Please show me the word "Christ" in the U.S. Constitution.

[Kosh]

Get your attacks correct. We have the number 1 med schools, doctors, medical research facilities, drug research facilities, hospital, clinics, test labs etc. However, I would agree we don't have the best health INSURANCE system in the world.

We certainly don't have the #1 system for covering all Americans either.

When you find an example of an American or a non-American being turned away from an emergency room for treatment, you should post it here on USMB. Don't count the government ran VA hospital system.

Hospitals can turn away non-emergencies.

Emergency rooms do not turn away anyone.

State run emergency rooms can not via the law signed by Reagan.

Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

SHHHHHHH!! Do not tell the far left as they will want to credit Obama and Obamacare..

 

[orogenicman]

Excuse me? The SCOTUS is designed to settled matters wrt the constitutionality of our laws and regulations. It is the final word on these matters, barring changes made via constitutional amendment. So don't give me this "case law is irrelevant" crap. As for taking property from people and giving it to others, perhaps you should actually READ the Constitution, bubba. Pay particular attention to Article 1, Section 8. And again, read United States v. Butler.

Your fart is excused.

Your obfuscation is not, Denial is not a river in Egypt, bubba.

The Constitution includes a job description for the officers and judges of the United States. It enumerates their powers. Coercion is not one of them.

Or can you show the class otherwise?

Erm, what? Strawman argument. Have you read Article 1, Section 8, yet? What about United States v. Butler? Read that yet? Come back when you do and we shall discuss this some more.

Nothing to discuss as it has no bearing on anything (except taxes) and the few keywords that your far left programming allowed you to pick up on site that allow users to edit content....

This isn't make up shit Thursday, dude. You don't know what it has bearing on since you refuse to even read it. When you come to your senses and finally do read what the Constitution actually says, and what the SCOTUS has ruled on the matter, do let the rest of us know.

 

[TooTall]

Please show me the word Charity in the US Constitution.

Nope. No welfare, medicaide or other social bullshit. Zip. Nada. None. Zero.

Also ain't no Obamacare in there either. In fact there is no mention of healthcare at all in the Constitution.

Healthcare was not a significant portion of the average family's budget then.

Plus, in early America if you had whatever they could treat and could not pay they just MIGHT have thrown you out in the street to die. In the 50's something changed. Medical science evolved and some costly treatments came about. Seemed we picked a socialist system then where most everyone had a right to them expensive treatments.

If our system is socialist why are we the worst at providing health care than any other developed nation?

Why do Canadians and citizens of a lot of other countries come here for treatment if their system is so much better than ours?

the numbers aren't that great. do some"? probably if they have unlimited financial resources.

and that is the point. there is a difference between the ability of our medical personnel and our ability to DELIVER health care to people who need it.

one shouldn't have to be a millionaire to be treated for a chronic illness.

Like this millionaire?

"A federal appeals court in Boston today upheld a judge’s ruling that a transsexual inmate convicted of murder is entitled to a taxpayer-funded sex change operation as treatment for her severe gender identity disorder."

 

[NYcarbineer]

United States v. Butler. Look it up. folks.
United States v. Butler. Look it up, folks.

Case law is irrelevant. What people do to violate the Constitution is irrelevant. You lefties are a daft lot.

What is relevant is what the Constitution authorizes. Where does the Constitution permit the federal government to take property from some people and give it to others?

You are not arbiter of what the Constitution authorizes.

Are you?

I am telling you who is, if you'd pay attention.

James Madison would be a good arbiter of the Constitution, wouldn't you say?

“I cannot undertake to lay my finger on that article of the Constitution which granted a right to Congress of expending, on objects of benevolence, the money of their constituents.”

And Hamilton argued for the existence of implied powers.

 

[orogenicman]

Excuse me? The SCOTUS is designed to settled matters wrt the constitutionality of our laws and regulations. It is the final word on these matters, barring changes made via constitutional amendment. So don't give me this "case law is irrelevant" crap. As for taking property from people and giving it to others, perhaps you should actually READ the Constitution, bubba. Pay particular attention to Article 1, Section 8. And again, read United States v. Butler.

Your fart is excused.

Your obfuscation is not, Denial is not a river in Egypt, bubba.

The Constitution includes a job description for the officers and judges of the United States. It enumerates their powers. Coercion is not one of them.

Or can you show the class otherwise?

Erm, what? Strawman argument. Have you read Article 1, Section 8, yet? What about United States v. Butler? Read that yet? Come back when you do and we shall discuss this some more.

Sure, when you're done arguing with straw man arguments.

So you are suggesting that the U.S. Constitution, the law of the land, is a straw man argument? That's amusing. You should take that joke to Vegas. I'm sure it will get a few laughs.

 

[orogenicman]

Get your attacks correct. We have the number 1 med schools, doctors, medical research facilities, drug research facilities, hospital, clinics, test labs etc. However, I would agree we don't have the best health INSURANCE system in the world.

We certainly don't have the #1 system for covering all Americans either.

When you find an example of an American or a non-American being turned away from an emergency room for treatment, you should post it here on USMB. Don't count the government ran VA hospital system.

Hospitals can turn away non-emergencies.

Emergency rooms do not turn away anyone.

Actually, if a hospital receives Federal funding, it cannot refuse emergency room treatment to anyone. On the other hand, if it doesn't receive Federal funding, it can, in some cases, in some states, deny anyone who cannot pay.

 

[Kosh]

Case law is irrelevant. What people do to violate the Constitution is irrelevant. You lefties are a daft lot.

What is relevant is what the Constitution authorizes. Where does the Constitution permit the federal government to take property from some people and give it to others?

You are not arbiter of what the Constitution authorizes.

Are you?

I am telling you who is, if you'd pay attention.

James Madison would be a good arbiter of the Constitution, wouldn't you say?

“I cannot undertake to lay my finger on that article of the Constitution which granted a right to Congress of expending, on objects of benevolence, the money of their constituents.”

And Hamilton argued for the existence of implied powers.

More proof that the far left should not be in charge of anything related to government..

 

[norwegen]

Case law is irrelevant. What people do to violate the Constitution is irrelevant. You lefties are a daft lot.

What is relevant is what the Constitution authorizes. Where does the Constitution permit the federal government to take property from some people and give it to others?

You are not arbiter of what the Constitution authorizes.

Are you?

I am telling you who is, if you'd pay attention.

James Madison would be a good arbiter of the Constitution, wouldn't you say?

“I cannot undertake to lay my finger on that article of the Constitution which granted a right to Congress of expending, on objects of benevolence, the money of their constituents.”

And Hamilton argued for the existence of implied powers.

Are you keeping up? I already mentioned the petulance of the Federalists.

After the fact, even. After the Constitution was ratified.

 

[Kosh]

Your fart is excused.

Your obfuscation is not, Denial is not a river in Egypt, bubba.

The Constitution includes a job description for the officers and judges of the United States. It enumerates their powers. Coercion is not one of them.

Or can you show the class otherwise?

Erm, what? Strawman argument. Have you read Article 1, Section 8, yet? What about United States v. Butler? Read that yet? Come back when you do and we shall discuss this some more.

Nothing to discuss as it has no bearing on anything (except taxes) and the few keywords that your far left programming allowed you to pick up on site that allow users to edit content....

This isn't make up shit Thursday, dude. You don't know what it has bearing on since you refuse to even read it. When you come to your senses and finally do read what the Constitution actually says, and what the SCOTUS has ruled on the matter, do let the rest of us know.

Yes I know the far left searches for certain keywords and cuts and pastes before they even read what they post..

But then again this is another one of those irony impairment post from a far left drone..

 

[orogenicman]

Case law is irrelevant. What people do to violate the Constitution is irrelevant. You lefties are a daft lot.

What is relevant is what the Constitution authorizes. Where does the Constitution permit the federal government to take property from some people and give it to others?

You are not arbiter of what the Constitution authorizes.

Are you?

I am telling you who is, if you'd pay attention.

James Madison would be a good arbiter of the Constitution, wouldn't you say?

“I cannot undertake to lay my finger on that article of the Constitution which granted a right to Congress of expending, on objects of benevolence, the money of their constituents.”

And Hamilton argued for the existence of implied powers.

United States v. Butler - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

 

[Kosh]

Get your attacks correct. We have the number 1 med schools, doctors, medical research facilities, drug research facilities, hospital, clinics, test labs etc. However, I would agree we don't have the best health INSURANCE system in the world.

We certainly don't have the #1 system for covering all Americans either.

When you find an example of an American or a non-American being turned away from an emergency room for treatment, you should post it here on USMB. Don't count the government ran VA hospital system.

Hospitals can turn away non-emergencies.

Emergency rooms do not turn away anyone.

Actually, if a hospital receives Federal funding, it cannot refuse emergency room treatment to anyone. On the other hand, if it doesn't receive Federal funding, it can, in some cases, in some states, deny anyone who cannot pay.

And who signed that into law?

 

[Kosh]

You are not arbiter of what the Constitution authorizes.

Are you?

I am telling you who is, if you'd pay attention.

James Madison would be a good arbiter of the Constitution, wouldn't you say?

“I cannot undertake to lay my finger on that article of the Constitution which granted a right to Congress of expending, on objects of benevolence, the money of their constituents.”

And Hamilton argued for the existence of implied powers.

United States v. Butler - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Yes posting debunked far left propaganda over and over again will prove nothing!

 

[orogenicman]

Your obfuscation is not, Denial is not a river in Egypt, bubba.

The Constitution includes a job description for the officers and judges of the United States. It enumerates their powers. Coercion is not one of them.

Or can you show the class otherwise?

Erm, what? Strawman argument. Have you read Article 1, Section 8, yet? What about United States v. Butler? Read that yet? Come back when you do and we shall discuss this some more.

Nothing to discuss as it has no bearing on anything (except taxes) and the few keywords that your far left programming allowed you to pick up on site that allow users to edit content....

This isn't make up shit Thursday, dude. You don't know what it has bearing on since you refuse to even read it. When you come to your senses and finally do read what the Constitution actually says, and what the SCOTUS has ruled on the matter, do let the rest of us know.

Yes I know the far left searches for certain keywords and cuts and pastes before they even read what they post..

But then again this is another one of those irony impairment post from a far left drone..

lol.

And wingnuts such as yourself ignore/belittle anything that is contrary to your narrow world view. Congratulations.

 

[orogenicman]

We certainly don't have the #1 system for covering all Americans either.

When you find an example of an American or a non-American being turned away from an emergency room for treatment, you should post it here on USMB. Don't count the government ran VA hospital system.

Hospitals can turn away non-emergencies.

Emergency rooms do not turn away anyone.

Actually, if a hospital receives Federal funding, it cannot refuse emergency room treatment to anyone. On the other hand, if it doesn't receive Federal funding, it can, in some cases, in some states, deny anyone who cannot pay.

And who signed that into law?

Congress, naturally. You didn't know this? Huh.

 

[norwegen]

Your fart is excused.

Your obfuscation is not, Denial is not a river in Egypt, bubba.

The Constitution includes a job description for the officers and judges of the United States. It enumerates their powers. Coercion is not one of them.

Or can you show the class otherwise?

Erm, what? Strawman argument. Have you read Article 1, Section 8, yet? What about United States v. Butler? Read that yet? Come back when you do and we shall discuss this some more.

Sure, when you're done arguing with straw man arguments.

So you are suggesting that the U.S. Constitution, the law of the land, is a straw man argument? That's amusing. You should take that joke to Vegas. I'm sure it will get a few laughs.

Oh my good lord. You said my argument was a straw man argument. That's what I was referring to. And now you say otherwise.

Lefties are the reason that arguments with lefties are always in circles.

 

[orogenicman]

Are you?

I am telling you who is, if you'd pay attention.

James Madison would be a good arbiter of the Constitution, wouldn't you say?

“I cannot undertake to lay my finger on that article of the Constitution which granted a right to Congress of expending, on objects of benevolence, the money of their constituents.”

And Hamilton argued for the existence of implied powers.

United States v. Butler - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Yes posting debunked far left propaganda over and over again will prove nothing!

A Supreme Court ruling is "far left propaganda"? Are you drunk?

 

[Kosh]

I am telling you who is, if you'd pay attention.

James Madison would be a good arbiter of the Constitution, wouldn't you say?

“I cannot undertake to lay my finger on that article of the Constitution which granted a right to Congress of expending, on objects of benevolence, the money of their constituents.”

And Hamilton argued for the existence of implied powers.

United States v. Butler - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Yes posting debunked far left propaganda over and over again will prove nothing!

A Supreme Court ruling is "far left propaganda"? Are you drunk?

Once again the far left searches certain keywords and posts without reading the content!

Then think it support their far left religious cause, yet does not!

 

[orogenicman]

Your obfuscation is not, Denial is not a river in Egypt, bubba.

The Constitution includes a job description for the officers and judges of the United States. It enumerates their powers. Coercion is not one of them.

Or can you show the class otherwise?

Erm, what? Strawman argument. Have you read Article 1, Section 8, yet? What about United States v. Butler? Read that yet? Come back when you do and we shall discuss this some more.

Sure, when you're done arguing with straw man arguments.

So you are suggesting that the U.S. Constitution, the law of the land, is a straw man argument? That's amusing. You should take that joke to Vegas. I'm sure it will get a few laughs.

Oh my good lord. You said my argument was a straw man argument. That's what I was referring to. And now you say otherwise.

Lefties are the reason that arguments with lefties are always in circles.

It is a straw man argument since no one here but you made any claim about coercion. But since you brought it up, the Constitution does, in fact, provide the government with enforcement powers. You didn't know this? I'm not surprised, since you have obviously never even bothered to read it.

 

[orogenicman]

James Madison would be a good arbiter of the Constitution, wouldn't you say?

“I cannot undertake to lay my finger on that article of the Constitution which granted a right to Congress of expending, on objects of benevolence, the money of their constituents.”

And Hamilton argued for the existence of implied powers.

United States v. Butler - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Yes posting debunked far left propaganda over and over again will prove nothing!

A Supreme Court ruling is "far left propaganda"? Are you drunk?

Once again the far left searches certain keywords and posts without reading the content!

Then think it support their far left religious cause, yet does not!

Right. You are drunk. Come back when you sober up, and we'll talk some more.

 

[norwegen]

The Constitution includes a job description for the officers and judges of the United States. It enumerates their powers. Coercion is not one of them.

Or can you show the class otherwise?

Erm, what? Strawman argument. Have you read Article 1, Section 8, yet? What about United States v. Butler? Read that yet? Come back when you do and we shall discuss this some more.

Sure, when you're done arguing with straw man arguments.

So you are suggesting that the U.S. Constitution, the law of the land, is a straw man argument? That's amusing. You should take that joke to Vegas. I'm sure it will get a few laughs.

Oh my good lord. You said my argument was a straw man argument. That's what I was referring to. And now you say otherwise.

Lefties are the reason that arguments with lefties are always in circles.

It is a straw man argument since no one here but you made any claim about coercion. But since you brought it up, the Constitution does, in fact, provide the government with enforcement powers. You didn't know this? I'm not surprised, since you have obviously never even bothered to read it.

Okay, you're too stupid to continue with. I'll end here.

I am not the one who brought up coercion; we had been discussing welfare programs for some time previous.

And the government has enforcement powers? You don't say. What a revelation.