us, and Tax Increases are not very Popular. Harder to Pass.

Obama Care would likely not even be law if they had, had to own up to the Fact that the Mandate was a tax, and people had known more about the trillion dollars in other taxes in it. From a Tax on Peoples Existing Insurance Premiums, To a Tax on Companies that Make Medical Devices.

Check em out Many of these Taxes actually seemed designed to Increase the Cost of medical Care.
20 Hidden Tax Hikes in Obamacare

 

[g5000]

Both of you idiots don't understand the difference between a State and the Feds.

Oh, I understand quite well the difference.

But for those people who believe an individual's rights means they cannot be forced to buy health insurance, then a state and a federal mandate are a difference without a distinction.

So for those people, Romney is just as big a rat bastard freedom hater as Obama. Or so one would logically think.

I happen to be one of those people.