Newsbusters: CNN's Roberts' - but but but Auto Insurance is Mandated...

[hjmick]

Automobile insurance is not mandated unless you own and/or operate a motor vehicle. This a choice we all get to make.

If you're determined to make this a discussion about choice then you have the choice to reside in a foreign country.

So do you.

 

[Oddball]

If you're determined to make this a discussion about choice then you have the choice to reside in a foreign country.

So do you.

Move the hell to Cuba.

Michael Moore tells me they have the best health care on the planet.

 

[Brubricker]

Automobile insurance is not mandated unless you own and/or operate a motor vehicle. This a choice we all get to make.

If you're determined to make this a discussion about choice then you have the choice to reside in a foreign country.

So do you.

Well, of course I do, but the real point here is that if it's all about freedom of choice in contractual relationships then we have to face the facts. Laws routinely impair or deny freedom of choice in the way contracts are constructed. If a contract is all about the freedoms available to you then I can name dozens of ways that your freedoms are abridged or denied in the course of how your business affairs are conducted. Such a notion is not controversial. Hell, it's WHY we have contract laws in the first place.

 

[Oddball]

If you're determined to make this a discussion about choice then you have the choice to reside in a foreign country.

So do you.

Well, of course I do, but the real point here is that if it's all about freedom of choice in contractual relationships then we have to face the facts. Laws routinely impair or deny freedom of choice in the way contracts are constructed. If a contract is all about the freedoms available to you then I can name dozens of ways that your freedoms are abridged or denied in the course of how your business affairs are conducted. Such a notion is not controversial. Hell, it's WHY we have contract laws in the first place.

There is no freedom of choice in gubmint compulsion.

That many of our freedoms are already trampled upon is not any kind of compelling case that your new way of doing so is any more acceptable and/or desirable....In fact, that has been a base line argument of despotic tyrants throughout human history.

 

[Brubricker]

There is no freedom of choice in gubmint compulsion.

That many of our freedoms are already trampled upon is not any kind of compelling case that your new way of doing so is any more acceptable and/or desirable....In fact, that has been a base line argument of despotic tyrants throughout human history.

I understand your displeasure for sure, but I think you're missing the legal substance of what I'm saying. You're basically arguing that complete freedom of contract is your right. The Supreme Court has already ruled against that angle in West Coast Hotel v. Parrish (1937). It's one of the biggest cases in American history and it said that the government can restrict your freedom of contract in the name of benefiting the community at-large and/or its health and safety. This is not a case you're likely to win if you take it to court.

 

[Oddball]

You understand nothing.

Dred Scott was also such a stare decisis case, yet was overturned.

Keep paddling, you closet Stalinist.

 

[86DuDE]

Owning a car is a choice, therfore, car insurance is a choice. The same cannot be said for an IRS jackboot enforced mandate.

 

[The Rabbi]

Owning a car is a choice, therfore, car insurance is a choice. The same cannot be said for an IRS jackboot enforced mandate.

And actually you could own a car without insurance as long as you didnt drive it on a public road.
So the comparison fails in about a million ways.
Of course none of Obamacare is about rational discussion anymore. There isn't any. The WHite House will do and say anything to save their president, which is how they see it.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

If you're determined to make this a discussion about choice then you have the choice to reside in a foreign country.

So do you.

Well, of course I do, but the real point here is that if it's all about freedom of choice in contractual relationships then we have to face the facts. Laws routinely impair or deny freedom of choice in the way contracts are constructed. If a contract is all about the freedoms available to you then I can name dozens of ways that your freedoms are abridged or denied in the course of how your business affairs are conducted. Such a notion is not controversial. Hell, it's WHY we have contract laws in the first place.

This is a law we're going to stop.

 

[editec]

IF medincine was entirely socialized, this might make some kind of consistence sense.

But as HC is still a for profit business, this is a truly bad idea.

Pretty simple really.

 

[DiamondDave]

Registering for the draft is mandated
Paying Social Security Insurance is mandated
Paying for Medicare is mandated

1) Yes... as nation defense is actually a charge of the federal government... this is not even close in comparison to mandated health care
2) And it should not be
3) And it should not be

And so just because we have the mistakes of mandated SS and Medicare, we need to make another mistake?

 

[frazzledgear]

Registering for the draft is mandated
Paying Social Security Insurance is mandated
Paying for Medicare is mandated

Social Security is a TAX as is the Medicare TAX. Registering for the draft is a civic duty.


Congress ordering people to buy a particular good or service, ordering people to spend their income as Congress has decided is in their best interest in order to be legal citizens or face financial and criminal penalties - is UNCONSTITUTIONAL you moron. And clearly the phrase "consent of the governed" is a meaningless phrase for you as well. Just because someone gets elected sure as hell doesn't mean they get to impose THEIR will on the people and ram through whatever they want against the will of the majority!

The Constitution says the ONLY requirement for me to be a legal citizen is to be BORN here or have a parent who is an American. Not that I must also spend my money as Congress orders me to or that I must purchase a particular product to be a legal citizen. Congress does not have the authority to order people to spend their money in the private sector as IT sees fit just for me to exist here. THIS is how tyranny sneaks into a country -right out in the open. If Congress has the authority to order me to spend my money as it sees fit or send me to prison for not doing so, then all the limits placed on Congress in our Constitution trying to insure it doesn't cross the line into despotism can ALL be tossed whenever Congress feels like it. And it puts an end to any doubt about our Constitution being nothing but a meaningless piece of paper not worth the ink the founders used to draw it up and sign it.

What is about freedom the left so despises that they not only prefer the totalitarian state for themselves, they want everyone to exist under one and seem to think man's natural state is to become the slave of his own creation? Part of that answer is that liberals believe they are entitled to step into that master position in the totalitarian state and should be wielding the power of the state to force everyone else to exist as THEY see fit. And that NO ONE has the right to resist their rule which is why they have no objection to seeing their own do whatever it takes to just ram through unpopular and strongly opposed legislation that will increase the power of the state at the expense of individual liberty.

You can't be a liberal without also being an advocate for the totalitarian state.

 

[Zoom-boing]

How will this health insurance mandate be enforced? Yeah I know they'll fine you if you don't get insurance . . . .and?? You pay the fine and still don't get the insurance. How will they collect the fine? What if you don't pay they fine, are they going to have health henchmen come around and collect you and put you jail? And?? You still haven't purchased health insurance.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

A. Auto is NOT manadated at the Federal level and requirements vary from state to state.
B. You don't have to drive therefore you don't really have to buy it. Many people don't.

Dumb argument.

 

[Oldandtired]

I am sure this has been said....but if not...

Anyone who compares the madate for auto insurance to the mandate of health insurance is either disingenuous or naive.

You have a choice for auto insurance. You do not need to purchase auto insurance unless you OPT to own a car.

The only comparison possible is if you were allowed to OPT to be born.

 

[Stephanie]

this is what passes for "journalism" today. Scary

 

[Oldandtired]

this is what passes for "journalism" today. Scary

and sadly.....someone actually repeated such jibberish.....as if it made sense.

 

[frazzledgear]

A. Auto is NOT manadated at the Federal level and requirements vary from state to state.
B. You don't have to drive therefore you don't really have to buy it. Many people don't.

Dumb argument.

You don't have to buy auto insurance just to be a legal citizen.

Driving is a PRIVILEGE, not a right. It is a privilege granted by the state in exchange for fulfilling and abiding by the requirements placed by the state, one of which is to have auto insurance. You don't want to buy insurance, you don't have to and it only means you will not be granted the privilege of driving. Getting state permission to drive is a contract -initially agree to your end of that contract yet fail to uphold it, you face consequences. Rack up too many points for driving violations or abuse the privilege and the state will rescind that privilege. Refuse to accept the contract in the first place then you face no consequences at all and are just denied the PRIVILEGE of driving.

NOT true with regard to Congress ORDERING people to purchase a particular good just to be a legal citizen and exist in this country. This bill includes financial and criminal penalties for failing to buy insurance as ordered by Congress. That means Congress has changed the citizenship requirements to include spending your money the way it orders you to -but doesn't have that authority ever. Just one of several unconstitutional measures in this bill -which is why 35 states have already positioned themselves to IMMEDIATELY file lawsuits in federal court challenging the constitutionality of this bill when it passes.

Not only do the majority of Americans oppose this bill, the majority of states do as well and no one intends to just passively sit back and let these tyrants ram this down all our throats against our will.