BREAKING NEWS: Appeals court rules part of President Obama’s health care law unconsti

[Intense]

The next issue is will Kagan have to recuse herself....

Prediction: She wont.
Not for any reason that resembles logic or precedence. It is simply political expedience. She will dress it up in some way or other, or her supporters. But Dems only care about power, not fairness, legality or anything else.

How can she not recuse herself when she, as his Solicitor General, was one of the President's chief legal advisors when they were putting this boondoggle together? How could she ever claim to be objective and impartial now?

How could she claim the Law was Constitutional with a straight face in the first place?

 

[007]

The next issue is will Kagan have to recuse herself....

She won't at her own free will, that's a given. I see one hellofva fight over it though, because she should.

She may surprise us, But I wouldnt hold my breath

She should have recused herself from her supreme court nomination period, for her racist and legislating from the bench comments, but she didn't. She's a died in the wool, radical, militant, mexican, liberal feminazi, and she won't step away from anything unless she's forced. That's the way I see it.

 

[bucs90]

Health care for Americans is bad. Better they die: Famous Republican Proverb

No one is denying you or anyone else healthcare. They are only saying that the US government cannot FORCE you to buy it. Just like the gov't can't force you to give birth to or abort a baby.

Gov't can't tell us what to do with our bodies...............right?

 

[ShackledNation]

The law is unconstitutional whether the courts say so or not.

 

[Full-Auto]

She won't at her own free will, that's a given. I see one hellofva fight over it though, because she should.

She may surprise us, But I wouldnt hold my breath

She should have recused herself from her supreme court nomination period, for her racist and legislating from the bench comments, but she didn't. She's a died in the wool, radical, militant, mexican, liberal feminazi, and she won't step away from anything unless she's forced. That's the way I see it.

I dont have anything to argue against that. Thats why Im not holding my breath.

She certainly wasnt one of the brightest either.

 

[Intense]

Health care for Americans is bad. Better they die: Famous Republican Proverb

Signing over your property Rights for a band-aid ranks right up there rdean. You should be right proud.

 

[Dr.House]

The next issue is will Kagan have to recuse herself....

Prediction: She wont.
Not for any reason that resembles logic or precedence. It is simply political expedience. She will dress it up in some way or other, or her supporters. But Dems only care about power, not fairness, legality or anything else.

Yeah, really? When the republicans that signed a pledge not to increase taxes recuse themselves, then you might have a leg to stand on.

Nice deflection, but not relevant....

Swing and a miss....

 

[Foxfyre]

Prediction: She wont.
Not for any reason that resembles logic or precedence. It is simply political expedience. She will dress it up in some way or other, or her supporters. But Dems only care about power, not fairness, legality or anything else.

How can she not recuse herself when she, as his Solicitor General, was one of the President's chief legal advisors when they were putting this boondoggle together? How could she ever claim to be objective and impartial now?

How could she claim the Law was Constitutional with a straight face in the first place?

Because she and the "constitutional professor' are not above bending the constitution for purposes of an agenda. I still shudder to think what the poor students in his classes were taught. But that is one of several differences between a leftist/progressive/liberal and a conservative in today's America. Those on the left see the Constitution as a 'living document' that can be adapted to accommodate the circumstances. Conservatives see it as an absolute as the Founders intended it.

Leftists, most especially those who at heart embrace at least some socialism, think it is okay to force people to accept government healthcare. Conservatives believe in unalienable rights.

 

[bucs90]

I even heard MSNBC hosts saying Obama prefers the "professors lecturn" over the "bully pulpit".

Deep down, the realized that their boy has ZERO leadership skills. The 1st thing he's ever led in his life is the ******* White House. What kind of logic is that?

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

No president has broken those kinds of promises in their first week. If you choose to be that skeptical I feel sorry for you.

Clinton did. When his promised middle class tax cut became a middle class tax hike.

In the first week?

February 17, 1993

In a nationally televised address to a joint session of Congress, Clinton unveils his economic plan. The plan focuses on deficit reduction rather than a middle class tax cut, which had been high on his campaign agenda. Clinton also discusses the plan in his first State of the Union address later that day. Even though Democrats control both houses of Congress, the economic plan is in jeopardy because of the president's earlier missteps, which have weakened confidence in the new administration.

The first month.....

 

[uscitizen]

So I guess this means that privitzarion of SS is also unconstitutional?

 

[CaféAuLait]

God I hope the SC hears this case BEFORE the 2012 elections.

Indeed:

* If you want socialized medicine, here’s the plan: First you pass a “weak” law that allows private insurance but imposes all sorts of rules on whom they need to enroll. Then, in order to keep them from going out of business, you require that every American buy health insurance. After that legislation is passed, have a court declare that the individual mandate is unconstitutional, but leave everything else in place. -Rothbardian economist Bob Murphy

Potpourri


The cost of this HC plan w/o the mandate will make it so private insurers are unable to stay above water and put them out of business. Some are stipulating this will open the door to the Public Option.

 

[Wicked Jester]

Doesn't change anything

Some courts have approved it others have denied

Have to wait for that 5-4 Supreme Court decision

Lets wait for January of '13 when the next president who will be a republican, shitcans that albatross around american citizens necks once and for all!

 

[Wicked Jester]

The next issue is will Kagan have to recuse herself....

Prediction: She wont.
Not for any reason that resembles logic or precedence. It is simply political expedience. She will dress it up in some way or other, or her supporters. But Dems only care about power, not fairness, legality or anything else.

Yeah, really? When the republicans that signed a pledge not to increase taxes recuse themselves, then you might have a leg to stand on.

Epic fail, yet again.

 

[Full-Auto]

Prediction: She wont.
Not for any reason that resembles logic or precedence. It is simply political expedience. She will dress it up in some way or other, or her supporters. But Dems only care about power, not fairness, legality or anything else.

Yeah, really? When the republicans that signed a pledge not to increase taxes recuse themselves, then you might have a leg to stand on.

Epic fail, yet again.

When did congress critters sit on the court?

 

[Flopper]

Who are you shilling for anyway?

I found the most interesting thing about today's ruling to be that it reversed the lower court's invalidation of the ACA and was instead careful to sever the individual mandate from the rest of the law. That fact seems to have been overlooked by some of the more overzealous posters around here.

Obamacare is dead without the mandate. That seems to be overlooked by you

That's not so. There are dozens of major changes in the law that do not depend on the mandate. A lot have already been implemented. The biggest impact of elimination of the mandate would be political. Obama's goal was 100% coverage which of course was not going to happen but elimination of the mandate would mean even less coverage.

The plan would proceed but with less people covered. The mandate itself is pretty weak. The penalty is not high enough to insure full compliance. One provision of the individual mandate would exempt people if insurance on the exchange costs more than 8 percent of their income. This would exempt most people in the middle class.

A wide variety of possibilities, some requiring legislation and some not, have been suggested if the mandate is dropped, including:

Creating an open enrollment period each year for about a month when people could obtain insurance more easily, followed by stiff penalties if people try to opt in later.

Creating some kind of automatic enrollment policy in which individuals would specifically have to opt out and face tough penalties.

Tying federal subsidies for Medicaid and tax credits for the insurance exchanges to states passing their own mandates. Len Nichols raised this as one option. By way of metaphor, he wrote: "We do this with highway funds to get states to adopt speed limits that conform with federal policy...It's messy but workable, with some states essentially opting for a minimalist health system."

Some liberals are calling for the revival of a public option or allowing people to buy into Medicare, a point made recently on the blog, Firedoglake. Or possibly a single-payer system.

Princeton sociologist Paul Starr, who warned of a backlash to the mandate before the bill passed, has suggested letting people opt out without a penalty, but then not letting them opt back into the insurance market for five years.

And Mark Pauly, a health economist who was an adviser to former President George H.W. Bush and is considered to be the father of the mandate back in the 1990s, says this version of the mandate may not be needed or effective. "I believe you could achieve almost the same reduction of the uninsured with the subsidies and without the mandate," he told the Washington Post's Ezra Klein in an interview this week.

For its part, the Obama administration publicly maintains that it's not ready to consider a back-up plan. Tanden says White House officials will study alternatives for now just in case they lose at the Supreme Court.

There are numerous alternatives. What that alternative might be would depend a great deal on the makeup of congress.

What If Health Reform Had No Mandate? Politicians, Experts Weigh In | The Rundown News Blog | PBS NewsHour | PBS

 

[Wicked Jester]

Yeah, really? When the republicans that signed a pledge not to increase taxes recuse themselves, then you might have a leg to stand on.

Epic fail, yet again.

When did congress critters sit on the court?

Ya' got me, man........Ya' got the tater!

All I know, is that this new guy is runnin' all over the board, and never seems to have a friggin' clue about much o' anything.

 

[rdean]

Health care for Americans is bad. Better they die: Famous Republican Proverb

No one is denying you or anyone else healthcare. They are only saying that the US government cannot FORCE you to buy it. Just like the gov't can't force you to give birth to or abort a baby.

Gov't can't tell us what to do with our bodies...............right?

Not if you're Republican.

 

[Flopper]

Doesn't change anything

Some courts have approved it others have denied

Have to wait for that 5-4 Supreme Court decision

Can't wait till obamaturds socialistic obamacare is repealed. It does matter. The appeals court made the right dcision. Lefties cry cry cry because there socialism march just got slowed down.

Obamacare will not be repeal and here's why. First the Republicans would have to control both houses and the presidency, but let's assume that happens and it's now 2013 and Congress is in session. At that time most the healthcare provisions would have been implemented. Insurance companies, healthcare providers, state health and welfare and the federal government would have spent hundreds of millions to implement the plan. The healthcare exchanges would be opening up in a matter of months. In essence it would be too late.

What would happen is Republicans would introduce a bill that claimed to be a repeal which would include about 95% of what's in the current law plus Republican favorites such as tort reform and some other needed changes that would be supported by Democrats. Republicans could then finally claim they have repealed Obamacare, but not much would have changed.

IMHO, if Democrats are still in control in 2012, there will be another bill which incorporates needed changes to the law.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Score is still in favor of the mandates. This will be decided by the SC.

How Antonin Scalia May Save The Individual Mandate

The "score" is even. This is only the second circuit court to rule on the mandate.

The score doesn't matter anyway, SCOTUS does not make decisions based on how many judges rule which way. If they did the 9th would have a much better track record.