SCOTUS Healthcare Ruling

[MLR]

With all due respect, justice Roberts decision was that congress does have the power to levy taxes.

You might not like that decision but I challenge you to disprove the authority of congress to levy new taxes.

Actually I agree with Justice Roberts opinion on the law. He did not make any new law when issuing his opinion. I also agree with his opinion that it it not the courts job to protect us from bad laws if they are Constitutional. That is our job at the ballot box.

My comments you are referring to were about you implying that if a person accepts a State infringing on someones personal freedom that they are somehow a hypocrite if they do not accept those same infringements when imposed on them by the Feds. The trouble with that argument is that the Feds are restricted in what they can do by the Constitution. The States on the other hand were free to do anything that did not step on those powers belonging to the Federal Government.

Michael

 

[flatwins]

We're broke anyway and borrowing money at this point. So I guess we can say Dingle Barry's health plan is "Made in China".

Reasons to be a proud American are rapidly slipping away. I'm still stunned how so many can be so completely blind.

I disagree with the comparison between a state-funded and a federally-funded healthcare plan. The state plan would be voted on in a much smaller scale and affect millions less people. Also, more than likely, it would not be completely and blatantly CRAMMED down the throats of millions of people trying to scratch out a living while the government is already way into the till.

Sugar coat it all you want with comparisons between guys who died a hundred years ago or 200 years ago but it makes no difference. They passed a worthless 2000 page bill they didn't read and then sent it over to the Court who agreed it was crap but had to take it at its crap face value and allow it.

This bill is the dream of one Barack Obama who was determined to complete it AT ANY COST as his legacy legislation.

I'm a realist living in reality in 2012. I see clearly. If I ran my house like the government runs its fiscal house I would be living on the street in 2 weeks. Remember that same gov't who is going to dabble in healthcare is the same outfit who couldn't successfully run "Cash for Clunkers".

I have had enough of this thread and unicorn riders who want to justify more government intervention into my life. If it looks like dog ****, smells like dog ****, it is most likely dog ****.

From the crystal clear place known as Reality...

 

[sanjuro893]

We're broke anyway and borrowing money at this point. So I guess we can say Dingle Barry's health plan is "Made in China".

Reasons to be a proud American are rapidly slipping away. I'm still stunned how so many can be so completely blind.

I disagree with the comparison between a state-funded and a federally-funded healthcare plan. The state plan would be voted on in a much smaller scale and affect millions less people. Also, more than likely, it would not completely and blatantly CRAMMED down the throats of millions of people trying to scratch out a living while the government is already way into the till.

Sugar coat it all you want with comparisons between guys who died a hundred years ago or 200 years ago but it makes no difference. They passed a worthless 2000 page bill they didn't read and then sent it over to the Court who agreed it was crap but had to take it at its crap face value and allow it.

This bill is the dream of one Barack Obama who was determined to complete it AT ANY COST as his legacy legislation.

I'm a realist living in reality in 2012. I see clearly. If I ran my house like the government runs its fiscal house I would be living on the street in 2 weeks. Remember that same gov't who is going to dabble in healthcare is the same outfit who couldn't successfully run "Cash for Clunkers".

I have had enough of this thread and unicorn riders who want to justify more government intervention into my life. If it looks like dog ****, smells like dog ****, it is most likely dog ****.

From the crystal clear place known as Reality...

Agree 100%! Not saying Romneys any better, just sayin this bill is more unnecessary intrusion. These types of bills and the people who write them need to go the way of the do-do.

 

[OKC_Jim]

Sometimes I wonder why I just dont try to get banned again.

Don't do it Whitey! I don't always agree with you (though usually it seems I do), but I always enjoy reading what you have to say.

 

[Shadowrider]

I'm not sure one can "cold turkey" stop medicare and medicaid. There are 1/2 million children in the state of Oklahoma alone who rely on medicaid for insurance. Country wide there are 48 million people who receive medicare. Turning the spigot off suddenly may make financial sense for the government's balance sheet but the cost left to be absorbed by the private sector will mean all of our insurance rates will skyrocket overnight (if the insurance sector doesn't collapse from the weight which it probably would). Also the sudden lapse in care may mean death / suffering for those with chronic or life-threatening conditions.

It's a shell game. Changing the payor, shifting money here or there doesn't change the total $ cost we owe for healthcare every year. Someone will pay at the end of the day by one means or another.

I hear what you're saying. It could be done gradually if executed properly. I just keep comparing my grandfather's generation with today's. My grandfather was born in 1918. He was newly married when the great depression hit. He was very fortunate to have a job that paid $5.00 a day, most folks made less than half of that. One day he was at the movies with his cousins and they were horsing around afterwards, I don't know exactly what happened but he ended up getting his foot ran over by his cousin's car tire and broke his foot all to heck. This is why they wouldn't take him when he volunteered for military service at the start of WWII. Anyway he was in the grocery store where he ran a tab that he always paid and the grocer asked him about his foot. He also noted that since he couldn't work with the cast he would not be able to run his credit line until he went back to work. My grandfather went ahead and paid his tab that day since he went in there to do so anyway and he had a couple of dollars left over. So he bought a big sack of beans and a sack of cornmeal. His neighbor cut him a deal on milk from his cow and some eggs. He and grandma ate beans and cornbread 3 times a day for over two months while he healed up. Back then there was no disability, no unemployment, no nothing. But they survived with no help, grampa was too proud to take any. And he never ever spent his entire paycheck again as long as he lived, he always put something back even if it were only a few cents, "for a rainy day" he used to call it. And as long as I can remember back he never borrowed a dime for anything. If he wanted something he saved up for it and paid cash. He bought and paid for his own insurance. Grandma worked and saved for a long time to buy him a Browning Sweet 16 for an anniversary present. $400 bucks was a chunk of change in 1962. He lived until 1 month before he was to turn 90. I look at today's generation and what they do in similar situations. Quite a contrast of responsibility since the first place looked to is for a handout of some sort. Man it makes you wonder how anyone ever survived. Pretty pitiful state of affairs we live in today...

 

[71buickfreak]

My grandparents also went through the DP. My pawpaw was born in 1906, lived till he was 91. He was hit with a mortar on the first day of the battle of the bulge. Lived the remainder of his life with Malaria, shrapnel in his neck and leg. He worked as a bread delivery guy in the 20s and 30s. Made $5 a week. My MawMaw was 7 years younger than him. She used to tell me how she would take the kids downtown to the store, then come home and eat bologna sandwiches everyday. I alked her how they managed to live on $5 a week. She said, we just did, we didn't have a choice. She was the toughest woman I have ever met. Lived for a week with a severe herniated intestine that the doc said most people are in the hospital screaming in pain and die after 2 days. She damn near pulled out of it, living in the hospital for a week and half. Our parents (or grandparents) generation was FAR tougher than the ones that came after. I am a child of the 70s, I can't say much other than I know that my grandparents went through more crap than I have.

That said, I see a time when we all will face similar peril when the house of cards finally collapses. It's coming soon.

 

[RidgeHunter]

If I did dissent it would be because I disagree with the Law. Not the States power to invoke it. While the State of Oklahoma may pass many laws that infringe on my personal freedom it is within their powers to do so unless they conflict with the enumerated powers given to the Feds.

To make it clear. I believe that any power the Federal Government claims to possess not enumerated in the Constitution and its amendments to be illegal. The document clearly states how and under what conditions that additional powers can be given to the Feds. Where in the Constitution does it state the the Federal Government can claim new powers except by using the Amendment process? Where does it say that one branch of Government could pull new powers out of thin air to meet some new need?

Michael

You're living a world where the Constitution has never been amended, states have never passed laws that violate it, and the supreme court has never ruled the Constitutionality of such laws.

So, the fourteenth amendment wasn't adopted until 1868. I guess it's with "the state's rights" to implement segregation by law, since we live in 1788. I've read the enumerated powers in Article 1, and I can tell you that "the power to make laws enforcing racial segregation" is not in there anywhere. Therefore, since it's not stated explicitly in Article 1, that means the Federal Government doesn't have the power to do it. Staying with this logic train, if the Federal Government is not granted the power to pass such a law, it's within the state's rights to pass and enforce suck a law according to this:

...the State of Oklahoma may pass many laws that infringe on my personal freedom [...] unless they conflict with the enumerated powers given to the Feds.

"State's rights" is such a weird slope for the conservative/small government/libertarian sect to champion as that basically undermines the individual and gives the states the power to hold you down and poop in your mouth because that's a right "reserved to the states".

Of course, I'm typing the above on a forum where people thought Ed & Elaine Brown were sane, rational and patriotic and that their actions were completely legal under the Constitution. I'm sure if they let Ed Brown post on OSA from Federal Prison he'd be telling me how wrong I am, too.

 

[MLR]

You're living a world where the Constitution has never been amended, states have never passed laws that violate it, and the supreme court has never ruled the Constitutionality of such laws.

So, the fourteenth amendment wasn't adopted until 1868. I guess it's with "the state's rights" to implement segregation by law, since we live in 1788. I've read the enumerated powers in Article 1, and I can tell you that "the power to make laws enforcing racial segregation" is not in there anywhere. Therefore, since it's not stated explicitly in Article 1, that means the Federal Government doesn't have the power to do it. Staying with this logic train, if the Federal Government is not granted the power to pass such a law, it's within the state's rights to pass and enforce suck a law according to this:
You do realize that when the Constitution is amended that new language becomes a part of the document don't you? The new language is every bit a part of the Constitution as it would be if it had been included in the original.



"State's rights" is such a weird slope for the conservative/small government/libertarian sect to champion as that basically undermines the individual and gives the states the power to hold you down and poop in your mouth because that's a right "reserved to the states".
Instead of pretending States rights do not exist. That the Constitution only gives limited powers to the Federal Government. Lets do it right and take those offensive portions of the Constitution out? If parts of the Constitution is out of date don't ignore it. Change it the way it was intended to be changed. Amend it, do it the right way.

Of course, I'm typing the above on a forum where people thought Ed & Elaine Brown were sane, rational and patriotic and that their actions were completely legal under the Constitution. I'm sure if they let Ed Brown post on OSA from Federal Prison he'd be telling me how wrong I am, too.

My replies are in bold.

Michael

 

[Glocktogo]

Many states have their own constitution. That constitution can enumerate the powers of the state and what is reserved to the people. If you don't like what it says, it can be amended as well.

Just sayin...

 

[David2012]

This picture & caption was making the rounds of the conservative talks shows yesterday....

View attachment 22119