Like I said on First Thoughts - the highly conservative 6th circuit appeals court in Cincinnati ruled
the law constitutional.

On to SCOTUS

On to SCOTUS

________________

And the sooner the better. I hope a decision comes out in the SC 2011-12 term so we can hear our constitutional law professor President explain why he supported an unconstitutional law, during the Presidential campaign. LOL!!!

I hope a decision comes out in the SC 2011-12 term so we can hear our constitutional law professor President explain why he supported an unconstitutional law, during the Presidential campaign. LOL!!!

You're 7th grade Social Studies teacher called and wants to change your grade based on this statement.

He did not support an "unconstitutional law" as no law is unconstitutional until the SCOTUS declares it as such.

...yes, I recall reading that somewhere.

Fisty Redbush, anyone else need to recuse themselves???

He did not support an "unconstitutional law" as no law is unconstitutional until the SCOTUS declares it as such.

...yes, I recall reading that somewhere.

_____________________________________________

In some liberal fairy tale book??

Using your lefty liberal logic (logic-LMAO!!!!), a law reinstituting slavery would not be unconstitutional until, and unless, the SC said so.

Is THAT really the position you want to be supporting??

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Really Noid?

Another setback for the bat sh-t crazy left wing nut jobs!!!

Nice way to end the week!!

"Another setback for the bat sh-t crazy left wing nut jobs!!!"

I've never heard uninsured American Citizens called that before.

The bastids.

I'm not going to defend a mandate to buy insurance from the private sector, which leads me to ask why conservatives support Paul Ryan's plan for seniors to buy insurance from the private sector. When you take away any other option, effectively you mandate it, especially when you throw in the voucher concept. By the same logic of being against the individual mandate in the Affordable Care Act, it would make more sense to me if conservatives supported an end to Medicare with no vouchers.

Hell, the same goes for everything they spew, like abortion is murder except in the case of rape/incest. Those against abortion under any circumstances are more intellectually honest. But when such logic is applied, we see how crazy radical they are. I don't know if it's cognitive dissonance or an evil plot to destroy our nation in phases.

Bachmann, who kept referring to the health insurance reform as unconstitutional (and her fight against everything and failure against everything), was completely accurate about Pawlenty's record. This shows Bachmann has the mental capacity to see truth, so when she embraces lies, what does that say? I digress, but anyone who wants stimulus funds to create jobs, especially from the EPA that she has vowed to dismantle, may not be batsh!t crazy but just outright fraudulent. People say she believes the crap she spews, but this jury is out on that one.

Carry on...

Actually this is just another example of the political cowardice of the Democrats of 2009 - 2011.

They did not change the Tax Rates after campaigning on it.

They did not raise the debt ceiling because they were afraid of the political consequences.

They did not fund Obamacare with a tax (even now if you don't get insurance they want to call it a fine, unless they're in front of judge, then it's an excise tax).

Political cowards everyone them.

Not to mention the 'mandate' was a Teapublican idea, well, at least until the President signed on... lol

Don't forget Alan - they are deathly afraid of numbers, which is why they just cannot, despite all the issues surrounding it, come up with a budget.

Nancy couldn't do one. Reid can't, and that thing Obama trotted out was too stupid to even be legitimately considered.

Oh and speaking of numbers [and tipping points] you all get a load of the Quinipeac (?) poll about New York? Obama favorable 45; unfavorable 49.

He's now upside down in one of the bluest of the blue states.

That is damn right Carter-esqe

Good point, True Patriot. Ryan's plan is a mandate.

This Appeals Court said the Republican idea of a mandate is unconstitutional. Can't say that bothers me much. I always felt President Obama was right during the campaign not to support a mandate but also understood the reasons why it made sense. It annoyed me that republicans insisted on the mandate an then still didn't vote for it even though they contributed a lot of ideas to the plan. What all these republicans filing the suits don't realize is the "mandate" was what the insurance companies wanted--all those new customers forced to buy their insurance. It would also make it less expensive for the rest of us because we wouldn't be paying higher fees to cover the required medical care of those who don't have insurance and go to the ER.

What all these republicans filing the suits don't realize is the "mandate" was what the insurance companies wanted--all those new customers forced to buy their insurance. It would also make it less expensive for the rest of us because we wouldn't be paying higher fees to cover the required medical care of those who don't have insurance and go to the ER.

So it's the Democrats who are in the pocket of the evil Insurance Companies?

Why don't we just do away with the law that says ER's have to treat anybody? How about they only can treat you if it's a medical emergency.

What is really ironic is that all the people who are now defending the mandate were all over Hillary when she proposed garnishing wages. Explain to me as if I was a five year old the difference between the government garnishing my wages, and the IRS imposing an excise fine...and then garnishing my wages.

Using your lefty liberal logic (logic-LMAO!!!!), a law reinstituting slavery would not be unconstitutional until, and unless, the SC said so.

Sorry, Joe...it's not the same thing and you know it. Nobody disputes now that slavery is unconstitutional because it's clearly written in the Constitution that there will be no slavery in this country.

Health Care Reform represents uncharted territory. If you look at the Constitution there is nothing that states in black and white that a law can not be passed if it includes an individual mandate. If the Constitution clearly stated something to the effect of, "Congress shall pass no law that imposes an individual mandate," then any President attempting to pass such a law would be a great fool.

In the absence of something being clearly stated in a matter like this, there becomes something called "Case Law". A pretty good example of "Case Law" is Roe v Wade. Suits regarding Health Care Reform will eventually end up before the Supreme Court and the Supreme Court will determine if the individual mandate is constitutional or not. Whatever they decide will become a precedent for future attempts at individual mandates.

If the Supreme Court determines that HCR is unconstitutional then you would be right to question anyone who pushes for them in the future with the knowledge that they are unconstitutional.

Until that decision is made, don't treat this like something the President should have known would fail.

Judge Joe:

Using your lefty liberal logic (logic-LMAO!!!!), a law reinstituting slavery would not be unconstitutional until, and unless, the SC said so.

How funny. Even I agree with Joe, for a change. For example, the President believes DOMA to be unconstitutional, even though the Supreme Court has never held such.

The fact that DOMA is unconstitutional is the very reason why the Attorney General is not defending it in court, although I did hear recently about how the AG is "enforcing" it -- in a way that sickened my stomach.

If the AG defends DOMA in court and wins, that decision can be challenged by whatever state is in question. In that case, it will ultimately reach the US Supreme Court for a ruling on its constitutionality. The President holds his nose and enforces it in individual cases -- much to my chagrin -- but doesn't want DOMA to go up to the SC to be rubber-stamped. There would be no hope of repealing it then.

By the way, anyone paying attention could see this individual mandate deal coming. The President was hoodwinked by the insurance companies, who insisted on the individual mandate because it was the only way the rest of the plan works. But they also made sure the severability clause was not in the final bill, so that if the mandate was struck down, the whole bill goes down, theoretically including even those parts already implemented.

Ultimately, it's my guess that this was the insurance companies' plan all along. To drive the bus right up to the last minute in order to get bill they could live with if it held up -- which obviously is not the same as what the rest of us might have liked -- and then jump off the bus at the last minute and let it crash.

Mark my words. The insurance companies, which were at the table with the President, will write amicus briefs against the bill for the Court. They win, either way.

TP - Seems that a voucher is nothing more than a means to buy health insurance coverage of their choosing. But as a sidebar, would the ryan proposal allow seniors can cash out the voucher and use it for something else?

Alan, you cannot be serious? what do you mean by an medical? And before you answer, are you a nurse or a doctor?

american,

No.

It is paid directly to the Insurance companies after the
insurance company proves to DC that an eligible person has purchased a
qualified health insurance plan.

Even I agree with Joe, for a change.

________________________________________

You're gonna get yourself kicked out of the libsrus clubhouse with statements like that.

You're 7th grade Social Studies teacher called and wants to change your grade based on this statement.

He did not support an "unconstitutional law" as no law is unconstitutional until the SCOTUS declares it as such.

...yes, I recall reading that somewhere.

Hey moonbat if the SCOTUS rules it unconstitutional then it was unconstitutional when richard cranium signed it.

If the Constitution clearly stated something to the effect of, "Congress shall pass no law that imposes an individual mandate," then any President attempting to pass such a law would be a great fool.

____________________________________

And yet you lefty liberals will argue very clear language in the Constitution: "Congress shall make no law... abridging the freedom of speech", doesn't apply in the Citizens United case striking down a law that abridged the freedom of speech?? After all The Constitution DOESN'T say "Congress shall make no law... abridging the freedom of speech, except for corporations and anyone else the lefty liberal Dems want to muzzle for their own political gain"

Sounds like the lefty liberals read the Constitution based on their pre-determined conclusions of what it should say, not what it actually does say. I'm looking forward to reading CJ John Robert's decision on ClunkerCare.

Hey moonbat if the SCOTUS rules it unconstitutional then it was unconstitutional when richard cranium signed it.

Read my explanation above...#1.15...and, really, "richard cranium"? That was original!

*squeak, squeak*

Let's face it, all GOP/TP candidates are running on the Paul Ryan Plan to end Medicare in order to give more tax breaks to the rich. But of course they are. They are running on "cuts" in taxes, "cuts" in spending, and NO revenue = Paul Ryan's plan to end spending on Medicare in order to give more tax breaks to the rich.

The only thing I found interesting about the GOP (Grand Obstructionist Party) primaries so far was how every candidate raised their hand that they would not support a 10 to 1 cut in spending per revenue. First off, it shows how stupid they are to answer a hypothetical. Without actual figures, how would you know what you're answering? Here's a fun exercise for those who love numbers, which is more draconian -- the "balanced budget amendment" with only 16-18% of GDP in spending versus Boehner's revenues of $800 billion x 10 = spending cuts?

Here's the campaign ad I would run -- A video of candidates raising their hands against a 10 to 1 compromise, then a photo of Paul Ryan and message: "Republicans would rather end Medicare than raise revenue 10 to 1."

Depending on approval ratings, the president may need to provide more specifics for recovery, but he is the incumbent. Just bashing the president is not a platform. If you want to remove one solution, you must present an alternative solution. The onus is on the opponent to provide specifics other than just "cutting" taxes or spending. What is their plan to create jobs, and stimulate the economy? Because "cutting" won’t do either of those things. When are conservatives going to get this through their heads?

Get off Roe v Wade no one cares about anymore, even the Affordable Health Care Act mandate hypocrisy already. Move on.

Bev, could you describe what "homicaal t-baggers" look like so I'll know one when I see one??

Joe in Albany

Bev, could you describe what "homicaal t-baggers" look like so I'll know one when I see one??

Yes, I can. After I spell it correctly you can familiarize your self with one by looking in the mirror. O-kay?

homicidal t-baggers

Who has any faith in the right wing of the Supreme Court since "Citizens' United" opened the floodgates to multinational and foreign entities, so they could buy up our US elections? And yes, there's evidence that Thomas got paid by Koch and we know his wife heads up an anti-ARA lobby.

Money buys everything, and never mind the 98% approach: WAR on HEALTHCARE, GOP WAR on the PRESIDENT is all about tanking the economy and blocking solutions for job creation and growth in our economy. Their goal is to end government, privatize-your-world and grow the rich.

GOPzerovision means no creative ideas, so demolition work is their specialty.

Even little old Justin Bieber said he wouldn't live in the US: "Because you don't have a responsible heath care system".

I can hardly wait to see how many of the cons on this board line up for Obama Care when they get sick.

It's a sure bet the repubs they worship will block their getting care.

homicidal t-baggers

___________________________________

Better watch out Bev. They are on to you and they have been stalking you in secret Dick Cheney stealth mode which makes them invisible to lefty liberals.

BOO!!!

extinct - I am still waiting for obama to tell us what "affordable" is in dollars and cents and then what the. copays and deductables are.

The loss of the individual mandate will be a big game changer as it will affect the size of the pool that the insurers will use to determine premiums.

Not to worry though extinct, obama has taken medicaid off of any bargaining table.

GOPisextinct said

I can hardly wait to see how many of the cons on this board line up for Obama Care when they get sick.

Don't need it, never will need it, you see I do this weird thing... I work and pay for my insurance. I know it's a strange concept but there it is. Now if you wanted to fix the problem of the 30 million uninsured people you could have just put them on medicaid and been done with it. Instead you try some good ole fashion social engineering that anyone of these bat sh-t crazy left wing nut jobs will tell you is soooo great and fully endorses as long as the government is running the show. We all know how that ends up cost overruns, fraud, etc. Oh and let's not forget the most important part of social engineering is it makes folks dependent on government. Welfare is a great example of waste, abuse and dependence. Look just what happened with the housing market and how social engineering collapsed a whole industry and da-n near the whole country. I could go on and on but I have to get back to work now as millions on welfare are depending on me for their next check!!

"We have to pass it to find out what's in it"!!

Now that's brilliant just brilliant!!

Joe:

Bev, could you describe what "homicaal t-baggers" look like so I'll know one when I see one??

Doesn't the mirror do the job well enough?

You didn't expect me to agree with you all afternoon, did you?

"Don't need it, never will need it, you see I do this weird thing... I work and pay for my insurance. I know it's a strange concept but there it is"

And good for you. I mean it. But- what about some poor breadwinner that had his job downsized out of existence by some money-hungry merger-mania adherents? Not some bum that WON'T work, but that is out of work through no fault of his own? Not sure where you work, but is there any chance at all it could happen to you? If not- again, good for you.

Ditto, dbo -- not only that but conservatives always think they're the only ones who pay for anything and the rest of us are feeding off of them. Au contraire. I work to pay for my insurance, too, and so does just about every liberal that I know, most of whom are well-educated professionals, working in both the private and public sectors.

Yes, that's right. Liberals DO work in the private sector.

I really hate that kind of ignorance. The kind that Rush Limbaugh sells.

Maxx Power,

There is a certain class of people that no matter how hard you try, no matter how much government money they soak up, no matter how many programs you put them on, and no matter how much welfare they get these people will never get off entitlement programs and get off their butts and get a real job, in the real world, doing real work.

We call these people republicans.

Almost as much as you hate charitable giving, AM?

Looks like most people are on the side of the courts

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/obama_and_democrats_health_care_plan-1130.html

Obama should let the Senate vote to repeal this disaster- democrats cannot afford to be on the losing end of this.

Either way it goes in the courts, they lose. If the courts strike it down, it makes Obama- he of the former Constitutional law instructors job- look like a moron.

If the courts uphold a law as loathed as this one, democrats lose even bigger, because folks want this repealed.

Eat your peas, Obama.

You didn't expect me to agree with you all afternoon, did you?

___________________________________________

No. But calling me a "homicaal t-bagger" is a very low blow. I would expect it from a superior intellect like Bev, but not you. Of course, you did make a conscious decision to take on a second career as a lawyer, so I guess maybe I shouldn't be surprised.

The rest of the program will remain in place. AND- because the mandate part is gone, the program will now cost even more.

________________________________________________

Actually, ClunkerCare will collapse under its own weight. If there is no penalty for not buying insurance and no denying coverage to new applicants, you would be a fool to buy insurance before you get sick. The healthcare providers will get staffed up to sign you up for ClunkerCare as you are being put in the ambulance or walking into the ER. If the mandate is thrown out, or the penalties for not getting coverage aren't severe enough, ClunkerCare isn't viable.

Actually, ClunkerCare will collapse under its own weight.

...and then we can go back to skyrocketing healthcare costs with no end in sight and no alternative solutions from the GOP. What's the alternative? What does the GOP plan to do besides talk themselves blue in the face about how Health Care Reform is evil and bad and they're going to repeal it?

What then?

Sorry...double post...my bad.

First the failure of the drafters to include an integration clause [silly libbies] will be an issue reviewed by the Supremes. My personal view, based upon basic contract law is that the failure will cause the entire law to fail.

As I recall Anna Molly and I discussed this at length several months ago and agreed on that point. Am?

As to the broader implications of the law remaining viable without the mandate - it seems to me that it would fail. Absent the mandate and money it generated the cost would be overwhelming.

The curious part for me, and I think Bev. and I agreed on thise, is why it doesn't just get fast tracked to the Supremes right now. Why wait?

Look- here's the deal on healthcare reform, clunker care, whatever you want to call it:

The republicans had 8 years to institute the best plans in the world to cover our uninsureds. Remember all the great plans they put out there? WHAT! You DON'T ?

Oh, yeah.....never mind. Easier to bitch about someone else's idea than to beat them to a better one.

Spanky-

The curious part for me, and I think Bev. and I agreed on thise, is why it doesn't just get fast tracked

to the Supremes right now. Why wait?

Spanky it's all apart of the Master plan to delay, stale, diamante false info, and get back the WH.

But most of all, it is to keeep exurberant prics in placee for th CEOs

Gosh, these Banana Republicans-Tea Bagger Clowns, that don't want health care are something else. Oh well, stupid is as stupid does.

Spanky

Sick for Profit

http://sickforprofit.com/ceos/

Subsidiary Of WellPoint Sues Maine To Raise Insurance Premiums 18.5%

http://bravenewfilms.org/blog/?p=71981

Anthem Blue Cross: Screwing Californians for Profits

http://bravenewfilms.org/blog/?p=72458

Cancer, Hart Attack, Cigna says walk it off

http://bravenewfilms.org/blog/?p=71943

What's the alternative?

____________________________________

Unfortunately, there is no good alternative. And we can thank the Dems and the unions for that. Prior to WW II virtually no one had health insurance. People paid cash or traded for medical care or got charity care. When FDR instituted wage and price controls during WW II, the then, large and powerful unions went whole hog for lucrative benefits like pensions and health benefits instead of wage increases. THAT is why the US has an employer based health insurance coverage system. Since the unions had such lucrative health insurance bennies with no payroll deduction and goodies such as first dollar coverage, there was no way they were going to give that up for a national health care system like Europe. We are now reaping what they had sown.

The curious part for me, and I think Bev. and I agreed on thise, is why it doesn't just get fast tracked to the Supremes right now. Why wait?

The Supreme Court is, for all intents and purposes, on break right now. They are currently determining which cases they will consider for the 2011-2012 session which opens on the first Monday in October.

They can hear cases on an emergency basis but I doubt that they would consider this an emergency.

Now..... da noid.... lets go back in the WAY BACK machine.... all the way back to LAST YEAR (I know.... liberals dont like to look back that soon as you havent had a chance to rewrite the history books yet...)

Now if memory serves me right.... ObamaCare was passed on a budget reconciliation vote.... now Im pretty sure that means that it CANT increase the national debt.

If the individual mandate (which the government CAN NOT mandate me to do anything.....) was the part that was going to pay for the bill and now its out.... that means it has to go back to the Congress and CANNOT be a lawful law as it does not meet the requirements of how it was passed....

Man doesnt it suck when you guys shove a bill that no one wants down the throats of the American people and pass it before you know whats in it?????

Well, looks like Joe's got nuthin'. Anyone else want to try and answer?

(which the government CAN NOT mandate me to do anything.....)

Did you register for Selective Service when you turned 18?

Thats different than FORCING me to purchase something that I may not want to purchase.

If I didnt register for selective service I would be ineligible for federal benefits and assistance.

If I dont want to buy health insurance thats a problem for my family and I isnt it?

Larry, Larry, Larry...

...your statement was that the Government can not mandate you to do anything...and that appears that really isn't the case, now, is it?

". People paid cash or traded for medical care..."

Think 'barter-for-chickens here'....

(why does that sound familliar from somewhere?)

Do you EVER want what's best for the country, instead of what's best for JUST YOU?"

TWENTYSIX STATES is just "JUST YOU" ...... Aren't these states along with the other states that oppose it on their own more than half the country (you realize that there aren't 57 states, right)?

You realize how partisan and soiled the whole process was ....... that not one repub voted for it, that there was bi-partisan support against it?

Do you not realize that except for the freak, COUPLE MONTH brief window of supermajority for Obama - there is NO TIME IN HISTORY THIS COULD / WOULD HAVE BEEN PASSED - Including today when repubs only control 1/3 of government.

You realize there was no "compromise" as Obama so sternly lectures everyday now that he doesn't have the super majority, that Obama basically said "eat it."

Don't pay attention to polls either, huh?

And really "best for the country"?

We are broke, we have just been downgraded .......... all because of spending and entitlements ..... everyone talks everyday about the need to cut entitlements - so Obama adds the biggest, most expensive one of all.

Job creation fell to 1/10th of what it was before Obamacare was passsed - under Obama's term!

We have 9% unemployment and the CBO says it will cost 800,000 jobs!

All of this for legislation that no one can say is even legal, LEGISLATION THAT WILL TAKE THE SUPREME COURT TO DECIDE IF IT IS EVEN CONSTITUTIONAL!

And you question the want for "what's best for the country"?

The Supreme Court is, for all intents and purposes, on break right now. They are currently determining which cases they will consider for the 2011-2012 session which opens on the first Monday in October.

They can hear cases on an emergency basis but I doubt that they would consider this an emergency.

_____________________________________________

Are you saying the SC couldn't add a case to their 2011-12 docket after the first
Monday in October unless it was an "emergency"?? And I thought it only took four of the nine justices votes to accept a case whenever they wnted to do so. From the SC website:

The Supreme Court has its own set of rules. According to these rules, four of the nine Justices must vote to accept a case.

The Supreme Court has its own set of rules.

Yes Joey - we are WELL aware of that...

Thanks for the reminder...

So Da Noid.... I supposed all this interference you are running means that you have absolutely NO reply to my statement that as it stands right now the "healthcare law" is illegal due to it being passed under budget reconciliation?

Thats what I figured.

But Ill play your little game.... I didnt HAVE to register with SS..... not doing so just meant that I would not qualify for any federal assistance.

Good try though

Larry, the only reason anyone thought HCR was shoved down their throats was because republicans told them to think that; right-wing media repeated it. It was nothing but electioneering propaganda. Tell those who need something that it was bad for them. Individual rights had zero to do with it. Prior to HCR being passed, republican legislators supported the idea; they even wrote plans and agreed it was a priority to get health care for everyone.

Jody the ONLY system that is going to work in this country is making people PERSONALLY responsible for their health care.

The only way that will work is to allow for intrastate sale of insurance (which fosters competition.... ergo lower prices) and making it so doctors cant be sued out of practice if they make a mistake....

Government involvement (the same people who run the Post Office and AMTRAK mind you) is the LAST thing we need in health care.

Joe in Albany, Your brief history of heath insurance is missing one important factor. Business also supported the plan to provide hath insurance. It was the beginning adding compensation to attract workers and keep workers.

for a great explanation of the whole history if health insurance offered by employers read:

chapter three in" The Tyranny of Dead "Ideas by Matt Miller

" all because of spending and entitlements..."

Y' sure about that, Numerals? Nothing about revenue?? Nothing about inability of politicians to work together for the common good?

But I digress- tell me all about the Republican plans for health-care reform that were best for the country back between 2001 and 2009. Remember all those great plans? Neither do I.

Jody the ONLY system that is going to work in this country is making people PERSONALLY responsible for their health care.

Oh, that'll work real well in a country where Sarah Palin, for example, makes fun of Michelle Obama for suggesting that people need to put down the Twinkies!

Are you saying the SC couldn't add a case to their 2011-12 docket after the first
Monday in October unless it was an "emergency"?? And I thought it only took four of the nine justices votes to accept a case whenever they wnted to do so. From the SC website:

The Supreme Court has its own set of rules. According to these rules, four of the nine Justices must vote to accept a case.

However they do it, bottom line is they are not actively hearing cases at the present time...the answer goes back to the question of why wait instead of "fast-tracking" HCR to the Supreme Court and I believe my explanation suffices.

noid - one part of what many call obamacare, dealt with the health care reform act which basically said what the insurers could and could not do, the rest of it "affordable care act", etc. does not address healthcare provider cost either.

Healthcare provider costs is what will most likely drive any plan into the ground as it will to medicare. Wage and price controls didn't work to well in the 70's should we really expect them to work in containing healthcare provider costs?

noid - one part of what many call obamacare, dealt with the health care reform act which basically said what the insurers could and could not do, the rest of it "affordable care act", etc. does not address healthcare provider cost either.

Healthcare provider costs is what will most likely drive any plan into the ground as it will to medicare. Wage and price controls didn't work to well in the 70's should we really expect them to work in containing healthcare provider costs?

...and so I go back to something I asked a way back when...what is the alternative to HCR if it goes away? I don't see any answers.

drive-by-numbnuts,

" all because of spending and entitlements..."

You really don't read anything do you ...... just get your information from the thrill leg Matthews kids?

Obama is spending 25% of GDP? Anyone ever spend that much?

The highest revenue in history is 19% of GDP.

Bush's revenue for 2007 was 18.5% of GDP.

Obama's revenue with the exact same tax rate as Bush is 15%. Obama has ownership of the worst recovery in history. Obama is so clueless, he is officially the first and only AA president in history.

You speak of revenue (tax increases) and working together. Even Harry Reid dropped the insanity of increasing taxes now, he doesn't have the dem votes.

They did work together - only the economic idiot Obama and the thrill leg fools are calling for them .....well them and numbnuts at FR.

Larry, Minot N.D

Thats different than FORCING me to purchase something that I may not want to purchase.

Larry and the rest of the cons: Your participation in ObamaCare, or any other health insurance is optional. However, your getting sick is NOT optional. One day you will need health care. I had an incident that hospitalized me for the first time in my life in late June of this year. Out of the blue. No warning. I swim laps for an hour a day, eat right, and I'm in pretty good shape too, but I got sick anyway.

You may have insurance now Larry, and you may regard it as a badge of pride to pay more for it, but I have this novel concept myself: If you can get it for cheaper, do it. Makes sense. Frugality is supposed to be a republican concept / virtue.

The point is that you are paying for other people's heath insurance now, and don't know it. The cost of paying for uninsured people gets tacked onto the end of your premiums Larry. That's why cost are going up so much all the time. And when the republicans running the health insurance company refuse your coverage you will stagger,....like the rest of the uninsured republicans,....right into my ER room for your free socialized coverage. And guess who is going to get billed for your free coverage Larry?

People who want to opt out of Obama Care are free loaders. You are parasites preying upon the rest of us who actually want to contribute to society.

Larry, because you asked:

http://www.unitedliberty.org/articles/5339-breaking-house-democrats-pass-obamacare

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=h111-4872

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patient_Protection_and_Affordable_Care_Act

The Senate bill was voted on by the Senate on 12-24-09 and passed (60-39). The House PASSED that Senate bill by a count of 219-212 on March 21, 2010. There was a reconciliation bill; but it was a separate piece of legislation:

http://www.opencongress.org/house_reconciliation

Good luck unraveling the first bill,...

Noid - it appears that no plan (or at best a vary limited one) would have been better. Many thousands of pages of passed legislation will amount to tens of thousands of pages of regs that really won't address health care costs which ultimately determines the insurers costs and our own out of pocket costs.

In the McLaughlins group year end summary and projections show in Dec 2010, McLaughlin made note of what rahm emmanuals recommendation was to obama on healthcare legislation. Basically break it down into smaller segments with passage as a long term event, rather than going for the whole thing at once. IE use the KISS principle, but that is hindsight talking now while rahm showed good foresight.

Amy,

as a member of the Party of Government, the notion of limited government escapes you totally.

The federal government has certain enumerated powers under our Constitution, and no other powers.

The federal government can't make you 'eat your peas' ..or purchase insurance.

Whether you think it is irresponsible to pass on eating peas, or purchasing insurance.

oh, and I will be in Maine next week(for real) ...so please ask the Government to mandate good weather...

"...And why would the Republican Party make it easier for people to be irresponsible? It's a puzzlement."

I don't know, Amy, but they sure went for it in 2010, now, didn't they? You ever seen such a mess? All because they didn't want the 'new guy' to have even half his term to beging to clean up the mess we found ourselves in after 8 years of their nonsense.

The WSJ recently had a chart based on data from OMB that showed a family of four at 400% of the poverty level (about $98,000) would have to cough up a little over $8,000 a year after the subsidy to get ClunkerCare coverage. Tell me they will consider that "affordable"??

And yeah, I do get it that your solution will be to make it closer to "free" for them, paid for by the productive members of society.

"Whether you think it is irresponsible to pass on eating peas, or purchasing insurance."

...Or hiding under your bed to see who you sleep with. Or controling your reproductive decisions. Or telling you where your congregaton can build it's mosque. Or.....Oh, you get the idea Bob Numerals was trying to point out, right?

Yeah Drive by, we're all still waiting for the swamp to be drained, and of course hope and change. The blind leading the blind.

Amy B. Portland, ME

Who in their right minds would choose not to get health insurance, if it's affordable? And why would the Republican Party make it easier for people to be irresponsible? It's a puzzlement.

Because, as Alan Grayson said their solution is you die.

That is t-bagger euthanasia.

Well, Bob - you are not totally correct, in Tennessee and probably most other states, you must purchase automobile insurance - it is the law. I guess neocons think more of their automobiles than they do of other people's health. Amy is correct, unless you are a zillionnaire you would be crazy not to purchase affordable health insurance and I know a lot of people who really, really want and need it but can not afford it or are denied due to pre-existing conditions. Who in their right mind respects judges anyway? most are all drug addicted or alcoholics living off the tax payer dime - they are no better than members of congress, unfortunately most are so self protected it is difficult to get one off the bench once placed there, and some appointments are lifetime appointments. Now, that's too much government even for me!

It's irresponsible to drink too much alcohol- remember what happened when the government banned alcohol?

This law was an overreach, and unwanted by the majority. It has gotten LESS popular since its passage- majorities in every poll want it repealed.

As to why people would not carry health insurance- well, many young, healthy people reason that they do not NEED it; that the odds of their getting seriously ill are slim to none. Could one of them get appendicitis and need surgery? Sure- but it is an oddity these days.

Please spare me the "hit by a bus" talking point, which is stupid on its face- if someone got hit by a bus, car, or taxicab, the motor vehicle insurance would have to pay.

If you fell down the stairs at your home, you homeowners would cover it, and if it were someone else's home, THEIR homeowners would cover it. If it were a commercial building, THEIR insurance would be the one to pay.

So, this is about forcing young, healthy adults to purchase insurance on the off chance they got a serious illness most of them will never get. It's about power, and a new entitlement program that Democrats think will solidify their chances of holding congress and the White House.

Whether or not the SCOTUS finds it unconstitutional, it will be repealed by the next congress, and signed by a newly inaugurated republican president.

Obama is about to go on permanent vacation- on his own dime.

Obama shelved in 2012.

If you fell down the stairs at your home, you homeowners would cover it,

Provided you still own a home...

By the time Citizen's United is finished with us - we'll all be living in tents...

Bob,

I hope you enjoy your vacation in our fair state.

Libertarians have the most childish attitude towards government I know. They expect hospitals to treat them when they are sick, but refuse to plan for that inevitabliity by making arrangements to be able to pay those bills. All in the name of "freedom." Shirking your responsibility is more like it.

What the hell is NJ talking about? Homeowners insurance??

Yo, Feisty- would those be multi-family tents, or would we be able to have our own individdle pup-tents?

I bet guys like Spankie would still find a way to finagle one of those big canvas 4-person tents. With the deluxe dining-fly. He been buying gold, you know....

The Libs know that the Evil Faceless Corporate Terrorists will be paying their fair share to pay for ObamaCare. Why else would they be hoarding all those trillions of dollars and not hiring people, other than to make Obama look bad?

And who's hiding under your bed to see who you're sleeping with DBO? Probably the farmer that wants his pig back.

Joe in Albany

I have a friend who makes that much, has a wife and two sons, and pays $2000.00 a month for high deductible health insurance.

If you are an adult that doesn't want health insurance, then you must not have any common sense. In an event of sickness, who would pay for your hospital bill of $100,000 or more if you don't have insurance?

The argument against the health care mandate just doesn’t hold water.

Because most of us dont wnat this country to become even more of a nanny state than it already is?

But then again Amy you and your type think you know whats best for everyone and that the American people are too stupid to do anything on their own....hence the reason you want Big Brother to do everything for you.....

"And who's hiding under your bed to see who you're sleeping with DBO? Probably the farmer that wants his pig back"

Hey, Smiff- I like it. (why did you leave the 's' off pig, though?)

Probably the farmer that wants his pig back"

Did she run off the farm again Buzz?

"hence the reason you want Big Brother to do everything for you....."

Yeah, AMy- what Larry said. You know- like helping you with your reproductive decisions.

Hey, Smiff- I like it. (why did you leave the 's' off pig, though?)

Didn't know Feisty was a participant.

I have a friend who makes that much, has a wife and two sons, and pays $2000.00 a month for high deductible health insurance.

_________________________________________

Anyone paying $2000 a month for high deductible health insurance is a moron.

OK DBO.... we can play that game too....

Last time I checked a person is alive from the moment of conception and the unborn child is to be protected just the same as the mother.

Now if you go out and have a one night stand and get pregnant that was YOUR CHOICE. Why is it that YOU get to decide whether or not the unborn child lives or dies? Who made you God?

Last time I checked the ONLY One that gets to decide who lives or dies is God Himself.....

I've read lame arguments but jeez, a homeowner's policy? I don't know of any homeowner's policy that covers cancer or chronic illness, a bad case of the flu or bronchitis.

A woman's reproductive decisions are no ones business other than that woman and her Doctor. It's not the government and not yours. So, butt out and stop preaching.

Because most of us dont wnat this country to become even more of a nanny state than it already is?

So tell us Larry - living up there is socialist-land Minot ND - just how much federal assistance did you receive due to the recent historic flooding?

Did you return your check?

Larry, you didn't get any federal help from FEMA for the flooding in your state. Why is that?

The U.S. government is not going to cover the losses suffered by individuals in severe flooding across North Dakota that has been going on since mid-February, says Governor Jack Dalrymple.

The governor received word June 16 from Craig Fugate, administrator of the Federal Emergency Management Agency, that the state's application for FEMA's Individual Assistance program has been denied.

Fugate's letter stated, "...the damage to the residences from this event was not of such severity and magnitude as to warrant the implementation of Individual Assistance..."

Source: http://www.ens-newswire.com/ens/jun2011/2011-06-22-091.html

Hey, Smiff- I like it. (why did you leave the 's' off pig, though?)

"Didn't know Feisty was a participant."

Wasn't talking about Feisty. Was asking why you thought I only had one pig in that 'poke'- y' think I only have a thing for YOU? Sorry, sweetie- not so monogamous when it comes to smelly barnyard animals.

Amy,

Republican Party make it easier for people to be irresponsible? It's a puzzlement.

What puzzles me is how can any party make you irresponsible?

Either you are or you're not, but its your choice, keyword is choice.

Larry- put a sock in it. Your morality is yours. More power to you for sticking up for what you belive. However, YOUR belief does not make for the next person's REALITY.

Now, exchange 'Larry' above for "OUR government', and we'll be good to go.]

Sorry.

Wasn't talking about Feisty. Was asking why you thought I only had one pig in that 'poke'

And that's where Feisty comes in. Does she participate, or just hold the camcorder?

Larry, you didn't get any federal help from FEMA for the flooding in your state. Why is that?

You really are off your feed these days honey...

“FEMA’s Individual Assistance program includes a wide range of aid, including emergency home repair, temporary disaster housing, replacement grants for serious-related needs and expenses not covered by insurance or assistance programs,” said a FEMA notice issued on June 24. More specifically, here are the kinds of assistance that are now available:

Temporary housing -- Rental payments up to three months for homeowners and at least one month for renters;

Grants for home repairs – Replacement of essential household items that are not covered by insurance;

Unemployment payments – Up to 26 weeks for those who have temporarily lost their jobs;

Loans to cover residential losses -- Low-interest loans up to $200,000 for primary residences and $40,000 for personal property;

Small business loans – Loans from the U.S. Small Business Administration (SBA) to small businesses, small agricultural cooperatives and many non-profit organizations, which cannot exceed $2 million;

Loans up to $500,000 -- For farmers, ranchers and aquaculture operators to cover their production and property losses.

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=3&ved=0CCMQFjAC&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.gsnmagazine.com%2Fnode%2F23692&ei=v5JFTuviOJTksQKkt52SCA&usg=AFQjCNHn5mtl2jai87Pgc7PiQPyqfGcPRA

Hey Larry buddy, where did you go?

Did you return that eevwil gubment assistance?

It was pretty obvious that I was talking about accidents, Jody. In fact, I specifically said "fall down the stairs".

And my point was that it is healthy young people who are the majority of those choosing not to buy health insurance.

Maybe knock off reading Obama's Greatest Speeches, or whatever your paperback bible is called. It's having a serious, deleterious impact on your reading comprehension.

"I don't know of any homeowner's policy that covers cancer or chronic illness, a bad case of the flu or bronchitis."

I had an auto policy once that covered a fire in my toaster. Or was it my black-jack 'insurance'? Can't remember- sorry.

"And that's where Feisty comes in. Does she participate, or just hold the camcorder?"

Don't say you don't remember (sorry, Beverly Bremers)- she brings the popcorn. Big old plump kernels for you, old maids for this guy!

All of you tea party, libertarian and Republican who posted above: Your posts are the very reason I am a liberal Democrat!!

Your reasons about individual right to say no to insurance, nanny state reasons etc. are pitiful. You are all in denial.

NJNB, if young adults don't need insurance because they are healthy then according to you children surely don't either. They don't do stupid things like drive while drinking. Your choice is to let the lawyers fight for the car insurance to cover a 19 year old who had major surgery to set their broken bones, months of physical therapy to be able to walk again. You must support the personal injury lawyers.

Joe in albany," Freedom to choose, I pay for it myself." Well have you or any member of you family have Parkinson disease, dementia. You don't have enough money in all your accounts to pay for these chronic and ultimately fatal diseases.

I was not on these boards when the HCR bill was passed. If this was your beliefs that we do not need health insurance for all citizens, you are truly living in an different universe.

" In fact, I specifically said "fall down the stairs"."

Yo Jo- what about if someone throws you out a window?? Ya homeowner's covers that I bet.

DBO: Big old plump kernels

Is that your nickname for ol'Feisty? That is so sweet.

How does she hold the camcorder with her cloven hooves?

Why don't you ask her, instead of me? You been palin' around with Spanky too much or something??

Hey - where did Larry go?

Anyone seen him?

Yea Feisty I did recieve government assistance from FEMA..... Im using it to rebuild my house that was destroyed because the Corps of Engineers and the Canadian government cant manage a dam system and 6 feet of water sat in my house for almost a month.

Now am I like the people in New Orleans who got up to $150,000 in government assistance and are STILL living in the FEMA trailers they got over 5 years ago? No...... I used the $30,200 that FEMA awarded me and used it to start rebuilding my home. The rest of the money is coming in form of a SBA LOAN that I have to pay back.

Am I sitting here crying about what the government need to do for me? No, unlike the people in New Orleans who had 5 whole days to leave town but stayed because they felt that it was the government's responsibility to get them out, I had 1.5 days notice and my family and friends pitched in and helped me get out so I could then go help my neighbors move their belongings.

See the difference Feisty? Maybe if us up here were willing to cry and whine and beg the government for money like New Orleans did..... maybe we would get more...

Because you know an ignorant street trash person screaming "Wheres my government check" makes a much better sound bite for MSNBC than someone like me saying "All I need is a little bit of help, which I want to pay back over time, so that I can go help my neighbor rebuild his house...."

But you wouldnt know anything about that type of sentiment would you Feisty....

Amazing isnt it?????? 12,000 people forced to evacuate in 1.5 days and less than 300 forced to stay in shelters (thats what happened up here). Now we can look at the numbers for Katrina...but Im pretty sure we know the what the numbers look like.....

Heading out to Del Mar racetrack - office party, yeeehaww.

But I have one little comment of no consequence [I know right, consistent to a fault :)] - it actually looks like the libbie to conservative ratio is narrowing round here.

In fact it's kinda looking like about 3 or 4 libbies to every conservative. And this is in MSNBC- land. What's the deal? Used to be at least 15 - 1.

This cannot be a good sign for Obama.

Hey EVERYONE - have a great weekend.

Bev. I am damn glad to have you back.

Now I got to go lose some cash, drink some martinis, and have a super fun time.

See Feisty.... what you are trying to do doesnt work.....

I ACTUALLY work and pay taxes and dont depend on the government for my well being....

Something horrific (something that I would not even wish upon you....even though your very existence makes my skin crawl) that was COMPLETELY out of my control happened.

Im ASKING (important word there....notice I didnt say demanding) for some assistance so I can rebuild my home.

Im not demanding that every month I get a check for food and to pay my bills. Thats MY RESPONSIBILITY. Not anyone elses.

Yea Feisty I did recieve government assistance from FEMA.....

Then quit bitching about a nanny state!

You just helped yourself to the evil welfare trough...

I think you owe the tax payers of America at least a thank you!

I ACTUALLY work and pay taxes and dont depend on the government for my well being....

ROTFLMAO! YOU CASHED THE CHECK!

Where were your bootstraps?

One more thing, I have the utmost sympathy for those that had to go through that horrible disaster...

However, I have zero sympathy for someone who hates the 'nanny state' gubment, yet is the first in line asking for MY tax dollars!

Parasite!

"...the Corps of Engineers and the Canadian government cant manage a dam system.."

AND- the idiots make you buy/build in a flood-plain! Jerks!!

Spanky, Your observation is noted. Maybe they are on vacation or took Friday off. Only time will tell.

Thank you for a post that is not filled of one line phrases.

I know you are working on your people person skills.

Have a great weekend. I will be at an Irish Festival with lots of song, dancing and storytelling.

[But I have one little comment of no consequence...]

So what else is new, ambulance chaser?

[Now I got to go lose some cash, drink some martinis, and have a super fun time.]

Got a bunch of hookers lined up?

Spanky,

Have a good time! We take the train every year, lots of fun to be had. Palio is a must, good food, drinks, view and last but not least AC.

Mickey,

No hookers at Del Mar, just beautiful people :)

God bless the hookers! They are great Americans, they are quite liberal by nature, but act on the conservative idea of take whatever it is you have and just start your own business.

For a bit of levity - here's a joke I ran across....

On the wedding night after her fourth marriage...a man and woman are about to consummate.

"Be careful!" she says right as they begin, "I'm a virgin.".
...
"You're a virgin? how can that be - this is your 4th marriage?!"

"Well, my first husband was a psychologist - all he wanted to do was talk about it. My second husband was a gynecologist - all he wanted to do was look at it...

and my third husband was a stamp collector - all he wanted to do was...God, I miss him.."

Buzz- are you still with us?

Hooking- Turning an enterprising private into a private enterprise!

Feisty, What happen to the Week Ahead segment?

Good to see you , Forrest, and Mickey on this thread.

Think I will stop by the DDI and then go on TripAdvisor and check out the hotel reviews in Rome.Planning a trip. Liberal Democrats do get around.

Feisty, What happen to the Week Ahead segment?t

My guess Northstar - is they'e too busy wolfing fried butter and corn dogs at the moment! ;o))

Just a hunch... lol

Okay it is Friday so I will try one. I don't really have a hooker story but if I did this would be my story. A guy walks in the happy house, the Madam greets him and he says I would like a woman in curlers to lay next to me and put her knee in my back. The Madam says, sir you can pick any of these lovely young ladies in these sexy nighties. The man says I would like a woman in a giant worn out silly T-shirt to just hog the covers. The Madam says but you can pick any of these girls for your wildest sex fantasy. The man says I don't want a sex fantasy, I don't even want sex I just want a woman to lay there and drape her leg across mine so she can scrape me with her toenails. The Madam says I have seen all kinds but I don't understand you mister, and man says what you don't understand is that I am not here because I'm horny I'm here because I'm homesick.

Forrest, What would your wife's version of this joke be? :0)

I imagine life on the road ain't easy Forrest.

She would want to sleep next to a Diesel engine straining through the gears trying to make a steep grade to remind her of my snoring.

[No hookers at Del Mar, just beautiful people.]

Then whats Schpanky the Toad doing hanging out there...dumpster diving, I bet...

Say it isn't so...really, come'on? If you don't drive you don't have to purchase Auto Insurance.

I have never killed a patient..in 35 years but had to carry malpractice insurance !

If you don't drive you don't have to purchase Auto Insurance.

Aha!!!

...suddenly all becomes clear...the answer is to not get sick. If you don't get sick you won't need to purchase health insurance. Brilliant!!!

Actually, you can drive all you want to without car insurance- provided it's somebody else's car.

New York has the same car insurance law that most states have, but there are literally millions of New Yorkers without car insurance- because they don't own cars.

It's a lame analogy that never made sense.

Kind of like Obamacare,.come to think of it.

JFK-2112

"Say it isn't so...really, come'on? If you don't drive you don't have to purchase Auto Insurance."

Gotta agree with JFK on this one. I'd also carry it a step further, and say "if you don't have coverage, and are brough into the emergency room, you get wheeled back outside to the curb. Fair is fair, right?

Da Noid, no one is saying its not a good idea to have health insurance just that the government can't force you to buy it.

I am very confused by the rhetoric here. Now Republicans DON'T want to mandate insurance purchase (or tax penalties); but they STILL want to make sure every child is born? So, let me just think out loud for a second,...

Someone gets RAPED and ends up pregnant; but because they are poor and don't have insurance they SHOULD receive medical care? And does that include all prenatal? And, just to be clear,...WHO should pay for that? And then the child is born to this impoverished parent, still no healthcare, but the child has a reversed heart valve. So does the child get wheeled to the curb? Or does the hospital perform the surgery. And is any of this elective?

And if COST is the issue,...why on earth would a state like Texas for instance, REQUIRE an unnecessary medical procedure such as a sonogram? Is that Nanny behavior? or is that just good 'business'?

I sure hope some of the 'brain trust' repubs on this thread can clear up some of this nuance. Cuz' otherwise it sounds like MORE of the I Only Want the Government I Need and screw everyone else. Especially that FEMA feeder,...WTF? Can someone say Poster Child for Give Me Mine First? (PS. Good to see you out and about Larry, it's been awhile).

At least President Obama and democrats did something about the health care crisis in the country. It isn't perfect but no legislation ever is at first. The GOP just sticks their collective heads in the sand and hopes no one will notice, even better they hope it will just go away. Kind of like hiding a city's homeless people when dignataries come to town. They aren't seen so they must not exist.

Jody....

Besides making my premiums go up even more than they would have and allow good for nothing 20 somethings stay on mommy and daddys insurance until they are 27 what good has Obama Care done for this country?

Oh wait.... Make it easier for illegal aliens to get free health care? That must be it...

Not all Conservatives are stupid; however, most stupid people are Conservatives that live in their own bitter world of me first and the heck with everyone one else.

A single payer system has always been the only solution, everyone receives the health-care they need and everyone pays. I knew when they would not even allow that to be discussed at the beginning of the health care reform debate that we were doomed. We will never see anything come out of Congress that is not designed to enrich the already rich, that sadly is just the country we live in, "one nation under God with Liberty and Justice for the rich".

So w bush.... in your opinion...... if I only go to the doctor once a year for a check up but you go every two weeks for a disease, I should have to pay the same....wait.... you are a liberal of course you think I should have to pay for you....

Lets put it this way..... YOU only go to the doctor once a year for a check up but I go every two weeks because I have a disease...... should you have to pay the same amount to the same people who ran the Post Office into the ground as I should?

Shouldnt what you pay for health care be based on how much you use?

In MY America thats the way it used to be....a person paid for what THEY used.... now in Obama's (and the America you envision / pine for) no one has personal responsibility.....

Well said, Missy TX.

Agree, w bush.

Medicare for all would solve several problems. 1) get healthier people into the program which would absorb the greater expense for the elderly. 2) provide universal coverage at a lower price than each of us currently pays, even those of us with some employer paid share. 3) Remove the health care burden from private industry making it more competitive. 4) Remove people's health as a commodity traded on the stock market for profit.

Larry, You worry about paying for what some else need for their medical care? You said you have insurance. You are therefore part of a pool of people covered under the insurance policy.

Larry, some day you and I will have a medical event, it is only matter of time. I hope you get the best care for you and your family who probably be caring for you . I am very willing to pay that you and all of us receive the care we need to regain our health or hospice care for end days of life.

The majority of the people wanted the Public Option.

"(CBS) A clear majority of Americans -- 72 percent -- support a government-sponsored health care plan to compete with private insurers, a new CBS News/New York Times poll finds. Most also think the government would do a better job than private industry at keeping down costs and believe that the government should guarantee health care for all Americans."

Larry, Minot ND: Do you agree with and appreciate the fact that America has public schools?

They shot Hillarycare down like a wounded rabid skunk. End of story.

No, Doug doesn't ponder! If Doug was a thinking man (neither) Doug wouldn't be bragging about winning a fight nearly 20 years ago with such vicious stinking imagery. We wouldn't have to have the current HCR (with the Republican touted constitutionally problematic "mandate") if Hillary had been listened to then.

It was the beginning of this here story DUG, NOT the end. THE END was when Obama and level headed Democrats got HRC passed and it became the LAW OF THE LAND whether you freaks want to admit it or not.

Go ponder something closer to your thought processing capabilities there Bub.

End of your story!

Not 100% but I think it was Charles Grassley who put the mandate in.

"It's a historical fact. In pre WW II days bartering was a very common way of conducting business for all kinds of goods and services. In 2010 it does sound ridiculous, but, it is what happenned way back then."

It's a historical fact. I'm old enough to remember having an outside toilet. An outhouse.

Ah....the good old days, before civilization progressed to the awful place we are today.

DBO, You beat me to the punch. Pre WWII was the 30"s ,exactly.

You got sick in the 30's and earlier. Yo might if you are lucky have a doctor give you some medicine, set a broken bone and maybe some surgery. And what was the infant mortality rate, longevity rate, women dieing in childbirth from 1900 through 1939?

Joe ,you seem to be a historian, look it up and get back to me ?

The Obamacare "Hippocratic Oath" :

"I work for the Government, not for you"

"Take a number"

"Expect the level of human sympathy and compassion seen at the DMV"

I agree. Like get a doctor's prescription to by weed.

Or drive the damned speed limit.

So we are now paying for birth control, why? Is this for all women what about for men? Are we going to pay for condoms? Is it all forms of birth control because there are women out there that use abortion as a form of birth control.

Thetotas- you mean abotion is so pain free and comfortable nowdays that girls use it for their choice of contraception?

Who knew?

Just this week the piece has kicked in and birth control is now covered for women.

It's about time!

Insurance has covered little blue impotence pills for years...

thetotas, Your statement is appalling. Please, take your post and read it to your mother. i think she need to teach you about life.

[...because there are women out there that use abortion as a form of birth control.]

...sigh...here's your sign...

Northstar,

I agree it's appalling, and drive by, no need to be condescending. I am just stating the truth.

I don't believe these young girls look at it as a form of birth control, its just a method that they use to remove the unborn child. They are simply void of any feelings. One young lady had seven abortions before she was twenty one. With no guidance at home, and a very low self esteem she used her body to get attention and refused to take the pill. Her fear was the weight gain and that is one of the pills side effects.

thetotas, You are stating a fact as you know it based on your personal experience. The example you used points to larger problem than your opinion that birth control should not be covered under your insurance plan.

Again from your example, there are many forms of birth control that does not involve a pill. The pill is found to be simple, inexpensive and a high rate of protection.

The young woman you know and many youth engage in a variety of self destructive behavoir. I believe that when a family fails their children, others need to provide help: mental, educational, social and spiritual.There must be individuals, groups, and institutions prepared to help. Everyone wants to be loved , valued, and live with dignity.

I hope someone will enter her life and help her to see that there is another way to live.

"...he got what he wanted not what the people wanted"

White Knight- maybe he was doing his Boehner imitation?

That is not true. The majority of the people wanted the Public Option.

"(CBS) A clear majority of Americans -- 72 percent -- support a government-sponsored health care plan to compete with private insurers, a new CBS News/New York Times poll finds. Most also think the government would do a better job than private industry at keeping down costs and believe that the government should guarantee health care for all Americans."

[...his signature accomplishment is unconstititutional the majority of Americans did not want this passed...]

Ohhh you little lying teabagger, you...now go wash your mouth out with soap...

Job1

Most people think the government would do a better job than private industry at keeping down costs.

Where did you get this information? Link, please.

Just type in,"people that want the Public Option," and the information is available.

white knight-3902005

"Why should not have to pay for birth control pills for someone who has the choice to abstainand if you cant then dont do it"

Well, why didn't I think of this? Maybe because it doesn't work? And maybe the birth control is a hell of a lot cheaper than feeding/housing unwanted children on the public's nickel?

Oh well- penny wise-pound foolish....

You mean abstain like the two Palin daughters that now have babies.

I have heard it works real well if you actually abstain which most young people don't whether they have birth control or not. At least with birth control they are not having babies.

France for one.

Just type in “people that want the Public Option,” and the information is available. Facts are facts.

Fancy, you await rioting? You want to obtain by coercion something that you havent earned by your own efforts?

Wait, isnt that what liberalism is all about anyway? Why riot and loot flat screen TVs, what is the hurry?

Soon enough we will have a study showing poor people's TVs are not as wide screened as the rich, and we will have a 'Share the Flat Screen TVs Equality Act" from the Democrats."

Let's remember the sixties...it was the left doing ALL the rioting...nothing has changed.

Atlas thanks for the positivity, unaccustomed to it on here as I am....

enjoy