Poor ol Ken Cuccinelli must be heartbroken that the court rejected his law suit.

How dare they say his suit lack grounds?

This and all the rest have no bearing. Again, a decision based on how and who brought the suit, not the merits of the legislation.

SCOTUS will decide this as soon as the Administration stops stalling and let's it get there.

Sometime next summer, I believe, just in time for the election.

Ought to be interesting to see the President's Hallmark legislation get dragged throught the SCOTUS and most likely get repealed.

Hey Feisty, who was paying the salaries of the lawmakers in Wisconsin when they high tailed it to Illinois?

I seem to remember you supported their actions? Doing the work of the people and all?

Today’s decisions are the first court of appeals decisions to dismiss a case for want of jurisdiction after a lower court reached the merits — potentially raising the possibility that one or more of the justices could agree with them and prevent this constitutional question from being decided on the merits until after 2014.

White Collar Auto - I wouldn't count on that if I were you. In order for the court to hold that the health care law was unconstitutional they would have to hold that Medicare and Social Security were also unconstitutional because they all get their authority from the Commerce Clause. The Supreme Court is never going to hold SS and Medicare unconstitutional and therefore won't hold this HRC unconstitional as well.

Feisty, Dennis - the action comes as good news, but it is of course a technical legal matter. Nonetheless, this continues the string of defeats the ACA challengers have experienced.

The Tea Partiers claim they wer sent to Washington to attack the defecit, debt, and "Obamacare."

Ther's no substance to that, of course. Election day exit polling in November, 2010, showed that only 22% of the voters attributed their ballots to anything proposed by Tea Party candidates, while 56% said they were not at all influenced by the Tea Party movement. And polling since has held pretty close to that - in fact, general Tea Party support has slipped quite a bit in recent weeks.

What were the real issues voters cared about? Jobs, the economy, excessive partisanship in D.C.!

The Tea Party, dragging the GOP along behind that movement, has betrayed the voters.

And just how well will that play in Peoria after the President's speech tonight before a chastened Congress and the American nation?

Laurie, it will go down because of the personal mandate, period. The whole thing will go because of the arrogance of the administration to not include a severability clause in the legislation.

I'm no lawyer, but from what I have read, the government has no right to tell me I have to buy a particular product.

The Administration isn't stalling anything. The SCOTUS denied fast track of the cases. That is their authority and prerogative. The White House cannot force the issue.

You must not have read where George Washington forced all militia members to buy guns.

They did the only thing they could do at that point to protect the interests of the people they represent, just like a few times in my career when I had nothing left but to punch someone in the mouth to protect the people I promised to protect, you can be horroified if you want to, but I am damn proud they did not roll over and they did what they did. How about that work of the people, how about that Congressional pay and benefit package to spend 4 years naming a few buildings. I have no use for lazy weak minded people, who have no solutions to the nations troubles other than to kiss Grovers ass, and to claim working people broke the piggy bank they have robbed. How about Congress being paid less than $24,000 a year and no benefits like those great jobs in Texas that they say you should be all excited about. Only a total chump would vote for the republican agenda. Did you notice that the crowd cheered Hoffa, you can slam unions and their members all you want but one thing they are not, they are not chumps, and they take better care of your families than ass kissing republicans and Grover plan to.

White Collar Auto - The government reaches into your paycheck every week and takes money for Medicare and Social Security. It is a mandate that you have no choice in contributing to and belonging to. The government not only requires you to pay into these programs, it also requires you once you reach the age of 65 and are no longer working to get Medicare. You cannot as an individual go out into the private market and get your own health insurance once you are no longer working. Go ahead and try and see what happens. Each and every private insurer will tell you that you must first sign up for Medicare then you can buy a private policy that would become the second payor after Medicare. Period...end of discussion. You can't have it any other way. Care to tell me that's not a mandate? Care to tell me that hasn't already and wouldn't be upheld in the Supreme Court today....Dude?

Rah rah rah!!! Go liberals go! I guess any victory is a good one for you, isn't it? Even if this means absolutely nothing in the big picture. The audacity of anyone wanting to strike down a law forcing us to pay heavy fines for not having health insurance is unthinkable. Technical reasons notwithstanding.

We'll see how this effects Obama's poll numbers... this combined with the lack of a speech tonight, the polls will reveal how well America as a whole feels about the head narcissist in charge. His already sinking poll numbers are like a rock tied around his neck. First of all, Obama can't stand the fact that less and less people believe in his hope and change... that eats at him like acid on metal. Second, he's going to need some real help ever winning a second term... We know where that help is going to come from... the 24% extreme liberals that actually believe he's helping America and doing good. For the life of me, I can't figure out what good he's done... To me, it appears as though he's purposefully doing his level best to hurt us.

I'm looking forward to Barry and all the Dems running for office in 2012 touting what a wonderful thing they did for the country by passing ClunkerCare.

You know, like they did in 2010, only BIGGER!!!

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

SCOTUS will decide this as soon as the Administration stops stalling and let's it get there.

ROFL!!! Conspiracy! Conspiracy, I tell you!

Of course, you have evidence that the Administration *IS* preventing the case from going to the Supreme Court, yes?

Good point WCA,

God forbid if those coward Democrats wouldn't show up for work even though that is what they got elected to do.

Rep Joe Walsh: “I don’t see the point in being a prop for another of the President’s speeches asking for more failed stimulus spending and more subsidies for his pet projects,”

What an ignorant SOB. So, he doesn't see fit to participate in the conventions of our democracy, like attending a joint session of Congress? Doesn't see fit to show up, even if just to scowl for the cameras?

This is not my father's Republican Party. Republican-ism in my father's day represented responsibility, service and dignity, as personified by General Eisenhower, Bob Dole and Gerald Ford. Today's Republicans are irresponsiblee, disrespectful and un-intellectual. What a dope.

Forrest Grump:

"just like a few times in my career when I had nothing left but to punch someone in the mouth to protect the people I promised to protect, you can be horroified if you want to, but I am damn proud they did not roll over and they did what they did. How about that"

Forrest, did you work as a thug enforcer for Jimmy Hoffa and the union? Did you take the SOBS out? Were you wearing your brass knuckles?

More liberal love, peace and bipartisanship.

Laurie,

I love reading your posts! Just wanted to tell you that.

Amy B.

Thank you. My father was a registered Republican and that used to mean something. He most definitely would not have agreed with the outright obstruction by the GOP in Washington.

Of course, you have evidence that the Administration *IS* preventing the case from going to the Supreme Court, yes?

_________________________________________

We'll know the answer to that question when we see if Barry appeals the three justice decision to the whole Eleventh Circuit, or appeals directly to the SC. They have 90 days from August 12, 2011 to decide which way to go. If they appeal to the whole Circuit court, we will know they are stalling in hopes of pushing the SC decision past the election.

My odds: Stalling - 100%, going directly to the SC - zero

So, what's the next step for the "Obamacare" killer nuts. HRC which these Incorrigible elements never provided no alternative solution. Busy doing nothing while millions are out jobs with no health insurance. Saboteurs, fighting to keep the rich and corporations on govt. welfare of paying no tax at all. Tax cuts at this point in this country for the rich and corporation alike amounts to welfare.

Vipp - Thanks so much for the compliment....I appreciate it.

laurie-480643

That's a standout post. Good one.

Just remember what Yogi said....

No Bob no brass knuckles, bear fists, if I waited until some kid got mangled then filled out some phony paperwork I have done nothing to keep my promise and try to protect my crew. By the way if you think I got my teeth damned near knocked out for Hoffa or some other imaginary "union boss" you like to refer to I did not, I did that for the men (and their wives and their children) who I work everyday with. I would not just stand by and watch and not say crap even if I had a mouthful, while 11 good men are vaporized on a non union oil rig, or 29 men are buried alive in a Massey Energy non union coal mine, because the company treats their safety and lives as a hindrance to higher profit, I would not let that happen to people I have worked with for years without making sure that me or somebody else got knocked out first if that is what it takes. You call me a thug, but my wife, my kids, my crew, and their wives they call me a stand up guy.

PEN-24, one of the odder things is that the Republicans were for the individual mandate before they were against it. That element, one of several in ACA, was taken directly from earlier GOP proposals.

But - wait! Aren't these guys the ones who claim they are Constitutionalists? Surely such people would never have made such a proposal unless they felt secure it was proper under the nation's Basic Law.

The hypocrisy and cynicism of the Tea Party/GOP once again is simply stunning.

PS - Laurie - I really enjoy your stuff, too. Keep up the good fight!

John A.-400474

"The hypocrisy and cynicism of the Tea Party/GOP once again is simply stunning"

Listen to them yesterday adoring st. Ronald Regan. But they'll never mention he raised taxes 11 times while in office......talk about hypocrisy, they wallow in it.

The DOJ could have agreed to skip appeals and let the case go to SCOTUS. They opposed so the SCOTUS rejected a fast track. What's funny is there stall tactic will eventually hurt them as the fight for the constitutionality of this abomonition will take place while it's figure head, a self proclaimed constitutional scholar, is trying to get elected.

White Collar Auto - I'm no lawyer, but from what I have read, the government has no right to tell me I have to buy a particular product.

It's a tax credit, just like the home mortgage deduction. Do you whine that you don't get that tax credit if you don't own a house?

Laurie,

For what it is worth, Medicare is probably unconstitutional too. They set it up so that if you want SS you have to get Medicare. Some things get so entrenched in our culture that they are hard to get rid of regardless of their vulnerabilities.

That is why HCA needs to be stopped before it gets started.

skrekk

White Collar Auto - I'm no lawyer, but from what I have read, the government has no right to tell me I have to buy a particular product.

It's a tax credit, just like the home mortgage deduction. Do you whine that you don't get that tax credit if you don't own a house?

Leave these guys, they all surfer from selective amnesia. Bad enough for them, the electorate is more aware now than ever.

Amy, kind of sad to see you join the Hoffa (Union) mob mentality of calling people who don't agree with you SOB's.

Somehow I thought you were better than that.

Hey Pen24, I haven't surfed since I lived in California for a while, but I remember it well. No amnesia here.

So a purchased product mandate and home mortgage tax credit are the same thing in your eyes, eh?

Boy you Libs are funny sometimes.

For the Dead beat dad and any other Republican-Tea Potty to not attend the Presidents speech tonight is treason against the nation and the Commander and Chief.

That is the problem you have when you have domestic terrorist filling these Republican-Tea Potty ranks.

We the people will remember in 2012.

White Collar Auto - Do your homework and read up on history. In 1936 the Supreme Court ruled that Social Security and the mandate for the FICA tax was constitutional based on the Commerce Clause of the 14th Amendment. Medicare was predicated on the constitutionality of Social Security and the justification of the Commerce Clause. White Collar.....these programs are most definitely constitutional and just because you think they are not doesn't make it so. However, based on prior decisions by the Supreme Court relative to these mandates, it will be very hard for the Supreme Court now to turn around and declare the health care act unconstitutional without then reversing the 1936 decision and declaring SS and Medicare also unconstitutional. You tell me what the likelihood of that happening is?

Tony C. Just remember what Yogi said....

It's a Luuuuuuuuv - e - leeeeeeee day for a pic- a- nic?

Got Wine?

White Collar Auto,

You a lawyer? Thought not! You are correct though, it will get to the SCOTUS! Perhaps not on your time frame. And, by the way, President Obama is not a "self proclamed constitutional scholar", he was proclamed a constitutional scholar by Harvard University. It is my understanding that Harvard University is fairly well recognized and respected in academic circles. You and your kind have a very deft way at stating HALF TRUTHS. My guess, half-truths make YOU FEEL like your not lying or distorting the truth. I will agree you are a master, though not a scholar, a master of deception! You had best stick to selling cars and listening to Rush Limpbrain, and leave the lawyering to real constitutional scholars and attorneys! Have a GREAT day, watch out for the oncoming light!

Ah, so that's the talking point...if they don't appeal directly to the Supreme Court it's a stall tactic.

Sad.

And, by the way, President Obama is not a "self proclamed constitutional scholar", he was proclamed a constitutional scholar by Harvard University. It is my understanding that Harvard University is fairly well recognized and respected in academic circles.

Sorry...Republicans hate smart people.

Feisty,

Uh OH!

That's not going to sit well with the wing nuts! lol

The court ruled that the State of Virginia doesn't have the "standing" to sue the federal government over Obamacare.

THEY CONSIDERED NO EVIDENCE , NO MERITS - NOTHING.

Three dem appointed judges just punted the ball away instead of doing anything.

It is nothing to be disappointed about.

Geez ...... do you never follow real news - real journalists?

On another note, the more I think about it the more incensed I become with these tea baggers who are refusing to attend the speech tonight!

Why would any one in the right mind want to watch another Obama campaign speech - much less be one of this idiot's props?

Yes - I'm L@@KING at you Joe DEAD BEAT Dad Wilson (R) IL!

Yea ..... I'm surly that was really his "Oprah Moment" ...... changed his life.

lol - right

I'm curious to know why those that do not like health care reform feel that it will be declared unconstitutional on the individual mandate provision. It seems to me that the government can mandate you purchase plenty of things. Try driving your car without insurance. How about the hunting, fishing and trapping licenses you must buy if you want to participate in these activities? While these are mandated by states, I'm sure there are plenty of federal permits, licenses, etc. that must be purchased in order to remain legal in our government's eyes.

As an owner of a small business, I'm quite happy to know that all persons will have to have insurance in order to spread risk.

Da Noid,

I don't know if they hate intelligent people or just don't understand how intelligent people think. Oh well...!

Laurie is one smart cookie folks.

WCA:

For what it is worth, Medicare is probably unconstitutional too. They set it up so that if you want SS you have to get Medicare. Some things get so entrenched in our culture that they are hard to get rid of regardless of their vulnerabilities.

I'd say that would be true if the Court were any other than the current Court, which operates on a different set of principles from any Court that I have ever observed. I don't think they would scruple to declare either one unconstitutional if a proper challenge were before them. But, neither Medicare nor Social Security are being challenged here, so the Court probably couldn't reach out and declare either one unconstitutional, even if it wanted to -- or perhaps would decide not to risk it -- although the logic that they apply to this case could certainly draw down a future constitutional challenge to those programs as well.

Even if there was such a challenge, however, I'm not sure it would be successful as the mandates of those two programs aren't exactly the same as the PPACA. If you earn no income, you don't pay in to Medicare or Social Security. Under the PPACA, as I understand it, the mandate applies whether you have earned income or not. You either have coverage or you pay the penalty, which is like 2 percent of income or $695.

Ever wonder what made the 2010 census so important?

What really irks me about it is not the Commerce Clause challenge -- which in my opinion could go either way -- so much as it is the fact that the mandate places what amounts to a surtax on people whose employers don't provide them with coverage, or who may not buy insurance because they can't afford it, meaning that their already diminished means will be diminished even further, placing them in even more economic distress and making it even less likely that they will be able to purchase medical care, even if they wanted to.

And that's why even a liberal like me is opposed to the mandate. If you're going to be forced to pay money, at least you ought to get something for it. The PPACA doesn't guarantee anything, nor does it even guarantee that insurance will be available for everyone to buy.

To me, that's what's really wrong with the mandate.

Laurie is one smart cookie folks.

Well except for the fact that she fails to mention that SS was argued as a tax ...... the federal government has the right to tax.

Obama promised that Obamacare was not a tax......

....... or will he try to argue that when he gets in front of the Supremes ...... and admit he was lying all along?

Anna Molly, you have no idea what you are talking about.

Ah, so that's the talking point...if they don't appeal directly to the Supreme Court it's a stall tactic.

___________________________________________

Sorry da hemmorhoid, it's not a talking point at all. If the Barry admin REALLY believes ClunkerCare will pass constitutional scrutiny, they will go directly to the SC so they can be publically vindicated as early as possible. If they have doubts about its constitutionality, they will appeal it to the full Eleventh Circuit in a stalling tactic so the "Constitutional law professor" President doesn't risk getting his Constitutional a$$ handed to him by the SC in the middle of the election.

Sad, but, true.

I'm surprised we haven't heard from Spanky on this one. He is supposed to be a lawyer, I guess.

Anyway, I guess the Court of Appeals is ruling that they can't rule because the plaintiffs don't have the right to sue. This will go to the SCOTUS, if only to rule on jurisdictional issues.

So far the cases have gone against those who think the ACA is unconstitutional, on the appellate level. The Appellate level judges are usually more likely to follow the law and not let emotion rule their judgement, not always, but usually.

laurie:

it will be very hard for the Supreme Court now to turn around and declare the health care act unconstitutional without then reversing the 1936 decision and declaring SS and Medicare also unconstitutional.

And do you really think the present majority would hesitate to overturn precedent -- even longstanding precedent -- if they had the chance and the inclination? I'm not so convinced that they wouldn't.

Just like I'm not convinced that the current majority, if the proper case were put in front of them, wouldn't overturn Griswold v. Connecticut, Roe v. Wade, and Lawrence v. Texas. A more results-oriented majority there never was.

And if they're successful with the PPACA, don't be surprised if you then see challenges to things like the National Labor Relations Act, the Fair Labor Standards Act, and other laws that protect the rights of working Americans.

If the mandate is found to be unconstitutional, can the minimum wage be far behind? How does the Commerce Clause give government the right to tell anyone what they ought to pay people for the work they do?

Wait for it.

WCA:

Anna Molly, you have no idea what you are talking about.

Well, I'd say that makes me about average out here. And thanks.

No AM, thank you for the softball. Now we are even.

Hi scrambolo,

Great point.

Hey Anna,

And if they're successful with the PPACA, don't be surprised if you then see challenges to things like the National Labor Relations Act, the Fair Labor Standards Act, and other laws that protect the rights of working Americans.

The NLRB has been sued a number of times, I don't think they ever won one.

But you are right - they certainly need to sue the hell of NLRB on just about everything from the Boeing travesty to the Honda / Ohio crap to the damn biased notices they require every employee to put up.

Obama is simply killing America.

Howdy dirp101 - I just got back from the gym, and had to run some errands - heading to Cancun tomorrow, and had to get $150 in ones, $50 in fives and some $20's. It's all inclusive so everything is "free" but you gotta tip.

Unless I hit a strip club on the way home. :(

Anyway I didn't read the ruling but it is irrelevant - this bad boy is headed to the supreme court.

In other news - anyone care to guess why the FBI raided Solyndra this morning? I'm thinking the feds are trying to CYA. White House logs show the Solyndra executives being there 20 times before getting their sweetheart loans, all of which have magically disappeared. I think they are trying to make a fraud case, but who knows. All I see is a ton of egg on Obama and Chu's faces.

It cost Solyndra $6 to make each panel, which it could only sell for $3 - and that's the business model Obama and Chu supported. You all getting that they don't know a thing about business?

You know, I know you all love the guy, but man Obama has done his best to not only show Big Gov. needs to stay out of the economy, but also that the whole "green shoot" thing was a total load of crap.

T-24 hours to white sand beaches and all the food and drink I can cram into my belly. :)

dang it ..... "biased notices they require every employee to put up."

Employer not employee.

Hey Spanky,

Have a good time and try to not get a look at the muzzle of one of the 2,500 Aks Onama sold to the drug cartels down there.

It's a Luuuuuuuuv - e - leeeeeeee day for a pic- a- nic?

Clara honey - I'm sending you my dry cleaning bill! LMAO!

[I'm no lawyer...]

No, you're not...but where's that parrot Spanky when you need him...you just can't rely on his ignorance anymore...

[But you are right - they certainly need to sue the hell of NLRB on just about everything from the Boeing travesty to the damn biased notices they require every employee to put up.]

Yeah, who needs workers' rights...why do republicans and conservatives hate America AND Americans?

Anna Molly - The Supreme Court could very well declare SS and Medicare unconstitutional but the social upheaval that would come in its wake would shatter our economy and plunge our country into such a severe depression I doubt we could survive in any recognizable form. Once these programs were declared unconstitutional they would have to end almost immediately. The middle class would be gone overnight ...poverty would become rampant as the economic activity and the dollars that flow from these two programs abruptly stops....riots would break out all over the country. Seniors would become destitute immediately and have no ability to pay for even the most meager of an existence. I doubt very much the Supreme Court would risk the devastation to our country that a decision like that would cause.

bob180

The NLRB has been sued a number of times, I don't think they ever won one.

If you're talking about challenges to the NLRA itself, you're probably right, but none so far in this Court.

Laurie:

Once these programs were declared unconstitutional they would have to end almost immediately. The middle class would be gone overnight ...poverty would become rampant as the economic activity and the dollars that flow from these two programs abruptly stops....riots would break out all over the country. Seniors would become destitute immediately and have no ability to pay for even the most meager of an existence. I doubt very much the Supreme Court would risk the devastation to our country that a decision like that would cause.

True, but that's where we're headed, like it or not. Conservatives have already sown the seeds by tricking people into believing that these programs -- including the PPACA -- need to be slashed. If they can't get the Courts to do it for them, they'll just wait till they can trick the same people into voting them into control of both houses of Congress and the White House, and then they'll just repeal all those things. They've already made repeal of the PPACA a virtual campaign promise.

Like we learned here in Wisconsin, it may be what they're NOT telling you that will ultimately kill you.

But you are right - they certainly need to sue the hell of NLRB on just about everything from the Boeing travesty to the Honda / Ohio crap to the damn biased notices they require every employee to put up.

Been found to be in violation, have we, bobby?

Otherwise, how would you know about the notices?

WCA:

No AM, thank you for the softball. Now we are even.

LoL No problem at all. My pleasure.

Judge strikes down key part of health care law

Let’s look at the Players here

Federal district court Judge Henry Hudson

That prediction is built partly on Hudson's roots in Republican politics. He was elected Arlington's commonwealth attorney as a Republican, briefly ran against U.S. Rep. James P. Moran (D-Va.) in 1991 and has received all of his appointments - as U.S. attorney, as a Fairfax County Circuit Court judge in 1998 and to the federal bench in 2002 - from Republicans.

Some have called on Hudson to recuse himself from the case because he owns stock in a campaign-consulting company that has done work for the Republican National Committee and other conservative groups. Cuccinelli also paid Campaign Solutions Inc. for $9,000 of work this year and last. When Hudson's investment became public, Cuccinelli canceled his account with the firm.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/12/07/AR2010120706982.html

But with power comes scrutiny. And as judgment day approaches, a Democratic source sends over judicial disclosure forms Hudson filed that could raise questions about his impartiality. From 2003 through 2008, Hudson has been receiving "dividends" from Campaign Solutions Inc., among other investments. In 2008, he reported income of between $5,000 and $15,000 from the firm. (Data from 2009 was not available at the Judicial Watch database.)

A powerhouse Republican online communications firm, Campaign Solutions, has done work for a host of prominent Republican clients and health care reform critics, including the RNC and NRCC (both of which have called, to varying degrees, for health care reform's repeal). The president of the firm, Becki Donatelli, is the wife of longtime GOP hand Frank Donatelli, and is an adviser to former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, among others.

Another firm client is Ken Cuccinelli, the Attorney General of Virginia and the man who is bringing the lawsuit in front of Hudson's court. In 2010, records show, Cuccinelli spent nearly $9,000 for Campaign Solutions services.

There's some pretty direct linkage between Frank and Rebecca Donatelli and the Koch family, the McCain campaign, and other Republican movers and shakers.

http://crooksandliars.com/node/38758/print

Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli ; Cootch to his friends

Kenneth Thomas 'Ken' Cuccinelli II (born July 30, 1968) is a U.S. politician and the Attorney General of Virginia.^[1] From 2002 until January 16, 2010 he was a Republican member of the Senate of Virginia, representing the 37th district in Fairfax County.^[2][3] A Republican convention selected him over two other candidates to run against Democrat Steve Shannon for Attorney General,^[4] and he won the November 2009 general election.^[5] He took office as Virginia's Attorney General in January 2010.

In addition to the NRA and Republican National Coalition for Life, Cuccinelli was endorsed by Mike Huckabee, Ron Paul, Fred Thompson, Morton Blackwell, William A. Zimmerman, Virginia Citizens Defense League PAC, Virginia Shooting Sports Association, Eagle Forum PAC, Congressman Rob Wittman, the Republican Liberty Caucus of Virginia, the Lincoln, Douglass & Washington Society, the National Federation of Independent Business, the Virginia Farm Bureau, and the Virginia Fraternal Order of Police.^[13]

Several papers who chose not to endorse Cuccinelli wrote editorials critical of his political views. According to the Virginian Pilot, “Cuccinelli’s election would bring embarrassment to Virginia, instability to the state’s law firm and untold harm to the long list of people who don’t fit his personal definition of morality.” ^[17] The Washington Post echoed a similar sentiment, writing, “given his bizarre ideas, he would very likely become an embarrassment for the commonwealth” in an editorial titled "Mr. Cuccinelli's Bigotry" ^[18]

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

___________________________________________________________

Funny thing about court cases. Before standing around and high fiving and then hustling out and cashing the award check you best set down and take a hard look at what you actually won and why. Actually if you’ve got a real smart Lawyer you will have taken a look at some of this before you ever step in to a court room.

In the interest of full disclosure I would have to admit that I’ve been involved in few court cases and I keep a young graduate of the University of Virginia Law School on retainer that is a better Lawyer than old Cootch will ever hope to be.

Cuccinelli went to court on behalf of the State of Virginia in a carefully handpicked venue with the request to overturn the entire health care statute as Unconstitutional. Even with things set up so well and carefully he could not win his case. The Judge could only rule on one provision as being Unconstitutional. That provision is not due to go into effect until 2014 so it is somewhat a moot question at this point.

At this point Cuccinelli has actually hurt the court effort to overturn Health care. As you can see from all that information above there is ample evidence for overturning the Judge’s ruling by a higher court simply on the conflict question alone without even revisiting the questions of the original complaint. This is why many of the other states and interested parties did not join with the State of Virginia in this court case. That would lead to me to believe that some of the other States have smarter Attorney Generals than we do here in Virginia.

So before all you’ll jump on this train and bet the Farm and next year’s rent money on this one taking you where you want to go( which I assume is the Supreme Court)take the advice of an old Redneck. This one ain’t no Thoroughbred. Looks to me to be a spavined old Nag that’s going to fall out on you in the Backstretch if he don’t throw a shoe on you getting out of the Starting Gate first.

Sorry da hemmorhoid, it's not a talking point at all. If the Barry admin REALLY believes ClunkerCare will pass constitutional scrutiny, they will go directly to the SC so they can be publically vindicated as early as possible. If they have doubts about its constitutionality, they will appeal it to the full Eleventh Circuit in a stalling tactic so the "Constitutional law professor" President doesn't risk getting his Constitutional a$$ handed to him by the SC in the middle of the election.

Ah...the ever-popular "I Triple Dog Dare You" defense of your argument.

Roger that VIPP,

I agree with you re: Laurie. I like her posts and well, Laurie, can you post a photo of yourself? Ahhhhhh sorry, You are a serious poster and we should not attempt to hit on fellow bloggers, even if they are probably hot and smart liberals just because we agree with them all the time.

Job1,

So reconcile your argument about how treasonous it is if a Republican doesn't go to a speech to the legislators in Wisconsin that abicated their duties and responsibilities by fleeing to another state?

Hey Anna Molly, care to rip into the mysogynist that is Pat in SoCal?

Gonna put him on "Ignore"?

I have a couple of questions. They very simple questions because I'm a very simple person.

WHY CAN'T WE HAVE UNIVERSAL HEALTH CARE?

Why is Health Care in the United States so much more expensive than anywhere else in the world?

Stop rhetoric at each other and answer these two questions please.

Why can't we have universal health care and why is health care in this country so expensive?

Seriously, can anyone explain this to me?

Is it greed?

Is it politics?

Is it graft and corruption?

Why?

Well hey Bob you Laurie just helped to solve the problem, and each side will get something they want, we will cancel medicare tax and replace it with the national health-care tax, call your nearest republican house member and tell to cancel the Ryan Plan and get to work on passing an across the board tax that will provide a means of affordable health-care for every American, and saves every American, and American business owner a hell of a lot of time, energy, and money dealing with all sorts of health care insurance providers whose function is to charge more than it costs for health care and make an outstanding profit. Oh yeah I know real live people who work for the government would have to administer the program so their will be some waste, but I really don't think that government waste could compare to the kind of profits the health care insurance industry has been posting. A lot of American industries have seen some real tough times economically, but I don't think the health care insurance industry has posted a loser in over 100 quarters, it is like they are some kind of thugs controlled by the mob they just keep asking for more and more, they don't care if you can afford it or not, and they threaten you and your family with serious bodily harm if you don't play it their way. I think this tax thing might be legally bullet proof and could solve some real problems, and I like it because it screws with thugs, I hate thugs.

White Collar Auto:

Hey Anna Molly, care to rip into the mysogynist that is Pat in SoCal?

Gonna put him on "Ignore"?

Nope. I don't have you on ignore, either, or that other misogynist guy from this morning that you're no doubt referring to who basically told me that as an uppity woman, and especially a liberal woman, I should shut up. That was certainly misogynist, but at least he didn't say it in crude or debasing sexual terms, like some people around here do.

And besides, that's not at all what Pat is saying to Laurie. He hasn't said anything offensive or condescending that I've seen, at least not so far. He's just trying to get a date. If she's not offended, why should I be?

Good luck to him.

skip Nicholson:

Why can't we have universal health care and why is health care in this country so expensive?

Seriously, can anyone explain this to me?

Is it greed?

Is it politics?

Is it graft and corruption?

Why?

All of the above.

"....and try to not get a look at the muzzle of one of the 2,500 Aks Onama sold to the drug cartels down there."

Don't listen to 'im, Spanks.

I guess the 4th Circuit people couldn't find a real plaintiff. I looked up the FL case and apparently the 11th Circuit looked at the issue, but did not have a problem since there was a real person involved.

In either case, I don't anticipate the SCOTUS will rule on this very political issue before the next election.

Have a good vacation spanky. Watch out for the sharks, particularly in the bars :)

Hey Spanky now don't take this the wrong way okay I am not trying to pick a fight or slam you, hell you brought it up yourself and even though Ms. Spanky tries to keep after you I just want to remind you as well, to try not to come off as condescending when you tip. I know you are generous, and I know that you know that unfortunately many of those people depend on tips as a major part of their income, so practice your people person skills and just tell them they did a great job, and you are enjoying the first class service. If you make Ms. Spanky proud you will have more fun! I hope you and Ms. Spanky have a great time, a safe trip and good luck in the Casino if there is one, have a ball Spanky.

Thanks dirp101.

And AM - you are an uppity female attorney, but that's exactly why I love you.

Please never, ever shut up.

ANd Drive By - sadly there are armed guards outside of all the resorts these days, but then again even in the old days the Mexican arm manned the toll roads carrying M16's. [Remember DBO - we supply the Mexican army, so they have M16s, not AK47s.]

Don't worry Forrest - I lost the tip/valet parking thing a long time ago.

Ms. Spanky handles all the tipping, and she's on heck of a good tipper. Me, I refuse to valet park, which of course pisses Ms. Spanky off to no end.

No casino - just all the food, drink, beach and pool my liver can take. Fact I have to take off soon - to excited to concentrate.

WCA:

[My odds: Stalling - 100%, going directly to the SC - zero]

Ohhh....another "conspiracy theory"...SWEET, right Spanky? That's right up your...alley.

Some conservatives just won't recuse themselves because they have to be in on the power play. Scalia's son worked for W's campaign, but Scalia delivered the 2000 election to W without a thought of recusal. (Souter thought the whole process surreal.) Clarence Thomas's wife is a vocal opponent of the new healthcare law, but he won't recuse himself. Looks like Virginia conservatives are just following suit.

I think its great Fiesty it means we are getting closer to the SCOTUS decision, yep lets get it on the docket in 2012 then barry will have to deal with it and it will be in the news everyday. What he shoved down the tax payers throat. A daily reminder while is out parading around putting out the BS about being President for all the people, yea each and every live off the government socialist.

Bob Jones if that did happen that would be fantastic press for a man who tried to deliver health care to the nation, as contrasted against those who want to cancel SS and medicare, personally I think that would be a great thing to have in the news, just before the election.

Laurie,

The whole reason WHY medicare was created was because insurance companies, through their business practices, indicated that they didn't want to provide insurance to the elderly. So it isn't a matter of you having a choice as a retired person to get private health insurance, it was a matter that a retired person couldn't get health insurance at all. Medicare solved that.

Insurance companies do not want to provide health insurance for retired persons because it just costs too much. Do you honestly think that medicare would have been created if it didn't address a problem that wasn't being served by the private insurance market?

Skip: There is one big reason that we can't have universal health care: The US Constitution! If you read it and understand it's history and what it all means, then the answer is a no brainer. However, if you believe that the Constitution doesn't limit federal power, then it is a worthless document that can be ignored, and thus, there is nothing preventing tyranny. Which, if you know your history, is what the framers were guarding against.

Of course, if you believe that the federal government has the authority to order someone sitting in the privacy of their own home to buy insurance, then they have the authority to order them to do anything else they want. That's why the Constitution restricted the governments powers. It's not a question of whether they are using it in the way that you want, it's whether they have the authority to exercise it at all. If you can be forced to buy insurance, then you can be forced to buy a Chevy sardine can to drive around in. You can also be forced to run 4 miles a day to stay healthy and forced to eat your veggies, and banned from eating cookies, cakes and ice cream.

Is that really the kind of country you want to live in?

As to the Constitutional issue, first you have the 10th Amendment which specifically reserves to the states those powers not given to the federal government. The only semblance of a power relating to the health care deal is the Commerce Clause. Read the power granted to the government there. It specifically allows Congress to "regulate commerce between the states." The history of that is related to tariffs, property rights, mobility of the people and discrimination by one state against residents of other states. It doesn't allow for universally forcing all the residents of the country to do something. What would be appropriate is for Congress to strip the powers of state insurance departments that prevent people of their state from obtaining insurance from companies in another state, as they do now.

You think this power is good to be exercised by the government? Wait until Michelle Obama carries on her campaign against obesity, and uses universal health care as the tool. I can imagine new regulations banning all couples with a combined weight of more than 400 pounds from getting married. Thanks to people like you, there is nothing to prevent those kind of regulations. That's why this has to be overturned.

Fuax Red Feisty gets first post again, How unusual.

Feisty Redhead Roselle, IL

"Uh OH!

That's not going to sit well with the wing nuts! lol"

Left wing lug nut is missing bigger picture again, as usual.

"But other cases remain active, including the lawsuit filed by 26 other states. So this issue has by no means gone away."

Too bad Fisty. Maybe time for a new natural doo?

Maybe work your way out of the projects.

Gee Bob ##'s...you really told Feisty, didn't you...good man...

Witchrunner and Anna Molly,

Thank you both for answering my question.

Witchrunner, sadly, you are merely hurling more rhetoric at me. I'm sure YOU have not personally read the constitution or have any better understanding of it than I do and I HAVE read the constitution and I believe I understand it very well.

Your argument suffers from two problems. The Mass. plan is a STATE plan, which requires it's citizens to have health insurance. That plan was proposed and sponsored by it's GOP Governor, Mitt Romney. The Obama plan was largely based on the Mass. plan.

But the more compelling issue is the State's DO force people who want to drive on the State and Federal highways to buy two things: A Driver's License, proving they have the skills and knowledge necessary to safely operate a motor vehicle and a Vehicle License Tag, the cost of which was originally intended to help pay for and maintain the highways on which they drive. If you want to operate a vehicle almost every state FORCES you to comply with those two requirements. Most states also FORCE you to buy insurance in case you have an accident. They are FORCING their residents to buy insurance.

Is that Tyranny?

Why is that not unconstitutional by your definition?

If you want to practice medicine, drive an 18-wheeler, be a nurse, fly a plane, or any of hundreds more skilled professions or trades YOU HAVE TO BE LICENSED TO DO SO. Why is that not unconstitutional by your definition? Why don't they just hang up their training certificate or medical degree and start offering their services? Seems just as "tyrannical" to me.

So, I ask the question again, Why Can't We Have Universal Health Care?

Why can't we do as Laurie suggests and have a universal health care tax that EVERYBODY pays to fund Universal Health Care? The cost would be minimal and the system would pay for itself. The well to do can afford to purchase private health care and they will. But for the elderly and the poor the universal care, with all it's downsides, (waiting, crowded providers) would be available to them at a price they could afford.

Why can't we have Universal Health Care?

Medicare for everyone?

skip: For someone who claims they've read the Constitution, you've apparently don't read posts here completely. What part of the 10th Amendment do you not understand? Your list of what states do has nothing to do with what the feds can do. If you don't understand that, then you really don't understand the Constitution and the concept of Federalism.

As to the states requiring insurance to drive, if one buy's the state's argument that driving is a "privilege," then the requirement to buy insurance to exercise the privilege may be understandable. No one is forced to buy the insurance, only those who wish to exercise the privilege. Not that I agree with it, but that is the way it has played out. That's completely different than the federal government requiring you to purchase insurance just because you breath. Who knows, they may require it after you die too. So, you apparently do think that the federal government has unlimited powers, and the other items are fair game. Actually, you will find, if this is upheld, that the other things I mentioned won't even come from Congress. They'll be dictated to us by some unelected bureaucrats through "administrative" regulations. Not unlike what this administration was trying to do with it's bogus global warming, so let's regulate what Congress couldn't agree to regulate, destruction of the country.

Of course, none of that even touches on the disaster that is universal health care. Other countries are trying to run away from it because it is a nightmare and costs an arm and a leg. No where in the history of the world has government run any type of healthcare system well. It is all based on a ponzi scheme mentality. There has to be more and more people paying into the system as time goes on, or it collapses into itself. we've already heard of Obama's ideas to keep costs down: just don't pay the service providers as much. Why do you think that doctors are increasingly refusing to treat medicare/medicaid patients? Look at Great Britain. they are running into a shortage of doctors because they are leaving the profession to make more money as stock brokers or other professions that reward their time and skills better than being a doctor would. To put this in perspective, why would anyone go to medical school if they know that they can only make so much money because the government says so?

Plus, when the government takes over the entire system, which is the stated purpose of Obamacare, people will find that the advances in medicine will cease to continue. With no possibility of making money on new technologies or medicines, who do you think will invest in such things? In case you haven't noticed, the bulk of new medicine and technology in the last 50 years has come from the US. Why? Because the rewards are worth the risks! Maybe, just maybe, I am ignorant and you can tell me of all the advances that have come out of Cuba, Russia, China, and all the other socialist systems. I'd be interested to hear of all of them.

As for medicare and social security? There's no doubt that their Constitutionality is questionable, to say the least. But, they were set up under very liberal Presidents with very liberal Congresses and very liberal Supreme Court majorities. Heck, it took FDR's threats to pack the court to get the Supreme Court to go along with his New Deal, Social Security and other liberal programs. It's true that because of their entrenchment in society, they are not likely to be declared unconstitutional anytime soon. But, we are seeing what happens when government tries to manage things like this. It turns into a catastrophe. They are both on the verge of bankruptcy. The ponzi scheme that is SS is becoming more evident all the time. When it started, about 40 workers paid into SS to support 1 retiree. Now, thanks to the way our superior federal government that you love has run the program, it takes about 3 1/2 workers to pay the benefits of 1 retiree. Within 10-15 years, that is expected to get down to 2 workers paying for 1 retiree. Tell me how that can sustain itself.

Hey, another swoop and poop from the 'Vine's strident screech owl!

You get pom-poms to go with your cheerleader's outfit?

Madison from NY: That is hardly likely since a majority of Americans blame the republicans in congress for the gridlock.

Refusing to continue destructive regulatory, spending and government growth policies is not called gridlock it is called elected representatives listening to the hard working citizens who elected them in a landslide in 2010. Admittedly not much productive will happen to turn around the economy until 2013 when a new President and Congress can act aggressively to reverse over 70 years of destructive Leftist policy, legislation, spending and bureaucratic growth.

____________________________________________________________________________________

Would you rather be stuck in traffic or having Obama and the Leftists driving you off a cliff?

Really Madison, are they listening to the people who flipped NY district 26 that has been republican forever, are they listening to the people who did not even wait for the next elcetion to recall republicans in WI and replace them with democrats, did they hear the crowd cheer Hoffa, I'm thinking they might need a hearing aid if they didn't.

The dumbing down has reached the brain of Madison. Oh well, just another bagger DA.

So, pray tell, who are these companies that are being stifled by regulatory? Haven't seen one of them come forward yet into the public eye. Could it be because they exist in industries where regulation is needed due to the high probability of worker mistreatment, financial malfeasance, injury or death of workers?

And you think that Republican gridlock during this extended economic downturn (recession by any other name) is good for this country? I suppose you were just thrilled to death during GWB's presidency especially right around September 2008, right?

There is one more option and the Republican/TP'ers will see it come November 2012, that is to give the President a veto proof majority in the House and 61 seats in the Senate, since republicans seem to think that a simple majority no longer represents the Will of the People.

As to the focus of this article, the longer the Supreme Court delays certainty on this matter the longer republicans can use it as a whipping post for democrats and the President. We already know that Scalia and Thomas are going to vote to strike it down, question is where will the other 5 justices stand on this issue?

So, pray tell, who are these companies that are being stifled by regulatory?

Boeing. They invested $1 BILLION in a plant in a right to work state that Obama/ NLRB shut down.

Obama does NOT CARE about all the unemployed non-union workers in South Carolina or the unemployed engineering graduates

People who vote for the right to work for less and less and less do not even care about themselves. Those engineering graduates from all around the country will be signing up for anything they can get, they will rake aspalht out on the highway if Obama can get a jobs bill passed because you can get any and all the engineering you need done for $10,000 a year in India. It is just not smart business to hire Americans and pay decent wages, benefits, pension, payroll roll taxes and SS taxes and such, it just does not maximize profit. It is a corruption of duty for a corporate excutive to hire anybody for more than he has to, or pay more taxes than he is forced to, he has a responsiblity to the stockholders to mind those purse strings, and collect his 7 figure bonus for being the kind of exceptional capitalist, captain of industry, wealthy job creator republicans adore.

I think the liberals should prepare themselves for the possibility of losing the Senate and the White House. Imagine that liberals... a complete reversal from 2009 and 2010. I can hear the howls now as Obama is escorted from the White House.

Here the funny thing gang - tonight we shall here a bunch of proposals from Obama.

So how many of those will be standard conservative ideas? I think most of them will be.

We already know a large portion of the $300 billion will be tax cuts. That sure ain't a democrat idea, is it? Others will be geared toward business, and regulations being cut. Again, more conservative ideas.

In fact, right now I am not certain what progressive ideas he will propose. A WPA? I don't think he has the guts.

So seriously Forrest, Job1 or whoever - what will the progressive ideas be, and how badly outnumbered will those be by tax and regulation cuts?

x

FR ate my post.

[So how many of those will be standard conservative ideas? I think most of them will be.]

Spanky, so what's your point? You have none. Probably most of them will be "conservative/teabagger" ideas, but Mitch McConnell is already on record saying that whatever President Obama proposes, they won't support. Why parrot stale talking points?

So, are you for getting this counrty out of the sewer, or are you against it?

Do you agree with McConnell?

Or did you cheer along with Glenn Beck when the August jobs report came out?

...Balls in your court, "counselor"...put up or shut up...

Oh no, ObamaCares,defeats the Viginia AG. But fear not Teabaggers,I'm sure the 'COOCH' will appeal and appeal and appeal. With Tyrants, I'ts their way or NO way...never mind the Affordable Healthcare Act will save a Trillion Dollars. I'ts all about Obama-Cares; for more than Millionaires and Billionaires, we can't have that! Or as John Boehner says,Hell No we can't have that...

[...Balls in your court, "counselor"...put up or shut up...]

..Spanky...?

...anything...?

...thought as much...

Madison,

The NLRB didn't shut down that plant, and before you spout off more nonsense, the NLRB didn't shut down that plant. How many times does it have to be said to you before you get that through your tea bagging thick skull (hell you figure with tea bags, that it would allow information in, rather than just crap out).

The NLRB decision had to do with a THIRD plant in Washington State. It had absolutely NOTHING to do with the plant in south carolina. Is there something about that which is inherently difficult to understand?

remeber one thing. you can't opt out of social security. you must participate. that is an individual mandate...........and it's constituional under the comerce clause. so anybody that thinks this law can be over turned because of that is wrong. period. i love raining on your parade righties.

dji

And the reason why you can't opt out of social security is because then you would have people opting out until just before they retire and then claim their 'benefits' which defeats the purpose of social security. If there was a legal way to create a one time 'opt out' with no chance of ever claiming benefits, maybe that could be an alternative. Since the capping prevents contributions over 105K, there probably would only be tea baggers and the rich (I would suspect that most tea party zealots are not in that income category) who would be exempting themselves.

I wonder if the rats will go down with the ship! LOL!!

Shoving women,children. the elderly & handicapped out of the way while scurrying to the life boats is much more their style! ;o)

You think even Obama wants this as in issue?

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

He knows how it plays in Peoria. He'd love it if it quietly disappeared from the radar.

Will not happen, though. If the electorate begins to lose faith that the courts will dispose of it, any fence sitters are going to vote republican- no matter WHO the nominee might be.

Obama has already proved that he cannot be trusted to solve any problems, and no one needs further proof that he simply exacerbates them.

laurie and Fiesty:

We will make sure you go down with the big ship also, definately do not want to squeeze ur fat azzez into the life boats. They can only take a combined weight of 1000 pounds. Ur fart boxes alone weigh that much.

We can always count on ITM to go to the gutter

We can always count on ITM to go to the gutter

Are you kidding GBM?

He NEVER leaves his comfort zone... ;o)

Oh well, ole IntheMiddle, TX is just another bagger DA who support Slick Rick.

Do you know anything about government NJ, didn't you have to pass a test in 8th grade about our government? In almost everyone of your rants about Obama you should replace his name with the word Congress, because they pass the laws and policies, the president can not do a damn thing congress won't act on, except direct the military which he has done pretty good on in as much he got two guys republican CIC's could not touch. You worry me NJ, I was raised to feel I had a responsiblity to look out for people less fortunate than myself and those who don't understand how, or can't protect themselves. I knew plenty of Catholic Nuns that had more moxy than the current crop of Republicans that have pleded to kiss Grover's ass, at the expense of people like you.

I was just reading about a "glitch" in the health care law.

Insurance can only be provided through the exchanges and if the exchanges are not authorized by the states then no insurance.

The author, a law professor from a hoity toity school, laid it at the feet of the drafters going too fast and not actually reading the bill before it was passed.

In other words - Pelosi was spot on and will now be very sad, should the beast ever pass the Supreme Court.

Is Feisty a hefer? Man I want to go to a game with her in the windy city next month. I don't want to get smothered when she sits on my face. 500lbs? wow

Spanky it got all boogered up from the git go in so many ways, I think they have figured it out above it needs to be passsed as a tax then you avoid the legal problems with individual states, and mandates and such.

Why do you have to resort to name calling?Why call Fiesty a heifer? She isn't telling anyone about the two inches between you legs.

NoJoBloMo:

[Obama has already proved that he cannot be trusted to solve any problems...]

Yeah...those black people can't be trusted, right Oh Ignorant One?

This is a good time to show everyone your bottle cap impression, and screw off...

I saw that Nj, funny that it isn't covered here. Also saw that the laid off workers are suing Solyndra.

Sounds like something stinks at the "Green Energy Model" that was a darling of this administration.

Heck $535 million goes a long way in a presidential campaign.

I'm sure the DOJ will get to this right after they are done getting rid of Gibson Guitars and the jobs that go along with it.

White Collar Auto,

Yes, it sounds just like Dick Cheney's contracts, to Halliburton in the Iraq war, only not as much money, right?

WCA,

Don't forget about the Fast and Furious.

Last week the Acting ATF Director Kenneth E. Melson was transferred to a low end position in the DOJ and the U.S. Attorney in Phoenix resigned.

But Eric Holder still has his job!

Obama and Holder - Dumb and Dumber.

20 times the Solyndra folks visited the White House.

Must be nice, eh?

Most Transparent Presidency EVAH!

I hear every day about how smart and educated Mr. Obama is, however I have never observed any document that confirms his grades his curriculum or really anything about his education. And no matter when and where I bring it up no one ever address's it in any way shape or form.

Yeah well why don't you give the ball to Trump and let him run with it, I am pretty sure Obama will be happy to shove a couple of college degrees up Trumps ass to go along with the birth certificate. Ha Ha Hoo Hee, now you went and made me Jolly too, geez I'm belly laughing!

jolly: you don't get to be president of the Harvard Law Review by being a C minus student. Only the best and brightest are invited to write for a schools Law Review, and usually (with the approval of the faculty advisor) they pick the very best to be president of the Law Review.

jolly - Not to mention that as a magna cum laude graduate, the president graduated in the top 10% of his class. Folks familiar with higher ed stuff know that.

Dude, (Dudette?),

No one is forced to buy Auto Insurance. If you want to drive a car, you have to have insurance. Don't want insurance, don't drive.

I have a dog and have to license him with my city. Can I sue for that, too?

Not sure if its the same, you don't really have to get car insurance, you could always just not drive.

That kinda of still makes it a choice.

After I posted, I see that White Collar Auto already beat me to it.

I believe that a better way to look at it is more in line with taxes. I don't have a choice on whether I pay taxes them or not. I claim that this is a better argument for the mandate. Eventually I'll need health care.

Three democratic judges two of whom were appointed by Obama. Hardly a fair hearing but then again in the liberals eyes that is fair since it eliminates all other opinions but their own.

You mean like Citizens United REB? I suppose when it's in favor of the political party of your choosing, all is good, correct? Had it swung the other way, you would have praised them. Saying they did the right thing, instead of throwing a political label on them.

When you enter reality and see that both parties have their hands into every dirty and underhanded thing going on, the sooner your blinders can be removed.

Let's get this right. REPUBLICANS can tell people what they can and can't do, meaning they can tell you that you can only be straight, that you have no control over your body, that you have no say in how they give TAX CREDITS to companies that send AMERICAN jobs overseas, and you definitely have no say in giving away PAYING TAXPAYER money to NON-PAYING OIL COMPANIES, etc. BUT you can't have insurance that COVERS PRE-EXISTING conditions, only through MEDICARE. Oh, wait, they want to get rid of Social Security and Medicare, Medicaid, and give the PRIVATE money stealing Insurance Industry, the right to deny you coverage, no matter the cost. Yup, TYPICAL RIGHT-WING NONSENSE.

There is a choice to health insurance as well, dont buy it and pay a fine. Car insurance don't buy it don't drive, don't have a job or don't buy it and drive. See what happens when you have an accident or get a ticket... you pay a fine just like not buying health insurance. You all forget the reason for the mandate. It is so you do not have to pay for the medical care of someone not insured but then they just pay the fine or not and still get the most expensive type of health care, Emergency Room Care. Its a choice just like living in this country don't like it move. You all have choices you just have to pick one and your nose does not count.

White Collar Auto,

Well let's just apply your "logic" to a person's health. If you don't want to buy health insurance fine, don't go to the emergency room, doctor, or hospital if you are injured or ill. Sounds kinda spooky right. Or how about, if you don't want to buy health insurance fine, just die if your injured or sick! Is that all the deeper your sense of morality extends?

Car insurance is mandated for the other guy, not you. The only coverage you have to carry is liability.

Apples and Oranges folks.

Besides everybody here in Cali knows the best situation is to be an illegal alien - they have to treat you, yet you never have to pay. Cool right?

I agree Spanky just like it is better to be non union and not have the insurance or the cash to schedule an appointment so you just go to the emergency room like it is a free clinic, they have to treat you, and some poor hardworking union man like me or some lawyer like you, or the government has to absorb those costs. Those illegal aliens and non union guys making 12 bucks an hour and no benefits got it made, when it comes to not paying for the insurance and just letting someone else pick up the tab.

My wife had a slip and fall accident last year and broke both of her legs. When I got the final Invoice there was an almost 10k charge on the invoice coded with a designation I couldnt find anywhere. SO I called and inquired. It was the charge to PAY for people who did not have insurance. Almost 10K I still cant believe it.

Geez Jolly, I'm sorry to hear that, is your wife okay?

I have never seen it listed as a separate charge, but I think that is why one cue-tip costs 9 dollars at the hospital.

Spanky,

RE: Your post #5.8

ANYONE driving a car is REQUIRED BY LAW to have auto insurance-- IN EVERY STATE!. In case you didn't know, libility insurance IS actually insurance! No kidding! Also, the coverage for a person's health is TOTALLY unrelated to auto insurance, even liability coverage. The ONLY people or group of people who have liability insurance for health related issues are healthcare providers (docs, hospitals, etc.).

scrambolo

His point was that the only car insurance that is required by law is the insurance to cover the other person in an accident, not yourself.

Jonathan,

Yes, I agree, the law says only liability INSURANCE is required, although some states require you to have at least minimal coverage for medical needs which may be needed (i.e. Florida). Also, IF the car is not paid for, you cannot get car financing if you do not have collision coverage. Also, reread carefully the post by Spanky. He states that ONLY the other guy is required, by law, to have insurance other than liability. My point, EVERYONE is required to have auto insurance, if they drive, even if it is only liability insurance. He implies that only the "at fault" driver has to have liability coverage, and alludes that liability is somehow not insurance. But I understand your point, to a point!

I know his wording is a bit funky, but he meant that you only need to have insurance FOR THE OTHER GUY.

Isn't repealing healthcare reform the only thing the tea party and GOP have been focused on for like 3 years now? They have had a laser focus on ensuring that Obama is a one-term President by blocking anything that is Good for 98% of Americans. The only things they are willing to pass are bills that help the 2% get even richer, well working America gets poorer.

At the same time the administrative workforce (billing office etc) grew by 18.4%. They needed more minimum wage workers to come up with reasons to deny coverage.

Fast,

So what's in it's place?

Would you rather the status quo? I like many of the provisions in the healthcare law and if you have or will have a family you should probably like them too. Whats the problem with making sure that everyone has health insurance? I don't get it....if in my policy there are costs that are associated with the costs that hospitals have to eat for those that are serviced but have no insurance....how is that fair?

In my opinion, it goes either two ways. 1) We all have insurance (by mandate) meaning everyone is covered for emergency and routine check ups. Or 2) Hospitals are forced to turn every single person away that has no insurance even if that means leaving them on the street to die. I don't think that would last long.

My point is is that if we go it the status quo than those who have insurance have to pay for those who don't. Plus it's not like the status quo is working to well for people. So we have to choose between insuring all or denying care. I choose insuring all.

FastZ, just like another comment made, SSI is a mandate, Medicare is another mandate. YOU HAVE TO PAY TO THESE PROGRAMS IF YOU WANT THEM TO WORK FOR YOU. Supreme Count didn't say these two programs were unconstitutional, they can't rule that Obamacare is unconstitutional either. All three are ways of life that everyone needs to survive and maintain a life during and after we all are employed.

Vipp - well said. I agree. The problem is, you have what most right-wingers lack. You look at the big picture. you have an understanding of how things really work. They are so filled with hate, they can't see past their own noses.

JoAnnO...it's so sad to see people fight against their own interests.

First off people need to be educated on the costs of medical care because that's what's being left out of the equation.

Start with personnel. Most everyone who comes in contact with a patient has a college degree ranging from Associate's to Doctorate. Needless to say they do not work for minimum wage and they most certainly do earn what they make. I know, I'm an RN.

Then consider the cost of facilities, building, updating and maintaining them cost huge amounts of money.

Then there's the diagnostics. PET Scanners, MRIs, CT Scanners, Radiology machines all cost massive amounts of money.

Medications are not free or in many cases even cheap. We have managed to extend life by decades but nearly every elderly person takes at least several medications and some take handfuls.

And then there's the albatross of government regulations. There are several agencies that medical care givers have to answer to, a ton of red tape. Medical systems spend a lot of money adhereing and proving that adherence to agencies.

We as a nation cannot afford national health insurance. The nations that have it have nearly 100% of citizens paying taxes as well as Value Added Taxes and smaller populations.

Every person that needs emergency care in this country gets it, it is illegal to turn them away.

Fast,

You never answered the question. If in my costs I have to pay for those who are uninsured...those that show up to the hospital without insurance yet are taken in because hospitals can not turn them away...how is that fair to those with insurance.

The only way to make it fair is to have hospitals deny those people without insurance....which they are never going to do.

Thus the only way to make this fair is to make sure that everyone has basic coverage. Although you will say it's a different situation...this is the primary reason why we all have auto insurance.

While the SCOTUS is at it, maybe they can rule that mandating the collection of taxes is also unconstitutional. Keep dreaming.

So you ACTUALLY believe that George Washington was a socialist traitor when he signed legislation mandating all adult white males between the age of 18 and 45 not otherwise exempted, buy a musket, bayonet and belt, two spare flints, a cartridge box with 24 bullets, and a knapsack; or Men owning rifles be required to provide a powder horn, 1/4 pound of gun powder, 20 rifle balls, a shooting pouch and knapsack. I'm quite surprised! After all, he was the "father" of the nation. There are monuments and schools all over the nation named after him. Should we tear them all down, destroy the monuments and re-write all the history books to correct this incredible injustice perpetrated upon the American people?

Medical insurance is not a right it is a product. If you want a good plan you should pay for a good plan like many of us do.

We didn't need a federal takeover of one-sixth of the economy to accomplish the things you highlight.

The pre-existing condition policies set up by the government have been a dismal failure. Instead of the hundreds of thousands of people the government thought would apply there have been only a couple of thousand. Because while the bill can force a pre-existing condition clause they cannot force the insurance companies to sell cheap insurance to people who are known to have high medical bills. Why would any company set themselves up for such sure failure?

Fast,

Take a look around the globe for a second. Remember as you do so that we are one of the wealthiest nations on earth...or the. We are the only industrialized nation not to have an universal healthcare system for all. Yet, we pay two times more in healthcare expenditures than the next nation that tops the list. And for our money our citizens are no healthier and we leave more people to suffer without care.

Where is your argument...where is your heart? Wouldn't it be good for our companies if they didn't have to help pay for their workers insurance? Wouldn't it be good for our economy? Wouldn't it be a good thing to do if we are a so called "Christian Nation"?

Lee, do you like Health Care... that you can actually get to? That you can actually afford? If so, run from ObamaCare. Do you remember what the issue that really drove Health Care Reform to the forefront was? CUTTING COSTS. Health Care was getting too expensive to afford. Now, under ObamaCare... it's even more expensive!

As for another idea, from a Republican, how about this: A Single-Payer, Government-Provided, Mandated (and tax funded) insurance program that covers... routine preventative care (which has been shown could drastically cut overall health care costs if it were actually routine), and nothing else. Tooth cleaning: covered. Mamograms after X age: covered. Broke your arm: go private. Cancer screenings: covered. Cancer care: go private, but since you got screenings more often, you caught the cancer earlier and it'll be much cheaper to treat (and better odds for remission).

Sorry but feel with your heart but think with your head. As I've already said countries that have national health also have nearly 100% of their citizens paying taxes. They also have high taxes in other areas including value added taxes. Germany is often used as a model but no one ever raises the fact that Germans pay between 45-55% taxes by the time they are all added up. Nor does anyone talk about the national health system in the UK being revamped. Seems they finally looked at how many people were dying from cancer and heart attacks because of long wait times and so are putting the money in the hands of the clinicians instead of the government managing it. If national healthcare was so good why did the citizens of Canada sue their government years ago for the right to buy medical insurance? And they won.

Fast,
Why are Canadians so happy with their healthcare might be the more appropriate question. Also, show me some statistics that prove that heart attacks and cancer are worse in other countries compared to the U.S.

PROMOTE THE GENERAL WELFARE,...

I know it's just a silly preamble; but yeah, access to healthcare is a RIGHT. Healthcare isn't just emergent, stop the bleeding care, either - which is granted EVERY person who shows up in an Emergency Room,...

We're talking GENUINE life-sustaining measures to include CHEMO, surgery to remove tumors, etc.

Thank Goodness we have a President who GETS this. Too bad he has to work with a bunch of ignorant school children who would rather throw taunts than solve the issues of our day. Alas, this too shall pass, and in 2012 - the tea leaves will turn, so to speak.

One of the things I dislike about social conservatives is their insistence on telling people how to live their lives.

They, too, use the "promote the general welfare" trope- which is twisting the context to meet their own, general meaning.

General welfare, in the context in which the framers used it, implied keeping the nation safe, with the ability to prosper. Using federal laws to insist on social "goods"- left or right- would have been anathema to them.

Isn't it odd that two groups supposedly at odds with each other use the same twisted reasoning to achieve their ends?

Fast, where are you an RN? I want to be sure to avoid that place at all costs. I want medical professionals that actually care about the people they are treating.

p.s. You are completely full of it and are merely spewing talking points. Europe is much healthier than the US. A simple Google search. People are not dropping like flies in Eurpoe like you would like us to believe.

Shellie I think you may have your facts skewed. Looks like even with Britain's health care system they have low cancer survival rates.

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=4&ved=0CCgQFjAD&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.telegraph.co.uk%2Fhealth%2Fhealthnews%2F6765210%2FBritain-has-among-worst-cancer-survival-rates-in-developed-world.html&ei=yy5pToPhGOP10gH8gpThCw&usg=AFQjCNG_o7FtvPnoBVJVa0pYbiSutuBV3w

"Promote the General Welfare". Actually appears two places, in the Preamble and in the taxation clause. The Hamiltonian view of General Welfare has been the basis of law. Hamilton saw it as broad, as long as taxation and resulting benefit were spread across the country, not limited to one area. Madison saw it as more limited, but Hamilton has prevailed. Does HCR fit? Yep. I think so.

Well Hamilton and Madison are one thing but how does Grover see it, that is the important thing right now, we have elected representatives of the US government ignoring the advice of economists, ignoring polls which say 80% of the nation wants taxes raised on the extremely wealthy, because they have signed a solemn pledge to this man. That is some seriously dangerous stuff right there, that is a lot like that tribal crap in Afghanistan and Iran where elected officials of a government are actually pledged followers of their own separate leader and a more important agenda. Which always winds up with them using their position in the official government as a way to accomplish their other agenda. No kidding, I would vote anybody right out who signed that pledge I don't care who they are, I would file charges if there is any that could be brought about, we probably have poor bastards rotting in Gitmo for less.

Hey Newday how you been kid?

Hey, Forrest! Fine as can be, but missed you greatly. It is true what you say about Grover Norquist. However did we get in a situation in this country where people are signing loyalty oaths to anything but the Constitution? We have lost our way.

Been watching a local situation, a lock out of union employees, and it seems to be purely union busting. The union has been very reasonable, the company just quit talking to them. Not over money, or health insurance, but removing language in the contract that seemed to make their jobs less secure. I don't know how this is going to turn out, but am outraged on their behalf. It is unconscionable. Hope you are your family are well.

Well first, it is great to see you again, I have been fine, I am sick as all heck right now with the worst head cold I can remember, I did not go to work tonight and I almost never miss work, as matter of fact I think this is the first time I called in sick since I had my heart attack and triple bypass three years ago. When that happened I was supposed to be off for 8 weeks after the surgery for cardiac rehab or whatever, but after four weeks I told the heart doctor I'm going back to work, he said do really feel that good and I said if I had known I would feel this good I would have had a heart attack years sooner, he said well I guess you know what you can do, and I went back to work that Monday. I went to the hospital on a Sunday with a heart attack, had open heart surgery on Tuesday and was back home on Friday and back to work 4 weeks later. Modern medicine is amazing, if you have the means or insurance to gain speedy access to the top notch hospitals. The head cold will probably take more time than the darn heart attack and surgery did. The bills were astronomical if I had to pay cash out of pocket I would be wiped out.

Elected representatives signing oaths to Grover Norquist is wrong on so many levels I don't know were to begin or end for that matter.

You would think that republicans would have some respect for unions who allow individual Americans to have the right and the means to also practice Capitalism and try to maximize their personal profit from their labor isn't Capitalism for everybody, who worries about the profitability of workers aside from their wives, and their union. Unions, union members, and the decent American owners that employ them take responsibility for their own health care costs and retirement costs so they do not depend solely on SS, medicare or charity for their families health care or their old age, you think they would be proud of that kind of do it for yourself, don't wait for a handout, earn your own way kind of system. Well they say that kind of stuff but I guess they don't really mean it because they seem to resent the fact union members do just that. I think you will see unions expand, people say they are unnecessary, but people working for less than I made 30 years ago in Texas are going to change their mind if they don't get one hell of a raise soon. I can't tell you how many young people with all sorts of degrees who want to get in my business, my union because they can't find any job with their degree and they want to make a decent living, we take a lot of them, they are educated and motivated, they love the union it saved their ass. The shame of that is 30 years ago with the degrees some of these kids have they would certainly not be doing what I do, and they would be paid way better than me. Today there is no place for them to work and they have to compete with older guys with experience willing to work for less than they used to. Even white collar workers are realizing what a plant closing is like because many of those jobs are in India now. All in all more people realize that the government is not going to protect you (because they are signing pledges to people who hate you). The corporations feel it is their responsibility to pay as little as possible, so you are on your own to bargain with huge corporations like say Wal-Mart, or Massey Energy. People can not live the American dream on 11 bucks an hour and no benefits, heck I am not completely convinced they could have survived my heart attack, and if they did they would be bankrupt or in debt for the rest of their lives. Slowly but surely even the white collar workers and the non union workers are figuring out we set their wages as well. The non union shops have to pay closer to the union package if they want decent help, and middle management at least hopes to make a little more than the people they manage, so if we go down they do as well, and when we get an increase they do as well. I think you will see a lot of people coming to the realization that unions are their best and maybe their only avenue to a fair slice of the profits their labor produces.

Forrest: so glad you healed from that heart attack. Hearts like yours are far too valuable to lose.

I don't get it. I have watched this local situation, written about it, and I am AMAZED at the hostility toward the Unions! Why is it that people don't remember things like the Triangle Fire that cost so many young women their lives? That the reason that most have vacation, sick leave and a 40 hr week is the Unions?

And when will they remember?

I would be interested in what a labor history course would look like in a Texas textbook. They probably now blame unions for losing the Alamo!

Ah the good old fear-mongering of the Left; built, as ever, of 100% American Democrat grade lies.

That's just silly. Do you know what SSI is?

The taxpayers are supporting 46 million people on food stamps and I've yet to hear even one politican on either side say they want to take them away.

The Medicare program must be revamped per the 2011 Social Security Trustees Report signed by Geithner and Sebelius which calls it unsustainable in its present form. Don't care much about the future generations do you or the Democrats?

And horror of all horrors- the earners might get to keep some of their own money! Would would imagine even wanting such a thing! I'm 100% certain that all Democrats and liberals pay their bills, buy their food and then send whatever is left to the government because they just feel that strongly about 'helping the poor' and would never keep a profit from their work.

Fast..please.

If it's the Dems position to have universal healthcare....they and we are fighting for the future generations far more than you and your affiliates. We are trying to cover everybody...including those who have not been born...at a far less expense to the nation. Your position upholds that we keep the healthcare industry in the private markets where we have only seen less coverage for more costs over time. Where more than 30 percent of the population can't even get insurance and more and more are losing it everyday. And you claim to be working for the future generations. Go fu$K yourself.

Vipp--in addition, other countries that provide universal healthcare coverage are able to provide care for their citizens at a fraction of the cost that the US does, AND have better outcomes than we do! I worked on a project in Canada, and saw first hand the stats on outcomes in Ontario--way better than ours! Yes those countries have higher taxes than we do--but--the taxes are put to use for benefit of the citizens of their respective countries. In the US, tax money is used for everything EXCEPT for the benefit of our citizens. We police the world, have the greatest capacity to destroy our world, build bigger bombs and other eqipment for destruction, ruin other countries and rebuild their infrastructures but don't spend money to fix our infrastructure, provide an enormous amount of corporate welfare...the list goes on and on. What is really amazing to me is that our infant mortality rate is higher than in some third world countries! Americans should be outraged over that--but the TP/GOP still believes we have the best healthcare system in the world! Too bad it isn't true. We probably do have the best technology, but at what cost? Our system is based on treating illness--in other countries, the focus is on wellness and prevention.

"We have met the enemy and he is us!" Pogo by Walt Kelly

Exactly Nurse - The issue is that our population overwhelming doesn't trust our government at all with their money. If only a single payer system could be implemented they would see the true benefits. Lowered costs and a healthier nation. It's difficult to stare at the truth when there's so much mud the eyes.

We are forced to buy insurance for people who don't buy it and end up in the emergency room, they raise the premiums to cover that, its a round about way to force people to pay for others!!!

Ron Paul said IN THE DEBATE that medicare was forced on people, what is medicare? its medical insurance! HELLO"

That's because Medicare IS forced on people... just like all other taxes are. That's legitimate government activity. ObamaCare is like the government telling me I HAVE to buy a car, even if I don't intend to drive anywhere, even if I have the money to pay for taxis to anywhere I need to go, and then mandating that I do it from a private company.

Yet, to use your example, the status quo is like you deciding to buy a car but having within the price of the car costs that cover/allow others who can't afford one to also have a car. Is that fair to you?

c. Smith if that's your real name, ha ha ha !!!

You have got to be kidding! government forces you to buy medicare, and you say that's not forcing people to buy medicare, which is medical insurance , and that's OK" but forcing you to buy medical insurance is not constitutional! Ill give you a few minutes to think about what you said, but don't bother coming back to discuss it !!!

Vipp; good point! we are forced to pay medicare for people who have never worked, with our taxes, and we are forced to pay higher premium's, [by private insurance companies,] because some people will not be responsible and buy insurance from these private companies, lets see simply put Its OK when we do it "but" its not OK when you do it!!! Or when we do it its constitutional! when you do it its not constitutional!

So you ACTUALLY believe that George Washington was a socialist traitor when he signed legislation mandating all adult white males between the age of 18 and 45 not otherwise exempted buy a musket, bayonet and belt, two spare flints, a cartridge box with 24 bullets, and a knapsack; or Men owning rifles be required to provide a powder horn, 1/4 pound of gun powder, 20 rifle balls, a shooting pouch and knapsack. I'm quite surprised! After all, he was the "father" of the nation. There are monuments and schools all over the nation named after him. Should we tear them all down, destroy the monuments and re-write all the history books to correct this incredible injustice perpetrated upon the American people?

JoANNO; I wouldn't call it hating! its more like LIBS AND Independants, FIGHT BACK AGAINST STUPIDITY!!!

Dale, you are only more evidence of the hating. Don't worry, though, I won't say anything about stupidity. I'll be polite and keep it in my head.

Uh mkaipo, they have been challenged. And the Supreme Court ruled they were in fact constitutional.

Arlin, huh?

Wow...how sad it is. But...I don't know about you boys but lets keep funnelling that money to the rich! YEEEHAWWW!!!

Steven Delaware; they all spoke about Reagan, they held the debate in the Reagan library!, I think Reagan was a good man, and a good President, If the leaders were honest and would have carried out his vision it could have worked, but they continued to double and tripled the deficit, and by the way Reagan did not pay one dime towards the debt, they misunderstood his intentions, His intentions was to pay down the debt and stop spending as the country was able to after the recession and they went on a wild ride instead!!!

They hold up Reagan but do things THE FORMER GREAT president WOULD SHUTTER AT IF HE WERE HERE NOW!!!

I don't think I have ever seen a larger collection of loaded statistics.

JimTN

Counter any of them.

PS. Did you see Ron Paul's comment about getting RID of the minimum wage? yeah,...that worked SO well during the industrial revolution.

Me thinks Massey and his ilk will LOVE that idea.

Ill just pick one at random.

#31 The number of Americans that are going to food pantries and soup kitchens has increased by 46% since 2006.

This statistic gives no data other than the size of an increase. One increased by one gives a 100% increase. Without the actual data the statistic is meaningless. The statistic also does not state if it is adjusted for population between 2006 and today so it could very well be fudged. I don't have to counter any statistic you give because you haven't proven any of them with sources or even explained how the data was collected, what type of sampling was done, or any relevant information about them. I don't have to disprove anything. If you want to make the claims, prove them, otherwise they are garbage.

I'm still waiting for some idiot to say all the things on this list are because of................. onerus REGULATIONS!

"Ill just pick one at random." Random, right.

To pick the most obscure statistic and declare that the number is meaningless because it does not include the number of people involved. Weak.

#31 The number of Americans that are going to food pantries and soup kitchens has increased by 46% since 2006.

"Government-affiliated food banks and other community and faith-based food pantries and soup kitchens served more than 37 million Americans, according to Feeding America's 2010 hunger study. This figure is up 46% from 2006.

"This is a record number of Americans who are voluntarily seeking emergency food assistance," says Kevin Concannon, USDA undersecretary for Food, Nutrition and Consumer Services."

How is it unconstitutional? Has the supreme court ruled yet?

So you ACTUALLY believe that George Washington was an unqualified little man, a socialist traitor when he signed legislation mandating all adult white males between the age of 18 and 45 not otherwise exempted, buy a musket, bayonet and belt, two spare flints, a cartridge box with 24 bullets, and a knapsack; or Men owning rifles be required to provide a powder horn, 1/4 pound of gun powder, 20 rifle balls, a shooting pouch and knapsack. I'm quite surprised! After all, he was the "father" of the nation. There are monuments and schools all over the nation named after him. Should we tear them all down, destroy the monuments and re-write all the history books to correct this incredible injustice perpetrated upon the American people?

Thank you Babina!

I have been trying to push this point the entire time I have been in this post....Those against the mandate never answer this question. They have nothing to say to it.

"simply can't afford health insurance and choose to go without and then visit an emergency room when they get sick or have an accident."

LOL, do you even understand what you are writing? Goodness, write for comprehension!

Jim,

Where was she wrong. To put it another way....if there are people who either choose to go without insurance or can't afford it and they have to run to the emergency room...why should those costs that hospitals have to eat be covered in the policies of those who do have insurance? Or in a more simple way...If I'm insured, why do I have to pay for the costs that hospitals have to eat when they have to serve those who don't have insurance? Understand now?

So...if you can't afford health insurance, say because you are in a minimum wage job that does not provide insurance and you have a family of four to cover, or you have been laid off of your job because of the economy, you and your family are not worthy of getting medical care? Wow--for a so-called "christian" nation--pretty pathetic! For all the so-called "christians" who lack compassion for their fellow citizens--WWJD? (hint: He overturned the tables of the money changers in the temple!).

Nurse..I hope you didn't take my post wrong. I don't mind paying more to help cover the masses. I believe we should have a single payer system that covers all.

Not sure what all the fuss is about? But I can promise you these socialist will take every dime from you so they dont have to work. Second, then the ones with money will be the politicians. I guess that is one the left wing can control everything. Third this union thing is a joke. everyone says join a union.lol give me a break. join a union sure, better wages not really. companies raise their prices to cover cost of their employees and paper work and benefits these unions demand. so that nice raise you got? just didnt make a dent in anything for the cost of goods you buy went up also to off set your union crap. and finally if a company goes from west cost to east coast and hire non union employees. that is their business. if the unions sue and win to keep them from hiring non union employees. I would shut the doors and move to mexico or any where but the U.S. I so hate the unions I would chip in to help the company move to another country. Only because I associate unions with socialists and the kgb of Russia. surprising 35% americans believe like me.